Al-Joma, M and Mangin, J C (2004) A scheduling model for repetitive activities. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
Construction management engineers are often faced with projects containing multiple units wherein activities repeat from unit to another. The repetitive activities, which can be seen clearly in multi-storey buildings, require schedules that ensure the uninterrupted usage of resources for an activity in one unit to a similar activity in the next unit. The repetitive and non-repetitive scheduling model described in this paper recognizes the constraints between the activities and includes also an additional resource continuity constraint to ensure continuous resource usage. It's applied to both vertical and horizontal projects containing either discrete or continuous activities. The scenarios stocked in the model will generate automatically the majority of these constraints and therefore the validation point between two successive activities is located and checked. For each activity the model validates the constraints with the precedent activities. The decision of the early time date of the sequence activity is taken when all the constraints are satisfied. The planning of the whole project can finally be obtained.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | planning scheduling; productivity; project duration; repetitive activity |
| Index terms: | duration, productivity, validation, engineer, scheduling, repetitive scheduling |
| Subjects: | profession, operations research, professional development, management, project controls |
| Topics: | Time Control, Business Strategy, Information Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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