MoveSchedule: a planning tool for scheduling space use on construction sites

Zouein, P P (1995) MoveSchedule: a planning tool for scheduling space use on construction sites. PhD thesis, University of Michigan, USA.

Abstract

"Site layout planning is crucial for enhancing the overall efficiency of construction operations and for reducing materials (re)location costs. More importantly, it helps identify construction time periods with potential spatial conflicts due to limited space so that they can be avoided in early project plans. This research develops an integrated scheduler and space planner, MoveScheduler, that adjusts an initial project schedule to comply with site space limitations in the process of accommodating resource space needs as they change over time. MoveSchedule solves a constrained dynamic layout problem with the objective of minimizing resource transportation and relocation costs. Two-dimensional geometric constraints between relative positions of resources are being considered. Four different space profiles describe variations of resource space needs over time. The timing of these needs is inferred from the activity schedule. The layout construction algorithm that underlies MoveSchedule uses Constraint Satisfaction to find the set of all positions that meet the constraints on resources"" positions and Linear Programming to find the optimal positions that minimize resource transportation and relocation costs. The solution is a sequence of layouts that describe changes in resource positions at discrete points in time corresponding to arrival and departure times of resources to and from site. When no solution is found, i.e., when the resources needed in a given time period cannot be accommodated on site without violating constraints on their positions, MoveSchedule adjusts durations or start dates of activities to lower the total space need over the problematic time period. MoveSchedule establishes a time-space relationship for each activity in the schedule based on alternative resource levels so that tradeoffs between activity duration and space need on site are possible. The resource levels describe different methods or crew-sizes for performing the activity. Two example applications of MoveSchedule illustrate other areas of application of the sue of MoveSchedule for optimally solving a MINISUM location problem with constraints on acceptable locations of the new facility, and for evaluating and choosing between alternative material delivery schedules. MoveSchedule is validated using realistic project data and its solution is qualitatively assessed by an experienced engineer on that project."

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Uncontrolled Keywords: conflicts; construction operations; programming; variations; scheduler; linear programming; duration
Index terms: scheduler, scheduling, construction site, project data, tradeoff, relocation, variation, programming, efficiency, satisfaction, linear programming, engineer, alternative material, construction operation, planner, duration, construction time, site layout planning
Subjects: algorithms, performance management, contractual condition, market analysis, project controls, decision analysis, data collection methods, profession, materials science, programming, practitioner, work location, operations research, construction operations, project delivery, construction planning
Topics: Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Site Management, Time Control, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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