Konrad Decision-making Tools in Construction Management (2)

8/11/2019 Konrad Decision-making Tools in Construction Management (2)

1/76

Dubai May 2013

Construction Management:Decision-making Tools and Processes

CIVL 493/521 201UBC

Konrad Siu M. Eng., M.B.A., P. Eng., FCSCEExecutive Director, Drainage Design and Construction

City of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

January 2014


2/76


3/76

Introduction


4/76

H istory - 1910s

Rat Creek Sewer Tunnel Construction in the 1910s


5/76

H istory - 1910s

Rat Creek Sewer Tunnel Construction in the 1910s


6/76

H istory - 1920s

Sewer Tunnel Construction in the 1920s


7/76

H istory - 1920s



8/76

H istory - 1950s



9/76

Tunnelling Machine 60s


10/76

Tunneling under the Bay Station 1970s

H istory - 1970s


11/76

TBM Tunneling 1980s

TBM 1980s


12/76

TBM Tunneling 2000s

TBM 2000s


13/76

Tunnelling


14/76

Pipe Ramming


15/76

Pipe Ramming


16/76

Micro-Tunnelling


17/76

Pilot Tube Micro-Tunnelling


18/76

Edmontons Infrastructure

Infrastructure arethe physical assets

developed and usedby a municipality to

support its socialand economic

activities


19/76

$15.11

$12.07

$4.28

$1.96 $1.67$1.03

$0.72$0.34 $0.34 $0.33 $0.14 $0.08 $0.07 $0.01

$0.0

$2.0

$4.0

$6.0

$8.0

$10.0

$12.0

$14.0

$16.0

$ b i l l i o n

Total 2012 Asset Replacement Value - $38.2 billion

Drainage ParksBuildingsRoadROW

AffordableHousing

TrafficControl

WasteMgmt

Fleet CommunityInfra.

LibraryPoliceTechnologyEquipment

FireRescue

Transit Fac.& Equip.

Replacement Value ofInfrastructure


20/76

A

B

C

D

F

VeryGood

Good

Fair

Poor

VeryPoor

These rati ngs areappli ed to eachclassification

StandardizedRating System
http://www.infraguide.ca/http://www.infraguide.ca/http://www.infraguide.ca/http://www.infraguide.ca/


21/76

Value Engineering


22/76

IntroductionHistory of Value Engineering

1945

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Canada adopts V.E. Acceptance for management / strategic process

U.S. Federal law mandates V.E.

Japan/EPA adopts V.E.

G.E. develops V.E.

U.S. Navy adopts V.E.

Adopted by:

-U.S. Department ofDefense -U.S. Manufacturers -Europe & Australia -Military Const.

Shortage of financial resources

Shortage of physical resources


23/76


24/76

Effectiveness of Value

EngineeringProactive ValueEngineering Constructability Review

Time

C o s

t

COST TOCHANGE

Traditional ValueEngineering

COST SAVINGSPOTENTIAL Varies with Type

of Project

Concept Development Design Construction or Production

Constructive VE Opportunity Constructive InterventionCost


25/76

Value Engineering Is

System Oriented

Multi-disciplined Team Approach

Life Cycle Oriented

Function Oriented - Relates function required to the value received


26/76

Value Engineering Is NOT

Design Review

Cheapening Process

A Requirement Done on all Designs

Quality Control


27/76

What is Value?

itinto putWhat wesomethingof outgetWhat we

Value

ResourcesBenefits

etc.Energy,Mass,Time,Cost,etc.Appeal,y,ReliabilitQuality,

Value

CostFunction

WorthCost

Value

Value = A ratio used for comparing alternatives that can reliably

perform the same function


28/76

Who Defines Value?

Good Value is definedby the owner

Performance Quality Aesthetics

Type of Value Religious Political Ethical Judicial Social Aesthetic

Economic Sentimental


29/76


30/76

Information PhaseInformation

Phase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhasePresentation

Phase

Implementation


31/76

Information Phase

Information needed from the designer andowner Design Criteria

Site conditions Regulatory requirements Elements of the design History of the project Constraints imposed on the project Available utilities Requirements from the public Design computations Cost estimate


32/76

Information Phase

Ask Questions What is the problem we are about to

discuss? Why do you consider this a problem? Why do you believe a solution is

necessary?

Ask questions of others the way youwould like questions asked of you


33/76

Function Analysis

InformationPhase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhasePresentation

Phase

Implementation


34/76

What is Function

Work Performed by a project, product,element, process, or procedure

Answers question: What does it do?


