Zhang, X. (2026) Simulation study on schedule control for engineering design based on system dynamics. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 152(10): 04026166, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Engineering design phase delays persistently challenge construction projects, cascading into costly construction setbacks. Traditional static methods fail to capture dynamic feedback among schedule pressure, productivity, and design errors. A gap exists in applying system dynamics (SD) specifically to design-phase schedule control. This study develops an SD model to simulate schedule strategies, testing its efficacy as a virtual decision-making platform for proactive management. A comprehensive SD model integrating five subsystems (design process, target duration, human resources, performance, cost) was built using Vensim, validated through mental model verification and sensitivity analysis. It was applied to a petrochemical design case to simulate strategies such as overtime, recruitment, and schedule adjustments under various scenarios. Simulations revealed critical trade-offs: moderate overtime (1.25 factor) reduced the prolonged duration from 72 days to near the original plan but increased costs; midphase recruitment of L2 employees optimally balanced progress and budget; combined L3/L2 recruitment best mitigated senior staff turnover impacts. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by providing (1) a novel validated SD model tailored to design-phase dynamics, addressing a literature gap, and (2) a practical "virtual laboratory"enabling managers to proactively test strategies, bridging theoretical planning and real-world execution in construction management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | engineering design; schedule management; simulation; system dynamics; vensim |
| Index terms: | strategy, platform, laboratory, design process, engineering design, system dynamics, design error, recruitment, human resource, manager, construction project, mental model, decision-making, dynamics, testing, productivity, sensitivity analysis, turnover, duration, schedule control, body of knowledge |
| Subjects: | practitioner, design methods, environmental hazards, computing systems, decision analysis, design process, business management, systems engineering, digital design, project controls, management, knowledge management, cognitive psychology, professional practice, production management, research management |
| Topics: | Information Management, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Time Control, Project Management, Research Practice, Design Practice, Sustainability, Human Resources, Roles and Professions, Business Strategy, Digital Applications |
| 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