IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Analysis of the Construction Machinery Work Efficiency as a Factor of

the Earthworks Sustainability
To cite this article: K Tijani et al 2019 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 222 012009

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 195.174.96.55 on 15/05/2020 at 14:59

PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

Analysis of the Construction Machinery Work Efficiency as a

Factor of the Earthworks Sustainability

K Tijanić, M Šopić, I Marović and D Car-Pušić

Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Rijeka, Radmile Matejčić 3, 51000 Rijeka,

Croatia

[email protected]

Abstract. Being aware of the construction machinery work efficiency is one of the key
conditions of dynamic planning of machine work at the construction site and it can be
considered as one of the earthworks sustainability factors. The main topic of this paper is the
time study analysis of one standard technological cyclic construction machine process (the
excavators’ loading the transportation vehicle), which was observed on-and-off site and
analysed. On-site data was obtained by snapback chronometry method with the purpose of
determining actual work efficiency; while the (off-site) planned work efficiency was
determined using the standardized tables. The aim was to determine the existence of
a deviation and examine the differences between planned and actual work efficiency of
particular technological process in earthworks as well as to identify its cost-effective area as
a prerequisite for identifying the earthworks sustainability. As the earthworks sustainability is
the synthesis and concordance of beneficial activities for technological, economic,
environmental and social performance context, the balance of excavators’ work efficiency is
needed. It was concluded that in order to achieve sustainability, i.e. to be in cost-effective area,
the maximum value of excavators’ cycle time extends up to 50 seconds.

1. Introduction
With the growing industrialization of construction works, the role of machinery on a construction site
is vital for achieving productivity, working standards and performance of contractors. Present
construction projects are highly mechanized and have been evolving continuously [1]. Adoption of
mechanized practices accelerates execution of works on the construction site, thus shortening the time
and cost of completing the project [2].
The choice of machinery for a specific construction site is mainly result of finding a solution that
gives the greatest practical or planned achievement, i.e. work efficiency at the lowest cost. However,
the increasingly popular phenomenon of sustainability in construction emphasizes the preservation of
energy, efficiency, environment, economy and human well-being. In such context, selecting the most
suitable machinery from the available options is highly demanding. Therefore, when selecting
construction machinery, there is a need for the most diverse criteria that have a positive impact on
operational efficiency, productivity, cost reduction, environment and human well-being [1].
The contractor does not always have an opportunity to select the optimal machine for the
construction purpose but to perform work with the available machinery. Therefore, it is of crucial
importance to calculate available machines’ work efficiency in order to achieve the best possible
result. Specifically, the efficiency is one of the key conditions of machines’ work dynamic planning at

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

the construction site resulting in cost-efficiency and desired productivity. Such overall consideration
of various parameters results in work efficiency information that can be considered as one of the
earthworks sustainability factors.
In order to examine the differences of planned and actual work efficiency, in this research on-site
measurement of excavator work with snapback chronometry method was carried out. The aim of this
paper is to determine the existence of a deviation between the work standards obtained by on-site
measurement and that obtained through the calculation of standard cyclic construction machine by
standardized tables. Based on the results obtained, it is necessary to identify the working conditions in
which the machine performs the most productive and most cost-effective work, and in that sense partly
contribute to the creation of sustainable working conditions of the observed excavator.

