Editorial

Citation

McCaffer, R. (2010), "Editorial", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 17 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam.2010.28617eaa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Volume 17, Issue 5

A total of 12 authors have combined to produce the five papers in this issue. Three of these authors were based in Australia, two in Greece, two each in China and the UK and one in each of the USA, Canada and Hong Kong. A pleasing feature is that one of these papers straddles academia and industry. One day Engineering Construction and Architecture Management (ECAM) will publish an issue with all papers written jointly by academics and industrialists and the relevance of academic research will be beyond question. Two other papers have authors from more than one institution, although in the case of the UK paper this is a result of a recent move. The other multi-institutional paper has a global span with the authors coming from Canada, Australia, Hong Kong and China. This mix of academic and industry and of multiple institutions give the papers in this edition a feeling that they come forward with broadly based inputs leading to some authoritative papers.

The predominate research approach in this issue is modelling and this appeals to the engineer in me and indeed the papers presented have a strong engineering focus. The topics include predicting the truck cycle times in open cast mining, productivity estimating in excavation operations, the management of construction waste, the overturning of excavators and safety in highway work zones. These paper have also clearly targeted practical outcomes: the management of trucks in mining, the improvement of excavation productivity, the improvement of waste management, the prevention of excavator accidents and improving safety in work zones in highways. The overall impression is that this group of authors and academic researchers are enthusiastic about seeing their work having a practical impact and I believe this is to be greatly encouraged.

The papers in this issue are: Emmanuel K. Chanda and Steven Gardiner offer computer simulation models for predicting truck cycle times in open-pit mining. The authors comment on the relative accuracy of the different modelling approaches, e.g. regression and neural networks. Overall the accuracy of the models is ±5 per cent of actual records. The authors could have made a much stronger case on the proposed use of the models and the advantages to be gained.

A. Panas and J.P. Pantouvakis provide an approach for comparing productivity estimation methods in excavation operations. The sensitivity to variations is also explored. The importance of operational conditions, e.g. digging depth and swing angle to the dumping point, is featured in the analysis. The output from this modelling is fed into determining truck fleet size and the unit cost of excavation.

Having, a very long time ago, produced an automated estimating system for trench excavation this paper was of particular interest.

Jane L.J. Hao, Vivian W.Y. Tam, H.P. Yuan, J.Y. Wang and J.R. Li use a system dynamics modelling approach to integrate three subsystems to simulate construction and demolition waste management. The data to populate the model was acquired through literature, official reports and questionnaires. The authors claim to have produced an experimental simulation platform to investigate the interdependencies of the factors in the management of construction waste. The model illustrates the need for effective measures and the need for waste reduction and for new landfill sites.

The authors claim that the model deepens the participants understanding of waste management and offers an effective tool for planning waste management. This seems a worthy contribution to a very real problem and hopefully the authors will work with their planning authorities to implement the model in practice.

David J. Edwards and Gary D. Holt present case studies of incidents of excavator overturns. These two authors are dedicated to health and safety in the use of construction plant and previously had offered a test to identify the risk of overturns of mini-excavators. In this paper, they investigate the factors that contribute to overturning. Comprehensive documentation from eight-case studies and anecdotal evidence from a further three provide the data for this analysis.

The results were presented to experts for comment. The authors list the factors that contribute to overturning. From this, they re-emphasise the need for operator and banksman training and argue that site managers also need to be aware of the risks so that they can implement risk control. I have no doubt that the information presented here is already embedded in training programmes by the authors.

Zongzhi Li reviews road safety audits worldwide and investigates the perceptions of experts on highway work zone safety in the USA. They go on to present a framework for developing guidelines for implementing works zone safety audits. The research methods were literature and questionnaire surveys.

The conclusions are that road safety audits have been successful and with respect to work zone safety this work has clarified the leading causes of problems.

This information should be used to prepare strategies for developing guidelines for work zone safety. This paper offers a very practical approach to the problem of work zone safety on highways.

Finally, the editorial team of ECAM wish to acknowledge the contribution of Professor Dave Langford of Glasgow Caledonian University who sadly and quite suddenly passed away in May, whilst attending a Project Management Conference held at Heraklion, Crete organised by NTUA. The many tributes paid to Dave Langford on the CNBR network is evidence that Dave had touched many people and therefore will be greatly missed. A regular contributor to conferences, he was always an eloquent, interesting and controversial speaker. His challenge to conventional views generated great debate. ECAM will miss him too. Dave was awarded Emerald’s prize of “outstanding reviewer for 2009”. This decision was made earlier this year but not announced until recently and so sadly Dave did not know how much we appreciated him.

Web site: www.mccaffer.com

Ronald McCaffer