Next Article in Journal
Experimental Study on Direct Shear Behavior of New-to-Old Interface for Recycled Aggregate Concrete with Different Replacement Ratios
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring Built Environment Visual Interactions: A SoftBIM Data-Driven Approach for a Database About the Outdoor View
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Simulation Experiment Research on the Production of Large Box Girders

1
CCCC Third Shipping Engineering Bureau Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200032, China
2
Henan Zechang Expressway Co., Ltd., Zhengzhou 450018, China
3
School of Water Conservancy and Transportation, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Buildings 2024, 14(11), 3338; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113338
Submission received: 4 September 2024 / Revised: 8 October 2024 / Accepted: 16 October 2024 / Published: 22 October 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Building Structures)

Abstract

:
This paper introduces system simulation technology into large-scale beam field production and uses the simulation software Arena (14.0) to construct a simulation model of the beam field production system considering the randomness of the actual beam field production process operation time. The relationship between the production efficiency of the beam yard and the working time system was studied. In this paper, the improvement in beam-making efficiency in the existing beam field that is achieved by the commonly used reinforcement pre-binding method in the existing beam field is analyzed and calculated, and the improvements in the production efficiency in the ordinary beam field and the intelligent beam field are quantitatively calculated and compared. The results show that (1) when the working time system is increased from 8 h/d to 12 h/d, the average occupancy time of the traditional beam-making pedestal is shortened by 11.5 h when the working time is extended by 1 h per day; (2) with the extension of the working time system, the advantages of the pre-binding method of reinforcement gradually decrease; and (3) the application of intelligent technology not only improves the production efficiency of the beam yard but also makes the beam yard’s production more flexible and more resistant to risks.

1. Introduction

Precast beam yards are an auxiliary engineering project in the process of road and bridge construction whose main purpose is to provide high-quality and sufficient precast beams for actual projects. With the continuous development of science and technology, more intelligent technologies are being applied to the production process of precast beams, thereby improving the production efficiency of precast beam yards.
Relevant scholars at home and abroad have conducted a lot of research on the prefabricated beam field used in prefabricated bridge engineering. Tommelein and Zouein [1,2,3,4,5,6] studied the layout of a construction site in depth through a combination of artificial intelligence and an expert system and proposed an advanced method to assist in the construction of the project using relevant advanced software. To address the low level of mechanization of the production and installation of steel bars in a traditional beam yard, the lack of standardized management methods or reliable preservation methods for the production data of the beam yards, and the inability to associate and share the data, Han et al. [7] carried out an intelligent transformation of six prefabricated beam yards of Zhengji Railway, added a three-dimensional navigation system, and established a full life-cycle management platform for the production progress, production process, production safety, quality control, operation, and maintenance of the beam yard. Yang [8] combined the intelligent construction mode of prefabricated beam yards with collaborative theory and parallel engineering theory and used the AHP network analytic hierarchy process and two-dimensional cloud model to evaluate the intelligence level of existing prefabricated beam yards. Shu et al. [9] developed a point cloud and machine learning-based automated recognition and measurement method for long reinforcement cages with corrugated pipes of concrete beams. Sun et al. [10] found that the magnitude of and variation in vibration velocity in the BIXPR foundation are closely related to the degree of saturation of the subsoil. Their research results provide insight into BTXPR foundations with respect to theoretical analysis and calculation. Zhang et al. [11] investigated the influence of the flexural performance of UHPC-RC hybrid beams and developed a theoretical method for predicting the bearing capacity of UHPC-RC hybrid beams, which can provide a reference for the design of similar structures. Yao et al. [12] proposed a novel form known as the steel-PEC spliced frame beam (SPSFB). Based on elastic and plastic analyses, the bearing capacities and deformation were calculated. The calculated results agreed well with the experimental results. Huang et al. [13] found that the diameter of studs has a significant influence on the shear performance of PECC. In addition, a model to calculate the shear strength of PECC was proposed.
There are three main types of simulation [14], namely, static simulation technology, continuous event simulation, and discrete event simulation. Static simulation mainly uses random variables and random numbers as parameters to analyze and deal with random events. Continuous event simulation is continuous in time and is characterized by high confidence in the hypothesis testing of the simulation results [15]. Discrete event simulation simulates a discrete point in time. The construction system used in building engineering is a complex system with random factors, which makes it difficult to use the analytical method to determine the best mathematical model for research and analysis. Simulation experiment design and analysis theory is mainly used in stochastic dynamic simulation systems or discrete simulation systems [16,17], and it is considered one of the few effective ways to optimize the design of complex systems [18].
The beam yard production system itself is a special production system with elements of standardized operations and project construction operations. Standardized production can be achieved under the working conditions of the beam yard, but the beam yard’s production is also affected by weather, raw materials, transportation efficiency, and other factors. This makes it difficult for production to be carried out in full accordance with the standardized operation of a factory. Therefore, if the actual production system and various uncertainties in the external environment are not considered, the production efficiency and resource quantity of the beam yard, as determined by a single fixed index method, may not be consistent with the actual production of the beam yard. Therefore, this paper uses the simulation software Arena to establish a box girder production simulation model for the production system of the beam field and conducts a simulation experiment to determine the influence of different key factors on production efficiency. The experimental results quantitatively show the production efficiency of the beam field and the utilization of related key resources under different scenarios. This is of great significance in promoting the standardization of construction and the management of beam yards.

