Integrating Constructability Tools into Constructability Review Process
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 126, Issue 2
Abstract
This paper describes research to develop a constructability review process (CRP) for transportation facilities. This process must incorporate tools to aid in performing constructability reviews. A comprehensive review of literature and existing constructability practices provided the basis for identifying and developing 52 analytical tools for use in a CRP. Detailed descriptions of each tool were developed. Tools were classified by whether they were used to understand/communicate constructability, were used to implement/measure constructability, or were cutting edge technology/computing based. Tools were integrated into the CRP by linking a tool(s) to each constructability function of the review process. Twenty-one constructability functions were included in the final CRP model, supported by 27 basic tools. These 27 selected tools were integrated into the CRP in a user-friendly format, using tables to communicate tool concepts, rather than by merely using text. Another 25 review tools were identified as advanced tools for future application. Road maps were used to indicate the linkage between basic and future tools and the constructability functions the tools support.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Anderson, S. D., and Fisher, D. J. (1997a). “Constructability review process for transportation facilities.” NCHRP Rep. 390, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C.
2.
Anderson, S. D., and Fisher, D. J. (1997b). “Constructability review process for transportation facilities: Workbook.” NCHRP Rep. 391, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, D.C.
3.
Anderson, S. D., Fisher, D. J., and Gupta, V. K. (1995). “Total constructability management: A process-oriented framework.” Proj. Mgmt. J., XXVI (3), 3–11.
4.
Anderson, S. D., Fisher, D. J., and Rahman, S. P. (2000). “Integrating constructability into project development: A process approach.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 126(2), 81–88.
5.
Betz, M. J. (1994). Appropriate technology: Choice and development. Duke Press Policy Studies, Durham, N.C.
6.
“Constructability: A primer.” (1986). Publication 3-1, Construction Industry Inst., University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
7.
“Constructability implementation guide.” (1993). Publication 34-1, Construction Industry Inst., University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
8.
Ellis, R. D., Kumar, A., and Ahmed, Q. A. (1992). “Life cycle reconstructibility—Final report.” Rep., Engrg. and Industrial Experiment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fla.
9.
Fisher, D. J., and Rajan, N. (1996). “Automated constructibility analysis of work-zone traffic-control planning.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 122(1), 36–43.
10.
Gibson, G. E., Jr. Kaczmarowski, J. H., and Lore, H. E., Jr. (1995). “Preproject-planning process for capital facilities.”J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 121(3), 312–318.
11.
Hugo, F., O'Connor, J. T., and Ward, W. V. ( 1990). “Highway construct* ability guide.” Res. Proj. 3-6-88-1149, Ctr. for Transp. Res., University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
12.
Khan, S. I., Ritchie, S. G., and Kampe, K. (1994). “Integrated system to develop highway rehabilitation projects.”J. Transp. Engrg., ASCE, 120(1), 1–20.
13.
McCullouch, R., and Patty, R. (1993). “An INDOT lessons learned constructability program and integrated multimedia system.” Rep., JFW-93/6, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind.
14.
Mayer, R. J. (1992). “IDEF0 function modeling: A reconstruction of the original Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratory Technical Report AFWAZ-TR-81-4023.” Rep., Knowledge Based Systems, Inc., College Station, Tex.
15.
Rho, J. A. ( 1994). “Systems engineering model for implementing automation technology into a construction process,” Dissertation, University of Houston, Houston.
16.
Russell, J. S., and Swiggum, K. E. (1992). “Investigation of constructability concepts and tools for highway construction—Phase 1 literature.” Tech. Rep. No. 122, Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt. Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.
17.
Russell, J. S., and Swiggum, K. E. (1994). “Investigation of constructability concepts and tools of highway construction.” Tech. Rep. No. 115, Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt. Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis.
18.
Sanvido, V. E., and Norton, K. J. (1994). “Integrated design-process model.”J. Mgmt. in Engrg., ASCE, 10(5), 55–62.
19.
Vanegas, J. A. (1993). “An integrated acquisition, storage, and retrieval multimedia system for constructibility lessons learned.” Proc., 5th Int. Conf. on Computing in Civ. and Build. Engrg.
20.
Williams, T. P. (1994). “Applying portable computing and hypermedia to construction.”J. Mgmt. in Engrg., ASCE, 10(3), 41–45.
21.
Wright, E. D. ( 1994). “Constructibility guide.” Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 126 • Issue 2 • March 2000
Pages: 89 - 96
History
Received: Jun 25, 1998
Published online: Mar 1, 2000
Published in print: Mar 2000
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.