English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 59061/92564 (64%)
造訪人次 : 728545      線上人數 : 41
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/69738

    題名: Discussion of "Comparison of Linear Scheduling Model and Repetitive Scheduling Method"by Kris G. Mattila and Amy Park
    作者: 楊亦東;Ioannou, Photios G.
    貢獻者: 淡江大學土木工程學系
    日期: 2004-05
    上傳時間: 2011-10-23 19:52:52 (UTC+8)
    摘要: This paper mistakenly treats the ‘‘controlling sequence’’ defined
    for the first time in Harris and Ioannou ~1998! as a synonym for
    the critical path in the traditional critical path method ~CPM!, by
    stating that ‘‘the control points in the repetitive scheduling
    method ~RSM! are used to define the controlling sequence of
    activities, the critical path in a CPM schedule, which in turn determines
    the project duration.’’ Yet, the introduction of the ‘‘controlling
    sequence’’ and its differentiation from the traditional critical
    path is a main contribution of RSM, which should be pointed
    out and recognized explicitly. By overlooking this important distinction,
    the paper ends with misleading results. Moreover, the
    paper identifies critical activities incorrectly, such as in Figs. 5, 7,
    13, 15, 20, and 22. Thus, the purpose of this discussion is to
    correct these misunderstandings and to clarify the original definitions
    of the controlling sequence and critical activities in RSM.
    關聯: ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 130(3), pp.461-463
    顯示於類別:[土木工程學系暨研究所] 期刊論文





    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回饋