Critical Path Method with Multiple Calendars
This article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYThis article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYThis article has a reply.
VIEW THE REPLYPublication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 131, Issue 3
Abstract
This paper presents the critical path method forward and backward passes with multiple calendars. Multiple calendars are required in many construction projects to effectively represent various project conditions such as work properties, resource availabilities, weather conditions, etc. For this reason, major project management software packages such as P3 and MS-Project provide functions to handle multiple calendars. However, the background theory of handling multiple calendars has not been disclosed, so users of those software packages simply assume without clear knowledge that the time data generated by them are correct. This paper provides how multiple calendars should be handled in scheduling. Applying the theory presented herein, it has been noticed that the P3 operations with two calendars may generate a wrong answer for a start-to-finish with zero lag and inconsistent results in all negative lags when nonworking days are involved. The theory covers all four relationships in the precedence diagramming method with lags of zero, positive, and negative values. This study should be of considerable benefit to the construction industry and academics because it details and advances the theory for scheduling with multiple calendars, which is real scheduling in practice.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Ahuja, H. N., and Nandakumar, V. (1985). “Calendar date scheduling on microcomputers.” Cost Eng., 27(2), 21–27.
Battersby, A. (1967). Network analysis for planning and scheduling, St. Martin’s Press, New York.
Callahan, M. T., Quackenbush, D. G., and Rowings, J. E. (1992). Construction project scheduling, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Clough, R. H., Sears, G. A., and Sears, S. K. (2000). Construction project management, 4th Ed., Wiley, New York.
Knutson, J. (2001). Project management for business professionals: a comprehensive guide, Wiley, New York.
Korman, R., and Daniels, S. H. (2003). “Critics can’t find the logic in many of today’s CPM schedules.” ENR, 250(20), 30–33.
Liberatore, M. J., Pollack-Johnson, B., and Smith, C. A. (2001). “Project management in construction: Software use and research directions.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 127(2), 101–107.
Lock, D. (2000). Project management, 7th Ed., Gower.
Melin, J. W., and Whiteaker, B. (1981). “Fencing a bar chart.” J. Constr. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 107(3), 497–507.
Wallwork, J. W. (2002). “Standards for a Critical Path Method Schedule” Cost Eng., 44(6), 13.
Wickwire, J. M., Driscoll, T. J., Hurlbut, S. B., and Hillman, S. B. (2003). Construction Scheduling: Preparation, liability, and claims, 2nd Ed., Aspen, New York.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 131 • Issue 3 • March 2005
Pages: 330 - 342
Copyright
© 2005 ASCE.
History
Received: Jun 23, 2003
Accepted: Jun 10, 2004
Published online: Mar 1, 2005
Published in print: Mar 2005
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.