sustainability
Article
A Simulation Model of Construction Projects Executed in
Random Conditions with the Overlapping Construction Works
Sławomir Biruk and Łukasz Rzepecki *






Citation: Biruk, S.; Rzepecki, Ł. A
Simulation Model of Construction
Projects Executed in Random
Conditions with the Overlapping
Construction Works. Sustainability
2021, 13, 5795. https://doi.org/
10.3390/su13115795
Academic Editors:
Elżbieta Radziszewska-Zielina,
Małgorzata Fedorczak-Cisak and
Grzegorz Śladowski
Received: 26 April 2021
Accepted: 19 May 2021
Published: 21 May 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115795
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Lublin University of Technology, 40 Nadbystrzycka St.,
20-618 Lublin, Poland; s.biruk@pollub.pl
* Correspondence: l.rzepecki@pollub.pl
Abstract: Reducing the duration of construction works requires additional organizational measures,
such as selecting construction methods that assure a shorter realization time, engaging additional
resources, working overtime, or allowing construction works to be performed simultaneously in
the same working units. The simultaneous work of crews may affect the quality of works and the
efficiency of construction processes. This article presents a simulation model aimed at assessing the
impact of the overlap period on the extension of the working time of the crews and the reduction
of a repetitive project’s duration in random conditions. The purpose of simulation studies is to
provide construction managers with guidelines when deciding on the dates of starting the sequential
technological process lines realized by specialized working crews, for sustainable scheduling and
organization of construction projects.
Keywords: civil engineering; construction project management; construction scheduling; random
conditions; simulation method
1. Introduction
The main purpose of developing the sustainable schedule at the project planning stage
is to determine the expected completion date of the project and the duration of individual
processes, as well as their cost. On the other hand, the schedule is also the main tool for
monitoring and controlling the realization of the planned project. During the execution of
the project, smaller or larger discrepancies between the as-planned and actual dates are
to be expected. It is a common phenomenon and it is difficult to avoid, especially in the
case of long-term projects, which involve multiple resources and consume considerable
funds. The reasons for deviations from the plan typically include problems with human
resources, changing weather conditions, or the lack of adequate financial reserves. Other
factors that may result in differences between the plan and its realization are changes in
resource availability, untimely deliveries of material and the equipment failures [1–7].
The growing requirements for the conservation of natural resources have a major
impact on the development of concepts for planning and executing construction projects.
Additionally, in a rapidly changing environment, with increasing investor demands for
cost, quality and timeliness, and increasing sustainability requirements, project managers
need to improve project planning and control tools. Construction projects consume large
quantities of resources. Therefore, their appropriate allocation to construction processes
ensuring their rational management is one of the main challenges of sustainable construc-
tion project management [8,9]. Untimely completion of construction processes can have a
negative impact on other parties involved in its implementation, mainly material suppliers,
construction machinery owners, and subcontractors [9]. It may lead to improper use of
their resources and even losses.
As a result of delays in the realization of works, additional resources may need to be
hired to help make up for the lost time. Most often, delays with some works propagate
throughout the schedule as subsequent works cannot start unless their predecessors are
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 2 of 13

