Duff, A R (1987) Interference in stochastic flow-line models. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 113(3), pp. 385-398. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The nature of the variability of construction activity duration is described and its effects on sequential repetitive activities investigated. The central limit theorem is used to argue that the distribution of activity durations containing sufficient sequential repetitions of an operation will be approximately normal. Based on this assumption of normality, the probability of an activity interfering with the progress of the next activity in the sequence is investigated. It is shown that this is a function of the probability of independent activities overlapping on the final operations and a heuristic method of evaluating this function is described. The assumptions inherent in this heuristic method are tested by comparing the results of such calculations with the results from a digital simulation model. It is shown that the calculated probabilities of interference compare very well with the estimated probabilities from the simulation results except for the results for activities whose average rates of progress diverge in time. These discrepancies are, however, unimportant in the anticipated uses of the model, where convergent activities have much greater significance.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | variability, heuristic, duration, construction activity |
| Subjects: | statistical analysis, project controls, risk assessment, construction operations |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Site Management, Time Control, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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