President,
Li-Tai Inc., San-shing, Yilan, Taiwan
ABSTRACT
The technology innovation is recognized as a main driver for the advancement of construction industry. Due to the lack of systematic innovation method, the advancement of construction technologies was slow compared with the other industries, e.g., ICT and Biotech Engineering. This paper proposed a Systematic Technology Innovation Process (STIP) for innovation of construction technologies to speed up the technology innovation in construction engineering. The STIP method integrates several techniques adopted for product research and development in other fast innovating industries including patent mapping, root cause analysis, TRIZ, function modelling, simplify design, etc. Details of the proposed STIP method are described. The construciton technology for road man-hole work is selected for case study. A step-by-step application of the proposed STIP method to the selected construction technology is demonstrated. Deliverables obtained from each step of STIP is reviewed and evaluated via a technology stage gate (TSG) process, which is commonly adopted in high-tech manufacturing industry.
Finally, an innovative design of a new man hole repairing technology is developed. Verification and testing of the developed innovative technology is also conducted to ensure its feasibility.
Keywords: Technology innovation, patent analysis, TRIZ, construction engineering
1. INTRODUCTION
Construction technology was defined as “the combination of construction methods, construction resources, work tasks, and project influences that define the manner of
performing a construction operation” [1] to “accomplish a desired aim necessary for human sustenance and comfort” [2]. Robert Harris pointed out that “…there is more to the construction process than just management…there is more to the construction process than just structural design or geotechnical evaluation…[We need] to create better methods for construction…”[3]. Technology innovation can result in revolutionary advancement in construction practice that traditional management techniques and other skills cannot achieve. Therefore, it becomes the critical component for a company’s long-term competitive strategy [4].
However, the innovation of construction technologies has been slow compared with other areas in Civil Engineering and other industries, e.g., Information and Communication Technology (ICT), Bio Genetic Technology, Nano Materials, etc. (Nam and Tatum, 1989). One of the critical reasons and maybe the most important one is the lack of a systematic approach for fast innovation [5]. As pointed out by Daniel Halpin in his speech of the Seventh Peurifoy Construction Research Award: “…we need a common framework—a common language” [6].
A Systematic Technology Innovation Process (STIP) is proposed to respond the appeals posed by previous researchers. The goal of STIP was to provide a common framework for fast innovation of construction technologies based on modern product innovation methods adopted in other highly innovative industries. In this paper, the STIP method is demonstrated with the innovation of a new manhole technology for road construction work.
2. INNOVATION OF CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
Innovation of construction technologies has resulted in dramatic revolutions in construction practice. For example,
the introduction of Portland cement in 1824 has brought up thousands of new construction technologies and equipment that completely changed the way of construction engineering; furthermore, in the first quarter of the 20th century, the steel structural technology was invented and introduced to construction industry, which triggered a second revolution of construction technologies.
During the late 1970’s, construction industry suffered in low productivity, hence inspired the next generation of construction innovation. Issues such as constructability (O’Connor and Miller, 1994), prefabrication, modularization (Tatum et al., 1986), and automation (Sarah, 1997) have drawn numerous researchers to devote their efforts in the innovation of construction and management processes.
In spite of the tremendous efforts spent, innovation in construction industry has been relatively slow. Lack of a common framework, as pointed out by Halpin, may contribute significantly to this lag. Previous researchers have exploited many approaches for organization process innovation [1], technology evaluation [7], and advanced technology repositories [8]. However, few of these efforts targeted directly to design of new technologies. Halpin proposed a CYCLONE model for analysis of construction processes [9]. Many efforts on construction process simulation followed him, e.g., COOPS [10] and STROBOSCOPE [11]. Most of the functionalities of process simulation techniques are still limited to the modeling of existing processes, rather than the invention of new technologies.
Just recently, a new area of construction innovation has been developing on patent analysis (PA) [12][13] and the Theory of Innovative Problem Solving (TRIZ) [14][15].
