Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor...
20
Copyright 2005 Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data CIFE TAC 2008 1 Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data Professor Martin Fischer Forest Peterson
Transcript of Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor...
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20081
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
Professor Martin FischerForest Peterson
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20082
Nothing matters except the quantities. You can manipulate unit cost and production rates all you want, but they don t mean anything if the quantities are wrong.Ron Dukeshier Reno Transportation Rail Access Corridor (ReTRAC) project manager, 30 years experience on heavy civil projects including the Guri Dam in Venezuela, staff instructions for preparing 2006 quarterly forecast material.
The time needed to get [actual performance data] is about two hours a week on a 15,000 m2 project. Monitoring daily would give more accurate results but is very difficult to implement.(Seppänen and Kenley 2006)
Good Coding Leads to Good Quantities
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20083table derived from fig 1 (Kizitas and Akinci 2005)
Agent Involved Information Source
foreman timecards and timecard comments
project staff verbal exchange
field engineers cycle time logs
project staff planning meetings
project staff 3 week look-ahead schedule meeting
construction mgr. progress meeting minutes
project staff, subs, owners rep., inspect.
coordination meeting minutes
construction mgr. project doc. plan, spec, RFI, CO
accounting system equipment and material delivery tickets
sensors sensor based data
cost report weekly unit cost
subcontractors invoice
field engineer walk worksite and measure
field engineer inferred estimate (statistical WAG)
Actual Performance
Data Updates
formalized way of automatically inferring from product / process
modelsensor based
dataknowledge-base
information
Coding
Manual & Automated Methods
Act
ual
Per
form
ance
Dat
aC
od
ing
500 CY
Qty
300721Conc. truck
Day 5Blg A
Activity code
equiptimelocation
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
our formalized method will capture the quantity from input information source then automatically assign an activity code:input info: fuel quantity,
equipment number, time, locationfilter: location I & time j =
activity kcheck: equipment x
assigned to activity k, equipment x fuel capacity >= fuel quantity code verified: assign fuel
quantity to activity k4
Miscode From Info. Complexity
Coding 22.06
CY/MH planned
17.43$713,025$166,50092,000Exc. support
CY/MH actual
Actual (1 yr later)
BudgetQty BCY
Cost Code
table derived from fig 1 (Kizitas and Akinci 2005)
Agent Involved Information Source
foreman timecards and timecard comments
project staff verbal exchange
field engineers cycle time logs
project staff planning meetings
project staff 3 week look-ahead schedule meeting
construction mgr. progress meeting minutes
project staff, subs, owners rep., inspect.
coordination meeting minutes
construction mgr. project doc. plan, spec, RFI, CO
accounting system equipment and material delivery tickets
sensors sensor based data
cost report weekly unit cost
subcontractors invoice
field engineer walk worksite and measure
field engineer inferred estimate (statistical WAG)
Co
din
gF
uel
Qu
anti
ties
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20085
Envision task of collecting weekly actual performance data and updating process model, design-build US 20 highway realignment project, $130 million, 3.5 million cubic yards (Hoover Dam, 3.4 million cubic yards of concrete) photo from Oregonian
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20086
The whiteboard stretches from one end of the wall inside the [project] headquarters to the other, and from floor to ceiling. We hold weekly meetings, to schedule everything out, said [the PM]. We draw our schedule out and everybody knows what needs to be done...
Asked how close to schedule the work is proceeding.
I can't honestly say, except that we are still striving to bring it in on time. (Gallob 2006)
Former project manager, $130M design-build highway project
Importance of Actual Performance Data Updates
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 20087
Proposed Approach/MethodAutomatically determine and assign the correct activity code from:
existing work breakdown structure format as information format to assign activity code4D product/process model to filter activity codessensor based data as contextual information about weekly production, e.g., material, location, associated data, e.g., material type or density, as formalized method to filter activity codesstatistical methods using historical data to infer likely code, e.g., link logic, likely data patterns
There is no focused effort to create formalized guidelines or algorithm for automatically assigning code to sensor based actual performance data
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
Current data date
Possible activities200380200545200670200615
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
date 1/0/1900location #N/Amaterial #N/Aactivity code #N/Averified #N/A
date location material Activity#N/A
date Location location activity material7/11/2008 Arlington Arlington 200615 .5 agg
End Area 200670 sandKeystone 200380 .5 aggRalston 200545 sand
7/12/2008 ralston
UPDATERESET
OPEN
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200810
Point of DepartureAutomatically determine and assign the correct activity code from:
work breakdown structure format input data into standard formatproduct/process model, what activity is at location l and time j sensor based data contextual information, equipment no. associated data, equipment fuel capacitystatistical methods, say equip no. missing, assume likely equip based on previous data.
