Use of float consumption rate in resource leveling of construction projects
Atilla DAMCI, Gul POLAT, Firat Dogu AKIN, Harun TURKOGLU
Use of float consumption rate in resource leveling of construction projects
The management of resources has been claimed to be as important as scheduling methods. Inefficiency in managing resources may bring about severe delays and cost overruns caused by resource shortages in some cases and/or idle resources in others. Therefore, resources should be utilized efficiently to prevent project failures. Resource leveling is one of the approaches that are used for the management of resources. It aims to minimize fluctuations, peaks, and valleys in resource utilization without changing the completion time of a project and the number of resources required. Although the main principle behind traditional resource leveling is achieving an even flow of resources while the original project duration remains unchanged, the literature supports the need to develop an efficient model that discriminates among the activities that are selected for participation in resource leveling. For this purpose, this study has developed a model that considers the float consumption rates of activities in resource leveling. The float consumption rate is the percentage that is set to determine the maximum amount of float which will be consumed to shift the start time of the activity. The proposed model allows a scheduler to assign float consumption rates to each activity that can be used during the resource leveling procedure. When the required information is inputted, the proposed model automatically changes the required daily resources as it shifts the noncritical activities along their available total float times. The proposed model is expected to minimize the likelihood of severe delays and cost overruns. The model is demonstrated by constructing a network and its resource utilization histograms.
resource management / resource leveling / float consumption rate / scheduling
[1] |
Ahuja H N (1976). Construction Performance Control by Networks. New York: John Wiley and Sons
|
[2] |
Al-Gahtani K (2009). Float allocation using the total risk approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135(2): 88–95
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[3] |
Ammar M (2003). Float analysis of non-serial repetitive activities. Construction Management and Economics, 21(5): 535–542
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[4] |
Anagnostopoulos K P, Koulinas G K (2010). A simulated annealing hyperheuristic for construction resource levelling. Construction Management and Economics, 28(2): 163–175
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[5] |
Arditi D, Tokdemir O B, Suh K (2001). Effect of learning on line of balance scheduling. International Journal of Project Management, 19(5): 265–277
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[6] |
Arditi D, Tokdemir O B, Suh K (2002). Challenges in line-of-balance scheduling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(6): 545–556
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[7] |
Benjaoran V, Tabyang W, Sooksil N (2015). Precedence relationship options for the resource levelling problem using a genetic algorithm. Construction Management and Economics, 33(9): 711–723
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[8] |
Burgess A R, Killebrew J B (1962). Variation in activity level on a cyclical arrow diagram. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 13(2): 76–83
|
[9] |
Christodoulou S E, Ellinas G, Aslani P (2009). Entropy-based scheduling of resource-constrained construction projects. Automation in Construction, 18(7): 919–928
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[10] |
Christodoulou S E, Ellinas G, Michaelidou-Kamenou A (2010). Minimum moment method for resource leveling using entropy maximization. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(5): 518–527
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[11] |
Damci A, Arditi D, Polat G (2013a). Resource leveling in line-of-balance scheduling. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 28(9): 679–692
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[12] |
Damci A, Arditi D, Polat G (2013b). Multiresource leveling in line-of-balance scheduling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139(9): 1108–1116
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[13] |
Damci A, Arditi D, Polat G (2016). Impacts of different objective functions on resource leveling in line-of-balance scheduling. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 20(1): 58–67
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[14] |
Damci A, Polat G (2014). Impacts of different objective functions on resource leveling in construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 20(4): 537–547
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[15] |
Damci A, Polat G, Akin F D, Turkoglu H (2019). Resource levelling with float consumption rate. In: Proceedings of the Creative Construction Conference 2019. Budapest, 597–602
|
[16] |
de la Garza J, Prateapusanond A, Ambani N (2007). Preallocation of total float in the application of a critical path method based construction contract. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(11): 836–845
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[17] |
de la Garza J, Vorster M, Parvin M (1991). Total float traded as commodity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 117(4): 716–727
