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

Q2 Business, Management and Accounting
Panagiota Ralli, A. Panas, J. Pantouvakis, Dimitrios Karagiannakidis
{"title":"Investigation and Comparative Analysis of Learning Curve Models on Construction Productivity: The Case of Caisson Fabrication Process","authors":"Panagiota Ralli, A. Panas, J. Pantouvakis, Dimitrios Karagiannakidis","doi":"10.2478/jeppm-2020-0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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).","PeriodicalId":53274,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management","volume":"10 1","pages":"219 - 230"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jeppm-2020-0024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

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).
施工生产率学习曲线模型的调查与比较分析——以沉箱制造工艺为例
摘要施工作业分析中的学习曲线被认为是决定现场生产力变化的主要因素之一,在规划和估算阶段总是被考虑在内。本研究试图利用生产力数据,评估学习曲线模型是否适合于有效分析大型海洋项目浮式沉箱制造过程中相当复杂的施工作业的学习现象。本文通过使用单位生产率和累积生产率数据对已发表的学习曲线模型(即直线或赖特;斯坦福“B”;三次;分段或逐步;指数)的结果进行比较,研究了它们的作用。主要有两个研究目标:首先,调查最适合已完成建筑活动的历史生产力数据的模型,其次,尝试确定哪个模型能更好地预测未来的表现。实际施工数据与每个模型得出的结果的偏差越小,其适用性就越好。在单位数据的情况下,三次模型适合更好的历史数据,而在未来预测的情况中,斯坦福“B”模型提供了更好的结果。分别地,当使用历史数据的累积数据时,三次模型产生更好的结果,而直线模型以更可靠的方式预测未来性能。可以在未来性能预测领域开发可能的扩展,通过采用不同的数据表示技术(例如移动/指数加权平均)或通过包括其他(非经典)学习曲线模型(例如DeJong、Knecht、双曲线模型)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management
Journal of Engineering Project and Production Management Business, Management and Accounting-Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信