completed. In such cases, the schedule developed at the planning stage is an appropriate
starting point for verification of the assumptions adopted in the plan. A detailed analysis
of these assumptions may allow the deadline for the project realization to be met [10–13].
The necessity to revise the assumptions is most often caused by the need to accelerate
the project, by incorrect determination of the realization time of individual processes, or
by delays in/speeding up the realization of some tasks. Reconsideration of the assump-
tions cannot be avoided in the event of changes in the demand for resources and their
availability, or when it is necessary to change the adopted technological and organizational
solutions [14–17].
The reduction of the project realization time very often results in additional costs.
They mainly result from higher overtime rates, additional charges for subcontractors for
express works, or the use of more advanced technology. To effectively accelerate the project,
the cost analysis should be based on the processes of the critical path. Increasing the
efficiency of non-critical tasks is economically ineffective if the focus is on reducing the
project time. Many sources recommended to first accelerate those critical activities whose
changes generates the lowest additional costs [18–20].
Depending on whether resource analysis is included in the schedule development
stage, the deadlines for realization of individual tasks result from the critical path or from
the sequence of tasks constituting the critical chain. Critical chain processes have limited
availability of one or several resources used during their realization. The critical path and
the critical chain overlap if all levels of resource availability allow the work to be realized
within the time limits resulting from the time analysis. If the deadline for completing
the project after the resource analysis exceeds the directive deadline resulting from the
time analysis, there is a need to compress the schedule. Therefore, in the first place, it is
necessary to identify the critical chain and resources that limit the efficiency and capacity
of the entire chain as well as extend the deadline for the realization of the project [3,21,22].
There are many techniques that can be used to shorten the duration of a project while
maintaining its scope. One of them is fast-tracking, which makes it possible to shorten the
critical path by planning parallel realization of processes that were previously scheduled
in sequence. It is recommended that fast-tracking method be the first of accelerating the
project duration, because it does not generate additional costs and can also contribute
to reducing the company’s fixed costs. However, starting work before the completion of
another stage is associated with a high risk of errors, generating additional resources and
work [23,24].
Another schedule compression technique is crashing. This method is based on acceler-
ating the realization of processes by increasing resources (employing additional people,
using equipment with higher efficiency). The essence of the effective use of crashing is the
maximum reduction of task durations using the minimum amount of additional resources
necessary to optimize these processes. Effective implementation of crashing involves
the application of this technique to the critical path activities, starting with tasks whose
optimization is associated with the lowest cost [19,25–27].
Another method that allows for the effective use of time for project realization is the
critical chain method. This technique assumes a time reserve (buffer) for the entire project
instead of for individual processes. The use of the critical chain method enables the project
to be completed in 10–50% less time compared with other techniques [28–30].
Short deadlines for the realization of projects imposed by investors who want to
benefit from projects as soon as possible, as well as the risk of contractual penalties for
failure to meet the deadline, often force general contractors to compress schedules. To
help managers analyze the effects of schedule compression measures, the authors put
forward a simulation model. It is specifically intended for assessing the impact of the
scale of task overlap period on the extension of the working time of the crews and the
reduction of the project duration in random conditions. To illustrate the idea, we present an
example—simulation tests on a repetitive construction project. The purpose of simulation
studies is to provide construction managers with guidelines when deciding on the dates of
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 3 of 13

starting the sequential technological process lines realized by specialized working crews,
for sustainable scheduling and organization of construction projects. The model aims to
eliminate delays in construction projects while taking into account the degree of resource
utilization, which is one of the objectives of sustainable construction project management.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature Review
There are many terms in the literature that define the overlapping of processes, such
as fast-tracking, concurrent engineering, or parallel engineering. Research related to
overlapping processes mainly cover two areas: product development and project manage-
ment [31–37]. The models developed in these studies informed researchers who imple-
mented them in the construction industry.
Constraints in managing overlapping are caused by, among other things, time-cost
trade-offs problems. Meier et al. [38] used a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm to
derive Pareto points of the best solutions to time–cost trade-off.
Ballesteros-Pérez [39] proposed a stochastic model that allows for extensive analysis
of overlapping activity. This proves that the possibility of reducing a schedule by more
than a quarter of its original duration is very unlikely. The relationship between cost and
overlap was also defined.
Dehghan et al. [40], having interviewed experts dealing with the mechanism of over-
lapping tasks, created a model that solves the problem of the compromise of time and cost
overlapping in the design phase. The developed model can obtain the optimal degree of
overlapping for schedule tasks while maintaining minimal costs.
Hossain and Chua [41] noted the large impact of the accuracy of the design phase
information on the reduction of project duration and the number of additional works
overlapping with design and construction tasks. As a result of the research, they created a
simulation model that determined the project parameters regarding the total duration of
the investment and the expected number of reworks.
Pena-Mora and Park [42], observing the dynamic construction process carried out
in fast-tracking conditions, developed the dynamic planning methodology (DPM). This
method aims to improve the planning and management of fast-tracking construction
projects by providing overlapping strategies, hiring control policies, and schedule adjust-
ments that minimize the negative impact of fast-tracking.
Berthaut et al. [43] paid attention to the lack of consideration of resource availability
constraints when overlapping tasks in the schedule. Using linear programming, they
developed a resource-constrained project scheduling model with different modes of task
overlap and the resulting rework. Research results also show a close interaction between
limited resources and task overlapping modes.
Simulation models have been used in the planning and testing of complex construction
projects for many years. The main advantage of simulation models is the lack of constraints
on the structure and complexity of the tested system and the possibility of taking into
account the risk conditions, which allows the modelling of real systems with a high degree
of complexity and a high proportion of random factors.
Referring to their previous research on the sensitivity and development of processes,
Bogus et al. [44] implemented one of the first comprehensive computer algorithms to opti-
mize the overlap of activities in schedules. This algorithm used Monte Carlo simulations
to predict different discrete outcomes for each activity to obtain more accurate rework
probabilities. The simulation model determined the risk of having to redo the task or part
of it. The simulation results provide information about the probability of rework based
on different combinations of variations, sensitivities, overlap strategies, and percentage
overlap between the process and the upstream and downstream activities.
Wang and Lin [33] created a simulation model in which they analyzed the impact
of the tasks sequence and the degree of activities overlap on the duration of the project.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 4 of 13

