Construction Management and Economics (October 2005) 23, 839850

Productivity and delays assessment for concrete batch

plant-truck mixer operations
TAREK M. ZAYED1*, DANIEL W. HALPIN2 and ISMAIL M. BASHA3
1

Construction, Engineering and Management Department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig,
Egypt; presently at Department of Building, Civil & Environmental Engineering, Concordia University, 1455 De
maisonneuve west, Montreal, Quebec H3G 1M7, Canada
2
Construction Division, School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
3
Construction Engineering and Management Department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
Received 24 May 2004; accepted 23 March 2005

Current research focuses on assessing productivity, cost, and delays for concrete batch plant (CBP) operations
using Artificial Neural Network (ANN) methodology. Data were collected to assess cycle time, delays, cost of
delays, cost of delivery, productivity, and price/m3 for the CBP. Two ANN models were designated to represent
the CBP process considering many CBP variables. Input variables include delivery distance, concrete type, and
truck mixers load. Output variables include the assessment of cycle time, cost of delays, delivery cost,
productivity, and price/m3. The ANN outputs have been validated to show the ANNs robustness in assessing
the CBP output variables. The average validity percent for the ANN outputs is 96.25%. A Time-Quantity (TQ)
chart is developed to assess the time required for both truck mixers and the CBP to produce a specified quantity
of concrete. Charts have been developed to predict cycle time/truck, delays/truck, cost of delays/truck, cost of
delivery/m3, and price/m3.
Keywords: Artificial Neural Network (ANN), productivity, cost analysis, cycle time, modeling, concrete batch
plant (CBP), truck mixer

Introduction
Artificial Neural Network (ANN) methodology is
applied to model the concrete batch plant (CBP)
operation and to assess productivity, cost, and delays.
This assessment procedure faces many problems due to
the large number of factors that affect the CBP
operation. Some of these factors can be summarized
as follows: concrete type; delivery distance; transit
mixer capacity; delays in the construction site; delays in
the CBP site; traffic conditions; and road conditions.
Therefore, the price of a concrete unit, which is
produced by the CBP, is affected by the abovementioned factors. Common practice prices out the
concrete based upon materials price plus overhead and
profit without considering the transporting distance,
delays in both construction and CBP sites, traffic
*Author for correspondence. E-mail: zayed@bcee.concordia.ca

conditions, and road conditions. A previous study has

been done by Zayed and Halpin (2001a) to add
distance as a dimension in the concrete unit price. To
enhance the productivity and cost estimation per
concrete unit, current study adds one more dimension
to this previous study to price out the concrete unit:
delays in plant and construction sites. There is a lack of
research in this area; therefore, this study focuses on
assessing the CBP productivity and cost per concrete
unit considering the transporting distance and delays
using ANN.

ANN major concepts

The ANN consists of a large number of artificial
neurons that are arranged into a sequence of layers with
random connections between the layers (Tsoukalas and
Uhrig, 1997). The ANN processing elements (e.g.
neurons) are arranged in layers so that the connections

Construction Management and Economics

ISSN 0144-6193 print/ISSN 1466-433X online # 2005 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/01446190500184451

840

Zayed et al.

Figure 1 Typical feed-forward fully connected artificial neural network structure

are systematic and the network can be solved (Portas,

1996). The ANN can be organized through different
layers: input, middle, and output. The middle layer(s)
is (are) called hidden layer(s). These hidden layers have
no connections to the outside world because they are
connected only to the input and output layers. Figure 1
shows a typical ANN structure where weights can be
assigned to each connection between two consecutive
neurons.
The ANN performs two major functions: learning
and recalling (Moselhi et al., 1991; Garrett, 1992;
Alsugair and Chang, 1994; Moselhi and Hegazi, 1994;
Tsoukalas and Uhrig, 1997; Bode, 1998). Learning is
the process of adapting the connection weights in an
ANN to produce the desired outputs corresponding to
defined inputs. In other words, the ANN tries to adapt
the weights of network connections so that the network
predicts the required output according to specified
inputs. If the output is provided to the ANN to train
itself, this type of training is called supervised learning. If
there is no output provided for training, then it is
unsupervised learning. Recall is the process of accepting
an input and producing an output response based on
the ANN weight structure that is trained during the
learning process. In this case, the input vector is
provided to the trained ANN where the predicted
output is calculated after executing the internal process
of the ANN. The predicted output is compared with
the required output to establish the prediction error.

