THE ASPHALT PAVING PROCESS: PLANS FOR ACTION RESEARCH

Seirgei Miller4, Henny ter Huerne & André Dorée

Civil Engineering & Management
University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT

Recent significant changes in public sector procurement in the Netherlands are

forcing road construction companies to professionalize one of their primary
processes: on-site asphalt paving. This paper describes an initiative aimed at
improving quality in the process. A literature review confirmed that research into the
asphalt paving process seems to be in a state of infancy. Interviews with on-site
plant operators confirmed that operational choices in the asphalt paving process
depend heavily on craftsmanship and that the work methods and equipment are
mainly selected on the basis of tradition and custom. Also, the operators were
reluctant to use new (available) technologies. Since improving the paving process
requires integrating new technologies with the learning of new work methods, this
paper proposes an action research strategy. Such an approach involves operators
and researchers in addressing the apparent mismatch between current technology
development, work methods and the operators' (tacit) operational strategies.

1. INTRODUCTION

Over the last three years, since the parliamentary enquiry into the construction
sector, the business environment within the road construction sector has changed
dramatically in The Netherlands. According to Dorée (2004) the collusion structure
that regulated competition has fallen apart. Public clients have introduced new
contracting schemes containing incentives for better quality of work (Sijpersma and
Buur, 2005). These new types of contracts, tougher competition and the urge to
make a distinction in the market, spur the companies to advance in product and
process improvement. These changes have significantly altered the playing field for
competition. The companies see themselves confronted with different “rules of the
game” than what they were used to. Performance contracting and longer guarantee
periods create a new set of risks and business incentives. In general, the companies
experience the pressure of new types of competition and other rules and trends, but
at the same time, they acknowledge the opportunity to distinguish themselves.

In an effort to outperform competitors, asphalt-paving companies seek better control

over the paving process, over the planning and scheduling of resources and work,
and over performance. Improved control would also reduce the risks of failure of the
paving during the guarantee period. To be able to achieve these goals, the relevant
operational parameters need to be known and the relationships between these

4
The Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa; email:
[email protected]

37
parameters need to be thoroughly understood. For the asphalt paving companies to
be able to improve product and process performance, they now more than ever
acknowledge they need to develop intricate understanding of the asphalt paving
process and the interdependencies within the process.

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This work forms part of an overall project focusing on the improvement of the Hot
Mix Asphalt paving process aiming at improved quality and consistent reduction of
quality variability. This paper reports on the development of a research strategy to
address two key research questions. The first question is what are the main causes
of variability in the asphalt paving process and the second is what will the effect of
revised operational strategies be on quality in the process.

3. METHODS

During a workshop conducted by Dorée and ter Huerne (2005), national experts and
representatives of agencies in the asphalt field were confronted about the state of
asphalt paving construction in The Netherlands. The experts suggested that.

x little or no research effort is put into systematic analysis and mapping of the
asphalt paving process;
x the asphalt paving process depends heavily on craftsmanship;
x work is carried out without the instruments to monitor the key process
parameters; and
x the selection of work methods and equipment is based on tradition and custom.

We then undertook three tasks in response to the anecdotal suggestions made

during the workshop. First, we conducted an extensive literature review to assess
the state of research into the asphalt paving process. Second, we conducted one-on-
one on-site interviews with twenty-eight machine operators. The purpose was to gain
insight into operational strategies in the asphalt paving process from operator
perspectives and therefore confront the suggestions made by the national experts.
Last, we developed a research strategy to move the process forward in attempting to
answer the key research questions mentioned above.

4. STATE OF THE ART

4.1 State of research into the asphalt paving process

Several dedicated asphalt research agencies and organisations exist in The

Netherlands and abroad. A scan of literature on asphalt issues showed a field of
asphalt research which is well developed. One area dominates the core of our
knowledge base to date viz. the characteristics of asphalt from the perspective of
construction material (mixtures, recipes, strengths, elasticity, etc). However, efforts
to systematically map and analyse the process of asphalt paving are few.
Approximately 100 papers were published in the International Journal of Pavement

38
Engineering during the period 2002 to 2005 with only one being in the construction
process research area. A similar situation applies to the International Journal of
Pavements during that same period with a mere two papers out of 65 (approximately
3%) speaking directly to construction modelling. A scan of publications in the Journal
of Computing in Civil Engineering revealed that six papers (approximately 5%) were
published in the areas of modelling and simulation of construction processes. This
out of 133 papers published during the same period analysed for the Pavement
Engineering journals.

