Siddika, A and Lu, M (2023) Project schedule acceleration optimization integrated with energy source-based assessment of occupational health and safety risks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 149(12): 04023120, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This research devises a risk indexing method to assess the occupational health and safety (OHS) hazards associated with major sources of energy in the construction field, providing numerical inputs to project plan and schedule optimization. Further, the problem of "minimizing project schedule at lowest safety risks"(MPSLSR) is formalized to incorporate the concept of energy sources for OHS management in project planning and scheduling optimization. Instead of following commonly applied techniques to solve multiobjective optimization problems, the proposed research takes an alternative two-step approach to minimizing project duration and risk index, based on interpretation of path float in connection with the critical path method. This results in optimized project schedules that mitigate the substantial increment of OHS-related risks due to accelerating construction progress on projects through avoiding the incurrences of unnecessary activity time crashing and associated increases in OHS-related risks. The research application is demonstrated with (1) a tunnel construction project and (2) a made-up project featuring a large, complex network model.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | duration, energy source, critical path method, crashing, indexing, scheduling, project planning, tunnel construction, occupational health and safety, schedule acceleration |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, information systems, project controls, civil engineering, energy systems, operations research, control systems |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Time Control, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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