This error is used to adjust the ANN connection

weights to enhance its prediction accuracy.

ANN model building

Fully connected, feed-forward, three-layer, and supervisedlearning ANNs have been used in this study for several
reasons (Tsoukalas and Uhrig, 1997): (1) three-layer
ANN is enough to solve all nonlinearly separable
problems; (2) larger number of hidden layers increases
the processing power of the ANN but it needs more
time and data for training process to be performed
properly; (3) one hidden layer (i.e. three-layer ANN) is
capable of representing any mapping; and (4) it is
found from the training process that three-layer ANN is
adequate to represent current problem. Current
research uses three-layer ANN: input, hidden, and
output layers. The input layer includes (as shown in
Figures 2 and 3): (1) delivery distances from the plant
to the site: 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 miles (4.8, 8.0,
11.2, 14.4, 17.6, 20.8, and 24.0 km); (2) concrete types
(2500 psi, 4000 psi, 5.5 bags and 6.0 bags); and (3)
concrete quantity transferred by one truck per trip: 1, 2,
, and 10 cy (0.76, 1.52, , and 7.6 m3). Other
factors that affect the CBP cycle time, productivity, and
cost (i.e. road and traffic conditions) will be studied in
future study(ies) due to data availability. Therefore, the
ANN model includes 12 neurons in the input layer:

841

Productivity and delays assessment

Figure 2 Cycle time assessment using ANN1

distance (seven variables), concrete types (four variables), and truck load.
The output layer of the ANN designated model
includes: (1) cycle time elements (loading, hauling,
unloading, and return times); (2) delays (delay inside
the plant and delay in construction site); (3) cost of
delays; (4) price per cy (m3); and (5) cost of delivery
per cy (m3). Consequently, the number of output
neurons is eight in the output layer. From a practical
standpoint, eight outputs are many for the ANN to
learn through training and to recall for prediction in
future. Lots of information in the output layer results in

large number of neurons in the middle layer(s) to

transfer and translate these information. Therefore,
several iterations have been done to select the best
ANN representation for the CBP operation particularly
the selection of output neurons that make the network
best fit the data. Eight, four, two, and one neurons have
been tried in the output layer. For example, in the case
of one neuron in the output layer, the CBP operation
can be represented by eight networks to cover the eight
output variables; however, four networks represent the
process in the case of two output neurons each. The
outcome of this iteration process leads to the fact that

Figure 3 Delays, price, and cost of delivery assessment using ANN2

842
four neurons in the output layer is the best choice to
represent the operation with two networks. The
selection was made based on the learning process
performance. In other words, the iteration of each
ANN training has a goal to achieve, which is the least
sum of square error. If the goal (performance50.05)
has been met, the network learns the data and can
represent the operation. Otherwise, the learning process is not efficient and the developed model might
have problems in predicting the outputs. The degree of
goal achievement (performance) is the comparison
indicator that supports the best architecture to achieve
this goal. Using four neurons best meets this goal
because it has a performance of 0.06893, which is close
to 0.05. Other architectures produce larger performance (i.e. two output neurons architecture produce
an average performance of 14.6253; however, this is the
second closest to the goal (0.05)). Consequently, the
CBP operation can be represented using two ANNs
(each one contains four output neurons). Details of this
selection process are not included here due to space
limitation.
Each ANNs architecture involves 12 input and four
output neurons. The ANN1 contains loading, hauling,
unloading, and return times in the output neurons. The
ANN2 contains total delays, cost of delay, price per cy
(m3), and cost of delivery/cy (m3) in the output layer
neurons. Figures 2 and 3 show the input and output
neurons in both networks. Both figures depict the
architecture of the networks that represent the CBP
operation. Each network has the same inputs with
different outputs. The hidden layer is different in both

Zayed et al.
networks because it relies upon the data set and the
nature of the outputs.

