Yunus, N B (1988) Toward the development of a knowledge-based construction schedule planning system. PhD thesis, University of Missouri - Rolla, USA.
Abstract
This research attempts to model and prototype a knowledge-based system for use in the construction industry to accomplish the automatic generation of initial construction schedules. The schedule can be transformed into a logical network that provides a physical representation of the construction operations plan. The prototype system, which requires symbolic processing and reasoning, is developed based on an intensive modeling that rationally examines industry practice. The model identifies work breakdown and precedence relationship as the two major concepts in schedule planning. Work breakdown is concerned with the identification of construction activities that result in the completion of project elements. Precedence relationship is related to the sequencing of construction tasks based on the constraints of scheduling. The knowledge structure of the prototype system is composed of databases, heuristics and algorithms. The databases consist of facts used to represent the structured hierarchy of activities and the formalized task precedence relationships. The heuristics are rules used to determine the breakdown of activities into scheduling modules, the appropriate level of detail and the precedence conditions. The algorithms are procedures used for activity breakdown, task sequencing and task redundancy. The current application, scheduling a reinforced concrete building, is specifically prototyped to evaluate the model and the effectiveness of the system. A knowledge system shell M. 1 is used to prototype this schedule planning system. The prototype has been evaluated by conducting a laboratory experiment on inexperienced schedulers. By measuring the quality and the time of performance, the results of this experiment have suggested that the system can be an effective productivity tool to construction schedulers and planners. The ability of the system to improve the quality of construction schedules further suggests that the model developed is rigorous enough to warrant its continued development into a production standard system.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Babcock, D and Benjamin, C |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction activities; construction operations; experiment; knowledge-based system; productivity; reasoning; reinforced concrete; schedule planning; scheduling |
| Index terms: | schedule planning, prototype, redundancy, experiment, laboratory, reasoning, scheduler, scheduling, level of detail, precedence relationship, reinforced concrete, construction activity, productivity, knowledge-based system, construction operation, database, heuristic, construction industry, modelling, module, effectiveness, planner |
| Subjects: | modelling and simulation, technical documentation, building materials, artificial intelligence, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, data management, industry analysis, management, performance management, operations research, construction operations, analytical methods, practitioner, research management, cognitive psychology, architectural elements |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Quality Management, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Site Management, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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