首页> 外文学位 >Comparison of design-build and design-bid-build performance of public university projects.
【24h】

Comparison of design-build and design-bid-build performance of public university projects.

机译:公立大学项目设计建造和设计投标建造性能的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

With an unsure market and scarce work, owners across the United States, especially universities, are finding themselves in situations where they are unable to complete their projects within cost and schedule using the traditional delivery method: Design--Bid--Build (DBB). Under the DBB project delivery method, many competent contractors are electing to send low bids on projects just to keep work on their books, with plans to receive change orders once the project is underway; this practice is leading to cost and schedule overruns. Public universities across the United States are beginning to elect to use Design-Build (DB) as an alternate project delivery method over the traditional project delivery method of DBB in order to aid in reducing the cost, schedule, and change orders.;Due to current legislation in effect, all 50 states are able to use the DB delivery method. However, only 20 states and their public agencies are permitted to use DB for all types of design and construction projects. In 18 states, DB is widely permitted, but not all agencies are permitted to use this delivery method. In the remaining 12 states, DB is a limited option.;In order to analyze and compare Design-Build (DB) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB) projects, this study collected data, by means of convenient random sampling, from construction projects built by Planning and Construction Departments of U.S. universities. Statistical tests were conducted to determine if the metrics related to cost, schedule, and change orders were significantly different from each other in these two types of projects.;The findings of this study will help public universities decide what delivery method is best for them in terms of controlling costs, schedule, and change orders. The results showed that DB projects significantly outperformed DBB projects in terms of Contract Award Cost Growth, Design and Construction Schedule Growth, Total Schedule Growth, Construction Intensity, Construction Change Order Cost Growth, and Total Change Order Cost Growth.
机译:由于市场不确定且工作稀缺,美国各地的业主,尤其是大学的业主,发现自己无法使用传统的交付方式在成本和进度范围内完成项目:设计,投标,建造(DBB) 。根据DBB项目交付方式,许多合格的承包商选择对项目进行低价投标,以保持其账簿上的工作,并计划在项目进行中接收变更单;这种做法导致成本和进度超支。美国各地的公立大学开始选择使用Design-Build(DB)作为DBB的传统项目交付方法的替代项目交付方法,以帮助降低成本,进度和变更订单。根据现行法规,所有50个州都可以使用DB传递方法。但是,仅允许20个州及其公共机构将DB用于所有类型的设计和建设项目。在18个州中,广泛允许使用DB,但并非所有代理商都可以使用这种交付方式。在其余的12个州中,DB是一个有限的选择。为了分析和比较Design-Build(DB)和Design-Bid-Build(DBB)项目,本研究通过方便的随机抽样从建筑中收集了数据由美国大学规划和建设部门建造的项目。进行统计测试以确定这两种类型的项目中与成本,进度和变更单相关的指标是否存在显着差异。本研究的结果将帮助公立大学确定最适合他们的交付方式控制成本,时间表和变更单的条款。结果表明,在合同授予成本增长,设计和施工进度增长,总进度增长,施工强度,施工变更单成本增长和总变更单成本增长方面,数据库项目明显优于DBB项目。

著录项

  • 作者

    Fernane, James David.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Nevada, Las Vegas.;

  • 授予单位 University of Nevada, Las Vegas.;
  • 学科 Engineering Architectural.;Engineering Civil.;Architecture.
  • 学位 M.S.E.
  • 年度 2011
  • 页码 119 p.
  • 总页数 119
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:44:07

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号