Priority rating logic simulation model for tower crane operations management

Appleton, B J A; Niaz, M A; Abourizk, S M; Al-Hussein, M and Mohamed, Y (2006) Priority rating logic simulation model for tower crane operations management. Journal of Construction Research, 7(1), pp. 133-147. ISSN 1609-9451

Abstract

Tower cranes are the most expensive and frequently shared resources on building construction sites. In practice, tower cranes are managed based on demand, urgency, and prioritized work tasks that must be performed within a set period of time on the field. Computer simulation proved to be an effective tool for aiding practitioners in modeling complex construction operations. Special Purpose Simulation (SPS) techniques have introduced computer modeling to the construction industry, resulting in a reduced model development time and a more user-friendly environment. Traditional SPS modeling techniques use "relationship logic links" to represent the logic contained in a modeled system. However, as the number of work tasks increases for the tower crane, the complexity of the relationship logic links model increases, resulting in limited acceptance by industry practitioners. This paper presents a new approach for handling process interactions for computer simulation modeling using "priority-rating logic," which is used to represent a tower crane's non-cyclic construction operations. The use of a priority rating logic control for model process interaction is implemented through the development of a SPS tower crane template. A case example and six variations to the case are presented to illustrate the advantages and viability of using the priority rating logic simulation modeling approach for tower crane operations.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: tower cranes; special purpose simulation; priority rating logic
Index terms: computer simulation, building construction, practitioner, variation, complexity, model development, operations management, computer modelling, construction operation, tower crane, simulation modelling, priority rating, interaction, modelling, construction industry
Subjects: practitioner, construction operations, analytical methods, maintenance engineering, building construction, behavioral psychology, modelling and simulation, management, contractual condition, decision analysis, industry analysis, systems engineering
Topics: Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management, Contract Administration, Digital Applications
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