2. Beam Yard Production Process and Process Time

2.1. Process

Through an investigation and analysis of the production process of large-scale prefabricated box girders, the key production links can be summarized as follows: reinforcement cage binding, formwork technology, concrete pouring, concrete curing, prestressed construction, box girder transportation from the beam pedestal, etc.
(1)
Rebar cage lashing: This includes steel bar processing, beam body steel bar binding, and hoisting, where steel bar binding is the process with the largest workload, which takes the most time and the most manpower. The beam reinforcement binding and hoisting process includes steel bar split binding and secondary hoisting. Then, the steel bar is bound as a whole and hoisted once, before being split and tied, and hoisted once after being installed as a whole. Then, the split binding of steel bars and one-time hoisting with inner molds are carried out. After the reinforcement of the prefabricated beam body of the box girder is tied, it needs to be hoisted to the beam-making pedestal via a gantry crane.
(2)
Formwork technology: The box girder formwork is divided into the bottom form, outer form, inner form, and end form. The formwork sub-project construction technology is mainly influenced by the steel bar sub-project production technology and the method of moving the beams. The bottom form and outer form are mostly fixed, and the steel bar cage is installed after the inner form is lifted. Finally, the end form is installed and the model is adjusted.
(3)
Concrete pouring: The concrete pouring process for the beam directly affects the quality of the box beam, requiring continuous pouring and one-time forming. During construction, strict control must be exercised over the delivery, mixing, pouring, and vibration of the concrete. The operation must be monitored throughout to ensure that the concrete strength and related quality indicators are met.
(4)
Concrete curing: The primary purpose of concrete curing is to ensure the appropriate temperature and humidity during the solidification process of the concrete. Different curing methods are chosen based on varying climatic conditions. In summer, the method of natural curing using curing blankets is mainly employed to maintain the moisture of the concrete and prevent surface cracking. In winter, steam curing is primarily used to ensure the proper temperature and humidity for concrete solidification, thus preventing the temperature from being too low during the initial setting and ensuring that the internal temperature of the concrete does not become too low or too high during the constant temperature curing period.
(5)
Prestressed construction: The prestressing of box girders generally consists of the following stages: initial prestressing, preliminary prestressing, and final prestressing. The initial and preliminary prestressing stages occur during the construction of the beam platform, while the final prestressing stage is performed on the storage platform after the required age has been met. After the prestressing of the box girder is completed, subsequent procedures such as grouting of the ducts are carried out.
(6)
Transportation of box girders from the beam production platform: The initial prestressing of the precast box girder can only begin when the concrete strength of the girder meets over 80% of the design requirements. To achieve timely cycling of the formwork and the beam production platform, the box girder is moved from the production platform to the storage platform according to the technical specifications. It will continue to undergo natural curing while waiting for the strength and age requirements for final prestressing to be met. The transportation of the box girder is primarily carried out using gantry cranes and wheeled girder lifters.
Based on the analysis of the correlation between the production process and the construction process of the beam field, this paper summarizes the process flow of the simulation modeling of the box girder production system as follows: Bottom web reinforcement binding; bottom mold and side mold trimming; hoisting the bottom web steel skeleton; hoisting the inner mold; roof reinforcement binding; roof reinforcement hoisting; connecting the plate reinforcement to the web reinforcement; end die mounting; concrete pouring of beams; concrete curing of beams; removing the end mold; removing the inner mold; tension preparation; restressed initial tension; and moving the beam to the storage beam pedestal. The process flow of box girder production simulation modeling is shown in Figure 1.

