4.7 Article

Development of workspace conflict visualization system using 4D object of work schedule

期刊

ADVANCED ENGINEERING INFORMATICS
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 50-65

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.aei.2013.12.001

关键词

Schedule overlapping; Workspace conflict; Time-space trade-off; Bounding box; 4D CAD; BIM (Building Information Modeling)

资金

  1. British Council
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2011-0016064]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Generally, workspace conflict analysis between construction activities by a 3D or 4D CAD system is performed for checking the conflict between element bodies. However, in case of many projects which consist of diverse activities in limited area, the workspace conflict analysis for reducing interferences caused by labor or equipment work is also an important management factor. In particular, if some activities are constructed adjacent to the overlap period, the workspace for those activities may be conflicting. Workspace conflicts decrease work productivity, and accidents can occur. Therefore, it is desirable that the workspace conflict should be minimized in order to perform efficient work. This paper presents a methodology that generates workspaces using a bounding box model and an algorithm in order to identify schedule and workspace conflict. Additionally, a workspace conflict verification system was developed to analyze the workspace information by integrating algorithms that include the automated generation of workspace models and an automatic check of workspace conflict within a 4D simulator. If a project manager can identify the workspace conflict using the system described, the overlapped activities can be rescheduled to minimize the conflict. A case study of a bridge project has been conducted to evaluate the practical applications and feasibility of the developed system. Therefore, the safety and constructability of a project can be improved by the workspace analysis system. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据