The former innovated the target technology based on existing technologies of the other areas, which are stored in public patent databases; the latter applied a systematic procedure to identify potentially improvable engineering attributes with tools provided with TRIZ [16].
Unlike the simulation approach to innovate the existing construction processes, PA- or TRIZ-based technology innovations seek a different dimension of technology improvement. The former belongs to “incremental innovation”, and the latter belongs to “system innovation”
or “radical innovation” according to the classification of Sarah Slaughter [4]. The “system” or “radical” innovations usually involve tremendous amount of information and knowledge and need to be performed with assistance of computer aided tools [17]. Such tools are incorpoerated into a systematic technolog innovation process called STIP, which will be described in the next section.
3. PROPOSED SYSTEMATIC TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION PROCESS (STIP)
The objective of STIP method is to achieve fast innovation of construction technologies by integrating three modern techniques: (1) a product research and development procedure called Research and Development Project Management (R&D PM); (2) an inventive problem-solving method namely TRIZ; and (3) a computer aided
innovation tool called Goldfire Innovator™. The STIP procedure consists of eight steps described as follows.
1. Root Cause Analysis (RCA)
The RCA step analyzes the potential opportunities for improvement with the identified technology problem. This step is associated with the Opportunity Analysis stage of the R&D PM Process. Two CAI tools are employed to perform RCA: the RCA module and knowledge database provided by Goldfire Innovator™.
2. Target Technology
The Target Technology step searches the patent database solutions for the root causes determined in the last step.
This step is associated with the Concept Definition stage of the R&D PM Process. The patent databases and patent search tools can be employed to identify the target technology.
3. Function Modelling
The Function Modelling step constructs the function model (FM) of the target technology identified in the last step. This step is associated with the Conceptual Design stage of the R&D PM Process. The Function Modelling module of Goldfire Innovator™ can be employed to construct the FM of the target technology.
4. FM Modification
The FM Modification step modifies the FM of the target technology obtained in the last step. Principles of TRIZ, Creativity Templates (CT), value engineering, or simplify design can be adopted for this end. This step is associated with the System Analysis and Basic Design stage of the R&D PM Process. The Simplify Design module of Goldfire Innovator™ or any other innovative solution generator (ISG) commercial software can be employed to construct the FM for the target technology. The result of FM Modification is an “innovated alternative” that improve the problem of the target technology.
5. Alternative Evaluation
The Alternative Evaluation step evaluates the modified FM of an innovated alternative generated in the last step.
The result of evaluation can be “approval” or “rejection”.
If the alternative is approved, the STIP proceeds to next step—Method Design; on the contrast, should the technology alternative be rejected, the process goes back to FM Modification to generate a new alternative. This step is similar to the technology stage gate (TSG) of the R&D PM Process [18], which provides the innovator a quality control function of product development.
6. Method Design
The Method Design step generates feasible solutions for an approved FM of an innovated alternative; that is, suggests a combination of resources (e.g., devices, materials, equipment, and human resources) and process to implement the innovated technology. This step is associated with the Product Design stage of the R&D PM Process. The knowledge database provided by Goldfire
2
Innovator™ can help the innovator in generating technology solutions. Other approaches for Method Design include brain storming, focus group, and expert interviews when the CAI is not available [18].
7. Prototyping
The Prototyping step implements the innovated technology generated in the last step with the available resources and methods. The implementation is experimental rather than formal. The objective is to test the feasibility of producing physical and practical methods that can be experimented or tested in the next step. This step is associated with the Prototyping stage of the R&D PM Process.
8. Experiment and Testing
The last step of STIP method is Experiment and Testing.
In this step, the prototyped technology is tested with real world scenarios to verify its feasibility and applicability.
Design of Experiment (DOE) can be adopted to plan the experiments for testing. Modifications and adjustments may be made to the previous steps (Method Design and Prototyping) if the experiment results show potential problems of the prototype technology.
