Waugh, L M (1990) A construction planner. PhD thesis, Stanford University, USA.
Abstract
The thesis of this research is that there are opportunities to extend network diagraming techniques which can be attained using a knowledge-based approach. These opportunities include: (a) a one-stage treatment of resource and non-resource constraints; (b) non-activity precedence; and (c) recording and communicating construction scheduling knowledge. Previous research has been conducted on the use of knowledge-based approaches in construction planning. However, the areas emphasized in this research have not been addressed by previous knowledge-based construction planners. The system developed in this research, called A Construction Planner (ACP), uses a knowledge-based approach to represent a construction project and its resources. It has a generic algorithm which can be applied to any construction project, thus incorporating an important procedural component. Finally, it uses rules which can easily be shared by similar projects and adapted or extended as desired. ACP offers a more integrated approach to scheduling by considering all constraints concurrently. It offers a richer representation of the scheduling problem and, based on this representation, it allows the user to query the model about its reasoning.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Levitt, R E |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | reasoning; construction project; construction planning; scheduling; construction planner |
| Index terms: | scheduling, construction project, resource constraint, construction planning, construction planner, reasoning, construction scheduling, integrated approach |
| Subjects: | operations research, operations management, cognitive psychology, contractual arrangements, practitioner, production management, project controls, construction planning |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Project Management, Procurement, Site Management, Research Practice, Time Control |
| 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