However, in their research they did not take into account the constraints related to the
availability of resources.
Cho and Eppinger [45], thanks to the use of a simulation model, analyzed the struc-
ture of information flow in a project in which cyclical, parallel, and overlapping tasks
were repeated. The model also took into account the randomness of the duration of the
processes and constraints in the availability of resources. The authors showed that resource
constraints can delay the overlap of certain activities and, thus, the completion time of a
project. As a result, they obtained an effective tool to evaluate alternative planning and
execution strategies.
Srour et al. [46] presented a methodology for using bi-directional information exchange
to schedule the design phase in an accelerated manner. As a result, it is possible to generate
the shortest (with overlapping) schedule based on the dependencies between different
design phases. Apart from task durations, the algorithm also takes into account the
exchange of information between them.
Hossain et al. [47] developed a simulation model to determine the total duration
of a project with overlapping tasks and the number of rework expected. The results
show that the reduction in project duration and the expected number of reworks vary
depending on the accuracy of the information from the earlier stages and the sensitivity
of the downstream activities. Moreover, unplanned overlap may not necessarily reduce
the project duration, but may result in an excessive amount of design and construction
work which can be very costly. The proposed optimization method minimizes the expected
number of rework while maintaining the project completion date and aids in deciding on
an overlay strategy.
The simulation model proposed by Lim et al. [48] uses schedule data and parallel
process parameters to calculate the variability of time and cost to realize a project by
adjusting the overlap of tasks. The study produces a compressed schedule that allows for a
limited budget to be implemented within a specific contract duration.

2.2. Simulation Model

Including simultaneous execution of successive technological processes on the same
unit in construction schedules requires describing the interaction between activities. It is
necessary to determine the probability function of rework occurrence as a function of the
time of overlapping activities and to determine the impact on time or cost of simultaneously
performed processes. The use of historical data to determine the impact of overlapping
on the occurrence of future rework is limited. Such information is not collected, stored, or
analyzed by construction managers. Construction projects are unique and are executed
under varying conditions (site location, ground conditions, different seasons) which adds
to the difficulty of both obtaining such data and applying it to a new construction project.
Many works, e.g., [43,45], assume that the relationship between overlap and amount of
rework is known. Bogus et al. [44] assume a theoretical relationship between the probability
of rework and degree of overlap. The issue of the model parameter estimation problem is
very often neglected in the literature.
The proposed method uses estimates, as in the widely accepted PERT method in the
construction, of duration distributions using three parameters. Estimates are also made for
the conditional distributions of process performance taking into account their simultaneous
execution on the same unit. The expert must consider the impact of overlapping activities
on process performance. A decrease in productivity can be caused by using the same
equipment on the construction site, e.g., limited number of concrete mixers or insufficient
capacity of construction cranes. Estimating the parameters of the conditional distributions
should not be difficult for an experienced construction manager. The expert can specify the
decrease in productivity as a percentage of the base productivity, which further simplifies
the method of estimating the parameters of the probability distributions of the duration of
construction processes. The model takes into account organizational constraints typical for
the construction industry: carrying out works on one work plot by two working brigades
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 5 of 13

