0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
13 просмотров2 страницы
Cracks were developing in buildings near a metro tunneling project in Chennai, India. Three alternatives were proposed to address the issue: 1) conduct service and repairs for maintenance only, 2) adopt new tunneling technologies, or 3) redesign and conduct lab testing of the building materials. Redesigning and testing the materials was selected as the best approach because it would directly address the root cause of the cracking, though it would be time-consuming. Adopting new tunneling technologies was the second best option as it could help prevent future cracking in a cost-effective manner with less human error.
Cracks were developing in buildings near a metro tunneling project in Chennai, India. Three alternatives were proposed to address the issue: 1) conduct service and repairs for maintenance only, 2) adopt new tunneling technologies, or 3) redesign and conduct lab testing of the building materials. Redesigning and testing the materials was selected as the best approach because it would directly address the root cause of the cracking, though it would be time-consuming. Adopting new tunneling technologies was the second best option as it could help prevent future cracking in a cost-effective manner with less human error.
Cracks were developing in buildings near a metro tunneling project in Chennai, India. Three alternatives were proposed to address the issue: 1) conduct service and repairs for maintenance only, 2) adopt new tunneling technologies, or 3) redesign and conduct lab testing of the building materials. Redesigning and testing the materials was selected as the best approach because it would directly address the root cause of the cracking, though it would be time-consuming. Adopting new tunneling technologies was the second best option as it could help prevent future cracking in a cost-effective manner with less human error.
1. Develop the alternatives Cracks building in Chennai metro tunnelling
Problem: 1. Cracking
Propose the alternatives:
1. Service and repair for maintenance only. 2. New technologist action. 3. Redesign and lab testing to material.
2.Focus on the difference 1. Redesign and lab testing to material.
2. New technologist action. 3.Use a consistent Viewpoint 1. Redesign and lab testing to material. a. Melibatkan masa untuk menguji bahan yang digunakan. 2. New technologist action. a Menggunakan MB waterproofing untuk menampal cracking. 4.Use a common unit of measure 1. Redesign and lab testing to material. a. Menggambil masa lama untuk mendapatkan keputusan. b. Memerlukan pekerja yang terlatih untuk menggendalikkannya. 2. New technologist action. a. Less material cost. b. Less human error. 5.Consider all relevant criteria Review again all criteria 6. Make uncertainty explicit Advantages: a. Less repair and maintenance b. Minimized cracking Disadvantages: a. Engage experienced consultants to facilitate.
7. Revisit your decisions Initiate and new technologies:
1. MB waterproofing. 2. Use Microwave imaging technique to check cracking. 3. Make a record, report and inspection.