35/76

Function Identification

Active Verb:Indicates state of being;

asserts somethingConveySupport

Transmits

ProtectsEnclosesHouses

Measurable noun:Object of the verb; allowsquantitative evaluation

WeightLoadFlowHeatLight

People

The more abstract the function description, the greater

The opportunities for finding creative alternatives

Identify using two-word description:


36/76

Types of Functions

There are two types of functions Basic Function

The specific work or purpose the product, project,process, must complete

Secondary Function Support function that may be needed but do not

perform the actual work


37/76

Function Analysis

Example: Pencil

Description Function Basic Secondary

Pencil Make Marks

Eraser Removes Marks

Band Secure eraser

Improve appearance

Body Support lead

Transmit force

Accommodate grip

Display information

Paint Protect wood

Improve appearance

Lead Make Marks


38/76

Function Analysis SystemTechnique (FAST)

Expansion of Function Analysis to FASTmodel Function analysis involves asking questions

about functions: How can we (verb/noun)?,Why do we (verb/noun)?.

Charles Bytheway, a UNIVAC logician,organized the functions and questions into afunctional family tree in the 1960s called aFAST model (Function Analysis SystemTechnique)


39/76

FAST Diagram


40/76

FAST Logic


41/76

SESS STAGE 1

Major Logic PathBasicFunction


42/76

Creativity Phase

InformationPhase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhase

PresentationPhase

Implementation


43/76

Search for new Ideas

Adapt What else is like this? Modify Change the meaning, size

color, direction

Magnify make larger, heaviermore costly

Minify minimize, omit; lighter, lower Substitute What else could used instead? Rearrange Is there an alternative design Reverse Can it be transposed, made upside

down? Combine Blend ideas; perform multiple functions


44/76

Example Project

Alternative Description

1 Pond with Concrete Liner, with Pump Station

2 Underground Concrete Tank

3 Aboveground Steel Tanks, with Pump Station

4 Pond without Concrete Liner, with Pump Station

5 SuperPipe with Trenchless Options

6Combination of SuperPipe, Trenchless Options andTanks

7 SuperPipe and Tunneling to replace Double Barrel Sewer

Table .1 Alternatives List


45/76

Judgment Phase

InformationPhase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhase

PresentationPhase

Implementation


46/76

Judgment Steps

Determine evaluation criteria and prioritize

Evaluation ideas Test with respect to criteria Identify advantages and disadvantages

Rate ideas

Select best alternatives


47/76

Develop Evaluation Criteria

Review project value objective (sometimesidentified at the beginning of the session)

Review owners comments during interviewsand opening presentation

List criteria and prioritize from ownersperspective


48/76

Weighted Evaluation Matrix


49/76

Example to Determine Weight of Criteria

Table 1- Evaluation Criteria A B C D E F G H I J Total Weights

A 2A 1C 2A 1A 2A 3A 3A 1A 2A 16 19%B 2B 2D 2E 3F 2B 3B 1B 1J 8 9%C 2C 2C 2C 3C 3C 1C 2C 16 19%D 1D 1F 2D 3D 1D 2J 9 11%

E 1E 2E 3E 1E 1E 10 12%F 2F 3F 1F 1J 10 12%G 2G 2I 1J 2 2%H 3I 1J 1 1%I 1J 5 6%J 8 9%

85 100%A Environmental

B Constructability 1 SAMEC Safety 2 MEDIUMD Maintainability / Operability 3 STRONGE Reliability of systemF Impact on existing infastructureG Availabiity of contractors for alternativesH AppearanceI Disruption to Traffic and other servicesJ Compatibility with WESS strategy/existing and future network


50/76

Example to Rate Alternatives

Alternative Evaluation Matrix

Criteria Evaluation Criteria Weight Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score1 Environmental 19 4 75.3 9 169.4 6 112.9 4 75.3 8 150.6 7 131.8 7 131.82 Constructability 9 7 65.9 7 65.9 6 56.5 6 56.5 6 56.5 6 56.5 6 56.53 Safety 19 6 112.9 7 131.8 6 112.9 6 112.9 5 94.1 5 94.1 4 75.34 Maintainability / Operability 11 3 31.8 8 84.7 6 63.5 2 21.2 6 63.5 5 52.9 7 74.1

5 Reliability of system 12 6 70.6 8 94.1 8 94.1 5 58.8 7 82.4 7 82.4 7 82.46 Impact on existing infastructure 12 8 94.1 7 82.4 7 82.4 8 94.1 8 94.1 8 94.1 8 94.17 Availabiity of contractors for alternatives 2 9 21.2 9 21.2 7 16.5 9 21.2 8 18.8 8 18.8 8 18.88 Appearance 1 4 4.7 9 10.6 5 5.9 4 4.7 8 9.4 8 9.4 8 9.49 Disruption to Traffic and other services 6 9 52.9 3 17.6 9 52.9 9 52.9 7 41.2 7 41.2 7 41.2