2. Research context and literature review

For reliable planning of both work costs and time, it is necessary to know the work efficiency of the
machinery that is intended to be used, especially the efficiency in specific construction work
conditions. The machine work efficiency can be defined as the amount of work with satisfactory
quality, expressed in appropriate calculation units (m3, m2, m, pcs, t) which takes place in a unit of
time, usually one hour [3]. The machine's theoretical work efficiency is the maximum efficiency of the
machine and can be measured on the basis of machine operation without loss of time and failure,
under optimum conditions. The practical or planned work efficiency of the machine, on the other
hand, tries to more precisely determine the value of the real work efficiency, and it takes into account
work-related failures due to the technology itself, the machine mode and the person who manages it
[4]. These site conditions are entered in the form of reduction coefficients in the calculation of the
practical efficiency.
Determining the actual work efficiency of standard construction machinery is one of the key
preconditions for dynamic planning of construction site work. That is why methods of calculating the
work efficiency of construction machinery are often subject to research in the field of organization and
construction technology and are also a special subject of interest of manufacturers of construction
machinery [5].
Another very important element in the planning of machinery work which is directly related to the
machine's work efficiency, is the determination of the machine work cost, which is mainly expressed
in unit costs [6]. Unit labour costs are direct costs and are calculated in the unit price analysis as
multiplication of the cost of a particular machine (how much it costs the contractors) and time
standards which should be the size inversely proportional to the average efficiency achieved [3].
For construction practice, not knowing the work efficiency needed to plan costs and time is
a common problem, i.e. lack of appropriate standards, therefore Vidaković et al. [3] suggest that each
construction company should create its own internal standards for the work being performed and the
machines they use to have relevant data to calculate their work efficiency. The development of these
standards should imply the real work efficiency that machines have achieved on the construction site
in real time period. They are best obtained by measuring machine operation, either by chronometry
method or some more sophisticated methods such as advanced wireless technology (such as GPS,
RFID, sensors, lasers, etc.) [7–8]. Car-Pušić et al. [5] determined the existence of differences between
the work efficiency obtained at the planning stage and those obtained by on-site measurements and
showed that the problem stems from the standard coefficient values [9–12] associated with
organizational conditions. Further research [13–14], in which the chronometry method was applied,
confirmed that the measured work efficiency of the machinery, in relation to the planned work
efficiency, was higher by 30%. The research [15] confirmed the existence of differences between
planned and actual work efficiency and emphasized the need for further study of machine work. This
is of particular importance if the aspects of sustainability are taken into account. As a matter of fact,
sustainability can be seen from the point of view of the working process, or from the point of view of
the nature preservation.

2
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

3. Methodology
3.1. Prerequisites for achieving earthworks sustainability
Successful realization of earthworks in terms of sustainability is reflected in the ability to reach
balance between optimized and efficient planning and performing, profitable actions, while preserving
nature and with long-term effects of all results and resources. The optimization and efficiency of
planning and performing earthworks is the application of best practices, standards and technology with
the criteria of cost-efficiency, availability of machines and safety. In relation to the planned project, it
is necessary to select the machine with optimal power and appropriate tool size. Also, it is important to
reduce unnecessary amount of work, use of means for work and energy consumption. The long-term
effects in results mean the fulfilment of a high quality project with the nature conservation criterion
and the lowest level of air, water and soil pollution.
Considering the long-term effects, an important segment is the mechanical state of the machines,
their age and maintenance regularity. Scheduled and regular maintenance of machines reduces the
possibility of sudden, unexpected failures that cause delays and losses on the construction site. In
addition, machine failures can result in unfavourable and adverse conditions of the environment.
Tracking and monitoring the earthworks operations enable correct decision-making, implementation
of improvements, more accurate predictions of activity duration, necessary costs and resources as well
as early detection of defects in order to take timely implementation of appropriate corrective measures.
Profitable actions represent operations and activity that contribute to the preservation and promotion
of the welfare of the whole community and environment. Also, it is important to encourage motivated
working environment with focus on solutions. Sustainability of earthworks is the synthesis and
concordance of beneficial activities for technological, economic, environmental and social
performance context (Figure 1). Sustainable project results of earthworks are duration and exploitation
of goods for the long-term period. Responsible realization of earthworks meets the needs and ensures
progress without compromising future activities.

Figure 1. Balance in conditions for earthworks sustainability.

One particular technological process of earthworks is loading materials from excavation into
transportation vehicles. In order to effectively perform the work, it is especially important to
dimension the machinery to enable continuous operation of the machines which load material, such as

3
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

excavator or wheel loaders, ensure sufficient number of transportation vehicles, such as a tipper truck
or a dump truck. Measuring actual work efficiency of the construction machinery represents an aspect
of the tracking and monitoring of operations as a part of earthworks sustainability.