at the same time at the most; and, first of all, meeting the precedence constrained by
introducing front reserve into the model.
The proposed simulation model allows the user to analyze the repetitive construction
project consisting of non-uniform processes (the durations of processes of the same kind
may differ from unit to unit) under random conditions. An example of such an undertaking
may be the construction of several buildings differing in size (e.g., cubic capacity or
usable space) using the same materials and methods in the same construction site, or the
construction of a tall building. Let us assume that the project consists of j (j = 1, 2, . . . , n)
units where processes i (i = 1, 2, . . . , m) are consecutively performed by specialized crews.
The start of process i on the unit (j + 1) can take place after the completion of this process
on the unit j. Let us assume the labor consumption Pij associated with processes i in unit j
are known; they can be calculated on the basis of standard productivity rates and work
quantities.
If the quantity of labor in a unit is considerable (e.g., the unit is the entire story of
a multistory building including several apartments), the crew does not need to occupy
the entire unit at the same time—e.g., partition walls are made only in one apartment
on a given day. This makes it possible to share the unit with a crew performing another
process—thus, conducting various processes at the same time. The processes overlapping
should, however, take into account technological limitations (e.g., partition walls cannot be
bricked and plastered at the same time) and ensure appropriate technological breaks.
It was assumed that, due to the impact of risk factors, the daily output of crews
performing the processes are random variables Li described by arbitrary probability dis-
tributions of known type and parameters of the distribution. The type and parameters of
the distribution should be determined by experts (construction managers with significant
experience). The number of works performed on the unit j by a crew i up to date t is
calculated as:
t −1
Pijt = ∑ Pijs + δij1 · lij1 +δij2 · lij2 + δij3 · lij3 ; ∀i(i = 1, 2, . . . m), ∀ j(i = 1, 2, . . . n), (1)
s =1

where:
• δij1 = {0, 1} and takes the value 1 in the event when, within the time limit t on the unit
i, only the process j is realized; 0 in other cases;
• δij2 = {0, 1} and takes the value 1 in the event when, within the time limit t on the unit
i, the process j and (j + 1) are realized simultaneously; 0 in other cases;
• δij3 = {0, 1} and takes the value 1 in the event when, within the time limit t on the unit
i, the process j and (j − 1) are realized simultaneously; 0 in other cases;
• lijt1 , lijt2 , lijt3 —random numbers according to the probability distribution of daily
efficiency appropriate for the variant of the process overlap Li1 , Li2 , Li3 taking into
account overlap processes.
This principle is presented in Figure 1. Process 3 is started on subsequent work units
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW delay due to the provision of time buffer between process 2 and 3 (no6 of
with some 13
work
front) required by technological constraints.

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Day 8 Day 9 Day 10 Day 11 Day 12 Day 13

Process 1 l1111 l1122 l1132 l1241 l1251 l1361 l1371

Process 2 l2123 l2133 l2141 l2152 l2162 l2271 l2281 l2292 l22102 l23111 l23122

Process 3 l3153 l3163 l3293 l32103 l33123 l33131

- Unit 1 - Unit 2 - Unit 3

Figure 1. Example
Figure Example of
ofa awork
workschedule illustrating
schedule thethe
illustrating rules for calculating
rules dailydaily
for calculating efficiency for overlap
efficiency for
overlap processes.
processes.

The simultaneous performance of works on the same unit by different crews may
lead to a reduction in the daily efficiency of works. Their influence on the preceding crew
is usually smaller than on the subsequent crew.
Due to technological limitations, it was assumed that the works’ front reserve Ri(i+1)t
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 6 of 13

The simultaneous performance of works on the same unit by different crews may lead
to a reduction in the daily efficiency of works. Their influence on the preceding crew is
usually smaller than on the subsequent crew.
Due to technological limitations, it was assumed that the works’ front reserve Ri(i+1)t
on every day t between processes i and (i + 1) on each unit (maximum allowable overlap)
must meet the following condition:

R i ( i + 1 ) t ≥ Di ( i + 1 ) , (2)

where: Di(i+1) —the minimum reserve amount resulting from technological limitations
(model parameter).
Reserve Di(i+1) on the first unit of the process i simultaneously determines the earliest
starting date of Si(i+1)1 process (i + 1). It is the smallest natural number that meets the
condition:
S( j+1),1 ≥ S j,1 + Di(i+1) , (3)
where: Sj,1 —the start date of the process i, and the start date of project (the first process on
the first unit) S1,1 = 0.
For every day t (t = 1, 2, . . . ), the real reserve between processes i and i + 1 in random
conditions can be calculated for as:
P P
   
