Baxendale, T (1984) Construction resource models by Monte Carlo simulation. Construction Management and Economics, 2(3), pp. 201-217. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The application of Monte Carlo simulation is reviewed and it is recognized that the method is very useful and flexible in comparing alternative systems. A case study is presented, based on data gathered from the construction site and developing an approach, showing the problems encountered in forming simulation models. The data presented can also be used as a historical record for future planning work. The need to develop a micro-computer program to avoid the repetitive calculations, once the basis of simulation is understood, is reviewed. The final discussion recommends the use of Monte Carlo simulation to augment precontract planning for large and complex projects or for re-planning work in progress, where the data gathered will be of particular significance to the unique situation that exists on that site.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction site; data collection; resource models; simulation |
| Index terms: | computer program, complex project, case study, construction site, Monte Carlo simulation |
| Subjects: | software systems, data collection methods, strategic project management, modelling and simulation, work location |
| Topics: | Project Management, Digital Applications, Site Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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