Hegazy, T and Menesi, W (2012) Heuristic method for satisfying both deadlines and resource constraints. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 138(6), pp. 688-696. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Project deadline and resource limits are practical constraints that coexist in most projects. While heuristic methods for constrained resource scheduling (CRS) have become mainstream in commercial scheduling software, no commercial software includes any time-cost trade-off (TCT) heuristic to help meet deadline, let alone any procedure to resolve both deadline and resource constraints. This paper, therefore, introduces a practical heuristic method to meet both deadline and resource limits. The proposed method basically uses cycles of crashing for lowest-cost critical activities (i.e.,stepwise TCT process) and resolves any resource overallocation (i.e.,CRS) within each TCT cycle. This intertwined approach is logical, fast, and provides a set of feasible project durations that do not violate resource limits. To facilitate its practical use, the proposed method has been programmed as an add-in tool to Microsoft Project software. The paper discusses several case studies that prove the practicality and usefulness of the proposed approach to both researchers and professionals and provides a comparison of results with other literature efforts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | computer application; constrained resource scheduling; heuristic; resource allocation; scheduling; time-cost trade-off |
| Index terms: | resource constraint, crashing, scheduling, duration, time-cost trade-off, computer application, resource scheduling, resource allocation, case study, heuristic |
| Subjects: | software systems, quantity surveying, project controls, risk assessment, data collection methods, operations research, operations management, resource management |
| Topics: | Time Control, Site Management, Digital Applications, Risk Management, Research Practice, Project Management |
| 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