Ri,(i+1),t ≥ 1 − Pij,t − 1 − P(i+1) j,t
ij,p (i +1) j,p (4)
i = 1, . . . , m − 1; j = 1, . . . , n

where: Pij ,p , P(i+1)j,p is the labor-consumption of works i and (i + 1), respectively, to be

performed on unit j; and Pij ,t , P(i+1)j,t is the amount of work of the process i and (i + 1),
respectively, realized by the date t on the unit j.
In order to meet the condition (1), the number of works performed by a crew realizing
the process (i + 1) being a successor of i on day t may be further decreased—the lack of a
work front caused by insufficient involvement of works i prevents the crew from achieving
the assumed efficiency (i + 1). Additionally, it was assumed that only two crews could
work on one unit.
The principle of the simulation model can be described in the following steps (Figure 2):
1. Increase the simulation clock by 1 day: t = t + 1;
2. Check if there are processes not yet realized. If yes, move to step 3. If not, move to
step 8;
3. Find the earliest process possible to realize due to date t according to the sequence
relation—remember it as (r, s);
4. If there are no processes to be realized by the date t, go to step 1;
5. Check if Prs,t = 0. If yes, remember the starting date for this process;
6. Check whether, on the date t, process r on unit s is performed independently or
whether it is a subsequent of the (r − 1) process carried out on the date t or a pre-
decessor of (r + 1). Select according to the assumed distributions of the value of the
daily amount of works Prs,t . If process r is a successor to (r − 1) and condition 2 is not
unfulfilled, reduce the daily output of that process. Increase the amount of realized
works up to day t according to Equation (1). Remember that the process (r, s) was
implemented on the date t;
7. Check if Prs,t ≥ Prs,p . If yes, remember the end date of this process;
8. Move to step 2;
9. End of the simulation run. Remember the end date of the last process, which is also
the end date of the project.
 7. Check if Prs,t ≥ Prs,p. If yes, remember the end date of this process;
8. Move to step 2;
9. End of the simulation run. Remember the end date of the last process, which is also
the end date of the project.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 The simulation model was developed using the General-Purpose Simulation System
7 of 13
in the GPSS World version 5.2.2 developed by Minuteman Software
(http://www.minutemansoftware.com accessed on 20 April 2021).

START

t = t+1

If there are processes NO

not yet realized?

YES

Find the earliest

NO
process possible to
realize due to date t
(r, s)

YES
YES
Check if Prs,t = 0

Remember the
YES starting date for this
process
Check whether the process is
performed independently or
whether it is a subsequentor
a predecessor

Select the daily amount

of works Prs,t

NO
Check if Prs,t Prs,p

YES
Remember the end
date of the last
process

END

Figure2.2.Accelerating
Figure Acceleratingoverlapping
overlappingtime
timealgorithm.
algorithm.

The simulation model was developed using the General-Purpose Simulation Sys-
tem in the GPSS World version 5.2.2 developed by Minuteman Software (http://www.
minutemansoftware.com accessed on 20 April 2021).

3. Results
It was assumed that the project consists of five processes, e.g., partition walls, plasters,
concrete screeds, floor finish layers and painting, carried out on subsequent working units.
The labor consumption of the works is presented in Table 1.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 8 of 13

Table 1. The labor consumption of works in man-hours.

Process i
Unit j
1 2 3 4 5
1 400 800 900 1200 500
2 500 600 1000 1000 400
3 350 720 800 900 600
4 600 900 750 700 450
5 550 1000 850 900 300

Due to the impact of risk factors, the daily efficiency of the crews realizing the process i
are random variables described by triangular distributions defined by three parameters: wia
(minimum efficiency), wib (maximum efficiency), and wic (most likely efficiency). Random
numbers are drawn using predefined generators in the GPSS simulation language. The
generator of numbers from the triangular distribution has the form TRIANGULAR (Stream,
Min, Max, Mode), where Stream is the number of random numbers generated from the s (0,
1), Min is the smallest and Max is the largest value to be drawn from the distribution, and
Mode is the most frequent value of the distribution. To increase the statistical reliability
of the results obtained (narrowing the confidence interval for the mean), 100,000 simula-
tion runs were conducted in each simulation experiment for different values of reserve D.
Process i (i = 2, 3, 4) can be realized on any day t independently on a unit (wi1 efficiency dis-
tribution), simultaneously with a process (i − 1) preceding it technologically (wi2 efficiency
distribution), with a successor (i + 1) (wi3 efficiency distribution). The assumed efficiency
distribution parameters for processes (model input parameters) are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Parameters (wia , wib , wic ) distributions of daily efficiency in manhours/working day.

