Scheduling and Cost Optimization of Repetitive Projects
Using Genetic Algorithms
Emad Elbeltagi1, Ehab Elkassas2, Ibrahib Abdel Rasheed3, and Shadi Al-Tawil2
1
Al-Mansoura University, 2 Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport,
and 3 Ain Shams University
Abstract —— Repetitive construction projects occupied
large space in construction industry. Repetitive projects
characterized by high cost, long duration and utilization of
many expensive resources. So, effective planning and
scheduling of repetitive projects is very important in order to
save time and cost. In this paper a flexible and dynamic
model for scheduling and optimization of repetitive projects
is presented. The model encompasses two modules: a
resource-driven scheduling module; and an optimization
module. The advantages of the model stem from the
following main characteristics: 1) it considers typical and
atypical repetitive activity, 2) it uses multiple crews and
assigns available crew to next units, 3) it considers different
construction methods for each activity, 4) it maintains work
continuity, 5) it allows for activity interruption, 6) it
incorporates a genetic algorithm procedure to search for the
optimum schedule that minimizes total project cost, and 7) it
presents outputs in both tabular and graphical formats. The
model is allowing the user to experiment with several
combinations of construction methods that produce different
plans by changing the construction methods indices
manually. The objective of the optimization part is to
minimize total construction cost which comprises direct cost,
indirect cost and interruption cost. The optimization part
allows the user to produce several optimal plans and choose
among them the best for his target project. Based on the
proposed model, a computerized system for scheduling of
repetitive project was developed. Details of model
development and implementation are described, and an
example application is presented to demonstrate the
capabilities of the developed system.
I. Introduction
Repetitive construction is commonly found in high-rise building,
housing project highways, and pipeline network and water and
sewer mains. They address the need to maintain work continuity
so that the resources are kept working all the time. As a result
they are more suitable for the scheduling and resource planning
of repetitive construction projects. Repetitive scheduling
methods are more effective than traditional scheduling methods
such as critical path method (CPM), program evaluation and
review technique (PERT), and bar charts, due to their inability to
maintain resource work continuity in scheduling. Many linear, or
repetitive, scheduling methods have been developed, with each
of them featuring unique functions and/or applications. The idea
of repetitive scheduling originated from the manufacturing
ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt
industry, with the use of mass production line units. These
production line units are identical. The manufacturing process
consists of a series of workstations requiring the same resources
(e.g., equipment, laborer, etc.), for processing. Resources are
normally stationed on the plant floor during the production
process with no movement of resource considered necessary. A
typical repetitive scheduling method is the line-of-balance
method (LOB) [1, 9, 14, 15], which provides a simple method
for scheduling and controlling the production progress.
Subsequent construction repetitive scheduling methods [6, 8, 10,
11, 12, 16] have tried to release the single duration constraint for
repetitive activities. Production units need not be identical, but
merely similar. El-Rayes and Moselhi (1998) for example,
designated operations by a work group with the same duration as
a “typical repetitive activity” and one with a different duration as
a “non typical repetitive activity.” They also pointed out that the
“non typical repetitive activity” is common in repetitive projects;
thus it is inadequate to treat repetitive operations within one
work group as the same, the difference between each work item
should be considered during preconstruction planning.
Maintaining crew work continuity leads to maximizing the
learning curve effect and minimizing the idle time of each crew
[2, 3]. On the other hand, maintaining crew work continuity
might result in longer project duration. Selinger (1980) for
instance, suggested that increasing crew work interruptions up to
a specific amount for some of the activities might reduce the
overall project duration. Therefore, the tradeoff between the
overall project duration and the number of interruption days is a
crucial factor in assigning resources in repetitive projects [13].
In an attempt to improve existing solutions, this paper presents a
resource-driven scheduling model for repetitive projects. The
model considers both typical and a typical activities, allows for
crew interruption and maintain work continuity. The model
incorporates a flexible genetic algorithm (GA) procedure for
optimizing the total project cost. The proposed model is
implemented on a spreadsheet program using the Visual Basic
for Application (VBA) macro programming language. Details of
model development are described along with an example
application.
319
 II. Model Development
The development made is this paper is to present a
multiobjective optimization model for planning and scheduling
of repetitive construction projects. The model has the following
