Zhong, D H and Zhang, J S (2003) New method for calculating path float in program evaluation and review technique (PERT). Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(5), pp. 501-506. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The path float use in the network is an effective method used to cope with various uncertainties existing within the construction, However, the current path float calculating method may bring misleading information to the managers on site and then cause project duration risk in the construction. The purpose of this paper is to present a new method, which calculates the noncritical path float in the program evaluation and review technique (PERT), to copy with the uncertainties within the network implementation, and to reduce the misleading information. An example network was analyzed with the new method, the results showed the consistent path float under required completion probability and required duration. The new path float concept will bring useful planning information to the managers and the planners in the construction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | computation; critical path method; scheduling; uncertainty |
| Index terms: | implementation, planner, manager, critical path method, duration, scheduling, programme evaluation and review technique, computation |
| Subjects: | computational methods, profession, practitioner, operations research, project controls, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Time Control, Digital Applications, Procurement |
| 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