![Different Plans
Introduction
Motivation
Problem 1: Static
Obstacles
Problem 2: Moving
Obstacles
Solution
Alternate Activity
Sequence
Different Plans
Simulation of the Plans
Simulation in MSL
Library
Heatmap Generation
Conclusions
8 / 12
Different plans yield different safety scores.
Moving equipment do not affect the safety of two sequential activities.
Static obstacles generated by an activity have a succeeding effect on
the safety score of all the successor activities.
P1 = [EX1, CP1, EX2, CP2]
P2 = [EX1, EX2, CP1, CP2]
P3 = [EX2, EX1, CP1, CP2].](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/icra-180504233827/85/A-Coupled-Discrete-Event-and-Motion-Planning-Methodology-for-Automated-Safety-Assessment-in-Construction-Projects-8-320.jpg)
A Coupled Discrete-Event and Motion Planning Methodology for Automated Safety Assessment in Construction Projects
- 1. 1 / 12 A Coupled Discrete-Event and Motion Planning Methodology for Automated Safety Assessment in Construction Projects Md Mahbubur Rahman, Triana Carmenate, Leonardo Bobadilla, Ali Mostafavi Florida International University May 23, 2015
- 2. Introduction Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution 2 / 12 Struck-by accidents are one of the most deadly hazards found on construction jobsites. But there is very few automated and proactive system to calculate the hazardous zones. Motion planning techniques can be used to estimate the safe trajectories. Discrete event system specification is useful to simulate the construction job in virtual environment.
- 3. Motivation Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution 3 / 12 Approximately 75% of struck-by fatalities involve bodies in motion such as trucks or cranes(OSHA). Possibility of using motion planning algorithms to avoid collision. Two important factors affecting the level of safety hazards: 1) Sequence of activities and jobsite layout, 2) Movement patterns of workers and equipment Dynamic, and continuously changing nature of construction jobsites like robotic path planning problem.
- 4. Problem 1: Static Obstacles Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution 4 / 12
- 5. Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution 5 / 12
- 6. Solution Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 6 / 12
- 7. Alternate Activity Sequence Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 7 / 12 We observed that alternate construction plans give better safety metrices. An construction project is represented using activity graph(precedence graph).
- 8. Different Plans Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 8 / 12 Different plans yield different safety scores. Moving equipment do not affect the safety of two sequential activities. Static obstacles generated by an activity have a succeeding effect on the safety score of all the successor activities. P1 = [EX1, CP1, EX2, CP2] P2 = [EX1, EX2, CP1, CP2] P3 = [EX2, EX1, CP1, CP2].
- 9. Simulation of the Plans Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 9 / 12 Discrete event system specification was used to model the simulation. Motion planners were used to generate the collisions free paths in configuration space. ES = {E, Z, EL, fη, fz, zI} An example excavation events are, EEX = {L, H, D, R}. z = (xtr, ytr, θtr, ηex, rex, tex). fEX η (L, z) = H. fEX z (L, z) = (xnew tr , ynew tr , θnew tr , H, rex − r′, tex + t′). The constant, r′ ∈ N, denotes the units of soil/resources.
- 10. Simulation in MSL Library Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 10 / 12 Motion Strategy Library is used to simulate the construction activities to generate trajectories.
- 11. Heatmap Generation Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 11 / 12 Environment is decomposed into grid. Risk heatmaps are genrated based on machinery movement and distances from each of the grid square.
- 12. Conclusions Introduction Motivation Problem 1: Static Obstacles Problem 2: Moving Obstacles Solution Alternate Activity Sequence Different Plans Simulation of the Plans Simulation in MSL Library Heatmap Generation Conclusions 12 / 12 We calculate safe trajectories that are as far as possible from static obstacles while avoiding moving bodies (i.e., equipment). Suggests some alternative paths with less hazards. Phase II generates heat map according to hazard rate on different region of the construction zone. A large scale planning is possible which can suggest alternate construction activity sequences to minimize the risks. Thanks!