3.2. Methodology proposal

The methodology proposal for tracking and monitoring of earthworks operations consists of
theoretical preparation, selection of an appropriate tracking tool, field research, comparative analysis
and conclusions (Figure 2). Theoretical preparation involves defining a key machine, or machines for
the technological process of earthworks and calculation of their planned work efficiency on assumed
conditions of the construction site. Field research involves tracking and monitoring the machine for
the purpose of measuring its actual work efficiency during the operations at the construction site. The
essential link between theoretical preparation and field research is the selection of an appropriate tool
for tracking the machine without disrupting its normal work. Tracking tool should have the ability of
quick, accurate, easy and inexpensive use. Comparative analysis of the planned and actual work
efficiency of the machine with the assumption that the planned work efficiency is appropriately
calculated, allows detecting the deviation between the theoretical preparation and the field research or
detection of lower work efficiency than planned. Spotting the large discrepancies between the planned
and actual work efficiency indicates a possible failure in performing earthworks. Then, it is necessary
to detect possible critical parameters that jeopardize successful performance of earthworks and explore
possibilities to eliminate or reduce their adverse effects and finally, take appropriate corrective actions.
Measuring the actual work efficiency of the excavator gives more precise estimation of required time
and costs and enables to identify its cost-effective area as a prerequisite for identifying the earthworks
sustainability.

Figure 2. Methodology proposal.

The technological process in this research which was monitored and analyzed was the
measurement of the cycle time of the excavator during the loading the tipper trucks on construction
site. Theoretical preparation was carried out on the basis of the collected data from the construction
site and for conditions that were assumed to run on construction site during the loading of excavated
material. Excavator’s planned work efficiency was calculated by the formula for calculating the
planned work efficiency which includes the reduction coefficient calculated using the existing
standardized tables [9–12]. Field research includes measuring i.e. recording the cycle time of the
excavator on the construction site. Measurement of the cycle time of the excavator was for the purpose
of estimating its actual work efficiency. The used tracking tool was the chronometer with the snapback
chronometry method. After each recorded part of loading operation, the counter of the chronometer
was reset to zero.
From the viewpoint of optimization and efficiency, the loading was performed by a new excavator,
regularly maintained, with optimum power and appropriate tool size. Conditions on construction site
were average with good use of working hours. Results of the theoretical preparation and field research
were compared and analyzed to determine the deviation between the planned and actual machine work
efficiencies. From the comparative analysis and discussion of the results, the corresponding
conclusions have been generated.
Manual data collection from the construction site as the snapback chronometry method is outdated,
long-lasting, inadequately accurate and requires careful attention in use. However, since this paper

4
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

analyzes just the work of the excavator during the loading of the tipper trucks, the snapback
chronometry method for that purpose represents a practical and simple method for estimating the
actual work efficiency of the excavator on construction site.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. On-site conditions during observed technological process
Measurements were taken in July 2017 during the earthworks on the part of a local road, number 233,
more precisely, on the construction of Jurčići-Jurjenići-Šporova jama roundabout. Great significance
of this road for the city of Kastav is in gaining an alternative traffic route in order to reduce traffic load
in the city centre. According to official meteorological station data for the city of Kastav during 20
measurement days, the average day temperature was 21.8°C and the average humidity was 42%. Data
was recorded during the loading work of new standard medium size hydraulic excavator (operating
weight 23 t) and a net flywheel power of 122 kW into standard transportation vehicle, i.e. tipper truck.
Observed excavator was equipped with 1.15 m3 large bucket, while the maximum bucket size that can
be placed on the reach boom is 1.70 m3.
For the measurement purposes, the observed technological process was divided into four work
operations as shown in Figure 3:

 RC1 – clutching the material with excavators’ bucket

 RC2 – rotation of excavators boom with the bucket filled with material
 RC3 – loading material into tipper truck
 RC4 – return into start position.

Figure 3. Observed technological process (excavators’ loading the tipper truck).

Alongside the machinery and technological process, other data was retrieved from the site (such as
material, working condition and organization). Well trained and experienced machine operator had to
load the tipper truck with previously excavated mixed material (combination of soil, gravel and rock).
The rotation of excavators’ boom was 90° (positions RC1 and RC4) and the observed process was
done on wide and barrier free area. This information is of great importance in order to describe
working environment, especially needed for the calculation of planned work efficiency of standard
cyclic construction machine. By using standardized tables [9–12] such information is shaped in a form
of reduction coefficient (material coefficient, working condition coefficient and organization
coefficient).

