Yu, H; Peng, Z; He, Z and Huang, C (2024) Application maturity evaluation of building steel structure welding robotic technology based on multi-level gray theory. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(11), pp. 4372-4397. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to establish a maturity evaluation model for the application of construction steel structure welding robotics suitable for the actual situation and specific characteristics of engineering projects in China and then to assess the maturity level of the technology in the application of domestic engineering projects more scientifically. Design/methodology/approach: The research follows a qualitative and quantitative analysis method. In the first stage, the structure of the maturity model is constructed and the evaluation index system is designed by using the ideas of the capability maturity model and WSR methodology for reference. In the second stage, the design of the evaluation process and the selection of evaluation methods (analytic hierarchy process method, multi-level gray comprehensive evaluation method). In the third stage, the data are collected and organized (preparation of questionnaires, distribution of questionnaires, questionnaire collection). In the fourth stage, the established maturity evaluation model is used to analyze the data. Findings: The evaluation model established by using multi-level gray theory can effectively transform various complex indicators into an intuitive maturity level or score status. The conclusion shows that the application maturity of building steel structure welding robot technology in this project is at the development level as a whole. The maturity levels of "WuLi – ShiLi – RenLi" are respectively: development level, development level, between starting level and development level. Comparison of maturity evaluation values of five important factors (from high to low): environmental factors, technical factors, management factors, benefit factors, personnel and group factors. Originality/value: In this paper, based on the existing research related to construction steel structure welding robot technology, a quantitative and holistic evaluation of the application of construction steel structure welding robot technology in domestic engineering projects is conducted for the first time from a project perspective by designing a maturity evaluation index system and establishing a maturity evaluation model. This research will help the project team to evaluate the application level (maturity) of the welding robot in the actual project, identify the shortcomings and defects of the application of this technology, then improve the weak links pertinently, and finally realize the gradual improvement of the overall application level of welding robot technology for building steel structure.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | maturity evaluation model; multi-level gray theory; steel structure; welding robot; wsr |
| Index terms: | personnel, China, environmental factor, quantitative analysis, methodology, capability maturity model, questionnaire, maturity level, maturity model, steel structure, project team, robotics |
| Subjects: | environmental science, automation and robotics, Geography, evaluation, research methods, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, project delivery, management, specialized materials and systems |
| Topics: | Construction Materials, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Project Management, Geographical Context, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here