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[18] |
Easa S M (1989). Resource leveling in construction by optimization. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 115(2): 302–316
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[19] |
El-Sayegh S (2018). Resource levelling optimization model considering float loss impact. Engineering, Construction, and Architectural Management, 25(5): 639–653
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[20] |
Gong D, Rowings Jr J E (1995). Calculation of safe float use in risk-analysis-oriented network scheduling. International Journal of Project Management, 13(3): 187–194
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[21] |
Gould F E (2012). Managing the Construction Process: Estimating, Scheduling, and Project Control. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
|
[22] |
Hajdu M (2015). Point-to-point versus traditional precedence relations for modeling activity overlapping. Procedia Engineering, 123: 208–215
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[23] |
Hajdu M (2018). Survey of precedence relationships: Classification and algorithms. Automation in Construction, 95: 245–259
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[24] |
Hariga M, El-Sayegh S M (2011). Cost optimization model for the multiresource leveling problem with allowed activity splitting. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(1): 56–64
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[25] |
Harris R B (1978). Precedence and Arrow Networking Techniques for Construction. New York: John Wiley and Sons
|
[26] |
Harris R B (1990). Packing method for resource leveling (PACK). Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 116(2): 331–350
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[27] |
Hashemi Doulabi S H, Seifi A, Shariat S Y (2011). Efficient hybrid genetic algorithm for resource leveling via activity splitting. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(2): 137–146
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[28] |
Hiyassat M A S (2000). Modification of minimum moment approach in resource leveling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(4): 278–284
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[29] |
Hiyassat M A S (2001). Applying modified minimum moment method to multiple resource leveling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 127(3): 192–198
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[30] |
Householder J L, Rutland H E (1990). Who owns the float? Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 116(1): 130–133
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[31] |
Kyriklidis C, Vassiliadis V, Kirytopoulos K, Dounias G (2014). Hybrid nature-inspired intelligence for the resource leveling problem. Operations Research, 14(3): 387–407
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[32] |
Lu M, Li H (2003). Resource-activity critical-path method for construction planning. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(4): 412–420
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[33] |
Naylor H F W (2012). Construction Project Management: Planning and Scheduling. New York: Delmar Pub
|
[34] |
Ponce de Leon G (1986). Float ownership: Specs treatment. Cost Engineering, 28(10): 12–15
|
[35] |
Ponz-Tienda J L, Yepes V, Pellicer E, Moreno-Flores J (2013). The resource leveling problem with multiple resources using an adaptive genetic algorithm. Automation in Construction, 29: 161–172
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[36] |
Popescu C M (1976). How to use CPM in practice, Part II—Resources. Austin: University of Texas at Austin
|
[37] |
Prateapusanond A (2003). Study on a Comprehensive Practice of Total Float Pre-allocation and Management for the Application of a CPM-based Construction Contract. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute
|
[38] |
Project Management Institute (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK). Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute
|
[39] |
Qiao J, Li Y (2018). Resource leveling using normalized entropy and relative entropy. Automation in Construction, 87: 263–272
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[40] |
Sakka Z, El-Sayegh S (2007). Float consumption impact on cost and schedule in the construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 133(2): 124–130
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[41] |
Savin D, Alkass S, Fazio P (1996). Construction resource leveling using neural networks. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 23(4): 917–925
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[42] |
Senouci A B, Adeli H (2001). Resource scheduling using neural dynamics model of Adeli and Park. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 127(1): 28–34
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[43] |
Son J, Skibniewski M J (1999). Multiheuristic approach for resource leveling problem in construction engineering: Hybrid approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 125(1): 23–31
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[44] |
Wagner H M, Giglio R J, Glaser R G (1964). Preventive maintenance scheduling by mathematical programming. Management Science, 10(2): 316–334
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[45] |
Wiest J D, Levy F K (1977). A Management Guide to PERT/CPM: With GERT/PDM/DCPM and Other Networks. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
|
/
〈 | 〉 |