# Resource-Based Quality Performance Estimation Method for Construction Operations
## 3 Quantitative Quality Performance Estimation System
### Resource Attribute and Data Collection  
Table 4 shows the attribute values of the resources inputted to the Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) pile installation simulation model used in the case study. Among them, the hourly cost of the equipment was referred to in the data presented in the performance handbook provided by Caterpillar [33]. For information on the cost of labor (pile and rebar) and materials (rebar and ready-mixed concrete) were collected by interviewing experts. The quality performance weight and score according to the resources were also collected via interviews using a data form. Interviews were conducted for three days with eight experts with 10 to 20 years of experience in the pile installation operation using a data form. Interviews were conducted with the data forms following the authors' guidelines to fill  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Resource Name**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Resource Category**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Available Type or**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**No. of Entity**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Quality Weight**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Cost/h or Unit**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Quality Score**} \\  & & **Experience of Resources** & & & & 100 \%/h & 85\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Machine} & \multirow{3}{*}{Crawler Crane} & 50 ton & & & 125 s/h & 90\% \\  & & 85 ton & & & 185 s/h & 95\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Lifting Excavator} & \multirow{3}{*}{Excavator} & 320 B & 1 & 0.1 & 22 s/h & 85\% \\  & & 322 B & & & 25 s/h & 88\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Cleaning Excavator} & \multirow{3}{*}{Excavator} & 325 B & & & 29 s/h & 92\% \\  & & 330 B & 1 & 0.1 & 32 s/h & 95\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Cage Crew} & \multirow{3}{*}{Rebar *} & 10 years & & & 28 s/h & 85\% \\  & & 15 years & 1 & 0.05 & 30 s/h & 90\% \\  & & 20 years & & 32 s/h & 95\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Machine Crew} & \multirow{3}{*}{Pile *} & 10 years & & & 32 s/h & 85\% \\  & & 15 years & 1 & 0.05 & 34 s/h & 90\% \\  & & 20 years & & 36 s/h & 95\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Ready Mixed} & \multirow{3}{*}{Remicon} & 25-21-12 & & & 78 s/m3 & 80\% \\  & & 25-21-15 & 9 & 79 s/m3 & 85\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 25-24-12 & (2.5 m3) & & 82 s/m3 & 90\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 25-24-15 & & & 83 s/m3 & 95\% \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Cage} & \multirow{3}{*}{Rebar} & Normal deformed bar & 9 & 0.25 & 0.81 s/kg & 80\% \\ \cline{1-1}  & & High tension deformed bar & (329.7 kg) & & 0.83 s/kg & 90\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
* * Cage and Machine Crew are consists of 2 labors.  
\end{table}
Table 4: Resource attribute.  
the quality weight for involved seven resources (i.e., crawler crane, lifting and cleaning excavator, rebar and pile crew, ready mixed concrete, and rebar for cage) and quality score for nineteen alternatives for each resource in the pile installation operation. Seven categories and nineteen alternatives of resources were informed to the interviewees to quantify the quality weight and score within the restrictions. The quality weight and scores are the average values suggested by eight experts.