Figure 1 STIP procedure 4. CASE STUDY
The proposed STIP method has been applied to the innovation of a new road manhole construction technology.
As Taiwan has become a developed country, many infrastructure systems are aging, including highways, utilities (e.g., electricity, water supply, and gas), sewage,
communication (e.g., TV, telephone) conduits, etc. As common conduits are rarely adopted in Taiwan, most of the pipeline conduits are constructed separately under roadways in the urban and suburban areas. Manholes are constructed in order to maintain the utility pipelines. It is found that the average lifecycle of traditional manhole is less than two years. Such damaged manholes have become one of the major causes of deterioration of road pavement, see Figure 2.
Figure 2 deteriorated pavement surrounding manholes Moreover, the deteriorated pavement surrounding manholes has contributed significant part of car and motorcycle accidents annually. There are more than seven millions constructed manholes in Taiwan. As a result, improvement of the lifecycle of manhole can not only save great amount of budget for public construction but also defer the deterioration of road pavement and improve the safety of road users. It is very desirable for public road agencies to develop an improved manhole construction technology so that the lifecycle of manhole is prolonged, the quality of road pavement surface is improved, and the lifecycle cost of manhole is reduced. In the case study, the STIP method is applied to improve the traditional manhole technology to achieve three objectives: (1) a longer lifecycle; (2) a better evenness of pavement surface surrounding the manhole; and (3) a lower lifecycle cost.
1. Scope of Case Study
The case study was conducted in Taiwan to innovate the manhole construction technology for asphalt concrete (AC) road pavement. Due to the limitation of time, the scope of patent search was limited to USTPO [19].
2. Application of STIP Method (1) Root Cause Analysis (RCA)
By interviews with the experienced engineers of road maintenance, major cause for manhole deterioration is the re-leveling of manhole covers due to re-pavement of road.
As the limited time allowed for concrete curing, the structure strength of manhole is not fully developed before undertaking the loads of traffics. The structure is cracked inside the manhole (see Figure 3) and the surrounding soils of the base layer could flew into the manhole with water when it rains. As a result, the base layer of road is damaged and the road pavement is deteriorated. The root causes of manhole damaged are shown in Figure 4.
3
Figure
Ins
In
Figure 4 In Figure 4, th surrounding m into manhole are: (1) cra Furthermore, cracked concr solved by p blocking the c (2) Target Te In this step, t the most appr the “target t maps are d technological technology do Table 1 show technologies patents in US code (IPC) w noticed that constructions found to be m case study.
Table 1 Searc (TTL/manhol (ICL/E02D02 ICL/E02D029 E02D029/12:
structures, ma By reviewing Adjustable m technology f
3 Cracked str
D
Cracked ma
sufficient strength
nsufficient curing time
RCA diagram he root cause manhole is th e. Two causes
acked manh the insufficie rete. Thus, the providing suf
channel of dra echnology and the patent dat ropriate techn echnology” f developed to
l competitiv omain.
ws the search used in this r SPTO. The In was adopted t the IPC
, undergroun most relevant
ch criteria for le OR A 29/14 OR
9/12): 406 pat fixed cons anholes.
g the most rele manhole suppo for innovatio
ructure inside
AND Pavement deterioration
Drainage with solis
anhole Rains
Loads
Traffics
m for manhole for road pave he drainage w s trigger the d hole; and (2 ent strength is
e solution to t fficient struct ainage into the d Patent Searc tabases are se nology that ca for innovation
visualize th veness in
criteria for p research to fin nternational Pa in searching.
class: “E02 nd structures t to the proble
manhole tech ABST/manho
ICL/E02D29 tents
structions, un
evant patents, ort” is consid on. The targ
the manhole
s(water)
e deterioration ement deterior with soils flo drainage with 2) rains (w s the main cau the problem c
ture strength e manhole.
ch
earched to fin an be consider n. At first, p he status of the consid pavement repa nd out the rel atent Classific
In Table 1, 2D029/12” ( s, manholes)
em domain o
hnologies ole) and
9/14 OR nderground
the “US 3773 dered as the t get technolog
4 n
ration owing soils water).
use of an be h and
nd out red as patent f the
dered airing evant cation it is (fixed
was f this
3428:
target gy is
cons (trad sche Figu
2 3 3 3
(3) F The furth Gold and Figu the c
(4) F As i deter manh cast-suffi drain Figu
sidered “trad ditional meth
matic diagram ure 5.