Abudayyeh et al. (2004) investigated construction research trends in technical

papers published in the American Society of Civil Engineering's Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management between 1985 and 2002. 879 technical
papers were analysed. The top research topical areas were reported as scheduling,
productivity, constructability, simulation and cost control. These topics formed
approximately 18% of the total number of papers published during that period. It’s
interesting to note that the modelling of construction processes comprised less than
2% of the total number of papers published during this period and that it only ranked
17th out of a list of 29 research areas. Despite the apparent neglect of construction
process research, a positive trend appeared in the period 1997 to 2002 with an
increase in the number of construction simulation papers published (Sawhney et al.,
1998; Halpin and Martinez, 1999; Naresh and Jahren, 1999; Kartam and Flood,
2000; Halpin and Kueckmann, 2002). This trend continued after 2002 (Zayed and
Halpin, 2004; Zhang and Tam, 2005) albeit with few papers published relating to the
simulation of the asphalt construction process (White et al., 2002; Jiang, 2003;
Nassar et al., 2005; Choi and Minchin, 2006).

We can therefore conclude that the majority of the research and the papers deal with
the characteristics of asphalt from the perspective of construction materials.
Research into the asphalt paving process is in a state of infancy.

4.2 Mapping the asphalt paving process

There have been several organized industry-aided research efforts for the
development of state-of-the-art technologies for real-time locating and positioning
systems for construction operations (Abourizk and Shi, 1994; Pampagnin et al.,
1998; Bouvet et al., 2001; Hildreth, 2003; Navon et al., 2004). They include efforts
to develop automated methods for monitoring asphalt laying and compaction using
GPS and other IT technologies.

Li et al. (1996) reported on a system to map moving compaction equipment,

transform the result into geometrical representations, and investigated the use of
Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to develop a graphical illustration
depicting the number of compactor passes. Krishnamurthy et al. (1998) developed
an Automated Paving System (AUTOPAVE) for asphalt paving compaction operations.
Peyret et al. (2000) reported on their Computer Integrated Road Construction (CIRC)
project. This aims to develop Computer Integrated Construction systems for the real-
time control and monitoring of work performed by road construction equipment,
namely compactors (CIRCOM) and pavers (CIRPAV). Oloufa (2002) described the
development of a GPS-based automated quality control system for tracking
pavement compaction. The Compaction Tracking System (CTS) allows tracking of
multiple compactors.

39
Several experiments to map the asphalt paving experience were conducted in recent
years. However, although some of these experiments were developed into industrial
applications, it appears that few have been accepted widely by industry and are
frequently used on the construction sites. Although some equipment manufacturers
now provide GPS as an option for clients, GPS is not yet part of operational
strategies and working practice in asphalt processes. Therefore, although GPS
technology has been subject of study in asphalt construction processes, and is now
available on roller equipment, it is not yet adopted and integrated into operational
strategies and methods.

5. RESULTS OF THE ON-SITE INTERVIEWS

The interviews revealed several tensions between theory and practice. One of the
major practical problems roller operators deal with is that whilst they are responsible
for the final compaction level of the asphalt mat, they are not able to measure the
degree of compaction during the compaction process itself. When final rolling has
stopped the target density should ideally have been achieved since it would be
difficult to achieve further compaction when the asphalt mat cools down (Timm et
al., 2001). However, most roller operators interviewed indicated that they were not
informed of the final density of the completed layer – not during the site operations
and even not afterwards - despite its importance. This is a significant shortcoming in
terms of quality control. It shows an absence of “closing the feedback loop”
(Montgomery, 2005) and as such negatively affects any learning that could occur. In
addition, the number of roller passes and the roller patterns directly influences
compaction (Leech and Powell, 1974; NCAT, 1991). Whilst indicating that they used
prescribed roller patterns during the compaction process, a concern is that most
operators did not keep track of the number of passes completed during rolling. They
also appear to base key operational decisions on what they “feel” and “see” since
they do not know what the actual temperatures and the material characteristics are
during the process of compaction. Roller operators indicated that they specifically
looked for the occurrence of “cracking” and “shoving” and the rapid cooling of the
asphalt during the compaction process. Interestingly, the speed of the asphalt paver
was not considered an important point of discussion between screed and roller
operators. This raises the issue of whether they were aware of the effect of
temperature differentials if the paver was too far away from the roller’s working
zone. The influence of temperature differentials on hot mix asphalt paving has been
studied extensively (Chadboum et al., 1998; Timm et al., 2001; Stroup-Gardiner et
al., 2002; Willoughby et al., 2002). The relevance of temperature issues seems in
stark contrast with the road crews' (lack of) attention to this parameter during the
paving process.

