Estimating Precipitation Impacts for Scheduling
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 115, Issue 4
Abstract
Contract managers are expected to evaluate requests for contract extensions due to abnormal weather. However, they may not have a definition of normal weather impact for comparison. The implicit assumption in a contractor's time‐extension request is that normal weather disruptions are included in the original schedule. While subjective estimates can be prepared for weather impact, analytical approaches have been limited. The development of an analytical technique for evaluating impact will provide a basis for comparing planned and actual weather impact. A conceptual model for evaluating precipitation impact is presented. The method utilizes a Markov process for prediction of rainfall events, combined with an impact evaluation utilizing basic fuzzy‐set operations. The treatment of information for the impact analysis stresses the individual treatment of activities. An example of a calculation is provided to demonstrate the technique. The proposed method provides an opportunity to evaluate normal weather impact to schedules, for planning purposes. If the normal weather impact can be defined, the difficulties of evaluating time‐extension requests can be reduced.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Ahuja, H. N., and Nandakumar, V. (1985). “Simulation model to forecast project completion time.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 111(4), 334–337.
2.
Ayyub, B. M., and Haldar, A. (1984). “Project scheduling using fuzzy set concepts.” J. Constr. Engrg. and Mgmt., ASCE, 110(2), 189–204.
3.
Benjamin, N. B. H., and Greenwald, T. W. (1973). “Stimulating effects of weather on construction.” J. Constr. Div., ASCE, 99(1), 177–180.
4.
Carr, R. I. (1979). “Simulation of construction project duration.” J. Constr. Div., ASCE, 105(2), 117–126.
5.
Dubois, D., and Prade, H. (1980). Fuzzy sets and systems: Theory and applications. Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
6.
Furuta, H., and Shiraishi, N. (1984). “Fuzzy importance in fault tree analysis.” Fuzzy sets and systems 12. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 205–213.
7.
Katz, R. W. (1985). “Probabilistic models.” Probability, statistics, and decision making in the atmospheric sciences. A. H. Murply and R. W. Katz, eds., West‐view Press, Boulder, Colo, 261–285.
8.
Kaufmann, A. (1975). Theory of fuzzy subsets. Vol. 1, Academic Press, Inc., New York, N.Y.
9.
Kavvas, M. L., Aksit, A. A., and Tulanay, Y. K. (1977). “A first order nonhomogeneous Markov chain for the daily rainfall occurrences in Ankara.” Proc. Symp. on Modeling Hydro. Process, Water Resources Publications, July, 44–59.
10.
Smith, G. R. (1986). “Improving schedule planning,” thesis presented to Purdue University, at West Lafayette, Ind., in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
11.
Stevens, J. D. (1981). “A study of the relationship between pertubations in construction time schedules and potential construction claims,” thesis presented to the University of Washington, in Seattle, Wash., in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
12.
Yao, J. R. P. (1980). “Damage assessment of existing structures.” J. Engrg. Mech. Div., ASCE, 106(4), 785–799.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 ASCE.
History
Published online: Dec 1, 1989
Published in print: Dec 1989
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.