Perera, S (1983) Resource sharing in linear construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 109(1), pp. 102-111. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In the method developed, the conventional method of allocating resources are not used. Instead, resource-hour units are employed. This enables to allocate resources precisely and the analysis becomes realistic unlike any other method. The method uses linear programming to determine the maximum rate of construction and the resource requirements in various activities. Sharing of resources which are available in limited quantities and balanced trades are all catered for in this development. The economics of using additional resources, working overtime and the optimal usage of all resources are the more important aspects of this paper. The step by step process of introducing additional resources and overtime ease the decision making process considerably. The method also helps to determine whether it is more economical to invest in additional resources or introduce work on overtime. If there is no proper method to compute resource requirements, a considerable waste in resource utilization would result. If resources are under utilized, even by a very small quantity, a considerably large delay of time would incur.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | decision-making process, linear programming, resource utilization, linear construction |
| Subjects: | site logistics, decision analysis, building construction, algorithms |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Digital Applications, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here