Simultaneity of Works on Parameters of the Triangular Distribution (lai ,lbi ,lci )

Process i
Units for Distributions Li1 ,Li2 ,Li3
Only 1 (34, 47, 39)
1
Process 1 (predecessor) and
(30, 40, 33)
2 (successor) simultaneously
Only 2 (50, 70, 55)
2 Process 1 (predecessor) and
(37, 61, 46)
2 (successor) simultaneously
Process 2 (predecessor) and
(43, 67, 52)
3 (successor) simultaneously
Only 3 (88, 118, 94)
3 Process 2 (predecessor) and
(65, 98, 77)
3 (successor) simultaneously
Process 3 (predecessor) and
(75, 107, 88)
4 (successor) simultaneously
Only 4 (63, 97, 80)
4 Process 3 (predecessor) and
(52, 80, 60)
4 (successor) simultaneously
Process 4 (predecessor) and
(58, 90, 68)
5 (successor) simultaneously
Only 5 (25, 36, 30)
5
Process 4 (predecessor) and
(18, 30, 24)
5 (successor) simultaneously

The simulation tests were carried out for the reserve value of Di(i + 1) in the range
of 0.4 to 1.0, and for the sake of simplification of the analyzed issue, it was assumed
Di(i + 1) = const. for every i. As a result, the average project duration time and the average
length of employment of working crews realizing subsequent technological processes were
calculated. The results are summarized in Table 3.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 9 of 13

Table 3. The dependence of the project duration time and working time of working crews on the
time reserve.

Variant Reserve Project Duration Process Duration Ti [Days]

m D (Days) 1 2 3 4 5
1 0.4 107.434 64.617 77.767 72.588 74.931 79.893
2 0.5 108.968 63.759 76.422 70.780 73.889 78.990
3 0.6 111.715 63.441 75.158 68.613 72.014 78.146
4 0.7 114.748 63.124 74.066 67.084 70.380 77.622
5 0.8 117.871 62.868 73.195 65.300 69.026 77.323
6 0.9 121.260 62.537 72.337 64.232 67.529 76.849
7 1.0 124.746 62.268 71.729 63.604 67.091 76.644

The influence of the choice of the reserve size Di(i+1) on the quality of the obtained
solution can be assessed using the value of the criterion function, which can be equated
with the penalty for extending the average duration of the project beyond the agreed
deadline and extending the working time of the working crews:

Ww = w1 · ( Tm − Tmin ) + ∑ w2i · ( Tmaxi − Ti ), (5)

where: w1 is the weight (cost) of extending the project duration over the assumed Tmin
value, w2i is the weight (cost) of extending the working time of the crew realizing the
process j over the assumed Ti value.
The values of Tmin and Tmaxi can be assumed based on the results of simulation
tests—Table 3. In the example, Tmin = 107.434, Tmax1 = 64.617, Tmax2 = 77.767, . . . days.
The example assumes w2i = const. regardless of the type of work being carried out (it
was assumed that the unit labor cost of the crews is similar).
Three cases were analyzed:
1. The duration of the project realization is crucial for the contractor, and they are ready
to incur additional costs caused by extending the work of the working crews; hence,
Sustainability 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 13
w1 = 0.9 and w2 = 0.1 (1st set of weights);
2. The directive deadline of the project is distant, and the contractor aims to reduce the
costs of the crews work; hence, w1 = 0.1 and w2 = 0.9 (2nd set of weights);
reserve between processes and, consequently, the dates of starting subsequent
3. Intermediate solution: weights equal to 0.6 and 0.4 (3rd set of weights).
technological process lines. When striving to shorten the project time as much as possible,
The results
one should take intoare presented
account in Figure
a significant 3.
increase in the value of the criterion function.