Evidence of barriers to technology adoption was revealed in a number of ways. Most

operators frankly acknowledged that they hardly made use of the available
technology on the machines. Of the operators that had temperature measurement
tools at their disposal, only a minority confirmed to use these. They showed an
awareness of the importance of the cooling process of the asphalt and they
considered weather conditions, the temperature of the asphalt mix and changes in
layer thickness to be important factors to pay attention to during the paving process.
Also, they understand that a change in layer thickness directly affects the cooling
rate of the asphalt mat. It is easier to achieve target density in thicker layers of
asphalt than in thinner layers. This is because the thicker the mat, the longer it

40
retains the heat and the longer the time during which compaction can be achieved
(Asphalt-Institute, 1989). However, in practice the roller operators are mostly
uninformed about the discontinuities because of adjustments made by the paver and
screed operators – such as paver speed, layer thickness and screed vibration.

The interviews conducted with operators confirmed anecdotal evidence which

suggested that in The Netherlands, work in the asphalt paving process depends
heavily on craftsmanship, that work is being carried out without measuring the key
process parameters (temperature, density and layer thickness) and that the work
methods and equipment are selected based on tradition and custom. There is also
evidence that no direct feedback is given to machine operators. Machine settings are
done mainly on the basis of “feeling and experience”. Although the interviewees all
refer to common and proven practice in machine setting, the actual settings and
operational strategies varied widely from team to team. Asphalt paving in many
ways still is a process driven by craftsmanship, heavily dependent on tradition, and
on operators' experience, gut feeling and tacit knowledge. Therefore, there is not
really one common practice, but a wide array of “common practices”. This wide array
must lead to extensive variability in the quality of final product.

6. ACTION RESEARCH STRATEGY

Given that craftsmanship still rules the operational choices in the paving process and
that the operational strategies are typically tacit; Can new technologies provide an
impetus towards a more professional approach? This is not a straightforward "yes" as
often assumed. Our interviews indicated that operators are not comfortable with new
technologies. Over the last decennia several technologies were developed to improve
process information and process control (see the pervious section). New features and
functions were added to the equipment. Most operators acknowledged that they
hardly made use of the available technology. They just do not know how or why to
use the new "gadgets". Another new technology is GPS. Although equipment
manufacturers now provide GPS as an option for clients, it is not yet adopted and
integrated into operational strategies and methods. The data provided by GPS
systems does not help the operators because they do not know that these data
might be relevant for their operational choices and work methods.

The adoption of technology process may also be hindered by scepticism and

reluctance of the operators - who feel that their workmanship is being devalued or
that management could use the technology to track their movements and possibly
use it punitively (Simons, 2006). Several authors argue that the construction
industry typically lags behind other industries in adopting technology (AbouRizk et
al., 1992; Halpin and Martinez, 1999; Halpin and Factors for likelihood
Kueckmann, 2002; Bowden et al., 2006). innovation adoption
For evaluating the adoption of technology one could use (Rogers 2003)
the innovation adoption factors as given by Rogers x relative advantage
(Rogers, 2003). When the data produced by the GPS x compatibly
systems do not match with the operators' operational x complexity
reasoning, at least three of Rogers' five attributes will x trialability
not be fulfilled – and adoption will be problematic. At x observability
the same time, tailoring the GPS solutions to overcome
this mismatch is difficult because the operational reasoning of the operators is tacit
and implicit.

