Chua, D K H and Shen, L J (2005) Key constraints analysis with integrated production scheduler. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(7), pp. 753-764. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Project delays due to late availabilities of resource and information (RI) prerequisites are one of the major threats to construction management. It is desirable to avoid such delays through better means of constraint management. With most contemporary planning methodologies and tools, it is generally difficult to represent many hidden flow constraints in a construction work plan. However, evaluating the impact of flow constraints is crucial in determining their criticalities, based on which the flow constraints may be prioritized and consequently resolved to minimize project delays. Due to the fact that limited resources are often shared among various trades, it may not be practical to resolve all the constraints simultaneously so that a tradeoff is inevitable, which suggests that management should focus on the most important ones termed as key constraints (i.e., those directly contributing to project delays). This paper presents a methodology that augments the traditional critical path method with RI availability constraints to analyze the causes of delays and locate the key constraints binding on project completion without ambiguity based on the principles of the theory of constraints. The methodology of key constraint analysis has been implemented with the integrated production scheduler, a constraint-based scheduling tool which facilitates the modeling, analysis, and management of constraints at the production planning level. An illustrative example is depicted to demonstrate how the proposed methodology works.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constraints; critical path method; lean construction; scheduling |
| Index terms: | methodology, critical path method, project delay, scheduling, scheduler, lean construction, tradeoff, production planning, theory of constraints, causes of delay, construction work, key constraint, modelling |
| Subjects: | project controls, building construction, decision analysis, research methods, project management theory and practice, operations management, operations research, analytical methods, project delivery, practitioner, control systems |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Site Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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