Russell, A D and Ranasinghe, M (1991) Decision framework for fast-track construction: A deterministic analysis. Construction Management and Economics, 9(5), pp. 467-479. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
A deterministic analysis framework that permits the computation of an upper hound on the constant dollar expenditure that should he made to fast-track a project to achieve a specified duration is presented. It employs a baseline plan which corresponds to the traditional method of sequential design, construct, commission and operate, and the economic principle that one will continue to spend as long as the return on the incremental investment equals or exceeds the minimum attractive rate of return. The analysis is based on a generalized definition of fast-track construction, which includes overlapping of the construction and revenue phases and acceleration as well as overlapping of design and construction. An example is given to illustrate application of the framework.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | deterministic framework; economic analysis; fast-track construction; upper bound on expenditure |
| Index terms: | upper bound, decision framework, design and construction, duration, computation, economic analysis, acceleration, revenue |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, economic analysis, design analysis, decision analysis, computational methods, probability and distributions, project controls |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Design Practice, Time Control, Business Strategy, Risk Management, Digital Applications, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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