, Marcin Świtała
, Danuta Bebłacz
https://doi.org/10.7409/rabdim.025.022
The article explores stakeholder perceptions of time intensity and execution challenges associated with ground improvement methods in road construction. Based on survey data from 214 respondents representing both employers and contractors, the analysis highlights differences in how various technologies are assessed in terms of implementation feasibility. Geosynthetics and grain size improvement with compaction are viewed as the least time-consuming methods, while preloading embankments are considered the most time-intensive. It should be noted, that despite their longer implementation period, preloading are usually the cheapest and most reliable solution, and reducing the duration of their load on the soil may limit the effectiveness of the improvement. Employers generally perceive higher time demands than industry professionals. Execution-related difficulties were rated as moderate overall, with the highest risks linked to equipment operations, design, and preparatory tasks. Employers expressed more concern about procurement and documentation stages. The results underscore the importance of including practitioner perspectives in planning and risk assessment processes. By identifying where stakeholder views converge or diverge, the study supports more realistic method selection and improved coordination in road infrastructure projects.
Download files
PDFCitation rules
Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English
Język Polski
