Senouci, A B and Adeli, H (2001) Resource scheduling using neural dynamics model of adeli and park. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 127(1), pp. 28-34. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents a mathematical model for resource scheduling considering project scheduling characteristics generally ignored in prior research, including precedence relationships, multiple crew-strategies, and time cost trade-off. Previous resource scheduling formulations have traditionally focused on project duration minimization. The proposed model considers the total project cost minimization. Furthermore, resource leveling and resource-constrained scheduling have traditionally been solved independently. In the new formulation, resource leveling and resource-constrained scheduling are performed simultaneously. The proposed model is solved using the patented neural dynamics model of Adeli and Park. A case study is presented to demonstrate the performance of the method under various resource availability profiles.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | resource levelling, resource scheduling, case study, duration, dynamics, strategy, project cost, mathematical model, minimization, project scheduling, scheduling, precedence relationship |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, mathematical modelling, resource management, operations research, management, algorithms, economics, systems engineering, project controls |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Site Management, Time Control, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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