Case study
To establish a decision-making framework, a Ready
Mixed Concrete (RMC) batch-plant operation, located
in the Lafayette, Indiana, was studied (Zayed and
Halpin, 2001a). The observed facility consisted of
storage bins for sand and gravel, a hopper tower, two
belt conveyors, two cement silos, and a discharge unit.
This facility serves an area of approximately 15 mi
(24 km) in radius. The production capacity of the plant
was rated as approximately 40 cu yd/h (30.4 m3/h)
(Zayed and Halpin, 2001a). Figure 4 shows the flow
diagram for the CBP and the transit mixer cycles.
Materials are withdrawn from the storage area to fill the
batch hopper through conveyor belt 1. There is a
scale to measure the aggregate weight in the hopper
tower before discharging to the transit mixer through
conveyor belt 2 (Zayed and Halpin, 2001a). Because
architecture design of the CBP might affect cycle time,
productivity, and cost, it is explained using Figure 4.
A concrete batch plant, in Lafayette, Indiana, is
selected to apply the designated ANN models and
verify their robustness in assessing the delays and their
influence on efficiency, cost, and time. Data (205 data
points) have been collected from the CBP site during
five months period. Several techniques have been used
to collect data: (1) CBP daily reports; (2) interview
with CBP management using site visits and telephone

Figure 4 Flow diagram for the CBP and the transit (adapted from Zayed and Halpin, 2001a)

843

Productivity and delays assessment

calls; and (3) direct data collection forms that are filled
during the CBP site visits. Data have been processed
and analyzed statistically to implement the designated
models. For example, the collected data for output
variables have been normalized (scaled) to reduce the
effect of variables interaction and correlation. Scatter
diagrams, normality plots, and other statistical tests
have been performed to check outliers and abnormal
data points before training the developed ANNs.
The breakdown of concrete price/cy ($/m3) is shown
in Table 1. It shows material, CBP, truck mixer, and
overhead costs. It also shows the total price/cy ($/m3)
for different concrete types based upon 1999 prices.
Cost of delivery/cy (m3) is calculated based upon the
previous study done by Zayed and Halpin (2001a).
Cost of delays/truck cycle is determined using model
(1):
C~b
d1 zt
d2 =60

Current research designed a general framework to

predict cycle time, productivity, cost, and price of the
CBP using the ANN. Because of detailed and
sophisticated data required for this study, the developed framework is only applied to one concrete batch
plant in Lafayette, Indiana. In other words, intricacy to
collect the required data abridged the available case
studies. Several factors contribute to the obscurity of
generalizing current research results: plant location,
project location, traffic and road conditions, day of the
week, time of the day, inside or outside cities, etc.

Table 1
Concrete
type
2000 psl
2500 psl
3000 psl
3500 psl
4000 psl
4500 psl
5000 psl
4.5 bag
(423 lb)
5.0 bag
(470 lb)
5.5 bag
(517 lb)
6.0 bag
(564 lb)
7.0 bag
(658 lb)

Therefore, current research developed a general framework that can be applied to any CBP so that
practitioners can build on and extend to suite their
plants. In other words, practitioners in different cities
can develop an appropriate conversion factor for the
results of current study framework to accommodate
market variations. Reviewing previous work shows lack
of research in the CBP area; therefore, current study
enriches the area of CBP management by developing a
robust ANN model that predicts different management
elements for the CBP. The developed ANN model is
essential for researchers who are engrossed in CBP
management.

ANN models validation

Data were collected and divided randomly into two sets:
training and validation data sets. The validation data
set represented 20% of the collected data; however, the
80% left was used to train the ANN models. After
training, the ANN models have been recalled to predict
the outputs based upon the validation data set inputs.
The eight output values are estimated using the
designated ANNs. The resulting outputs are compared
to the collected output data to check the validity
percent of the designated ANNs results. The average
invalidity percent (AIP) value is determined using
model (2) (adapted from Zayed and Halpin, 2001b,

Price breakdown per 1 cy (m3) of concrete

Equipment $/cy ($/m3)

Material
3

Total direct cost

Profit & overhead

Total price

$/cy

($/m )

$/cy

($/m )

