Thabet, W Y and Beliveau, Y J (1994) Modeling work space to schedule repetitive floors in multistory buildings. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(1), pp. 96-116. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Multistory buildings are in a category of projects, termed linear or repetitive projects, that involve considerable repetitive activities performed consecutively by the same crew. Current available network techniques and linear scheduling methods mainly consider technological constraints and resource requirements in the generation of schedules for repetitive work. Such techniques and methods ignore requirements of activities for work space necessary for material storage and movement of manpower and equipment. Ignoring such requirements will increase conflicts among the different trades, decrease productivity, impact safety, and may lengthen project durations. To acknowledge work-space constraints in the scheduling process, one first needs to identify and evaluate the different parameters that characterize work space. Once these parameters are defined, scheduling decisions can be formulated to generate a work sequence based on these parameters. This paper describes a model to define and quantify work-space demand and availability parameters for repetitive floors in multistory buildings. A scheduling procedure to implement these parameters for sequencing repetitive work is discussed. Work continuity issues and variable crew-productivity rates associated with scheduling this type of construction are also considered.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | movement, scheduling, linear scheduling, productivity, repetitive project, duration, modelling |
| Subjects: | health behaviours and lifestyles, operations research, analytical methods, management, production management, project controls |
| Topics: | Time Control, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Project Management, 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