2.2. Production Process Time Data Distribution

At present, the assumption of fixed process operation time is often used in the relevant literature, which ignores the randomness of the actual process operation time. According to the characteristics between the prefabricated production and the process of the box girder in the beam field, the operation time of the 10-step concrete curing process in Figure 1 is assumed to be evenly distributed according to the actual situation. The other process time is estimated by the field engineer as the most probable time, the most pessimistic time, and the most optimistic time, which is assumed to be a triangular distribution. Table 1 lists the data on the operation time of each process in box girder production obtained from the survey.

3. Establishment of the Simulation Model of Box Girder Production

3.1. Model Establishment

In order to study the influence of the system between work on the production efficiency of the beam-making pedestal, the simulation software Arena 14.0 was used to establish a simulation model for the beam field production system. From the analysis of the box girder production process in Section 2.2, a logical model of the box girder production process was established, as shown in Figure 2.

3.2. Model Parameter Settings

According to the actual investigation of the ordinary precast beam yard of a highway 2 standard 3, in the production process of the beam yard, the working time of workers is generally 8 h; under normal circumstances, it is 8:00–12:00 in the morning and 3:00–7:00 in the afternoon. However, if special circumstances need to rush the construction period, the working hours will be appropriately extended according to the actual situation. Therefore, in the process of modeling with Arena 14.0 software, this paper made the following assumptions about the model:
(1)
The time system of the beam field simulation model is 24 h a day.
(2)
Processes 1, 5, and 7 are the operation of steel bar binding, the work intensity of this process is large, and the work progress that has been carried out is not affected when the operation is started again after the operation is suspended. Thus, the preempt scheduling rule is adopted, that is, the point is off work, the operation can be continued after going to work, and the quality of work is not affected.
(3)
For the other 12 kinds of processes, once started, if they are stopped before they are completed, the quality of the project will be affected. Thus, the ignore scheduling rule is adopted, that is, once the process starts, it must be completely completed before it can be completed.
(4)
Process 10, concrete curing, adopts the uniform distribution (UNIF) assumption, as shown in Figure 3, according to the actual situation, and the process is not subject to the working time system.
(5)
The operation time for the other processes is estimated by the field engineer for the most probable time, the most pessimistic time, and the most optimistic time and processed into a triangular distribution (TRIA), as shown in Figure 4 (taking the bottom web reinforcement binding as an example).
(6)
According to the actual situation, it is assumed that the supply of resources for the non-direct process is sufficient, and there will be no downtime and waiting due to resource shortage, especially in the concrete pouring process, which strictly requires the continuity of pouring.
(7)
Because the production process between different beam-type concrete beams is basically the same, but there is a time difference in the beam-type production process technology. Because the number of 24 m beams in the research beam field is not much, this paper ignores the beam type difference in this study, and the 32 m beam is taken as an example for simulation test research.

4. Verification of Simulation Results

In order to verify the accuracy of the simulation software, this paper takes the 8-h working system as an example to carry out a manual simulation, as shown in the figure. For the process that obeys the uniform distribution of time, the average time is taken for calculation, and for the process that obeys the triangular distribution, the most likely time is taken for calculation. The results of the manual simulation are shown in Figure 5.
Figure 6 shows the output of the Arena 14.0 simulation model obtained by inputting the operating time and production rules of each process in Table 2 into the Arena simulation model and setting the number of entities to 1.
By comparing the above two calculation results, it can be seen that the effective working time of the manual simulation is 110 h, the effective working time of the Arena software simulation is 108.7 h, the error is 1.2%, the total time of the manual simulation is 192.5 h, the actual working time of the Arena software simulation is 195.6 h, and the error is 1.5%. Considering that the operation time of the process is simplified in the manual simulation in this paper, the output results of the simulation model are basically consistent with the theoretical calculation results.

