New generation of planning structures

Russell, A D and Wong, W C M (1993) New generation of planning structures. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(2), pp. 196-214. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

This paper describes the development and use of a new generation of planning structures that provides the basis for a superset of the traditional criticalpath method. These structures provide a means to marry critical-path planning with linear scheduling. Attributes required of these structures for modeling projects with repetitive elements are discussed. They have been gleaned from the literature; an extended development process; and the planning, scheduling, and updating of many projects. Members of the family of planning structures include the continuous activity, the ordered activity, the shadow activity, and the cyclic activity. These actMties permit the treatment of work continuity, the execution of work in an ordered location sequence, execution of work on a first-come–first-served basis, and cyclic relations between predecessor and successor activities at different work locations. Their application is facilitated by the use of a generalized set of precedence relationships. Four examples are given to demonstrate the flexibility these structures offer for modeling a diverse range of project types.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: scheduling, precedence relationship, linear scheduling, modelling, successor
Subjects: analytical methods, operations research
Topics: Time Control, Engineering Principles
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