Analysis reveals how air threats complicate technical supervision in construction sites, indicating the need for specific methodologies.
The article presents the results of a study on the impact of air threats on the activities of technical supervision engineers and develops methodological approaches for taking this factor into account in the planning and organization of technical supervision under high-risk conditions. The research was conducted using an analytical and computational method. In the course of the analysis, key factors were selected to assess the degree of complication in the implementation of technical supervision due to air threats, namely the number and duration of air threats during a selected period. To enable consideration of the level of air threat impact depending on the location of the construction site, these factors were analyzed across various regions of Ukraine. As part of this analysis, the regions of Ukraine were classified into five groups based on the intensity of air threat impact. As a result, a methodology was proposed for accounting for the influence of air threats on the labor intensity of technical supervision. According to the proposed methodology, two different approaches are considered. One approach can be applied for generalized calculations or preliminary planning of technical supervision activities and involves the use of specific correction factors applied to labor intensity, determined separately for each group based on the level of air threat impact. The second approach is more suitable for detailed planning, as it does not rely on an averaged coefficient but instead outlines a procedure for calculating a specific coefficient for an individual construction site. This method takes into account a wider range of air-threat-related factors and preventive measures to mitigate potential negative consequences at the construction site. The results of the study will make it possible to determine the level of air threat impact on the labor intensity of technical supervision.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TUGAY et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: