Fischer, M A and Aalami, F B (1996) Scheduling with computer-interpretable construction method models. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(4), pp. 337-347. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Current scheduling tools require the manual translation of design information to activities and typically do not provide dynamic links between cost estimates and corresponding schedules. To take advantage of the increasingly electronic and object-based descriptions of designs, schedules, and estimates, integration mechanisms that translate design descriptions into schedule and cost views of projects are needed. This paper presents computer-interpretable models for the representation of construction methods as one such a mechanism. These models support the automated generation of realistic construction schedules. Methods elaborate higher-level activities into appropriate lower-level activities to link schedules of various levels of detail. Five attributes define a construction method: domain, constituting activities, activity sequencing, constituting objects, and resource requirements. These construction method models can act as templates to capture production and scheduling knowledge specific to firms and projects. We illustrate the use and implementation of these models by scheduling the construction of a small masonry structure. These models assist architects, owners, and contractors in studying cost and schedule implications of design and construction alternatives.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | scheduling, masonry structure, owner, integration, construction method, estimate, architect, cost estimate, design and construction, implementation |
| Subjects: | profession, building construction, sociology, organizational analysis, financial and cost management, operations research, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Procurement, Site Management, Time Control, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management |
| 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