41
6.1 New research approach

Developing better operational strategies requires adoption of new technologies, but

new technologies are not adopted due to insufficient understanding of current
operational strategies (the common practice). This resembles a chicken or egg
problem, a causality dilemma. Against that background, the research project follows
an action research strategy alternating steps of technology introduction and mapping
of operational strategies (see Figure 1). Through monitoring of the learning
processes of the operators, and evaluating the operational choices with them, the
tacit knowledge of the "common practice" will become explicit. This provides the
opening for further development of process understanding, tools and operational
strategies. Qualitative heuristics will be confronted with quantitative process data.

Figure 1. Action research strategy for the asphalt paving process

The proposed strategy implies that it firstly, involves the asphalt machine operators
directly in the research project and secondly, it includes a statistical modelling and
computer simulation component that aims to test and validate models developed
during the research. The explicit models will facilitate the practitioners in
synthesizing their tacit knowledge and promote learning processes. Trochim (2001)
suggests that “there is so much value in mixing quantitative and qualitative
research. Quantitative research excels at summarising large amounts of data and
reaching generalisations based on statistical projections. Qualitative research excels
at telling the story from the participants viewpoint, providing the rich descriptive
detail that sets quantitative results into their human context”.

The aim is for operators and researchers to jointly develop operational strategies
using an iterative process (see Figures 2 and 3) of problem definition, operational
strategy development, implementation, evaluation, and consciously specifying the
learning taking place. This is expected to lead to:

42
x better understanding of the asphalt paving process;
x the development of innovative tools and technologies to assist understanding of
the paving process; and
x adoption and wider acceptance of innovative tools and technologies and its
associated benefits.

Figure 2. Iteration process Figure 3. Typical iteration

A qualitative paradigm should provide insight and understanding from the

perspective of those actually involved in the asphalt construction process. One of the
major distinguishing characteristics of qualitative research is that the researcher
attempts to understand people in terms of the own definition of their world (Mouton,
2001). By utilising a qualitative approach, an attempt will be made to understand the
asphalt construction process, from the subjective perspective of the individuals
involved. These individuals include the operators involved in the actual paving
process. The complexities can only be captured by describing what really happens
when they are doing their job, incorporating the context in which they operate, as
well as their frame of reference. In other words, there needs to be a commitment to
the empowerment of participants and the transfer of knowledge. Chisholm and Elden
(1993) advises that one should strive for the full involvement of the client (in this
case the machine operators) and researcher. The involvement of participants
enhances the chances of high construct validity, low refusal rates and “ownership” of
findings. The validity should also benefit by several iterations and expansion of the
research scope across iterations. This is shown in Figure 2.

A qualitative approach therefore has the potential to supplement and reorient our
current understanding of the asphalt paving process. Key research questions using
an action research strategy are normally of an exploratory and descriptive nature.
Exploratory in that you are attempting to firstly, assess what is happening during the
asphalt paving process and secondly, to identify the key factors that affect the
process. Descriptive questions also provide opportunities for finding correlations
between variables affecting the paving process.

The quantitative paradigm is aimed at developing and validating accurate models of

the somewhat complex asphalt paving process. The overall objective is to build
process models of the asphalt paving process and to bring these models together in
an event scheduling system. The models to be developed need to be checked and
validated in practice. This requires the involvement of stakeholders closest to the

43
asphalt construction process. Several causal and predictive questions have to be
addressed during this modelling phase. What are the main causes of variability in the
paving process? Is variability the main cause of reduced quality, productivity and
efficiency within the paving process? What will the effect of a revised operational
strategy be on the asphalt paving process? Will a revised operational strategy lead to
improved quality, productivity and efficiency?

With this action research strategy, the chicken-or-egg problem (the causality
dilemma of technology development and adoption) is side-stepped by progressing in
small steps involving the practitioners. The described action research strategy has an
added benefit. Since progress in the research project coincides with actual learning
and growth of operational knowledge and capabilities, the companies are happy to
take part in the research - instead of just being the object of study. It breaches the
classical divide between science and practice. It not only challenges the practitioners’
presumption of the paving process, but also their opinions of the value of academics
and academic work.