$/cy

($/m3)

($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)
($10.5)

$44.53
$46.17
$48.87
$50.80
$52.89
$55.99
$55.29
$52.61

$58.59
$60.75
$64.30
$66.84
$69.60
$73.67
$72.75
$69.23

$12.97
$13.83
$13.63
$14.20
$14.61
$14.01
$18.21
$9.74

$17.07
$18.19
$17.94
$18.69
$19.22
$18.44
$23.96
$12.81

$57.50
$60.00
$62.50
$65.00
$67.50
$70.00
$73.50
$62.35

$75.66
$78.95
$82.24
$85.53
$88.82
$92.11
$96.71
$82.04

$4 ($5.26)

$8 ($10.5)

$54.49

$71.70

$10.36

$13.63

$64.85

$85.33

$58.39

$4 ($5.26)

$8 ($10.5)

$56.37

$74.18

$10.98

$14.44

$67.35

$88.62

$46.06

$60.60

$4 ($5.26)

$8 ($10.5)

$58.06

$76.39

$11.79

$15.52

$69.85

$91.91

$49.82

$65.55

$4 ($5.26)

$8 ($10.5)

$61.82

$81.34

$13.03

$17.15

$74.85

$98.49

$/cy

($/m )

Batch plant Truck mixer

$32.53
$34.17
$36.87
$38.80
$40.89
$43.99
$43.29
$40.61

$42.80
$44.96
$48.51
$51.05
$53.81
$57.88
$56.96
$53.44

$4
$4
$4
$4
$4
$4
$4
$4

$42.49

$55.91

$44.37

($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)
($5.26)

$8
$8
$8
$8
$8
$8
$8
$8

Sand cost/ton5$10.01; Stone/ton5$15.84; Truck mixer/hr5$80.00; Batch plant/hr5$100.00; Cement/ton5$88.00; Cement/bag5$4.15;

Truck/hr510cy (7.6 m3); Plant/hr540cy (30.4 m3).
Sources: Ogershok and Phillips (1999); RS Means (1999a,b); Ready Mixed Concrete Company (1999).

844

Zayed et al.

CSCE); however, model (3) represents the average

validity percent (AVP) as follows:
!,
n
X
n
2
AIP~
j1{Ei =Ci j
i~1

AVP~1{AIP

The AIP values calculated using model (2) are:

delays8.27%; cycle time3.53%; cost of delays
4.56%; cost of delivery2.16%; and price/cy (m3)
0.23%. Table 2 shows the determination of the average
validity percent (AVP) for the aforementioned output
variables (model 3). It indicates that most of ANN
architectures are excellent in predicting the output
variables. Based upon the analysis of cycle time, it is
clear that the usage of total cycle time as output
variable has a lower AIP value than breaking down the
cycle time into its elements. Therefore, breaking down
the cycle time into its elements results in high AIP
values for loading, hauling, and unloading times. The
average AIP1 (based on total cycle time) is 3.75% that
leads to AVP1 of 96.25%. This percent shows the
robustness of the ANN designated model to predict the
output variables. If the detailed cycle time elements are
used, the average AIP2 (based on cycle time elements)
is 9.00% that leads to AVP2 of 91.00%. Although the
deviation in the cycle time elements is larger than using
the total cycle time, the AVP2 is still acceptable (lower
than 10% deviation). However, it is still essential to
model the cycle time elements to track delays because
they have significant effect on expenses. In conclusion,
the designated ANN models are very convenient to
represent the CBP operation and to predict its delays,
cycle time, cycle time elements, cost of delays, cost of
delivery, and price/cy (m3). Figures 5 and 6 show the
deviation of the ANN output variable results from the
actual outputs. Cost of delivery/cy (m3) and price/cy
(m3) curves show very minimal deviation; however,
delays and cost of delays show maximum deviation.

Table 2

Cycle time has a considerable deviation as shown in

Figure 5. There is considerable noise within the cycle
time curve validation data points that range as 713,
2425, and 3133. This noise results from compromising other factors that affect cycle time, such as concrete
type, traffic, and road conditions.

