Line-of-balance against linear scheduling: critical comparison

Author:

Lucko Gunnar1,Gattei Giovani23

Affiliation:

1. Department of Civil Engineering, Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA

2. Construction Engineering and Management Program, Department of Civil Engineering, Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA

3. Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES Foundation), Ministry of Education, Brasília, DF, Brazil

Abstract

Among alternative scheduling techniques in construction management are linear and repetitive scheduling and line of balance (LOB). They are uniquely different from the dominant network-based technique because they have been developed for projects with repetitive units of work and crew operations. Notably, they feature quantitative measures of both work and time, which no network-based approach offers. However, a study of their origins – for example, the US Navy – reveals that their original use and capabilities deviate from current application, which is limited at best. Indeed, currently, the name-giving LOB is itself omitted. Therefore, this research has the goal to explore these scheduling techniques in detail. Its objectives are to delineate their modelling elements as described by original sources in a structured manner, to compare them in detail and identify any changes over time and to comment on implications for practical use and extract unsolved research questions. Its methodology follows a comparative research approach. Differences are found in how productivity and cyclic crew deployment are expressed, besides the glaring omission of the LOB itself in the construction use of this method. It is found that, historically, LOB was intended for manufacturing, but when introduced to construction, important characteristics of the production plan and progress chart became forgotten. In parallel, linear scheduling was developed for construction, whose similarities to LOB may have added confusion. Clarifying the complete methods by explicitly outlining their analytical capabilities will improve understanding to allow project managers to benefit from these powerful tools. It also enables future research to model LOB with singularity functions to yield a unified formulation of these alternative scheduling techniques.

Publisher

Thomas Telford Ltd.

Subject

Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality,General Business, Management and Accounting,Civil and Structural Engineering

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3