Alkoc, E and Erbatur, F (1997) Productivity improvement in concreting operations through simulation models. Building Research & Information, 25(2), pp. 82-91. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Describes simulation models developed in microcyclone, a cyclic operations simulation software. Two main methods of concreting are simulated for pouring slab, beam and column concrete. MicroCYCLONE simulation software, while not yet adopted extensively in the construction industry, has gained general acceptance in academic research and, compared with other software, the program presents a simple graphic system that can be readily understood by engineering and field personnel. The general rules of thumb derived from these models are used in a prototype advisory expert system which is designed to present the results in a user-friendly manner to construction practitioners.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | concreting; construction; productivity improvement; simulation; Turkey |
| Index terms: | personnel, Turkey, prototype, productivity, construction practitioner, column, program, concreting, beam, expert system, construction industry |
| Subjects: | building construction, data management, industry analysis, software systems, management, structural engineering, professional development, Geography, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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