ANN results analysis

The time required to load a truck mixer as well as the
other cycle time elements and delays are shown in
Figure 7. The average loading time for different
delivery distances is 6.25 minutes. In fact, loading time
does not depend on delivery distance; however, its
differences recorded in Figure 7 result from using
average loading time for various concrete types and
round off error. On the other hand, truck mixer
unloading time, which is distance independent, is 10
minutes on average. It depends on the on-site pouring
method and the number of available spaces beside the
pump. Truck mixer travel and return times are distance
dependent (directly related to distance). In other
words, the higher the distance, the higher the travel
and return times will be. They depend upon traffic and
road conditions but these factors are not covered by the
current study. The curves of cycle time elements are
shown in Figure 7. This figure also shows the average
total cycle time for the various distances and its
associated average delays per cycle. It shows that the
average cycle time, without delays, for a 4.8 km
distance is 26.02 minutes; however, it is 59.99 minutes
for 24.0 km delivery distance. Delays for each truck
mixer cycle represent a considerable percent out of the
cycle time: 40.45% on average (17.07 minutes/cycle).
The delay of a truck mixer traveling a 4.8 km distance is
43.97% (11.44 minutes); however, it is almost 35.48%
(21.28 minutes) for traveling 24.0 km distance. These
delays are huge and they have a bad effect on cost per
concrete unit. The total truck mixer cycle time

The ANN output validation

Items
Delays
Cycle time
Cycle time elements

Cost of delays
Cost of delivery/cy (m3)
Price/cy (m3)
Average

Output variables
Delays
Total
Loading
Hauling
Unloading
Returning
Cost of delays
Cost of delivery/cy (m3)
Price/cy (m3)
Average

AIP1

AVP1

AIP2

AVP2

8.27%
3.53%
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.56%
2.16%
0.23%
3.75%

91.73%
96.47%
NA
NA
NA
NA
95.44%
97.84%
99.77%
96.25%

8.27%
NA
23.20%
17.06%
7.78%
8.76%
4.56%
2.16%
0.23%
9.00%

91.73%
NA
76.80%
82.94%
92.22%
91.24%
95.44%
97.84%
99.77%
91.00%

Productivity and delays assessment

Figure 5 The ANN validation using cycle time and delays

Figure 6 The ANN validation using costs and prices

845

846

Zayed et al.

Figure 7 Average cycle time, its elements, and delays

including delays is determined to be 60.10 minutes on

average; however, it is 37.45 and 81.27 minutes for
delivery distances 4.8 km and 24.0 km, as shown in
Figure 7, respectively.
The effect of cycle time delays appears clearly in
Figure 8 under the cost of delays category. Figure 8
shows the cost of delays per truck cycle for different
delivery distances. It averages $56.15/truck cycle. It
ranges from $37.63 to $70.00/truck cycle for delivery
distances from 4.8 km to 24.0 km, respectively. These
cost figures are averaged for different truck loads and
capacities. Price per cubic meter is also shown in
Figure 8 for various travel distances. It averages $93.85/
m3 for various concrete types, truck loads, and travel
distances. Average price ranges from $81.59 to
$105.83/m3 for distances from 4.8 km to 24.0 km,
respectively. This price covers the cost of delivery for
various delivery distances. The cost of delivery estimate
shown in Figure 8 averages $15.37/m3 for different
travel distances. Its border limits are $5.93 and
$26.38/m3 for 4.8 km and 24.0 km travel distances,
respectively.
Based upon the previous analysis for Figures 7 and 8,
the CBP and truck mixer management have to control
their cycle time delays because it will increase the
concrete unit cost by at least $7.39/m3 on average. This
cost increase might exceed the concrete profit margin

resulting in huge losses. It is essential to study the

factors that support this huge delay of 28 minutes per
truck cycle, on average, to stop bleeding money.