1 manhole system 11 Cover 12 Cover bed 13Manhole seat 131 RC 132 Concrete 14 Positioning bo 2 Asphalt concre 3 Formwork syst 31 Bracing 32 Form
Figure 5 Sche Function Mode target technol her analysis.
dfire Innovato technology r ure 6 shows th construction m
Figure 6 Fun FM Modificati
dentified by R rioration are c hole; direction -on-site meth icient strength nage channel.
ure 7.
ditional manh hod)” hereaf
m of traditio
m
olt te pavement tem
ematic diagram elling
logy is conver The Device or™ is adopt representation he FM of the method describ
nction Model ion
RCA, the two cracked manh
ns for problem hod with a p
h of manhole A modified F
hole construc fter in this
onal method
m of traditiona rted into funct Model (DM) ted for functi n of the targe target techno bed in the last
of traditional
o root causes hole and water
m-solving are precast metho
structure; (2) FM is generate
ction method paper. The is shown in
al method tion model fo ) provided by ion modelling et technology
logy based on step.
l method
for pavemen r drainage into
: (1) replacing od to provide ) blocking the ed as shown in d e n
r y g y.
n
nt o g e e n
(5) Alternativ The alternativ the domain constructabili results are s employs labo bed on site. T result, the fun However, th equipment an cost, and thus Table 2 Evalu
Criterion Functionalit Constructab Cost effectiv
(6) Method D In this step, innovative te Innovation (C again to gene of the innovat
‘45’ indicate adjust the lev that provides of surroundin
Figure 7 ve Evaluation ve evaluation n experts
ity, and cost shown in Tab orers to constr
They are repl nctionality and he innovative nd precast uni s is inferior co uation of the in
Trad ty Poor ility Med veness Good
Design implementati chnology is d CAI) tool, Go erate design sc tive method is the ‘adjustm vel of manhol
a block to th ng base layer w
Modified FM n
is performed in terms effectivenes ble 2. The t ruct the manh laced by prec d constructab e method re
t, which will ost effectivene nnovative tech
Technolog ditional Inn
r Go
dium Go
d Me
(hig cos
ion method f designed. The oldfire Innovat cenarios. The
s shown in Fig ment ring’ tha le; ‘42’ show he drainage ch
would not flow M
d qualitatively of function s. The evalu traditional me hole seat and
ast structure.
ility are impr equires addit
increase the i ess.
hnology gy novative ood ood
edium gh initial st)
for the conce e Computer A
tor™, is empl schematic dia gure 8. In Figu at can be us ws the ‘frame hannel so that w into manhol
5 y with
nality, uation ethod cover As a oved.
tional initial
eptual Aided loyed agram ure 8, ed to base’
t soils le.
Figu (7) P The prod
Figu (8) E Expe techn the r by th
ure 8 Schemati Prototyping
prototype o duced and asse
ure 9 Productio Experiment an eriment and t nology for the requirement o he governmen
13 4 42 45 5
ic diagram of
f the innova embled in the
on of prototyp nd Testing esting was co e compression f regulations a nt agencies, se
32 Cover seat 1 Neck ring 2 Frame base 5 Adjustment
Manhole
innovative m
ative technolo plant, see Fig
pe product in p
onducted for t n strength in o
and SPECs of e Figure 10.
t
ring
ethod
ogy has been gure 9.
plant
the innovative order to fulfil f public work n
e ll s