Matching Items (6)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Design Build
- Creators: El Asmar, Mounir
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Resource Type: Text
- Status: Published
Description
Alternative Project Delivery Methods (APDMs), namely Design Build (DB) and Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR), grew out of the need to find a more efficient project delivery approach than the traditional Design Bid Build (DBB) form of delivery. After decades of extensive APDM use, there have been many studies focused on the use of APDMs and project outcomes. Few of these studies have reached a level of statistical significance to make conclusive observations about APDMs. This research effort completes a comprehensive study for use in the horizontal transportation construction market, providing a better basis for decisions on project delivery method selection, improving understanding of best practices for APDM use, and reporting outcomes from the largest collection of APDM project data to date. The study is the result of an online survey of project owners and design teams from 17 states representing 83 projects nationally. Project data collected represents almost six billion US dollars. The study performs an analysis of the transportation APDM market and answers questions dealing with national APDM usage, motivators for APDM selection, the relation of APDM to pre-construction services, and the use of industry best practices. Top motivators for delivery method selection: the project schedule or the urgency of the project, the ability to predict and control cost, and finding the best method to allocate risk, as well as other factors were identified and analyzed. Analysis of project data was used to compare to commonly held assumptions about the project delivery methods, confirming some assumptions and refuting others. Project data showed that APDM projects had the lowest overall cost growth. DB projects had higher schedule growth. CMAR projects had low design schedule growth but high construction schedule growth. DBB showed very little schedule growth and the highest cost growth of the delivery methods studied. Best practices in project delivery were studied: team alignment, front end planning, and risk assessment were identified as practices most critical to project success. The study contributes and improves on existing research on APDM project selection and outcomes and fills many of the gaps in research identified by previous research efforts and industry leaders.
ContributorsBingham, Evan Dale (Author) / Gibson Jr., G. Edward (Thesis advisor) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Bearup, Wylie (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
The water and wastewater industry in the United States is in dire need of renovation due to dwindling infrastructure and requires substantial reinvestment. Design-bid-build (DBB) is the traditional method of project delivery most widely applied in this industry. However, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) are on the rise and touting the benefits of reduced project schedule and cost. The main purpose of this study is to conduct a qualitative and quantitative performance evaluation to assess the current impact of APDM in the water and wastewater industry. A national survey was conducted targeting completed water and wastewater treatment plant projects. Responses were obtained from 75 utilities and constructors that either completed their projects using DBB, construction manager at risk (CMAR), or design-build (DB). Data analysis revealed that CMAR and DB statistically outperformed DBB in terms of project speed and intensity. Performance metrics such as cost growth, schedule growth, unit cost, factors influencing project delivery method selection, scope changes, warranty and latent defects, and several others are also evaluated. The main contribution of this study was that it was able to show that for the same project cost, water and wastewater treatment plants could be delivered under a faster schedule and with higher quality through the utilization of APDM.
ContributorsFeghaly, Jeffrey (Author) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / Bearup, Wylie (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The built environment is responsible for a significant portion of global waste generation.
Construction and demolition (C&D) waste requires significant landfill areas and costs
billions of dollars. New business models that reduce this waste may prove to be financially
beneficial and generally more sustainable. One such model is referred to as the “Circular
Economy” (CE), which promotes the efficient use of materials to minimize waste
generation and raw material consumption. CE is achieved by maximizing the life of
materials and components and by reclaiming the typically wasted value at the end of their
life. This thesis identifies the potential opportunities for using CE in the built environment.
It first calculates the magnitude of C&D waste and its main streams, highlights the top
C&D materials based on weight and value using data from various regions, identifies the
top C&D materials’ current recycling and reuse rates, and finally estimates a potential
financial benefit of $3.7 billion from redirecting C&D waste using the CE concept in the
United States.