Production analysis
A Time-Quantity (TQ) chart, Figure 9, has been
developed to assess time per truck mixer for delivering
a specified quantity of concrete; to determine the CBP
production time for this specified quantity; and to
select the number of trucks required for various travel
distances. The x-axis (horizontal) represents the
required concrete quantities that a client might request.
There are two y-axes (vertical): (1) the left hand side yaxis represents the time required from one truck mixer
to deliver the required concrete quantity; and (2) the
right hand side y-axis represents the time required from
the CBP to produce this required concrete quantity.
The CBP production time curve considers the delay
percentages of the truck mixers for various distances.
The TQ chart can be used efficiently when, for
example, a client requested 100 cy (76 m3) of concrete
for a 24 km delivery distance. The CBP management
will use the TQ in Figure 9 to calculate the delivery
time, the CBP production time, and number of truck
mixers that can be used. If a vertical line is constructed

Productivity and delays assessment

847

Figure 8 Price and expenses per m3

from a quantity of 76 m3 in the x-axis, Figure 9, it

intersects the CBP production curve and the 24 km
travel distance curves in two points B and A,
respectively. From point A, construct a horizontal line
that intersects the left hand side y-axis (time/truck
mixer) in a point (10 hrs) without delays. Therefore, it
takes 10 hours from one truck mixer to deliver this
quantity of concrete. Construct a horizontal line from
point B to the right hand side y-axis (plant production
time). It takes 2.85 hours, including delays, from the
CBP to produce this quantity of concrete. The
optimum number of trucks to be used for this distance
(24 km) is five truck mixers as mentioned in the
keynote in the upper left hand side of the graph
(Figure 9). Therefore, this optimum number of trucks
will keep the CBP busy for 2 hours and 51 minutes
(both the CBP and truck mixer) considering the
average delays that might occur for truck mixers cycles.

Cycle time, delays, and expenses analysis

The developed ANN models for the CBP operation are
recalled to predict truck mixer cycle time, delays per
cycle, price/m3, and the various expenses that are very

essential for the CBP management. Load and unload

times depend on the truck mixers load volume, which
affects the length of truck mixer cycle time. Because the
truck mixer load is one of the controlling factors in the
prediction process, particularly for cycle time, different
truck mixer loads have been used in the prediction
process. The selected truck mixer loads are 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
and 10 cubic yards (3.8, 4.56, 5.32, 6.08, 6.84, and
7.60 m3). Sets of charts have been developed, based
upon the ANN outputs, to predict the truck mixer cycle
time, delays per cycle, price/m3, and the various
expenses considering the above truck mixers loads
for different types of concrete. This paper presents a
sample of these prediction chart sets that cover only the
4000 psi concrete type.
Figure 10 presents the cycle time prediction for the
4000 psi concrete considering different truck mixers
loads. If the truck mixer carries a load of 8 cy (6.08 m3)
for a 11.2 km delivery distance, the corresponding cycle
time is approximately 63 minutes for one truck
including delays. The CBP management can predict
delays considering different distances and truck mixers
loads for the 4000 psi concrete using Figure 11. The
delay for a load of 8 cy (6.08 m3) traveling 11.2 km is
predicted to be approximately 17 minutes. Therefore,

848

Zayed et al.

Figure 9 Time-quantity chart for the CBP and truck mixer

Figure 10

Cycle time prediction for 4000 psi concrete

Figure 11

Delays prediction for 4000 psi concrete

849

Productivity and delays assessment

Cost of delivery/m3 prediction for 4000 psi

Figure 12 Cost of delays prediction per truck mixer cycle

for 4000 psi concrete

Figure 13
concrete

the net cycle time for that distance will be (63 minus
17546 minutes). It is the responsibility of the CBP
management and truck mixers operators to reduce
these delays as much as they can so that they are able to
increase their productivity. The cost of delay for
11.2 km delivery distance can be predicted using
Figure 12. It shows that the cost of delay for an 8 cy
(6.08 m3) truck load, 4000 psi concrete, is approximately $43.00/cycle. It costs the CBP management
approximately $7.8/m3 (4000 psi concrete) to deliver to
an 11.2 km distance, as shown in Figure 13. It is
obvious from Figure 13 that the cost of delivery
decreases when the truck mixer load increases because
the truck mixer expenses are allocated to a small
quantity of concrete. On the other hand, Figure 14
shows the prediction of price/m3 for various truck
mixers loads and delivery distances. The price/m3
(including cost of delivery) for 4000 psi concrete that is
delivered for 11.2 km distance is approximately $90.5,
as shown in Figure 14. This shows the drastic increase
in the price/m3 to deliver a small quantity of concrete to
the various distances.
These developed charts (tools) are designated to be
helpful to the CBP management and operators of truck
mixers. They facilitate their decision-making process
particularly in pricing out the concrete unit for different
distances and quantities. The developed tools are
flexible enough to cover many variables that enable
the CBP management to answer a broad range of
questions.

