Edwards, D J; Holt, G D and Harris, F C (2002) Predicting downtime costs of tracked hydraulic excavators operating in the UK opencast mining industry. Construction Management and Economics, 20(7), pp. 581-591. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
This paper describes the development of a model to predict the hourly cost of downtime (using regression equations) for tracked hydraulic excavators operating in the UK opencast mining industry. A three-stage process was utilized for the model's development. The first stage predicted machine cycle times, the second predicted hire costs per hour and the third used the outputs of the first two to forecast the cost of breakdown. Both cycle time and hire cost models were revealed to be good predictors, as exhibited by the 'high' R2 values of 0.86 and 0.95, respectively. A plant expert employed within the Defence Logistics Organisation, UK Ministry of Defence, validated these regression models and the process by which downtime costs were predicted. Future research work will aim to enhance the predictive ability of the models developed, expand the research to cover other machine types, and reproduce the findings in graphical and tabular format to improve the interpretation of information generated.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction plant; downtime cost; machine cycle time; productivity; regression analysis |
| Index terms: | cost model, regression analysis, hydraulic, mining, productivity, construction plant, regression model |
| Subjects: | construction equipment, management, statistical analysis, geotechnical engineering, financial and cost management, fluid mechanics |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Plant and Equipment |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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