10 Compat ibi li ty wi th WESSstrategy/ex isting and future network

9 9 84.7 9 84.7 9 84.7 9 84.7 9 84.7 9 84.7 9 84.7

Ranking Alternative Value1 13.92 12.83 8.94 8.45 7.16 6.17 5.3

7

61.4 58.2 69.5 66.6 66.8

1 42 3

8.9 7.1

5 6

13.9 12.8 8.49.5 5.0 5.2 8.0

FunctionCost (Millions $)Value = Function / Cost 6.1

11.55.3

76.2 68.28.6 9.6

Combination SuperPipe, Trenchless Options and TanksSuperPipe with Trenchless Options

Underground Concrete Tank

Pond without Concrete Liner, with Pump Station

Function69.566.676.2

61.4

Aboveground Steel TankSuperPipe and Tunneling to replace Double Barrel Sewer

Pond with Concrete Liner, with Pump Station

66.868.258.2


51/76

Development Phase

InformationPhase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhase

PresentationPhase

Implementation


52/76


53/76

Presentation Phase

InformationPhase

Function

Analysis

CreativityPhase

JudgmentPhase

DevelopmentPhase

PresentationPhase

Implementation


54/76

Presentation & Implementation

Results General Information

Key Issues Evaluation of alternatives Summary and alternatives VM alternatives and backup data

Sketches* Calculations* Cost worksheet* LCC Worksheet* * Include as needed


55/76


56/76

VE Session


57/76

Risk Assessment


58/76

Risk:

The possibility of suffering loss (or harm) and the impact that loss has onthe involved party.

Risk can be characterized in terms of its severity, where:

Risk Concept

58

Severity = Likelihood of Occurrence x Magnitude of the Impact


59/76

Risk Management Method

59

Identify Analyze

ImplementMonitor


60/76

Example of Risk Assessment Table

Number

Category:Planning

Design

Construction

Risk FactorMitigation

Note

l k l


61/76

Value Engineering + Risk AnalysisInformation

Phase

Function Analysis

Creativity Phase

Evaluation Phase

DevelopmentPhase

Presentation andImplementation

Phase

Nominal MethodGut Feel Index (GFI)

AHP

Identify RiskFactors

RiskQuantification

Risk Mitigation

Life Cycle Cost

Sensitivity Analysis

Risk AnalysisValueEngineering


62/76

Constructability

C f Ad i l R l i hi


63/76

Cause of Adversarial Relationshipsin Construction

Poorly defined scope of project Excessive change orders Changes not properly managed Lack of communication of objectives Unrealistic project schedule Unrealistic project budget


64/76

What is Constructability?

Constructability is the optimum use ofconstruction knowledge and experience in

planning, design, procurement and fieldoperations to achieve overall projectobjectives. CII

Abili I fl Fi l C O P j Lif


65/76

A B

I L I T Y T O

I N F L U E N C E C O S T

HIGH

LOW

START COMPLETETIME

START-UP

CONSTRUCTION

PROCUREMENT

DESIGN

CONCEPTUAL PLANNING

Ability to Influence Final Cost Over Project Life


66/76

Objective of Constructability Review

Perform an in-depth analysis of the designfrom the contractors perspective.

Answer the question: Can this project beconstructed as it is represented in the

design?


67/76

Constructability Review - 1

The Team:

Step 1: develops an understanding of the project, its

constraints, design and underlying assumptions

Step 2: becomes familiar with the plans, learns whatfeatures were existing and proposed

Step 3: identifies potential conflicts and evaluates theproposed design in details


68/76

Constructability Review - 2

Step 4: starts developing concepts as a contractorwould build the project under the given constraints. This

allows development of alternatives for the design and/orrecommendations for enhancement as required

Step 5: puts together staging plan and schedule basedon various assumptions regarding achievableproductivities and methods of construction


69/76

Success Factors

Senior management's commitment to constructability and similarcommitment from all project participants.

Formal constructability program - establish a constructability procedure for inclusion in project executionplans apply early in project planning involve construction specialist as early as possible

Consideration of major construction methods, such asmodularization or preassembly, and sequencing of constructionactivities as part of basic design approaches to facilitate fabrication,transportation, installation , system turn over and start up.

Success Factors


70/76

Success Factors

Encourage teamwork, creativity, newideas and new approaches.

Emphasize total project integration, notoptimization of individual parts.

Evaluate progress and results.


71/76

Project Team

Design engineer or

consultant Construction

supervisor and/ordesignate

Planningrepresentative

Operationsrepresentative

Equipment/tradesrepresentative

Estimator

Technician Inspector Others as required

Project Manager, and any or all of the followingpersonnel:


72/76

Benefits

Constructability works - frequently withdramatic results.

-Better project-Lower costs-Better productivity

-Earlier project completions-Earlier start-ups


73/76

Closing


74/76


75/76


76/76

Thank you!Questions?

Konrad Decision-making Tools in Construction Management (2)

Documents

Transcript of Konrad Decision-making Tools in Construction Management (2)