Constructability for Piping Automation: Field Operations
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 117, Issue 3
Abstract
This paper focuses on how the productivity of semi‐automated piping construction for process plants may be improved through constructability‐enhancement tactics. This paper answers the question regarding how field operations activities must be altered to support the automated field effort. The semi‐automated environment of piping erection assumes a pipe manipulator attached to the boom of a 22‐ton, rough‐terrain crane for the base piece of pipe‐lifting equipment. This study concentrates on horizontal process piping erection. Three major categories of constructability issues are addressed. These issues include material handling, equipment capabilities, and equipment configuration. Quantitative techniques used to compile empirical data regarding innovations for a semi‐automated construction process include physical modeling and computer simulation, via a three‐dimensional computed‐aided design simulation software package. There is a 24% construction‐productivity savings occurring when these constructability issues for the automated piping erection system are implemented.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Atkin, B. L. (1986). “Computer‐aided design and its implications for the management of construction projects.” Proc. of the 10th Triennial Congress of the Int. Council for Building Research, Int. Council for Building Res., Studies and Documentation, Washington, D.C., Vol. 1, 19–26.
2.
Bernold, L. E. (1985). “Productivity transients in construction processes,” thesis presented to Georgia Institute of Technology, at Atlanta, Georgia, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
3.
Bernold, L. E. (1989). “Simulation of non‐steady construction processes.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 115, 163–178.
4.
Constructability, a primer. (1986). Bureau of Engineering Research, Publication 3‐1, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX.
5.
Constructability concepts file. Publication 3‐I. (1987). Bureau of Engineering Research, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX.
6.
Fisher, D. J. (1989). “Piping erection constructability issues in a semi‐automated environment,” thesis presented to the University of Texas, at Austin, Texas, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
7.
Fisher, D. J., and O'Connor, J. T. (1988). “Piping erection constructability issues in a semi‐automated environment.” Proc. of Int. Pipe Association, New Orleans, La.
8.
Geror, J. S., Radford, A. D., Rosenman, M. A., Coyne, R. D., Balachandran, B., and MacKenzie, C. (1986). “Knowledge‐based building design.” Proc. of the 10th Triennial Congress of the Int. Council for Building Research, Int. Council for Building Res., Studies and Documentation, Washington, D.C., Vol. 1, 93–102.
9.
Glass, C. C. (1984). “The pipe manipulator: A complete assessment of a new idea in construction equipment technology,” thesis presented to the University of Texas, at Austin, Texas, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science.
10.
Halpin, D. W. (1977). “CYCLONE: Method for modeling of job site processes.” J. Constr. Div., ASCE, 103(3), 489–499.
11.
Hendrickson, C., and Au, T. (1989). Project management for construction. Prentice‐Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
12.
Hughes, P. J., O'Connor, J. T., and Traver, A. E. (1989). “Pipe manipulator enhancements for increased automation.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., 115(3), 412–423.
13.
“Japan takes early lead in robotics.” (1983). Engrg. News‐Rec., 211(3), 42, 43, and 45.
14.
O'Connor, J. T. (1985). “Impacts of constructability improvement.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., 111(4), 404–410.
15.
O'Connor, J. T., and Davis, V. S. (1988). “Constructability improvement during field operations.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 114(4), 548–564.
16.
O'Connor, J. T., and Fisher, D. J. (1988). “Constructability for semi‐automated piping construction: Research progress.” The Fifth Int. Symp. on Robotics in Construction, Tokyo, Japan, 185–194.
17.
Paulson, B. C. (1985). “Automation and robotics for construction.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., 111(3), 190–207.
18.
Paulson, B. C., Chan, W. T., and Koo, C. C. (1987). “Construction operations simulation by microcomputer.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., 113(2), 302–314.
19.
Paulson, B. C. (1984). “The potential for robotics in construction.” Technical Paper MS84‐1050, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, Dearborne, Mich.
20.
Skibniewski, M., and Hendrickson, C. (1988). “Analysis of robotic surface finishing work on construction site.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., 114(1), 53–68.
21.
Skibniewski, M., and Russell, J. S. (1989). “Robotic applications to construction.” J. Cost Engrg., Am. Assoc. of Cost Engrg., 31(6), 10–18.
22.
Sundareswaran, S., and Arditi, D. (1988). “Current state of automation and robotics in construction.” The Fifth Int. Symp. on Robotics in Construction, Tokyo, Japan, 175–184.
23.
Technology needs and priorities. (1982). Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness Project, Report B‐3, The Business Roundtable, New York, N.Y.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 117 • Issue 3 • September 1991
Pages: 468 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 ASCE.
History
Published online: Sep 1, 1991
Published in print: Sep 1991
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.