Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 13 results ...
Bayraktar, M E, Arif, F, Ponder, D, Prozzi, J and Mahmoud, N V (2016) Opportunities for Value Extraction Projects in Highway Rights-of-Way and Development of Feasibility Assessment Tool. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
da Rocha, C G, Kemmer, S L and Meneses, L (2016) Managing Customization Strategies to Reduce Workflow Variations in House Building Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
González-Jorge, H, Martínez Sánchez, J, Díaz-Vilariño, L, Puente, I and Arias, P (2016) Automatic Registration of Mobile LiDAR Data Using High-Reflectivity Traffic Signs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Hajifathalian, K, Howell, G, Wambeke, B W, Hsiang, S M and Liu, M (2016) “Oops” Simulation: Cost–Benefits Trade-Off Analysis of Reliable Planning for Construction Activities. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: Planning; Cost of project; Productivity; Performance reliability; Computer aided simulation; Labor and personnel issues;
- ISBN/ISSN: 0733-9364
- URL: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001135
- Abstract:
“The Oops Game” explores the question, how much should be invested in planning? The simulation offers the opportunity to reduce the risk of an “Oops” by collecting more information or to go ahead and make the choice with the information at hand. There are two extreme strategies. Nothing is invested in planning in the so-called Guts-ball approach, but this increases the likelihood that an “Oops” will occur and thus increases the cost to complete the project. The second strategy is to invest in planning before attempting to build. This will increase the cost of planning upfront, but may reduce the risk and cost of an “Oops” in building. In reality, the cost and value of planning depends on the complexity level of the project, the amount of uncertainty that we need to deal with it, and the cost of an “Oops.” We used computer simulation to show how the value of planning is sensitive to those factors. The results showed that the project with the reliable planning strategy had a 35% higher productivity and a cost-benefit ratio of
Hanna, A S, Ibrahim, M W, Lotfallah, W, Iskandar, K A and Russell, J S (2016) Modeling Project Manager Competency: An Integrated Mathematical Approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Hwang, S, Park, M, Lee, H and Lee, S (2016) Hybrid Simulation Framework for Immediate Facility Restoration Planning after a Catastrophic Disaster. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Love, P E D, Teo, P, Morrison, J and Grove, M (2016) Quality and Safety in Construction: Creating a No-Harm Environment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Luo, X, Li, H, Huang, T and Skitmore, M (2016) Quantifying Hazard Exposure Using Real-Time Location Data of Construction Workforce and Equipment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Nassar, N and AbouRizk, S (2016) Introduction to Techniques for Resolving Project Performance Contradictions. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Singhaputtangkul, N and Zhao, X (2016) Applying a Fuzzy Consensus Scheme to Enhance the Group Decision Making of a Building Envelope Design Team. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Tymvios, N and Gambatese, J A (2016) Direction for Generating Interest for Design for Construction Worker Safety—A Delphi Study. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Weidman, J, Dickerson, D E and Koebel, C T (2016) Effective Intervention Strategy to Improve Worker Readiness to Adopt Ventilated Tools. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).
Xiong, W and Zhang, X (2016) The Real Option Value of Renegotiation in Public–Private Partnerships. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(08).