7. CONCLUSIONS

A parliamentary inquiry into collusion in the Dutch construction industry sparked new
public procurement strategies and altered the business environment for road paving
companies. Performance contracting and extended guarantee periods drive the
companies towards the improvement of product quality and process control. Since
the density of the pavement is a key factor in the strength and durability of the road
surface, operational strategies are a cardinal focus for research. The attention for
these issues exposed that site operations and operational strategies are driven by
"common practice" – the tacit knowledge and heuristics of the site crew built on
years of personal experience (and often idiosyncratic). Building an objective picture
of site operations is difficult since site operations are not documented. Knowing the
exact location of asphalt construction vehicles, their speed and their motion
characteristics, can provide essential information for the understanding of asphalt
pavement construction processes. This can be done using GPS technology. That is
not straightforward. Experiments of such technology introduction show problems of
adoption. To be adopted the technology should be tailored to the prevailing
operational strategies, but at the same time the technology has to be adopted to
make the prevailing operational strategies tangible. To overcome this causal
dilemma we propose an action research approach.

This action research approach provides opportunities for developing a framework to

capture the operational characteristics of the asphalt paving process in a more
holistic manner. It diverts from previous process modelling studies where key role
players have been left out of the process. Latham as cited in (Blockley and Godfrey,
2000) observed that “there is an acceptance that a greater interdisciplinary approach
is necessary, without losing the expertise of individual professions.” He recognised
that all concerned with construction are interdependent and need to behave as a
team. Blockley and Godfrey (2000) also argue that “we need to have a whole new
view of process” and in order “to do that we need to include factors that are
particularly needed when co-operation between people is important”. The key issue
here is that the operators need to be involved in, and take responsibility for the
process. They are in fact largely responsible for the success of the process.

44
The selected action research methodology involves the researcher, innovative
technologies and most importantly, the machine operators "driving" the asphalt
construction process. The first steps in this project show that the approach selected,
taps into the enormous wealth of tacit knowledge and experience of operators – it
provides insights necessary in analysing important operational characteristics in the
asphalt paving process. The unravelling and confronting of the practitioners view is
expected to lead to improved control during the asphalt paving process and
consequently to improved product and process performance.

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors wish to thank MSc. student Bart Simons for conducting the interviews
with the on-site operators.

9. REFERENCES

AbouRizk, S., Halpin, D. & Lutz, J. D. (1992) State of the art in construction
simulation. Proceedings of the 1992 Winter Simulation Conference. USA.
Abourizk, S. & Shi, J. S. (1994) Automated Construction-Simulation Optimization.
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management-Asce, 120, 374-385.
Abudayyeh, O., Dibert-DeYoung, A. & Jaselskis, E. (2004) Analysis of trends in
construction research: 1985-2002. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 130, 433-439.
Asphalt-Institute (1989) The Asphalt Handbook, The Asphalt Institute.
Blockley, D. & Godfrey, P. (2000) Doing it Differently - systems for rethinking
construction, London, Thomas Telford Publishing.
Bouvet, D., Froumentin, M. & Garcia, G. (2001) A real-time localization system for
compactors. Automation in Construction, 10, 417-428.
Bowden, S., Dorr, A., Thorpe, T. & Anumba, C. (2006) Mobile ICT support for
construction process improvement. Automation in Construction, 15, 664-676.
Chadboum, B. A., Newcomb, D., Voller, V. R., DeSombre, R. A., Luoma, J. A. &
Timm, D. (1998) An Asphalt Paving Tool for Adverse Conditions: University of
Minnesota,
Chisholm, R. F. & Elden, M. (1993) Features of Emerging Action Research. Human
Relations, 46, 275-298.
Choi, J. & Minchin, R. E. (2006) Workflow management and productivity control for
asphalt pavement operations. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 33, 1039-1049.
Dorée, A. & ter Huerne, H. (2005) Workshop proceedings - Development of Tools
and Models for the Improvement of Asphalt Paving Process. University of Twente.
Dorée, A. G. (2004) Collusion in the Dutch construction industry: an industrial
organization perspective. Building Research and Information, 32, 146-156.
Halpin, D. & Kueckmann, M. (2002) Lean Construction and Simulation. Proceedings
of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference. USA.
Halpin, D. & Martinez, L. (1999) Real World Applications of Construction Process
Simulation. Proceedings of the 1999 Winter Simulation Conference. USA.
Hildreth, J. C. (2003) The Use of Short-Interval GPS Data for Construction
Operations Analysis.
Jiang, Y. (2003) The effects of traffic flow rates at freeway work zones on asphalt
pavement construction productivity. Transportation Quarterly, 57, 83-103.

