Huang, R Y and Sun, K S (2006) Non-unit-based planning and scheduling of repetitive construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(6), pp. 585-597. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Repetitive scheduling methods are more effective than traditional critical path methods in the planning and scheduling of repetitive construction projects. Nevertheless, almost all the repetitive scheduling methods developed so far have been based on the premise that a repetitive project is comprised of many identical production units. In this research a non-unit-based algorithm for the planning and scheduling of repetitive projects is developed. Instead of repetitive production units, repetitive or similar activity groups are identified and employed for scheduling. The algorithm takes into consideration: (1) the logical relationship of activity groups in a repetitive project; (2) the usage of various resource crews in an activity group; (3) the maintaining of resource continuity; and (4) the time and cost for the routing of resource crews. A sample case study and a case study of a sewer system project are conducted to validate the algorithm, as well as to demonstrate its application. Results and findings are reported.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | algorithms; project management; resource management; scheduling |
| Index terms: | sewer, resource management, case study, project management, repetitive scheduling, critical path method, scheduling, repetitive project, repetitive construction |
| Subjects: | control systems, building construction, project management theory and practice, data collection methods, operations research, production management, infrastructure and transport systems |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Construction Technology, Project Management, Research Practice, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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