Kanagasabapathi, B and Ananthanarayanan, K (2005) A simulation model for resource constrained scheduling of multiple projects. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 21st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2005, London, UK.
Abstract
Since the late 1950's, Critical Path Method (CPM) and Programme Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) have been widely used in the construction industry for planning and scheduling construction projects. The major drawback of these two techniques is the assumption of unlimited resource availability. In many real life situations, construction projects must be scheduled under limited resources. The problem becomes more and more complex when the resources are allocated and shared among multiple projects. This challenge of allocating scarce resources to the competing activities of different projects is of great concern to any project manager. Such decisions need to be made quickly. The availability of a decision rule or heuristic, which will be effective in minimising the total project tardiness, can be especially valuable. A simulation model has been developed to schedule the activities in the multiple projects when the resources are highly constrained.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | heuristic rules; multiple projects; resource management; scheduling; simulation |
| Index terms: | construction project, construction industry, resource management, critical path method, scheduling, project manager, heuristic, programme |
| Subjects: | operations research, profession, risk assessment, control systems, project controls, industry analysis, production management |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Project Management, Research Practice, 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