30

25

20
1st set of weights
Penalty amount

15
2nd set of weights

10

3rd set of weights

5

0
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Reserve D

Figure 3. The impact of the reserve value on the value of the criterion function (cost) for three sets of
Figure 3. The impact of the reserve value on the value of the criterion function (cost) for three sets
ofweights.
weights.

The triangular distribution of daily productivity in the example was arbitrarily

assumed. In reality, the type of distribution is unknown. In the extreme case, it may
assume a quasi-uniform (E2 in Figure 4) or a quasi-delta shape (E3 in Figure 4), which
 20
1st set of weights

Penalty amount
15
2nd set of weights
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 10 of 13
10

3rd set of weights

In5the analyzed example, thanks to the introduction of overlapping, it was possible to
reduce the average duration of the project by approximately 13.9% from 124.746 to 107.434
days. This effect was achieved by increasing the total average working time of working
0
crews by about 0.4
8.3%, 0.5
from 341.336
0.6
to 369.796
0.7
days.
0.8
The analysis
0.9
of
1.0
the results for different
contractor preferences (different values of weights)
Reserve D
may be helpful in choosing the variant
of carrying out the works consisting in determining the amount of the time reserve between
processes and, consequently, the dates of starting subsequent technological process lines.
Figure 3. The impact of the reserve value on the value of the criterion function (cost) for three sets
When striving to shorten the project time as much as possible, one should take into account
of weights.
a significant increase in the value of the criterion function.
The
Thetriangular
triangulardistribution
distributionofof daily
dailyproductivity
productivityin the example
in the examplewas was
arbitrarily as-
arbitrarily
sumed. In reality, the type of distribution is unknown. In the extreme
assumed. In reality, the type of distribution is unknown. In the extreme case, it may case, it may assume
aassume
quasi-uniform (E2 in Figure
a quasi-uniform (E2 in4) Figure
or a quasi-delta shape (E3shape
4) or a quasi-delta in Figure(E3 4), which differ
in Figure in
4), which
mean
differand variance
in mean andfrom the assumed
variance from the triangular distribution
assumed triangular (E1 in Figure
distribution (E1 in4).Figure
In further
4). In
simulation studies, the E2 distribution was approximated by
further simulation studies, the E2 distribution was approximated by a uniform a uniform distribution on the
interval (la , lb )on
distribution and
thethe E2 distribution
interval (la, lb) andbythea E2
constant value that
distribution by a is equal tovalue
constant the mode
that isofequal
the
triangular distribution. The results of the sensitivity analysis of the effect of distribution
to the mode of the triangular distribution. The results of the sensitivity analysis of the
type on the construction project duration are shown in Table 4.
effect of distribution type on the construction project duration are shown in Table 4.

E1
f(l) E2
E3

la lc lb

Figure4.4.Examples
Figure Examplesofofpossible
possibleprobability
probabilitydistribution
distributionfunctions.
functions.

Table4.4.The
Table Therelationship
relationshipbetween
betweenthe
thesample
sampleproject
projectduration
duration(days)
(days)and
andthe
thetype
typeofofconstruction
construction
processes’
processes’probability
probabilitydistribution
distribution(days).
(days).

Variant Reserve TypeofofDistribution

Type Distribution
Variant m Reserve D
m D E1
E1 E2E2 E3E3
11 0.4
0.4 107.434
107.434 106.543
106.543 109.000
109.000
22 0.5
0.5 108.968
108.968 107.965
107.965 110.000
110.000
3 0.6 111.715 110.791 113.000
4 0.7 114.748 113.709 116.000
5 0.8 117.871 116.789 119.000
6 0.9 121.260 120.189 122.000
7 1.0 124.746 123.590 126.000

Assuming a triangular distribution may result in an error of no more than 2.5% in

estimating project duration.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

High competition in the construction market requires the contractor to prepare an
offer that meets the investor’s expectations as much as possible. One of the key factors of
competitive advantage is the realization of construction projects within short time limits. A
reduction of the project duration can be achieved by using organizational methods such
as overtime work, increasing the number of working crews, or allowing parallel work
of working crews on working units. However, the contractor, when preparing the offer,
must not neglect the impact of schedule compression measures on the cost of the works.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 11 of 13