5. Beam Field Production Simulation Experiment

5.1. Simulation Research of Traditional Production Methods

In this paper, the influence of different working time systems on the beam-making efficiency of a single pedestal was studied. The above experiments were carried out on the seven working time systems of 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 24 h/d, and the simulation results shown in Table 2 were obtained.
The method used to calculate the beam-making efficiency of a single pedestal is as follows:
u: Single pedestal beam making cycle (h);
η: The beam-making efficiency of a single pedestal, piece/day, that is, the number of beams that can be produced by a beam-making pedestal in one day, η = 24/u.
The relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of pedestal beam-making was calculated, as shown in Table 3:
The relationship between the beam-making cycle of the pedestal and the working time system is shown in Figure 7.
As can be seen in Figure 7, the beam-making cycle of the pedestal is shortened with the extension of man-hours, which is consistent with traditional cognition, and the beam-making cycle of the pedestal is 195.6 h when working 8 h a day, that is, about eight days. In the ultimate state, the beam-making cycle of the pedestal is 108.6 h, and it can be seen that when the beam yard production is in the ultimate state, the beam-making cycle of the pedestal can be shortened by 44.5%. In addition, the sensitivity analysis of the daily working time of the beam yard shows that when the working time system increases from 8 h/d to 12 h/d, the sensitivity coefficient relative to the working time is about 11.5, that is, the average occupancy time of the beam-making pedestal is shortened by 11.5 h when the working time system is extended by 1 h per day. When the working time system changes from 12 h/d to 24 h/d, this sensitivity coefficient decreases to about 3.43, that is, the average occupancy time of the beam-making pedestal is shortened by 3.43 h when the working time is extended by 1 h every day. Thus, the sensitivity coefficient of the extended working time in the early stage is significantly greater than that in the later stage. The experimental results quantitatively indicate the change in the beam-making cycle of the pedestal under different time systems, allowing the beam yard manager to adjust the working time to achieve the desired production efficiency and, at the same time, avoid the unnecessary cost increase caused by blind overtime.

5.2. Research on the Production Simulation of the Steel Bar Pre-Binding Method

The manual simulation Figure 5 clearly shows that process 1, bottom web reinforcement binding, and process 5, roof reinforcement binding, occupy a long time. Through the investigation, it is found that the situation of pre-binding of steel bars is found in most beam yards, that is, the steel bar binding is parallel to the production process of the box girder beam pedestal. Thus, when the previous beam is maintained, the steel bar binding work of the next beam is carried out, which can improve the production efficiency of the box girder to a certain extent. In order to verify the improvement in the beam-making efficiency of the beam field by the pre-binding of reinforcement, the method was simulated and calculated. The above experiments were carried out on the seven working time systems of 8, 10, 12,14, 16,18, and 24 h/d, and the following simulation results were obtained, as shown in Figure 8, taking the 8-h working system as an example.
The calculations for different work hours are summarized in Table 4.
Figure 9 was made by comparing the pedestal beam-making efficiency of the above two production methods.
As can be seen in Figure 9, when using the pre-binding method of steel bars or the ordinary production method, the beam-making efficiency is improved with the extension of man-hours, which is consistent with traditional cognition. Under the normal condition of working for 8 h a day, the beam-making efficiency of the two methods is 0.123 and 0.177 per day, respectively. The beam-making efficiency of the beam field is increased by 43.9% by the steel bar pre-binding method, and the beam-making efficiency is improved very obviously. However, in the ultimate state, the beam-making efficiency of the two methods is 0.221 per day and 0.268 per day, respectively. The beam-making efficiency is increased by 21.3%, and it is found that with the extension of the working time system, the advantages of the steel bar pre-binding method gradually decrease. This shows that the method does improve the beam-making efficiency to a certain extent, but this is realized by separating the reinforcement binding process. In addition, the reinforcement pre-binding method does not fundamentally change the operation time of the beam-making process, so it results in a very limited improvement in the beam-making efficiency.