capabilities: (1) scheduling projects with typical or atypical
repetitive activities, (2) assigning multiple crews to repetitive
activities to work simultaneously, (3) calculating the total project
cost comprising direct, indirect and interruption costs, and (4)
generating the optimum construction plan considering the
number of interruption days at all activities or at any number of
activities specified by the planner. In order to achieve these
outputs mentioned previously, the present model requires
planners to input readily available data including: (1) project data
that specifies the number of sequentially repetitive activities in
the project (I) and the project indirect cost, (2) activity data that
specifies the number of repetitive sections (J), the quantity of
work (Qi,j) of activity (i) in each unit (j), and (3) the alternative
construction methods along with their production rate, direct cost
and number of crew available. The planning and scheduling
computations in the present model are organized in tow major
modules: (1) scheduling Module that develops practical
schedules for repetitive construction projects; and (2)
optimization module that searches for near optimal solutions
taking into consideration the interruption cost. The following
sections present a detailed description of these two major
modules.
A. Scheduling Module
The main objective of this module is to develop schedules for
repetitive construction projects. Accordingly, this module is
designed to compute the scheduled start (STij) and finish (FTij)
times for any activity (i) in any repetitive unit (j), the total
project duration (D), the total number of crew interruption days
(R) at activity level or the project level, and the total project cost
(TPC). The calculation, as such, is performed in two stages as
follows:
Stage 1
An activity (i) in unit (j) could start only when its predecessor
activity(ies) finished (logic constraint) and there is a crew
available on the site (if multiple crew are used on this activity).
These are done as follows:
1- Calculate the construction duration (dijm) of activity (i) in
each repetitive unit (j) using its selected construction method
(m), and its quantity of work (Qij) and the daily production rate
(Rim) of the selected construction method.
Q
ij
D = (1)
ijm R through units based on their order and Fig. 2.b, the crews are
im
2-Calculation of Start Time and Finish Times:
The calculation of start times and finish times for all activities in
each unit in stage 1 is the base calculation to get the scheduled
start and finish time. The start time of an activity (i) in unit (j) is
calculated as the maximum of the minimum finish time of the
crews working in similar units in the same activity and the finish
time of its predecessors. Start time according to crew availability
ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt
( STCAijnm ) for activity (i) at unit (j) using construction method
(m) and has crew number (n= 1 to N).
STCA = Min( FT , FT ,......... ..FT ) (2)
ijnm i1 i 2 iN
Equation 2 ensures that the first crew (n) available will be
assigned to unit (j) in activity (i). Accordingly, the algorithm will
scan all available crews in activity (i) which was working in
previous units (1 to j) considering construction method (m) to
explore which crew can be transferred to the new location or
unit. A special case of Equation (2) when a single crew is
assigned to repetitive activity, Eq.2 becomes as follows:
STCA = FT (3)
ijnm i ( j − 1)
Single crew assignment strategy is shown in Fig. 1. As shown in
the figure, activity 1 has production rate more than activity 2 and
activity 2 has less production than activity 3.
Unit
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
Crew
1
Time
Figure 1: Repetitive Scheduling for Vertical Projects
The current formulation allows for assigning sites to crews, in
which sites are assigned to the first crew that becomes available
for work and not the crews is assigned to the sites sequentially.
Since linear project is consist of locations or sites has different
quantities for some or all activities and the activity can be
assigned to the multiple crews, This approach has very important
positive impact on minimizing the whole activity duration as
shown in Fig. 2.
In Fig. 2a, crews are assigned sequentially by moving crews
moving through units based on their availability. For example, in
unit 5 the available crew with the minimum finish time (FT) is
crew 1. Accordingly, crew 1 has been assigned to unit
5regardless of its assignment to the previous unit (unit 4). Crew
1 has the right to be assigned to unit 5 because of its earliest
finish time (FT). This strategy of assigning sites or activity units
to available crews has efficient impact in time saving as
illustrated in Fig. 2.
320
 Unit A: The crews moved sequentially Third, (0 value) which means that the activity (i) in unit (j) will
Crew 2
start immediately once activity (i-1) in the same unit finished
8 Crew 1 (Fig. 3).
7 Crew 3
6 Having defined the start time of any activity (i) in unit (j), then
Crew 2
its finish time (FTij) can be easily calculated as follows::
5 Crew 1
4 FTij = STij + Dijm (6)
3 C
Crew 3
Crew 2
2
Crew 1 Unit Activity A Activity B
1 Crew 1 Crew 1
8
B: The crews moved based on Time
Unit Crew 2 Crew 2
availability Crew 1 Time Saving 7
8 Idle (6)
Crew 2 Crew 3 Crew 1
7 6
Crew 3 Idle (5) Crew 1
Crew 1 STJLB7 < STCAB72
6 Crew 1 5
5 Crew 2 Crew 2
Crew 1
4 4

