Selinger, S and Stamler, H (1983) Computerized method for quantity surveying. Construction Management and Economics, 1(1), pp. 75-87. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The dimensions take-off of building elements is the most tedious and time-consuming stage in the quantity surveying procedure. A computerized comprehensive method of quantity surveying aimed at reducing work invested in this stage has been developed. The method is based on geometric representation of the structure elements of a building (columns, beams, slabs and walls) in a three-dimensional co-ordinate system. This enables the intersections and contact areas between elements to be defined by the computer program. Consequently, the dimensions take-off, to be carried out by the quantity surveyor, is significantly reduced and simplified. The method has been developed for quantity surveying of buildings with rectangular structure elements whose edges are parallel to the axes of the co-ordinate system. The general approach of this method may, however, be extended to other kinds of buildings. The approach is likely to be of value in the development of computer graphic systems.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Buildings; computers; quantity surveying |
| Index terms: | dimension, computer program, quantity surveying, take-off, surveying, beam, computer graphic, column |
| Subjects: | health monitoring assessment and metrics, structural engineering, software systems, profession, computer hardware, quantity surveying |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Digital Applications, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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