4.2. Calculation of standard cyclic construction machine efficiency by standardized tables

The calculation of the construction machinery planned work efficiency is of great importance for
determining more realistic duration of machine work on construction site. Such calculation is used for

5
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

estimation of technological processes duration and therefore the prediction of the whole construction
project duration. Construction machinery practical, or planned work efficiency (UP) is calculated [9–
12] by multiplying the machines’ maximal efficiency (i.e. theoretical efficiency) with the reduction
coefficient (kR) as is shown in formulas (1) and (2)
𝒒∗𝑻
𝑼𝑷 = 𝒕 ∗ 𝒌𝑹 , (1)
𝒄
𝐤𝐑 = 𝐤𝐀 ∗ 𝐤𝐁 ∗ 𝐤𝐂 (2)
Values of the reduction coefficient can be found in standardized tables [9–12] while the selected
values for specific conditions during performed measurement on site are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Selected reduction coefficients.
Name of reduction coefficient Coefficient value
kA – material coefficient = kp*kr*kvm
kp – loading bucket capacity 0.85
kr – material relative density 0.75
kvm – humidity of material 1.00
kB – working condition coefficient = kpr*ko*ku
krp – working area 1.00
ko – rotation of the boom 1.00
ku – for loading operation 0.900
kC – organization coefficient = kog*krv*kds
kog – mechanic work condition 0.80
krv – utilization working time 0.84
kds – machine wear and tear 1.00

According to expression (2) and selected values (Table 1), the reduction coefficient (k R) equals
0.3856.

4.3. Results of the on-site measurement

During on-site measurement the snapback chronometry method was used in order to identify the
labour time of each identified work operation (RC1 – RC4). In total, the 200 complete technological
processes of the excavators’ loading the tipper truck were recorded, i.e. 800 work operations.
Snapback chronometry method is one of time study methods [16] which is frequently used on
construction sites to record duration of a single work operation rather than a technological process as a
whole [14–15]. Therefore, as each work operation is directly recorded there are some advantages
compared to other traditional time study methods [16]:

 Observer error can be calculated

 Irregularities in work can be easily noticed
 Time of justified delays bounded to technological process can be calculated
 Easy recording of delay times during the work which is not connected to technological process
 If the recording is interrupted for any reason it can always be continued.

Table 2 gives an overview of recorded cycles of observed technological process. Beside summary
time and rating factor, a normal time of each work operation is shown. While a normal time of each

6
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

work operation is a product of its average time and related rating factor [16], a normal cycle time
(NVS) is a sum of normal times of each operation.
Table 2. Overview of normal cycle time calculation process.

Observe Summary time Normal time

d work Rating
operatio xmax xmin ∑x(sec) ∑x(%) ̅
𝒙
factor NVS=ΣNt
n

RC1 14.80 2.90 1263.90 28.26 6.320 0.95 NtRC1=6.004

RC2 36.60 2.20 942.80 21.08 4.714 1.01 NtRC2=4.761

RC3 14.40 2.60 887.20 19.84 4.436 0.97 NtRC3=4.303

RC4 54.30 2.10 1378.90 30.83 6.895 1.02 NtRC4=7.033

∑ 4472.80 22.365 NVS=22.101

Since the measuring cycles are relatively short when snapback chronometry method is applied in
recording cycles of standard cyclic construction machine during the whole machines’ working shift,
there is a need to additionally multiply the acquired normal cycle time by additional time coefficient
(KD)
𝐍𝐕 = 𝐍𝐕𝐒 ∗ 𝐊 𝐃 (3)

According to Taboršak [16] and previous site measurements [13–15], such coefficient equals
2.035. Therefore, after additional time correction (equation 3) the normal time of the whole
technological process (NV) equals 44.9755 seconds per cycle or 0.01249 h/cycle.
As the result is acquired per cycle, it is necessary to determine how many cubic meters of loaded
material is included in one cycle. For such purpose the observation method [17] is used, as it was
estimated that with each bucket clutching and loading only 75% of total bucket capacity is filled.
Therefore, by each cycle the total of 0.8625 m3 is loaded into the tipper truck. According to the
aforementioned data, the total measured excavators’ actual work efficiency for on-site conditions is
69.05 m3/h.