45
Kartam, N. & Flood, I. (2000) Construction simulation using parallel computing
environments. Automation in Construction, 10, 69-78.
Krishnamurthy, B. K., Tserng, H.-P., Schmitt, R. L., Russell, J. S., Bahia, H. U. &
Hanna, A. S. (1998) AutoPave: towards an automated paving system for asphalt
pavement compaction operations. Automation in Construction, 8, 165.
Leech, D. & Powell, W. D. (1974) Levels of Compaction of dense coated macadam
achieved during pavement construction: Transport and Road Research Laboratory,
UK,
Li, C. C., Oloufa, A. A. & Thomas, H. R. (1996) A GIS-based system for tracking
pavement compaction. Automation in Construction, 5, 51.
Montgomery, D. C. (2005) Statistical Quality Control, New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Mouton, J. (2001) How to succeed in your Master's & Doctoral Studies - A South
African Guide and Resource Book, Pretoria, Van Schaik Publishers.
Naresh, A. L. & Jahren, C. T. (1999) Learning outcomes from construction simulation
modeling. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 16, 129-144.
Nassar, K. M., Nassar, W. M. & Hegab, M. Y. (2005) Evaluating cost overruns of
asphalt paving project using statistical process control methods. Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management-Asce, 131, 1173-1178.
Navon, R., Goldschmidt, E. & Shpatnisky, Y. (2004) A concept proving prototype of
automated earthmoving control. Automation in Construction, 13, 225-239.
NCAT (1991) Hot Mix Asphalt Materials, Mixture Design and Construction, NAPA
Research and Education Foundation.
Oloufa, A. R. (2002) Quality control of asphalt compaction using GPS-based system
architecture. Ieee Robotics & Automation Magazine, 9, 29-35.
Pampagnin, L.-H., Peyret, F. & Garcia, G. (1998) Architecture of a GPS-based
guiding system for road compaction. Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation. Leuven, Belgium, IEEE.
Peyret, F., Jurasz, J., Carrel, A., Zekri, E. & Gorham, B. (2000) The Computer
Integrated Road Construction project. Automation in Construction, 9, 447-461.
Rogers, E. (2003) Diffusion of innovations, Free Press, New York.
Sawhney, A., AbouRizk, S. M. & Halpin, D. W. (1998) Construction project simulation
using CYCLONE. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25, 16-25.
Sijpersma, R. & Buur, A. P. (2005) Bouworganisatievorm in beweging: Economisch
Instituut voor de Bouwnijverheid, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Simons, B. J. A. G. (2006) Op weg naar een beheerst asfaltverwerkingsproces.
Enschede, University of Twente.
Stroup-Gardiner, M., Wagner, C. T., Hodgson, D. T. & Sain, J. (2002) Effect of
temperature differentials on density and smoothness. ASTM Special Technical
Publication. 1433 ed.
Timm, D., Voller, V. R., Lee, E. & Harvey, J. (2001) Calcool: A multi-layer asphalt
pavement cooling tool for temperature prediction during construction. The
International journal of Pavement Engineering, 2, 169-185.
Trochim, W. M. K. (2001) The Research Methods Knowledge Base, Cincinnati, Atomic
Dog Publishing.
White, G. C., Mahoney, J. P., Turkiyyah, G. M., Willoughby, K. A. & Brown, E. R.
(2002) Online tools for hot-mix asphalt monitoring. Construction 2002, 124-132.
Willoughby, K. A., Mahoney, J. P., Pierce, L. M., Uhlmeyer, J. S. & Anderson, K. W.
(2002) Construction-related asphalt concrete pavement temperature and density
differentials. Construction 2002, 68-76.
Zayed, T. M. & Halpin, D. W. (2004) Simulation as a tool for pile productivity
assessment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130, 394-404.
Zhang, H. & Tam, C. M. (2005) Consideration of break in modeling of construction
processes. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 12, 373-390.

46