Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12652/Ksce.2019.39.4.0531

Validating Dozer Productivity Computation Models  

Kim, Ryul-Hee (Kyungpook National University)
Park, Young-Jun (Intelligent Construction Automation Center)
Lee, Dong-Eun (Kyungpook National University)
Publication Information
KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research / v.39, no.4, 2019 , pp. 531-540 More about this Journal
Abstract
Existing dozer productivity computation models use different input variables, formulas, productivity correction factors, and experimental data source. This paper presents a method that characterizes the productivity outputs obtained by the PLS model and the Caterpillar model that are accepted as industry standards. The method identifies the input variables to be collected from the site, the performance charts to be referenced, and the formulas and implements them in a single computational tool. This study verifies that the PLS model may replace the manual computational process of Caterpillar model by eliminating reliance on graphics manipulation. Replacing the Caterpillar model with the PLS model and implementing the process as a function contributes to assess the productivity of a dozer timely by encouraging to utilize real-time information collected directly from the site. This study allows researchers and practitioners to effectively deal with the values of productivity correction factors collected from the job site and to control the productivity. The practicality and effectiveness of the method have been validated by applying to a project case.
Keywords
Dozer; Productivity; Computational model; Comparative verification;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Caterpillar, Inc. (2010). Caterpillar performance handbook 40th Ed, Caterpillar Inc, Peoria, I.L.
2 Church, H. K. (1981). Excavation handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
3 Komatsu, Inc. (2009). Specifications and application handbook, 30th Ed, Komatsu Inc, Tokyo, Japan.
4 Peurifoy, R. L., Schexnayder, C. J. and Shapira, A. (2009). Construction planning, equipment, and methods 7th Ed, McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
5 SAE International (2003). Earth-moving machinery crawler and wheel tractor dozer blades volumetric ratings : SAE J/ISO 9246, SAE International, Warrendale, M.I.
6 Shi, J. and AbouRizk, S. S. (1998). "An automated modeling system for simulating earthmoving operations." Computer‐Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 121-130.   DOI
7 Shi, J. J. (1999). "A neural network based system for predicting earthmoving production." Construction Management & Economics, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 463-471.   DOI
8 Touran, A., Sheahan, T. C. and Ozcan, E. (1997). "Rational equipment selection method based on soil conditions." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 123, No. 1, pp. 85-88.   DOI
9 Xiaoping, B., Gengyun, Z. and Xiaojing, Z. (1996). "Predicting vehicle turbocharged diesel engine performance at altitude." SAE Technical Paper, No. 961826, pp. 57-64.