5.3. Research on the Production Simulation of the Intelligent Beam Field

With the rapid development of science and technology, more and more intelligent technologies are applied to the process of beam field production, such as prestressed automatic tensioning systems, intelligent hydraulic templates, intelligent distribution, intelligent maintenance, etc., which makes the beam-making efficiency of the beam field continue to improve. Through on-site investigation and literature analysis, this paper simulated the production process of an intelligent beam field and adopted a total of seven working time systems including 8 h/d, 10 h/d, 12 h/d, 14 h/d, 16 h/d, 18 h/d, and 24 h/d. The improvement in the efficiency of the intelligent beam field on the beam-making pedestal was calculated.
Intelligent equipment commonly used in intelligent beam yards includes the following:
(1)
Prestressed automatic tensioning system: The prestressed synchronous automatic tensioning construction technology is adopted, the manual operation is changed to mechanical automatic control, and the equipment operation is started with one key. Automatic measurements, synchronous control, accurate data, and timely checking are used to realize multi-top synchronous tensioning, reduce the construction period, improve work efficiency, and reduce labor input (one whole box girder only needs to be configured with five to six people).
(2)
Smart templates: The intelligent hydraulic template realizes the functions of automatic walking positioning, automatic leveling, automatic overall lifting, translation of the outer mold through the intelligent control system, and the functions of automatic opening of the inner mold, automatic rotation of the lower chamber, and automatic walking. Intelligent hydraulic formwork is generally equipped with a monitoring system, including a laser ranging sensor, horizontal inclination sensor, rope displacement sensor, etc., to ensure the efficiency and accuracy of formwork installation.
(3)
Smart fabric: Intelligent distribution is the use of intelligent equipment to pour concrete evenly on the prefabricated component template and automatic vibration process. An intelligent distribution machine is generally composed of a control system, a distribution system, a vibration system, and a monitoring system.
(4)
Smart maintenance: The intelligent maintenance system of a precast beam yard is generally composed of a high-pressure water pump, induction temperature measurement, automatic controller, etc. This equipment automatically perceives the temperature and humidity of the beam and the environment, realizes unmanned, intelligent, and refined spray maintenance in accordance with the intelligent spray algorithm and maintenance specifications, improves the maintenance quality, and greatly reduces the maintenance time.
The use of intelligent technology, while improving production efficiency, will bring about an increase in construction costs during the construction of the beam field. Thus, the construction unit needs to weigh the relationship between production costs and production efficiency and make choices according to the actual situation.
Through the field investigation of a highway smart beam yard and the inquiry of the engineer of the project department, the operation time of each process of the intelligent beam yard was estimated, as shown in Table 5.
The adjusted data were input into Arena14.0 software for production simulation calculation, and experiments with the seven working time systems of 8 h/d, 10 h/d, 12 h/d, 14 h/d, 16 h/d, 18 h/d, and 24 h/d were conducted. The simulation experiment results in Figure 10 were obtained by taking the 8-h working system as an example.
The calculation results of different working systems are summarized in Table 6.
We compared the production efficiency of the traditional beam yard with the production efficiency of the intelligent beam yard. The comparison diagram of the production efficiency of the pedestal beam-making is shown in Figure 11.
As can be seen from the above figure, the series of intelligent technologies adopted in the beam yard led to a large improvement in the production efficiency of the beam yard. Under the normal condition of working 8 h a day, the beam-making efficiency of the traditional method is 0.177 w/day. After the use of a series of technologies such as intelligent maintenance, the beam-making efficiency increases to 0.275 w/day, and the beam-making efficiency increases by about 55.4%. In the limit state, the beam-making efficiency of the traditional method is 0.268 w/day. After the use of intelligent maintenance and other series of technologies, the beam-making efficiency reaches 0.487 per day. The beam-making efficiency is increased by about 81.7%, which also means that with the extension of daily working hours, the advantages of the intelligent beam field become more and more obvious. This shows that the production of the intelligent beam field is more efficient, the production process of the beam field is more flexible, and the ability to resist risks is stronger.