3
2
4 Crew 3
Crew 2 3
Crew 3 Idle (3) Crew 1
STJLB4 = STCAB42
Crew 1 Crew 2 Crew 2
1 2
1 STJLB3 > STCAB31
Crew 1 Crew 1
Time 1
Figure 2: Multiple Crew Assignment Strategy
Time
The start time according to job logic ( STJLij ) represents the Figure 3: Interruption of Crews Produced in Stage 1
finish time of predecessor activity (i-1) at unit (j) and means that
activity (i) at unit j can't start until activity (i-1) at the same unit
is finished and can be calculated as follows: 3- Direct cost Calculation:
After scheduling activities in different units, the direct cost is
calculated as it is depend on the construction method used. The
STJLij = FT(i −1) j (4) direct cost consists of the cost of labor, equipments and
materials. The direct costs ( DC ijm ) for activities at each unit
Having defined both the start time based on crew availability can be calculated as follow:
STCAijnm and the start time based on job logic STJL , the
ij
model considers the largest value among these two values and DC ijm = DC i * Dijm (7)
assigns the largest value as the start time of unit (j) in activity (i).
Equation 5 represents the start time of any activity (i) in unit (j),
as follow: Where:
DC ijm : Direct cost of activity (i) at unit (j) using construction
STij = Max ( STJLij , STCAijnm ) (5) method m;
Dijm : Duration of activity (i) at unit (j) using construction
The difference between ( STCAijnm ) and ( STJLij ) may lead to method m; and
three different Values represent different meanings. First, (+ DC : Estimated direct cost of activity (i) per day.
i
value) which mean that the crew can move to next unit with time
The total activity direct cost for activity ( TDCim ) using its
buffer between activity (i) and (i-1) equal ( STCAijnm –
construction method (m) is the summation of all direct costs in
STJLij ). Second, (-ve value) which means that the crew for all units (j = 1 to J), as follows:

activity (i) in unit (j) should wait (interruption) for time equal to
J
( STCAijnm – STJLij ) till the activity (i-1) in unit j finished. TDCim = ∑ DCijm (8)
j =1

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 321

 Then, Total direct cost of whole project is the summation of For example in Fig. 4, crew 1 has an idle times in units 3, 5 and 6
direct cost of all activities from (i=1 to I): and the quantity of idle times are respectively idle(3), idle(5) and
idle(6). Accordingly, the shift for crew one in all units should be
calculated as follows:
I
TDC = ∑ TDC (9) Shift (1) = idle (3) + idle (5) + idle (6)
i =1 im Shift (3) = idle (5) + idle (6)
Shift (5) = idle (6)
Shift (6) = 0.
Stage 2 The identified shift of each unit is used to shift the scheduled
start and finish times of stage 1as follows:
The developed schedule of stage 1 may cause crew idle time in
some units so, in order to minimize crew idle time and maintain
maximum work continuity constraint, stage 2 shifts the STij = STij + Shift ijn (12)
developed schedule for each activity of some units, if any, in
stage 1 to a later time. The required shift of a unit j is identified
as the summation of all idle times of later scheduled units Accordingly, the finish time of activity (i) at unit (j) can be
assigned to the same crew, (Fig. 4). The shift of activity (i) at calculated as follow:
unit (j) using assigned crew (n), shiftijn , can be calculated
using the following equation: (13)
FTij = FTij + Shiftijn
J
shiftijn = ∑ Idleijn (10)
j +1 Given that the FTij ≤ ST(i +1) j and the shift time is used to
Where: move the start and finish times of activity (i) at unit (j) to comply
Idle ijn : is the idle time of assigned crew (n) at unit (j) and can with crew work continuity constraint taking into consideration
the shifted activity can't cross over any successor activity. The
be calculated as follows: shift will not be forced into schedule and that will cause surly
interruption in some activities. This shift, however, may cause
the working period of some crews to be shifted outside their
Idleijn = STijn − FTikn (11) availability period considered in stage 1. Therefore, stage 1 is
repeated for a second iteration to consider the impact of such
shifts on crew availability. The second iteration of stage one will
Where k is the predecessor unit crew n was assigned. consider the latest value calculated in equations 11 an 12, and
reassign crews based on their availability period starting from
activity (i=1 to I).

Unit J
Crew 1 Crew 1 Interi = ∑ idleijn (14)
8 j =1
Crew 2 Crew 2
7
Crew 3 Idle (6) Crew 1 Where:
6
Crew 1 Idle (5) Crew 1
Interi = Total interruption of activity (i).
5 Shift = Idle (6)
Crew 2 Crew 2
4 Accordingly, the total interruption of the whole project for all
Crew 3 Idle (3) Crew 1 activities (i=1 to I) can be calculated as follows:
3
Crew 2 Crew 2 Shift = Idle (5) + idle (6)
2 Chromosome I
Crew 1 Inter = ∑ Interi (15)
Crew 1 Shift = idle (3) + Idle (5) + idle (6) i =1
1

Time Penalty interruption cost ( TPIC i ) is the penalty applied when

Figure 4: Stage 2 and Interruption Treatment
work continuity is violated (i.e., when an interruption to a crew
occurred). Penalty interruption cost is applied to the total
interruption time for each activity. Thus means that each activity
has its own penalty interruption cost and can be calculated as
follows:

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 322

 TPIC i = Interi * PIC i (16)
Where:
TPIC i = Total penalty interruption cost for activity (i).
PIC i = Penalty interruption cost per time unit for activity (i).
The total penalty interruption cost for whole project is the
summation of penalties of all activities as follows:
I define the differences among each others by changing one of
TPIC = ∑ TPICi (17)
i=1
Total duration (TD) for the repetitive project is equal the finish
date of last activity at last unit minus the start date of first
activity at unit (1) as given below:
TD = FTIJ − ST11 (18)
Accordingly, total project indirect equals the total project
duration times the indirect cost per time period (IC):
TIC = TD * IC (19)
B. Optimization Module
The proposed scheduling formulation is suitable for generating
project schedule by specifying the values for construction
methods. However, with large number of possible combination,
a cost optimization model becomes necessary to identify the
optimum combination of construction methods. The optimization
module is utilizing a non-traditional optimization technique
which is genetic algorithm. This module involves the setup of the
objective function, optimization variables and optimization
constraints.
1- Objective function:
The objective function of the model is to minimize total
construction cost. This function is formulated to include all the
factors that affect the total construction cost:
1- Direct cost.
2- Indirect cost.
3- Crew interruption penalty.
The objective function consisting of the three factors mentioned
above can be formulated as follows:
Minimize: TC = ∑iI=1 ( DCi + TPIC ) + TIC (20)
i
ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt
2- Optimization Variables:
The independent variables in the present model are the
construction method indices. Every construction method
represents different production rate, direct cost and number of
crews. Among several construction methods, the optimization
process shall search for the optimum combination of
construction methods that produce the targeted schedule that
minimizes the total project cost. The algorithm is designed to
deal with large number of alternative construction methods
specified by the planner and the construction methods may
three component, production rate of crew, direct cost and number
of crews, or changing the completely the three components. As
such, the number of optimization variables equals the number of
project activities (I) and the value of each variable is represented
by the construction method index. Accordingly, the chromosome
is represented as a string of elements with a length equal to the
number of activities, where each element (gene) contains a
construction method index (Fig 5). Each chromosome, as such,
represents a feasible solution for the problem at hand.
Activity 1 Activity I
1 3 2 1 3
Activity
Chromosome Construction Method Index
Fig.5: Chromosome Representation
3- Optimization Constraint:
Several constraints are considered for the model to function
properly. These include:
1- The method-of construction indices are limited to the
number of methods available to each activity.
2- The number of crews used in each activity is limited to
a specific number defined by the user (the maximum
number of crew does not exceed the number of
repetitive units of the activity).
Once the chromosome structure and objective function (also
referred to as fitness function) are set, the developed GA
evolutionary procedure takes place on a population of parent
genes. The simplest way to generate that population is randomly.
Population size (number of genes) is also an important factor that
affects the solution and the processing time it consumes. Larger
population size (in the order of hundreds) increases the
likelihood of obtaining a global optimum, however, substantially
increases processing time. In the present application, the user is
given the flexibility to input the population size. Once the
population is generated, the fitness of each chromosome in this
population (m genes) is evaluated using the objective function.
The reproduction process among the population members takes
place by either crossover or mutation, resembling natural
evolution. Crossover (marriage) is by far a more common
process [3] and can be conducted by selecting two parent genes,
exchanging their information, and producing an offspring. Each
323
of the two parent genes is randomly selected in a manner such The project is divided into 15 repetitive units each of length 1
that its probability of being selected is proportional to its relative Km. each of the five activities is repeated at each of the 15
merit. This ensures that best genes have higher likelihood of segments or units of the project. The precedence relationships
being selected, without violating the diversity of the random among these sequential activities are finish to start with no lag
process. Also, the exchange of information between the two time as given in Table II. The activities of (cut and ship trees),
parent genes is done through a random process to produce a one (grup and remove stumps) and (earthmoving) do not have
offspring. As opposed to crossover, which resembles the main identical duration in all units and thus can be classified as
natural method of reproduction [7], mutation is a rare process atypical repetitive activities. The activities of (base) and (paving)
that resembles the process of a sudden generation of an odd have identical duration in all units and thus can be classified as
offspring that turns to be a genius. This can be done by randomly typical repetitive activities. The two categories of repetitive
selecting one gene from the population and then arbitrarily activities are represented in this example to illustrate the
changing some its information. The benefit of the mutation flexibility of the algorithm. The data of alternative construction
process is that it can break any stagnation in the evolutionary methods and quantities for each activity is shown in Table II and
process, avoiding local minima. Table III.
Once an offspring is generated by either method, it is evaluated
Table II
in turn and can be retained only if its fitness is higher than that of
Alternatives construction methods data
others in the population. Usually, the process is continued for a
large number of offspring generations until an optimum gene is
Activity Method 1 Method 2 Method 3
arrived at. In the present application, the user is given the ID Descrip
flexibility to input the number of offspring generations [5]. tion R C NCA R C NCA R C NCA

Cut and

3000
2000

2500

1250

3500

1500
III. Model Implementation 1 Chip

4
trees
The proposed model was implemented on a commercial Grub
and

4000
2000

3000

1500

3500

1750
spreadsheet program to simplify the implementation process and 2

2
automate the scheduling of repetitive projects. In this study, remove
stumps
Microsoft Excel software is selected for the implementation of
the proposed model because of its ease of use and powerful Earthm
1000
1700

1000

2500

1600
900
3

2
programmability features. Among the strong features of oving
spreadsheets are their intuitive cell-based structure and the
3200
3000

3200

3000

3000

3800
simple interface that is easy to use. Underneath the structure and 4 Base
4

3
the interface is a host of powerful features, from data entry and
manipulation to a large number of functions, macros and charts.
Spreadsheet has, also, features for internet connectivity, working
4000
3000