ContributorsAldaaja, Mohammad (Author) / El Asmar, Mounir (Thesis advisor) / Buch, Rajesh (Committee member) / Kaloush, Kamil (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
Sustainable Materials Management and Circular Economy are both frameworks for considering the way we interact with the world's resources. Different organizations and institutions across the world have adopted one philosophy or the other. To some, there seems to be little overlap of the two, and to others, they are perceived as being interchangeable. This paper evaluates Sustainable Materials Management (SMM) and Circular Economy (CE) individually and in comparison to see how truly different these frameworks are from one another. This comparison is then extended into a theoretical walk-through of an SMM treatment of concrete pavement in contrast with a CE treatment. With concrete being a ubiquitous in the world's buildings and roads, as well as being a major constituent of Construction & Demolition waste generated, its analysis is applicable to a significant portion of the world's material flow. The ultimate test of differentiation between SMM and CE would ask: 1) If SMM principles guided action, would the outcomes be aligned with or at odds with CE principles? and conversely 2) If CE principles guided action, would the outcomes be aligned with or at odds with SMM principles? Using concrete pavement as an example, this paper seeks to determine whether or not Sustainable Materials Management and Circular Economy are simply different roads leading to the same destination.
ContributorsAbdul-Quadir, Anisa (Author) / Kelman, Candice (Thesis director) / Buch, Rajesh (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05
Description
Project teams expend substantial effort to develop scope definition during the front end planning phase of large, complex projects, but oftentimes neglect to sufficiently plan for small projects. An industry survey administered by the author showed that small projects make up approximately half of all projects in the infrastructure construction sector (by count), the planning of these projects varies greatly, and that a consistent definition of “small infrastructure project” did not exist. This dissertation summarizes the motivations and efforts of Construction Industry Institute (CII) Research Team 314a to develop a non-proprietary front end planning tool specifically for small infrastructure projects, namely the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) for Small Infrastructure Projects. The author was a member of CII Research Team 314a, who was tasked with developing the tool in September 2015. The author, together with the research team, scrutinized and adapted an existing infrastructure-focused FEP tool, the PDRI for Infrastructure Projects, and other resources to develop a set of 40 specific elements relevant to the planning of small infrastructure projects. The author along with the research team supported the facilitation of seven separate industry workshops where 71 industry professionals evaluated the element descriptions and provided element prioritization data that was statistically analyzed and used to develop a corresponding weighted score sheet. The tool was tested on 76 completed and in-progress projects, the analysis of which showed that small infrastructure projects with greater scope definition (based on the tool’s scoring scheme) outperformed projects with lesser scope definition regarding cost performance, schedule performance, change performance, financial performance, and customer satisfaction. Moreover, the author found that users of the tool on in-progress projects agreed that the tool added value to their projects in a timeframe and manner consistent with their needs, and that they would continue using the tool in the future. The author also conducted qualitative and quantitative similarities and differences between PDRI – Infrastructure and PDRI – Small Infrastructure Projects in support of improved planning efforts for both types of projects. Finally, the author piloted a case study that introduced the PDRI into an introductory construction management course to enhance students’ learning experience.
ContributorsElZomor, Mohamed A (Author) / Parrish, Kristen (Thesis advisor) / Gibson, Jr., G. Edward (Committee member) / El Asmar, Mounir (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
As the construction industry in Saudi Arabia was on its way to thriving again. Their growth was due to the unprecedented volume of planned projects such as large-scale and unique projects. Suddenly, the world was faced with one of the most disrupting events in the last century which had a devastating impact on the construction industry specifically. This paper explores mainly the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on construction projects in Saudi Arabia. Particularly, this paper explores how the pandemic and its related events contributed to the projects' schedule disturbances. This is because most of the projects rely on manpower and supply chains which were heavily disrupted due to the protective measures. For that, a study was conducted to evaluate the impact on the construction projects in Saudi Arabia, to what extent the schedule projects were affected, and what were the main reasons for the schedule delays. The research relied on a field survey and schedule analysis for 12 projects which resulted in identifying several causes of delays and the delayed durations that the projects in Saudi Arabia were facing. This research allows those in construction fields to identify the main causes of delays in order to avoid or minimize the impact of these issues on future projects.
ContributorsObeid, Muhammad Hasan Hani (Author) / Ariaratnam, Samuel (Thesis advisor) / El Asmar, Mounir (Committee member) / Chong, Oswald (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021