4.4. Comparison of results

According to the obtained reduction coefficients, the known excavator shovels (1.15 m3) and working
time at the site (8 h), as well as the varying cycle time, both excavator's work efficiencies were
obtained; for measured conditions and from spreadsheets. The comparison of the efficiencies, i.e. their
dependence on the cycle time is shown in Figure 4.
From the chart, it is evident that with the increase of cycle duration, the impact of the excavator is
reduced, which is logical because it performs less work in the observed time unit (1 h).
According to the work efficiencies obtained, unit labour costs are calculated. The total costs include
the hour cost of the machine work and the machine worker’s hourly rate. The relevant prices are
downloaded from the Bulletin, III. 2018 [18]. Figure 5 shows the dependence of excavator unit costs
on the cycle time.
By increasing unit cycle times, the unit costs of machine working are linearly growing.
In both graphs (Figures 4 and 5) there is a very small difference between work efficiencies obtained by
measuring (i.e. actual work efficiencies) and calculating (i.e. planned work efficiencies).

7
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

120

100

80
Efficiency (m3/h)

Calculated
Measured
60

40

20

0
14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62
Time (sec)

Figure 4. Dependence of excavator work efficiency on unit cycle time.

40

35

30
Unit price (kn/m3)

25

20
Calculated
Measured
15

10

0
14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62
Time (sec)

Figure 5. Dependence of the unit costs of the excavator on the unit cycle time.

According to Linarić [9], the basic aim of the machine work planning and the corresponding work
performance is that the selected machines or machinery and their corresponding work efficiency give
the minimum cost per unit of quality product or minimum cost of the work efficiency. Therefore, the

8
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

optimum work of the excavator would be at as short as possible cycle duration. Then the highest
performance is achieved, and its unit cost is the lowest. In reality, maintaining the shortest possible
time cycle is very difficult, almost impossible, because of almost unpredictable circumstances that
appear during work. The chart in Figure 6 shows the area where the excavator continues to operate
economically with respect to the cycle duration.
120 120

100 100
Calculated
Measured
80 80

Unit price (kn/m3)

Efficiency (m3/h)

60 60

40 Cost-effective area 40

20 20

0 0
14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62
Time (sec)

Figure 6. The area of the economical operating of excavator when loading.

The scope of cost-efficiency, for measured performance and costs, as well as those calculated,
extends up to about 50 seconds of cycle duration.

5. Conclusions
Measuring the actual work efficiency of the construction machinery represents an aspect of tracking
and monitoring the operations as a part of earthworks sustainability. Tracking and monitoring
earthworks operations enable correct decision-making, implementation of improvements, more
accurate predictions of activity duration, necessary costs and resources as well as early detection of
defects in order to take timely implementation of appropriate corrective measures. The aim of this
research was to notice the existence of a deviation and examine the differences between planned and
actual work efficiency of the excavator during loading the tipper trucks, and to identify its cost-
effective area as a prerequisite for identifying the earthworks sustainability. As the earthworks
sustainability is the synthesis and concordance of beneficial activities for technological, economic,
environmental and social performance context, the balance of excavators’ work efficiency is needed.
In this research, a comparative analysis of the planned and actual work efficiency has shown that they
are approximately equal which gives us confirmation that the work would be carried out according to
the plan. It was concluded that in order to achieve sustainability, i.e. to be in cost-effective area, the
maximum value of excavators’ cycle time extends up to 50 seconds. The next step would be to
consider the possibilities and conditions for loading with the shortest possible cycle time in order to
improve the efficiency of the excavator.
Proposed methodology allows tracking and monitoring the construction machines with possibilities
for increasing their work efficiency, aimed at earthworks sustainability. The key to the successful
implementation of this methodology is the selection of the appropriate tracking tool. Since this

9
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

research analyzes just the work of the excavator during the loading the tipper trucks, the snapback
chronometry method for that purpose represents a practical and simple method for estimating the
actual work efficiency of the excavator on construction site.
However, for more complex technological processes in the earthworks when selecting the
appropriate tracking tool, advanced wireless technologies such as GPS, RFID, and vision-based
technologies (photogrammetry and video analysis) should also be considered. Specifically, application
of such technologies significantly reduces the possibility of human error. It is certain that the potential
of these technologies in not fully explored. Therefore, further research attention to these issues is
rightfully expected.