6. Conclusions

The production activities in the prestressed concrete girder production system are actually production activities that combine standardized production processes with construction operations. Production efficiency is the core content of the design and production management of the prestressed concrete girder production system. However, the traditional design and production management of the prestressed concrete girder production system is often based on existing project data and the experience of construction personnel. Because of the randomness in the operation time of the production processes in actual production, the mutual influence between production processes, and the influence of key resource allocation on production efficiency, it is not enough to guide the complex production activities of the box girder with a fixed production efficiency based on existing project data and the experience of construction personnel. Managers can use simulation technology to achieve fine-grained control and management of the prestressed concrete girder production system.
Fine management is an important direction in the field of engineering construction management. This paper uses simulation technology to study the method of improving the efficiency of beam-making in the existing large-scale precast beam field, calculates the influence of different working time systems on the efficiency of pedestal beam-making, and compares and analyzes the influence of three methods on the efficiency of beam making. he following conclusions were obtained:
(1)
In the traditional beam yard, the beam-making cycle of the beam-making pedestal is usually about eight days. In the ultimate state, the beam-making cycle of the pedestal can be shortened by 44.5%. In addition, the sensitivity analysis of the daily working time of the beam yard shows that when the working time system increases from 8 h/d to 12 h/d, the average occupation time of the beam-making pedestal is shortened by 11.5 h when the working time system is extended by 1 h. When the working time system changes from 12 h/d to 24 h/d, the average occupancy time of the beam-making pedestal is shortened by 3.43 h when the working time system is extended by 1 h/d per day. Thus, the sensitivity coefficient of the extended working time in the early stage is significantly greater than that in the later stage. This quantitatively gives the changes in the beam-making cycle of the pedestal under different time systems, allowing the beam yard manager to adjust the working hours to achieve the desired production efficiency and, at the same time, avoid the unnecessary cost increase caused by blind overtime.
(2)
Under the normal operation of the beam yard, the steel bar pre-binding method increases the beam-making efficiency of the beam yard by 43.9%, but in the extreme production state of the beam yard, the steel bar pre-binding method increases the beam-making efficiency of the beam yard by 21.3%. Thus, with the extension of the working time system, the advantages of the steel bar pre-binding method gradually decrease. This shows that the method improves the beam-making efficiency to a certain extent, but this is realized by separating the reinforcement binding process. The reinforcement pre-binding method does not fundamentally change the operation time of the beam-making process, so it results in a very limited improvement in the beam-making efficiency.
(3)
The application of intelligent technology greatly improves the production efficiency of the beam field, and this improvement is gradually increased with the extension of the working time system. Thus, with the extension of the daily working time, the advantages of the intelligent beam field become more obvious. This shows that the production of the intelligent beam field is more efficient. In addition, the production process of the beam field is more flexible and the ability to resist risks is stronger.
Through simulation experiments and research on the prefabricated beam production system in the prestressed concrete girder factory, this paper points out the shortcomings of the traditional beam production system design and planning. It proposes using simulation technology to innovate the traditional resource allocation process. This paper analyzes the impact of the traditional prefabricated beam production time system on the efficiency of the beam production system in a prestressed concrete girder factory, the impact of the pre-bonding method of steel bars on the efficiency of the beam production system, and the impact of the application of intelligent technology on the efficiency of the beam production system. The results provide new ideas and methods for the research and practice of the beam production system.

