Search

Compressing project schedule using activity accelerating and overlapping requires that an intensive time-cost trade-off analysis be carried out, to determine costs and benefits for each day of compression. However, the cost elements and implications of compression techniques differ significantly, since activity accelerating imposes extra direct cost whereas activity overlapping adds a risk of changes and rework. Such a trade-off becomes even more complicated in capital projects comprised of a large number of schedule activities and relationships. The variety of combinations of accelerating and overlapping of different activities in these complex networks can offer numerous possibilities for compression with various costs and potential risks. The lack of a reliable analytical tool for performing a precise cost-benefit analysis causes this critical task to be performed in a subjective manner during the planning stage of projects. The purpose of this paper is to present an advanced method using a multi-objective evolutionary optimization tool seeking the optimum degree of accelerating and overlapping during the schedule compression process. This optimization technique would be beneficial in maximizing project benefits while meeting the intended target dates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Schedule compression is an attempt to reduce project durations for early delivery, or to catch up on occurred delays. This is usually performed using 'crashing', 'overlapping' and 'substitution' of activities. 'Crashing' is shortening task duration by adding more resource hours. 'Substitution' is changing the method or tool by which the activity is performed. 'Overlapping' is performing sequential activities in parallel. Few studies can be found in the literature that compare costs and benefits of each technique and recommend the optimum combination of these techniques in project schedules. In fact, the implications of each technique are inherently different since crashing and substitution impose extra cost whereas overlapping adds the risk of changes and rework. Therefore, it is a challenge to develop a reliable analytical tool for performing time-cost trade-offs using the three methods. There are also few studies in the literature to propose a practical method for performing schedule compression by combining these techniques. The purpose of this paper is to discuss these schedule compression techniques in detail, and present and validate a heuristic method to perform the combination of crashing, overlapping and substitution in a project schedule, to reach the maximum benefit while meeting the project target dates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]