抄録
Productivity is one of the most important criteria enabling site engineers to evaluate construction performance. A great deal of research has been carried out to investigate an appropriate method of productivity measurement. From these efforts, four different methods have been developed according to the various ways measurements and calculations of productivity are performed: 1) deterministic model-based, 2) simulation model-based, 3) queuing theory-based and 4) actual measurement. However, since there is no reference for productivity measurement based on practical applications, difficulties have arisen in determining which method is appropriate under specific situations. This paper presents a study on the quantified comparisons of results obtained by different methods in order to resolve this limitation. Actual datasets were collected from five construction jobsites where earthmoving was being carried out. Productivity was acquired through four methods. Results showed that the highest value of productivity was yielded by a deterministic model, followed by those obtained by a simulation model. The actual measurement yielded the lowest values of productivity. A queuing theory-based measurement was only available for four datasets due to the limitation of practical application in queue discipline. This study contributes to academia and industry in the field of construction by providing basic characteristics and quantified comparisons of various productivity measurements based on practical applications to actual cases.