Author Contributions

Data curation and formal analysis, Y.H.; resources and project administration, T.Y.; software and supervision, B.L.; writing—original draft and methodology, Y.X.; writing—review and editing and validation, Q.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are unavailable because of privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors Yufeng Huang and Tongquan Yang are employed by the CCCC Third Shipping Engineering Bureau Co., Ltd. Author Bo Liu is employed by the Henan Zechang Expressway Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tommelein, I.D.; Zouein, P.P. Activity-Level Space Scheduling. In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, ISARC ’92, Tokyo, Japan, 3–5 June 1992; Volume 5, pp. 411–420. [Google Scholar]
  2. Zouein, P.P.; Harmanani, H.; Hajar, A. Genetic algorithm for solving site layout problem with unequal-size and constrained facilities. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2002, 16, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tommelein, D.; Levitt, R.E.; Hayes-Roth, B. Site-Layout modeling: How can artificial intelligence help. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1992, 118, 594–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tommelein, D.; Levitt, R.E.; Hayes-Roth, B. Sight plan model for site layout. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1992, 118, 749–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zouein, P.P.; Tommelein, I.D. Dynamic layout planning using a hybrid incremental solution method. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 1999, 125, 400–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zouein, P.P.; Tommelein, D. Space Schedule Construction. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineer, Anaheim, CA, USA, 7–9 June 1993; pp. 1770–1777. [Google Scholar]
  7. Han, X.; Liu, W.; Jiang, Z.; Wang, W. Practice of railway intelligent precast beam yard. China Railw. 2021, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yang, Y. Research on Intelligent Construction Process of Large-Scale Prefabricated Beam Yard Based on BIM.; Lanzhou Jiaotong University: Lanzhou, China, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  9. Shu, J.; Zhang, X.; Li, W.; Zeng, Z.; Zhang, H.; Duan, Y. Point cloud and machine learning-based automated recognition and measurement of corrugated pipes and rebars for large precast concrete beams. Autom. Constr. 2024, 165, 105493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sun, G.; Kong, G.; Liu, H.; Amenuvor, A.C. Vibration velocity of X-section cast-in-place concrete (XCC) pile-raft foundation model for a ballastless track. Can. Geo. J. 2017, 54, 1340–1345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhang, W.; Zheng, D.; Huang, Y.; Kang, S. Experimental and simulative analysis of flexural performance in UHPC-RC hybrid beams. Constr. Build. Mater. 2024, 436, 136889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yao, Y.; Huang, H.; Zhang, W.; Ye, Y.; Xin, L.; Liu, Y. Seismic performance of steel-PEC spliced frame beam. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2022, 197, 107456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Huang, H.; Yao, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zhou, L. A push-out test on partially encased composite column with different positions of shear studs. Eng. Struct. 2023, 289, 116343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. David, M.; Carsten, G.; Ralph, T. Hardware-in-the-loop-simulation of a vehicle climate controller with a combined HVAC and passenger compartment model. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, AIM 2005, Monterey, CA, USA, 24–28 July 2005; pp. 1065–1070. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kiesling, T. Approximate Time-Parallel Cache Simulation. In Proceedings of the 2004 Winter Simulation Conference, Washington, DC, USA, 5–8 December 2004. [Google Scholar]
  16. Fum, C. Feature article: Optimization for simulation: Theory vs. practice. INFORMS J. Comput. 2002, 14, 192–215. [Google Scholar]
  17. Nelson, B.L. 50th anniversary article: Stochastic simulation research in management science. Manag. Sci. 2004, 50, 855–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chen, V.; Tsui, K.L.; Barton, R.R.; Meckesheimer, M. A review on design, modeling and applications of computer experiments. IIE Trans. 2006, 38, 273–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Li, M.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y. Research on production efficiency and resource allocation of high-speed rail beam yard based on simulation technology. Railw. Stand. Des. 2023, 67, 60–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Box girder production process flow diagram.
Figure 1. Box girder production process flow diagram.
Buildings 14 03338 g001
Figure 2. Logical model of the box girder production process.
Figure 2. Logical model of the box girder production process.
Buildings 14 03338 g002
Figure 3. Uniform distribution (UNIF) parameter settings.
Figure 3. Uniform distribution (UNIF) parameter settings.
Buildings 14 03338 g003
Figure 4. Triangular distribution parameter settings.
