Investigation and Comparative Analysis of Learning Curve Models on Construction Productivity: The Case of Caisson Fabrication Process

Author:

Ralli Panagiota1,Panas Antonios2,Pantouvakis John-Paris3,Karagiannakidis Dimitrios4

Affiliation:

1. Mechanical Engineer, M.Sc., Department of Projects Contracts & Procurement, Building Infrastructures S.A. , Moudrou 12 str., 11146 Galatsi, Athens , Greece .

2. Civil Engineer, Ph.D., Centre for Construction Innovation , National Technical University of Athens , Zografou Campus, Iroon Polytechniou 9 str., 15780 Zografou, Athens , Greece .

3. Professor, Centre for Construction Innovation , National Technical University of Athens , Zografou Campus, Iroon Polytechniou 9 str., 15780 Zografou, Athens , Greece .

4. Civil Engineer, M.Sc., Aristotle University of Thessaloniki , Moudrou 30 str., 11146 Galatsi, Athens , Greece .

Abstract

Abstract Learning curves in construction operations analysis is deemed as one of the main factors that determine the variation of on-site productivity and is always taken into account during the planning and estimation stage. This research attempts the assessment of learning curve models’ suitability for the effective analysis of the learning phenomenon for construction operations that are fairly complicated concerning a floating caisson fabrication process for a large-scale marine project, using productivity data. This paper investigates the role of published learning curve models (i.e. Straightline or Wright; Stanford “B”; Cubic; Piecewise or Stepwise; Exponential) by comparing their outcomes through the use of both unit and cumulative productivity data. There are two main research objectives: first, the model best fitting historical productivity data of construction activities that have been completed are investigated, while secondly, an attempt is made to determine which model better predicts future performance. The less actual construction data deviate from each model’s yielded results, the better their suitability. In the case of unit data, the cubic model fits better historical data, while in the case of future predictions, the Stanford “B” model provides better results. Respectively, the Cubic model yields better results when using cumulative data on historical data and the Straight-line model predicts in a more reliable fashion future performance Possible extensions could be developed in the area of future performance predictions, by adopting different data representation techniques (e.g. moving/exponential weighted average) or by including other (non-classic) learning curve models (e.g. DeJong, Knecht, hyperbolic models).

Publisher

Engineering, Project, and Production Management (EPPM)

Subject

Mechanical Engineering,Engineering (miscellaneous),Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Öğrenme eğrilerinin karşılaştırılması;Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi;2021-03-23

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3