Criticality comparison between the repetitive scheduling method and the network model

Although the repetitive scheduling method (RSM) is more visual and straightforward and is easier to use, the network model is more commonly accepted by both owners and contractors as a means for modeling repetitive projects. In this paper, a method for converting an RSM into an equivalent network model is proposed, and the cause of differing makespans and critical paths in the relevant literature is examined. Using the proposed method for converting an RSM into a network model enables the transfer of both resource continuity requirements and distance constraints. For three different distinguishing cases, a comparison of critical paths and activity criticality is made between an RSM and a network model, with the results showing that the RSM coincides completely with the network in terms of the makespan, critical path, and activity criticality. From this comparison, variances in makespan and criticality in existing literature are caused by the conversion of backward-controlling RSM segments containing two or more subactivities, without maintaining resource continuity. This paper can help researchers to better understand the relationship between these two methodologies. It offers practitioners a method for easily and accurately converting an RSM to a network model when contractually required, and practitioners can accrue the benefits of both methodologies.