Conclusions
Current research has discussed the role of ANN as a
tool for decision-making and resource management. It
adds one more dimension to the CBP management
analysis: delays and their effect on the price/cy (m3).
Two ANN models were designated to represent the

Figure 14

Price/m3 prediction for 4000 psi concrete

850
CBP process considering many input and output
variables. Input variables include various distances,
concrete types, and truckload. Output variables include
the assessment of cycle time, cost of delays, delivery
cost, productivity, and price per concrete unit. The
average validity percent for the ANN outputs is
96.25%, which shows the robustness of the designated
ANN models. A set of charts has been developed to
help the CBP management answer questions regarding
prices and expenses for different distances. The TQ
tool is developed to assess the time required from both
truck mixers and the CBP to produce a specified
quantity of concrete. Charts have been developed to
predict cycle time/truck, delays/truck, cost of delays/
truck, cost of delivery/m3, and price/m3.
This research is relevant to both industry practitioners and researchers. It provides sets of charts for
practitioners usage to schedule and price out the CBP
operation. In addition, it provides the researchers with
the methodology of applying the ANN approach to the
CBP operation, its limitations, and future suggestions.

Acknowledgements
The writers wish to express their gratitude and
appreciation to the concrete production companies,
which generously allowed us to collect data and access
their sites. The cooperation and assistance of plants
managers and operators are also gratefully acknowledged and appreciated.

References
Alsugair, A.M. and Chang, D.Y. (1994) An Artificial Neural
Network approach to allocating construction resources,
Proceedings of the Computing in Civil Engineering First
Congress held in conjunction with A/E/C Systems, Vol. 1,
June, pp. 95057.
Bode, J. (1998) Neural networks for cost estimation. Cost
Engineering, 40(1), 2530.
Garrett, J.H. Jr. (1992) Neural networks and their applicability within civil engineering, Proceedings of the 8th
Conference of Computing in Civil Engineering, June,
pp. 115562.

Zayed et al.
Moselhi, O. and Hegazy, T. (1994) Analogy-based solution
to markup estimation problem. Journal of Computing in
Civil Engineering, 8(1), 7287.
Moselhi, O., Hegazy, T. and Fazio, P. (1991) Neural
networks as tools in construction. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 117(4), 60625.
Ogershok, D. and Phillips, D. (1999) National construction
estimator, 47th edn.
Portas, J.B. (1996) Estimating concrete formwork productivity, MSc thesis, Construction Engineering & Management,
Department of Civil Enineering, University of Alberta,
Canada.
Ready Mixed Concrete Company (1999) Price Sheet,
Lafayette, IN.
RS Means (1999a) Heavy construction cost data, 13th edn.
RS Means (1999b) building construction cost data, 57th edn.
Tsoukalas, L.H. and Uhrig, R.E. (1997) Fuzzy and Neural
Approaches in Engineering, Wiley, New York, NY, USA.
Zayed, T.M. and Halpin, D.W. (2001a) Simulation of
concrete batch plant production. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, ASCE, 127(2), 13241.
Zayed, T.M. and Halpin, D.W. (2001b) Construction
productivity assessment using artificial intelligence, 4th
Construction Specialty Conference of the Canadian
Society for Civil Engineering (CSCE), Victoria, British
Columbia, Canada, 30 May2 June, C55.

Appendix
Notations
C5cost of delays (delays at plant site and at
construction site)
b5batch plant cost per hour
d15delay at the plant site in minutes
t5truck mixer cost per hour
d25delay at the construction site in minutes
AIP5average invalidity percent for validation data set
AVP5average validity percent for validation data set
Ei5estimated output variables value by ANN for
data point i
Ci5collected output variables value for data point i
n5number of data points
i5data points