4000

3000

4000

3500
5 Paving
3

3
sharing and programs. Moreover, the feature of programming
gives the spreadsheets the power to model more complex
algorithms by totally implement the model by Visual Basic R: Production Rate of each crew.
Application macro tool (VBA macros). The spreadsheet C: The direct cost for activity per day
implementation for scheduling repetitive project and cost NCA: Number of crew available.
optimization will follow the same steps as the formulation
explained in previously in section II.
All the data of this example are entered to the model template on
Excel. The model is implemented totally by programming in
IV. Numerical Example VBA macro to make it more dynamic. Figure 6 shows the
The Example used in this study involves the construction of a project data including number of activities, number of units,
three-lane-highway for stretch of 15 Km and consist of five alternatives construction methods for all activities and indirect
activities (Table I). cost for the project.
Table I After entering all the data of the project the planner can
Activities of the example experiment a lot of combinations of construction methods to
produce several plans. The tabular results of the schedule are
ID Activity Description Predecessor shown in Fig. 7 while Fig. 8 shows the graphical representation
1 Cut and Ship Trees - of the obtained schedule using the following construction 2, 3, 1,
2 Grub and Remove stumps 1 2, and 1 for activities 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively.
3 Earthmoving 2
4 Base 3
5 Paving 4

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 324

 Table III
Quantities of activities in each unit

Repetitive Activities
Grub and remove
Cut and Chip Trees Earthmoving Base Paving
stumps
Repetitive
units Quantities Quantities Quantities Quantities Quantities
Units Units Units
(Km) (Qij) Units (Qij) Units (Qij) (Qij) (Qij)
(j)
1 12000 12000 7000 32000 32000
2 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000
3 18000 18000 6000 32000 32000
4 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000
5 18000 18000 8600 32000 32000
6 30000 30000 7000 32000 32000
7 36000 36000 6500 32000 32000
8 30000
m2 30000 m2 6000 m3 32000 m2 32000 m3
9 24000 24000 6000 32000 32000
10 24000 24000 6000 32000 32000
11 18000 18000 6000 32000 32000
12 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000
13 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000
14 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000
15 12000 12000 6000 32000 32000

Fig. 6: Project data

As presented in Table IV, the project scheduling results are

shown using construction methods combination 2, 3, 1, 2, and 1
for activities 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. It is also shown that
using this combination will lead to total project cost of
LE1,440,450 and project duration of 82 days. Also, it is shown
that the total interruption time is 3 days.

Table IV
Project scheduling output details

Project Project Project Total

Project
duration direct cost indirect interruption
cost (LE)
(Days) (LE) cost (LE) (Days)
Fig. 7: Scheduling results in tabular form.
82 1,276,450 164,000 1,440,450 3