Figure 4. Triangular distribution parameter settings.
Buildings 14 03338 g004
Figure 5. Manual simulation of beam production time.
Figure 5. Manual simulation of beam production time.
Buildings 14 03338 g005
Figure 6. Simulation results of the beam production software.
Figure 6. Simulation results of the beam production software.
Buildings 14 03338 g006
Figure 7. Beam-making cycles corresponding to different working time systems.
Figure 7. Beam-making cycles corresponding to different working time systems.
Buildings 14 03338 g007
Figure 8. Simulation results of beam production by the rebar pre-binding method.
Figure 8. Simulation results of beam production by the rebar pre-binding method.
Buildings 14 03338 g008
Figure 9. Comparison of the common method and the rebar pre-binding method.
Figure 9. Comparison of the common method and the rebar pre-binding method.
Buildings 14 03338 g009
Figure 10. Simulation results of beam production in an intelligent beam field.
Figure 10. Simulation results of beam production in an intelligent beam field.
Buildings 14 03338 g010
Figure 11. The improvement in beam-making efficiency by intelligent technology.
Figure 11. The improvement in beam-making efficiency by intelligent technology.
Buildings 14 03338 g011
Table 1. The operation time of each process in the production of box girders.
Table 1. The operation time of each process in the production of box girders.
Serial NumberThe Name of the OperationTime Distribution (h)
1Base plate and web rebar bindingTRIA (12, 14, 18)
2Bottom side mold trimmingTRIA (2, 3, 5)
3Bottom web reinforcement hoistingTRIA (3, 4, 6)
4Inner mold hoistingTRIA (1.5, 2, 2.5)
5Roof reinforcement bindingTRIA (9, 10, 13)
6Roof reinforcement hoistingTRIA (2, 3, 4)
7Connect the roof reinforcement to the web reinforcementTRIA (2, 3, 4)
8End die mountingTRIA (1.5, 2, 3)
9Concrete pouring of beamsTRIA (5, 6, 7)
10Concrete curing of beamsUNIF (50~56) [19]
11Remove the end moldTRIA (1, 1.5, 2)
12Remove the inner moldTRIA (2, 2.5, 3)
13Tension preparationTRIA (2, 2.5, 3)
14Prestressed initial tensionTRIA (1.5, 2, 3)
15Move the beams out of the seatTRIA (1, 1.5, 2)
Table 2. Summary of simulation experiment results.
Table 2. Summary of simulation experiment results.
Working Hour SystemWaiting TimeTotal Time Spent (h)
8 h/d87.0195.6
10 h/d48.6157.2
12 h/d41.2149.8
14 h/d26.3134.9
16 h/d17.3125.9
18 h/d15123.6
24 h/d0108.6
Table 3. Relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of pedestal beam making.
Table 3. Relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of pedestal beam making.
Working Hour SystemEfficiency (pcs/Day)
8 h/d0.123
10 h/d0.153
12 h/d0.160
14 h/d0.178
16 h/d0.190
18 h/d0.194
24 h/d0.221
Table 4. The relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of beam making (pre-binding of rebar).
Table 4. The relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of beam making (pre-binding of rebar).
Working Hour SystemWaiting Time (h)Total Time Spent (h)
8 h/d45.8135.3
10 h/d24.1113.6
12 h/d21.1110.6
14 h/d18.5108.0
16 h/d9.599.0
18 h/d493.5
24 h/d089.5
Table 5. Intelligent beam yard process operation time.
Table 5. Intelligent beam yard process operation time.
ItemProject NameTemporal Distribution
2Bottom side mold trimmingTRIA (2, 3, 5)
3Bottom web reinforcement hoistingTRIA (3, 4, 6)
4Inner mold hoistingTRIA (1.5, 2, 2.5)
6Roof reinforcement hoistingTRIA (2, 3, 4)
7Connect the roof reinforcement to the web reinforcementTRIA (2, 3, 4)
8End die mountingTRIA (1.5, 2, 3)
9Beam pouringTRIA (3, 4, 5)
10MaintenanceUNIF (16~20)
11Remove the end moldTRIA (1, 1.5, 2)
12Remove the inner moldTRIA (1, 1.5, 2)
13Tension preparationTRIA (1.5, 2, 3)
14Initial tensioningTRIA (1, 1, 1.5)
15Move the beams out of the seatTRIA (1, 1.5, 2)
Table 6. The relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of beam making (intelligent beam yard).
Table 6. The relationship between the working time system and the efficiency of beam making (intelligent beam yard).
Working Hour SystemWaiting Time (h)Total Time Spent (h)Efficiency of a Single Pedestal (pcs/d)
8 h/d38.087.30.275
10 h/d25.374.60.322
12 h/d19.869.10.347
14 h/d10.159.40.404
16 h/d8.457.70.416
18 h/d3.552.80.455
24 h/d049.30.487
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Huang, Y.; Yang, T.; Liu, B.; Xue, Y.; Li, Q. Simulation Experiment Research on the Production of Large Box Girders. Buildings 2024, 14, 3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113338

AMA Style

Huang Y, Yang T, Liu B, Xue Y, Li Q. Simulation Experiment Research on the Production of Large Box Girders. Buildings. 2024; 14(11):3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113338

Chicago/Turabian Style

Huang, Yufeng, Tongquan Yang, Bo Liu, Yang Xue, and Qingfu Li. 2024. "Simulation Experiment Research on the Production of Large Box Girders" Buildings 14, no. 11: 3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113338

APA Style

Huang, Y., Yang, T., Liu, B., Xue, Y., & Li, Q. (2024). Simulation Experiment Research on the Production of Large Box Girders. Buildings, 14(11), 3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113338

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop