# Integrated Decision Support Framework of Optimal Scaffolding System for Construction Projects
## 3 Implementation of the Proposed Framework
### Step 2: Implementation of Phase 1  
The selection procedure began with a checklist provided by the planners, including the information about the project name, 3D model, workforce data, and schedule, followed by a work description. Based on the checking algorithms shown in Figure 3, the module identified 13 candidate scaffolding systems that met the technical qualifications from the database. However, they involve four main types of different manufacturers, which are, respectively, Haulotte Compact, Genie \(\mathrm{G}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{t}\mathrm{m}\), Haulotte Quick-up and AMP series. Specifically, these four types are scissor lift, scissor lift, vertical lift, and vertical lift. As the rules and algorithms have been applied in Phase 1 to select the applicable types and models of scaffolding, the factor of running and rental costs for scaffolding is considered as a pre-assessment criterion within the models of the same scaffolding manufacturer for further checking in Phase 2. For example, if the module outputs three scissor lift models of the same manufacturer \"Haulotte Compact\" from Phase 1, the model with the lowest running and rental cost will be selected for selection in Phase 2. Therefore, the equipment models selected from the 13 identified candidate scaffoldings are Haulotte Compact 10 DX, Genie \(\mathrm{G}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{T}\mathrm{M}\)-3390 RT, Haulotte Quick-up 8 and the AMP 26 model.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Workface ID**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\mathbf{x}\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\mathbf{y}\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\mathbf{z}\)} & **Workface** \\  & & & & **Orientation** \\ \hline
001 & 200.3 & 10000.0 & 5959.7 & upward \\
002 & 200.3 & 10069.9 & 6362.6 & upward \\
003 & 200.3 & 10059.5 & 6902.6 & upward \\
004 & 715.6 & 5105.0 & 6622.0 & upward \\ \hline � & & � & � \\ \hline
039 & 11917.6 & 4981.6 & 7127.6 & upward \\
040 & 11923.8 & 5005.7 & 7019.6 & upward \\
041 & 1197.6 & 5018.4 & 6817.7 & upward \\
042 & 11799.7 & 5105.0 & 5979.2 & upward \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Workface coordinates and properties.  
Figure 5: 3D model of the case study: (**a**) 3D model; (**b**) Side elevation.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**ID** & **Manufacturer** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Manufacturer** \\ **Country** \\ \end{tabular} & **Model** & **Type** & \begin{tabular}{c} **MWH** \\ **(m)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Platform** \\ **Length (m)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Platform** \\ **Width (m)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Raiser/Lower** \\ **Speed (s)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Drive** \\ **Speed-Slowed** \\ **(km/h)** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Lift** \\ **(kg)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Horizontal** \\ **Reach** \\ **(m)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
1 & Genie & USA & GSTM-1930 & Scissor lift & 7.79 & 1.63 & 0.74 & 16/25 & 4.0 & 227 & - \\
2 & Genie & USA & GSTM-2032 & Scissor lift & 8.10 & 2.26 & 0.81 & 30/34 & 3.5 & 363 & - \\
3 & Mantall & China & X265N & Scissor lift & 6.50 & 1.64 & 0.75 & 16/22 & 3.8 & 270 & - \\ \hline \hline
10 & Haulotte & France & Quick-up 7 & Vertical lift & 6.70 & 0.68 & 0.66 & - & - & 200 & - \\
11 & Haulotte & France & Quick-up 8 & Vertical lift & 8.10 & 0.68 & 0.66 & - & - & 159 & - \\
12 & Haulotte & France & Quick-up 8 & Vertical lift & 9.50 & 0.68 & 0.66 & - & - & 159 & - \\ \hline \hline
22 & JLG & USA & 600S & Telescopic lift & 18.36 & 2.44 & 0.91 & - & 6.8 & 227 & 15.09 \\
23 & JLG & USA & 600J & Telescopic lift & 20.36 & 2.44 & 0.91 & - & 6.8 & 227 & 17.30 \\
24 & SINOROOM & China & GTZ215J & Telescopic lift & 14.80 & 1.83 & 0.76 & - & 7.0 & 250 & 7.62 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Scaffolding specification database.