There is no focused effort to create formalized guidelines or algorithm for automatically assigning code to sensor based actual performance data
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200811
Stat. WAGStat. WAG
% of Cost% of Cost
Field Engr. Measured Work-In-
Place
3D Model
Cost ReportProduction Rate
Est. & Hist. Prod. Rate Database
4D Model
Quantity Take-Off
Estimated Work-In-Place
Auto Activity Code
Check
Weekly Quantities
Check
Recipe-formula
Sensor Quantity Capture
Check
Schedule
A
CB
E
DFeed-Back
Loop
Field Engr. Measured Work-In-
Place
3D Model
Cost ReportProduction Rate
Est. & Hist. Prod. Rate Database
4D Model
Quantity Take-Off
Estimated Work-In-Place
Auto Activity Code
Weekly Quantities
Recipe-formula
Sensor Quantity Capture
Schedule
Feed-Back Loop
1
26
8
3
4
5
7
66
6
6
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200812
1. select component-operations necessary to construct product
2. create recipe-formulas to convert from explicit-components (existing in model) to implicit-components (not existing in model, i.e., formwork)
3. lookup production rate for each component-operation4. assign relevant component-operations to each activity5. export activities and product to process/product
model6. actual performance data and expected work-in-place 7. assign activity code based on information source8. update process model and historical database then
iterate from step 1, capturing change in scope & quality
Activity Coding Process Description
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200813
Assign Code
Recipe-formula
Code Subset
Time
Data Fusion
Sensor based data collection
3D-Image Object
Recognition
Activity Code List
Exception
4D Model
Potential Code
Statistical WAG
Check
Check
Check
Check
1
32
5
4
Measured Work-In-Place
Production Rate
Estimated Work-In-Place
Weekly Quantities
Recipe-formula
% of Cost
Stat. WAG
Feed-Back Loop
assign / verify activity code
3D Model Object Group
Library Database
Estimate / Budget
Schedule
develop project
plan
Recipe formula
components, productions rates
and quantities
Componen
t-oper
atio
ns
& pro
ductio
n rate
s
Map Objects
Status: exists todayStatus: CMU field trial (new)Status: CIFE seed proposal (needed)Status: NIST 2010 goal (new)Status: future NSF proposalStatus: Technion algorithm (new)
Lo
cati
on
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200814
Research MethodsInterview engineers to define the process used to interpret / consider information sources. Collaborate with data collection researchers to determine inputs available for activity code assignment.
Develop formalized process to interpret / consider information sources. Once developed, demonstrate process through a model. Then validate the model through a case study of archived project data.
Anticipated success is based on data collection research at CMU, Technion and FIATECH. Similar automated methods are used in static manufacturing process control and are applicable to this research.
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200815
Industry Involvement
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 200816
Through improved actual performance updates this research supports CIFE 2010 and 2015 measurable goals:using integrated schedule methods to allowpiloting automation of construction activity (i.e. activity coding)thus increasing schedule (update) performanceduring project executionleading to increased cost conformanceall in pursuit of safety and sustainability
Automation of measurements, furthers NIST 2003 goals for reduction in delivery time and waste through technology advances in information and decision technologies, 1996 NIST Automation Program Report No. 2 .
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
Autumn Qtr: conduct interviews to determine 1) existing methodology 2) parametersprovided by, sensor based data and process / product models. Risk: interviews not productive
Winter Qtr: precedence of parameters to infer activity code. Through case study, conduct validation to determine if methodology is correctRisk: parameters insufficient
Spring Qtr: deliver prototype and results of validation study. Prepare for field trial on one or more activity types.Risk: validation fails
17
Research Plan, Schedule and Risks
what are the
inputs
if then else
this
is the output correct
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
Recap
1. vision process/product model updates automatically from actual performance data collected using sensors and automatically assigned activity code
2. benefits reduced need to manually collect actual performance data, resulting in accurate, precise, reliable, high level-of-detail actual performance data
3. importance of proposed work reliability, precision, accuracy and level-of-detail in project data sufficient to actively anticipate trouble and take corrective action
Copyright 2005
Automating Activity Coding from Model and Sensor Data
CIFE TAC 2008
ReferencesGallob, J. Highway 20 project moves mountains Newport News-Times
08/30/2006 http://www.newportnewstimes.com/articles/2006/08/30/news/news01.txt
Granite Construction (2007) Granite Construction Incorporated Announces New Strategic and Organizational Realignment , company website, investor relations, 2/14/07
Kiziltas, S. and Akinci, B. The Need for Prompt Schedule Update By Utilizing Reality Capture Technologies: A Case Study. Construction Research Congress, April 5-7, 2005, San Diego, CA.
O. Seppänen, R. Kenley "PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT USING LOCATION BASED STATUS DATA" Proceedings IGLC-13, July 2005, Sydney, Australia
Photo Cost Engineer of the Year Engineer Update Corps of Engineers of the Department of Defense publication February 2001 http://www.hq.usace.army.mil/cepa/pubs/feb01/feb01.htm
R. Korman with T. Illia (December 2006) Big Design-Build Road Jobs Aren t Foolproof Profit-makers , Engineering News Review (ENR)
Washington Group International (2006) Washington Group International Announces Third-Quarter Charges, Reaffirms 2006 Net Income Guidance , company website, investor relations, 10/25/06
This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.daneprairie.com.The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only.