Acknowledgements
This work has been partly supported by the University of Rijeka under the project number
13.05.1.3.10.

References
[1] Waris S, Liew M S, Khamidi M F and Idrus A 2014 Criteria for the selection of sustainable
onsite construction equipment Int. J. of Sustainable Built Environment 3 pp 96–110
[2] Waris S, Liew M S, Khamidi M F and Idrus A 2014 Investigating the awareness of onsite
mechanization in Malaysian construction industry Procedia Engineering 77 pp 205–12
[3] Vidaković D, Lacković Z and Ivanović M 2017 Maintenance and effect of machines worked on
construction site Mašinstvo 2 pp 91–104
[4] Kozlovská M, Krajnák M, Sirochmanová L, Bašková R and Struková Z 2015 New approaches
to specifying performance of construction machinery Građevinar 67 pp 673–80
[5] Car-Pušić D, Husić F and Marović I 2008 Analysis of standard construction equipment
efficiency in construction of the Vodnjan-Pula road Zbornik Radova Građevinskog Fakulteta
Sveučilišta u Rijeci 11 pp 175–88 (in Croatian)
[6] Bezak S and Linarić Z 2008 Methodological approach to the calculation of machine work cost
in civil engineering Građevinar 61 pp 23–7 (in Croatian)
[7] Šopić M, Vukomanović M and Car-Pušić D 2017 Planning and control of productivity of
construction machinery through use of wireless technology Proc. of 13th Int. Conf. on
Organization, Technology and Management in Construction (Poreč, 27-30.09.2017.) Cerić
A, Huemann M, Radujković M, Vukomanović M, Završki I (Zagreb: Croatian association
for construction management, University of Zagreb – Faculty of Civil Engineering) pp 638–
49
[8] Šopić M and Vukomanović M 2017 Tracking and control of productivity of construction
machinery by integrating wireless technologies 3th Symp. on Doctoral Studies in Civil
Engineering (Zagreb, 11-12.09.2017.) Lakušić S (Zagreb:University of Zagreb – Faculty of
Civil Engineering) pp 95–104 (in Croatian)
[9] Linarić Z 2007 Lexicography of machines and equipment for industryal production of
construction materials (Zagreb: Business Media Croatia) (in Croatian)
[10] Trbojević B 1988 Construction machines (Beograd: Građevinska knjiga) (in Croatian)
[11] Car-Pušić D 2016 Teaching material of Organization and construction technology course
(Rijeka:University of Rijeka - Faculty of Civil Engineering) (in Croatian)
[12] Slunjski E 1995 Machines in construction (Zagreb: Croatian Society of Civil Engineers) (in
Croatian)
[13] Marović I, Car-Pušić D and Završki I 2008 Application of chronometry method towards
calculation of regulation Proc. of 8th Int. Conf. on Organization, Technology and
Management in Construction (Umag, 17-20.09.2008.) Radujković M, Mlinarić V,
Izetbegović J, Cerić A (Zagreb: Croatian association for construction management)
[14] Marović I, Žic E and Jajac N 2011 Application of snapback chronometry method in calculation

10
PBE IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 222 (2019) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/222/1/012009

of regulation J. of Civil Engineering and Architecture 5 pp 273–7

[15] Berljafa A, Marović I and Car-Pušić D 2018 Analysis of excavators' work efficiency by
applying chronometry method Zbornik Radova Građevinskog Fakulteta u Rijeci 20 pp 59–75
(in Croatian)
[16] Taboršak D 1987 Work studies (Zagreb: Tehnička knjiga) (in Croatian)
[17] Lopez Y C 2005 Modeling for the estimation of work duration and management of labor
resources for the facilities department at UPMR (Mayaguez: University Puerto Rico
Mayaguez Campus)
[18] Institut IGH d.d. 2018 Bulletin Standard calculation of construction work 3 (in Croatian)

11