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 325

 VI. Conclusion
In this paper, a flexible and dynamic model for scheduling and
optimizing repetitive project has been developed. The model has
been implemented on spreadsheet program. The developed
scheduling model along with the optimization algorithm was
automated using the Visual Basic for Applications Macro
programming language. The model provides a schedule complies
with precedence relationship and maximum work continuity
constraint. In addition, it considers the impact of following
practical factors:
• Type of repetitive activity (i.e. typical or atypical )
• Multiple crews assigned to work simultaneously.
• Interruption for repetitive activities.
• Multiple construction methods.
• Optimization among several alternatives construction
methods for each activity among repetitive project.
Fig. 8: Graphical presentation of schedule
For each activity in a repetitive unit, the model identifies the
scheduled start and finish times as well as the crew assigned and
By clicking on the optimization button, the GA procedure starts
the number of interruption days for each crew, if any. The model
by activating an add-in program to Excel (Evolver) and starting
also identifies the project duration, total direct cost and total
searching for a solution that minimizes the total project cost.
indirect cost. The developed model employs a non-traditional
Accordingly, another solution is presented that minimizes the
optimization technique - Genetic-Algorithm- that has powerful
total project cost. In this case, an interruption penalty cost is used
random search capabilities. The optimization process identifies
to direct the optimization process. By assigning high penalty
the combination of construction methods that can achieve the
interruption cost for an activity (e.g., LE10,000), the system will
following results:
not allow for interruption to that activity in order to minimize the
1-
total project cost. The schedule results presented in Table V
2- - Minimum total cost without considering interruption.
shows that case. In this case, an interruption penalty cost of LE
3- - Minimum total cost with allowing interruption at specific
10,000, is assigned to all activities to allow for no interruption.
unit.
Accordingly, the total interruption time in days is zero as shown
in Table V.
Also, the developed optimization algorithm can deal with
discrete or linear function of cost-time relationships.
Table V
Optimization Output Details
REFFERENCES
Project Project Project Project Total [1] Arditi, D., and Albulak, M.Z., “Line-of-Balance Scheduling
duration direct indirect total cost interruption in Pavement Construction”, Journal of Construction
(Days) cost (LE) cost (LE) (LE) (Days) Engineering and Management, Vol. 112, No. 3, pp. 411-
424, 1986.
86 1,262,100 172,000 1,434,100 0 [2] Ashley, D.B., “Simulation of Repetitive Unit Construction”,
Journal of the Construction Division, Vol.106, pp. 185-194,
Solving the problem again by allowing interruption for the “cut 1980.
and ship trees” activity by assigning zero interruption penalty [3] Birrell, G.E., “Construction Planning - Beyond the Critical
cost, the results in this case is presented in Table VI. Assigning Path”, Journal of the Construction Division, Vol.106, pp.
low interruption cost means that the crew working in this activity 389-407, 1980.
has small utilization cost and it dos not cost the project due to its [4] Caudill, M., "Evolutionary Neural Networks." AI Expert,
mobilization in and out the site or due to their hiring and firing. March, pp. 28-33, 1991.
[5] Elbeltagi, E., “Applicability of Genetic Algorithms in
Table VI Construction Engineering and Management”, International
Optimization Output Details Conference on Structural & Geotechnical Engineering and
Construction Technology, Mansoura, Egypt, pp. 1049-1062,
March 2004.
Project Project Project Project Total [6] Elrayes, K., and Moselhi, O., “Resource-Driven Scheduling
duration direct cost indirect total cost interruption of Repetitive Activities”, Construction Management and
(Days) (LE) cost (LE) (LE) (Days) Economics in Engineering, Vol. 16, pp. 433-446, 1998.
[7] Goldberg, D.E. “Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization
79 1,252,700 158,000 1,410,700 1 and Machine Learning.” Addison-wesley Publishing Co.,
Reading, Mass, 1989.

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 326

[8] Harris, R.B. and Ioannou, P.G., "Scheduling Projects with
Repeating Activities", Journal of Construction Engineering
and Management, Vol. 124, No.4, pp. 269-278, 1998.
[9] Hegazy, T., and Wasef, N., “Cost Optimization in Project
with Repetitive Nonserial Activities”, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 127, No.
3, pp. 183-191, 2001.
[10] Hegazy, T., Elhakeem, A., and Elbeltagi, E., “Distributed
Scheduling Model for Infrastructure Networks”, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No.
2, pp. 160-167, 2004.
[11] Hyari, K., and Elrayes, K., “Optimal Planning and
Scheduling for Repetitive Construction Projects”, Journal of
Management in Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 11-19,
2006.
[12] Johnston, D.W., “linear Scheduling Method for Highway
Construction”, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, Vol. 107, No. 2, pp. 241-261, 1981.
[13] Nassar, K., “Evolution Optimization of Resource Allocation
in Repetitive Construction Schedules”, Journal of
Information Technology in Construction, Vol. 10, pp, 121-
137, 2005.
[14] O'Brien, J.J., “VPM Scheduling for High-Rise Building”,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.
101, No. 4, pp. 895-905, 1975.
[15] Reda, R.M., “RPM: Repetitive Project Modeling”, Journal
of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 116,
No. 2, pp. 316-330, June 1990.
[16] Seliger, S., “Construction Planning for Linear Project”,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol.
106, No. 2, pp. 195-205, 1980.

ICCTA 2007, 1-3 September 2007, Alexandria, Egypt 327