Discussion of "Comparison of Linear Scheduling Model and Repetitive Scheduling Method"by Kris G. Mattila and Amy Park

機構典藏 > College of Engineering > Graduate Institute & Department of Civil Engineering > Journal Article > Item 987654321/69738

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/69738

Title:	Discussion of "Comparison of Linear Scheduling Model and Repetitive Scheduling Method"by Kris G. Mattila and Amy Park
Authors:	楊亦東;Ioannou, Photios G.
Contributors:	淡江大學土木工程學系
Date:	2004-05
Issue Date:	2011-10-23 19:52:52 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	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.
Relation:	ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 130(3), pp.461-463
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute & Department of Civil Engineering] Journal Article

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
Discussion of Comparison of Linear Scheduling Model and Repetitive Scheduling Method by Kris G. Mattila and Amy Park.pdf		153Kb	Adobe PDF	1	View/Open
index.html		0Kb	HTML	19	View/Open