The impact of risk factors, such as weather conditions or workers’ absence, mean that the
daily efficiency of working crews is not a deterministic value as well as the duration of
construction processes. Currently, there are no analytical solutions for a multipath case
with stochastic durations, and the exact compression can only be calculated by computer
simulation. Therefore, as a partial conclusion, accelerating the schedule requires at least a
minimum consideration of the probabilistic dimension.
The presented simulation model makes it possible to study the influence of the simul-
taneity of processes on the average duration of a construction project and the working time
of working crews with the assumed variability of daily efficiency of working crews. It can
be used as a tool to support the work of construction managers and to determine the start-
ing dates of working crews taking into account the random condition of the construction
project realization.
Choosing the optimal amount of overlap between successive processes on the basis of
the assumed aggregation objective function, which is a compromise between the duration
of the entire construction project and the sum of the working crews’ working times, allows
for the development of a deterministic schedule of construction works. Depending on the
construction manager’s willingness to accept risk, the schedule can be developed based on
average values or mode of the distribution L of daily productivity. The daily output can be
determined by the condition 1 − K = P( L ≤ l ) which means that the planner assumes a
probability K that the daily productivity will not be less than l.
The developed schedule allows for the calculation of the planned duration of the
project, and conducting simulation studies, by analogy with the random simulation method
for the PERT network and allows for the estimation of the probability of its fulfillment.
The direction of further research should be the expansion of the simulator with
additional options most often introduced in a fast-track project, e.g., overtime work. At a
later stage, simulation studies should be combined with optimization methods. This will
enable separately determining the reserve of the work front for each pair of technological
process lines (pairs of predecessors and successors). In addition, it will be possible to
analyze the impact of the dates of starting the sequences on the continuity of working
crews. The presented simulation model can be easily adapted to the analysis of non-
repetitive non-uniform construction projects

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.B. and Ł.R.; methodology, S.B.; data curation, S.B. and
Ł.R.; software, S.B.; writing—original draft, Ł.R. and S.B.; writing—review and editing, Ł.R. and S.B.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This work was funded under the grant “Subvention for Science” (MEiN), project no.
FN-10/2021.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from the
corresponding author by request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. PMI Standards Committee. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge; Project Management Institute: Worcester, MA,
USA, 2000.
2. Demeulemeester, E.L.; Herroelen, W. Project Scheduling: A Research Handbook; International Series in Operations Research &
Management Science; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-1-4020-7051-8.
3. Hajdu, M. Network Scheduling Techniques for Construction Project Management; Nonconvex Optimization and Its Applications;
Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997; ISBN 978-0-7923-4309-7.
4. Tomczak, M.; Jaśkowski, P. New Approach to Improve General Contractor Crew’s Work Continuity in Repetitive Construction
Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2020, 146, 04020043. [CrossRef]
5. Hosny, A.; Nik-Bakht, M.; Moselhi, O. Workspace Planning in Construction: Non-Deterministic Factors. Autom. Constr. 2020, 116,
103222. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 12 of 13

6. Tomczak, M. Modeling of the Harmonization Method for Executing a Multi-Unit Construction Project. Open Eng. 2019, 9, 282–291.
[CrossRef]
7. Rzepecki, Ł.; Jaśkowski, P. Application of Game Theory against Nature in Supporting Bid Pricing in Construction. Symmetry
2021, 13, 132. [CrossRef]
8. Kim, K. Generalized Resource-Constrained Critical Path Method to Improve Sustainability in Construction Project Scheduling.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8918. [CrossRef]
9. Yu, M.; Zhu, F.; Yang, X.; Wang, L.; Sun, X. Integrating Sustainability into Construction Engineering Projects: Perspective of
Sustainable Project Planning. Sustainability 2018, 10, 784. [CrossRef]
10. Jaśkowski, P.; Biruk, S. Minimizing the Duration of Repetitive Construction Processes with Work Continuity Constraints.
Computation 2019, 7, 14. [CrossRef]
11. Biruk, S.; Rzepecki, L. Scheduling Repetitive Construction Processes Using the Learning-Forgetting Theory. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater.
Sci. Eng. 2019, 471, 112039. [CrossRef]
12. Radziszewska-Zielina, E.; Sroka, B. Priority Scheduling in the Planning of Multiple-Structure Construction Projects. Arch. Civ.
Eng. 2017, 63, 21–33. [CrossRef]
13. Apollo, M.; Grzyl, B.; Jakubowicz, P. Risk of Delays in Implementation of Building Investment in Urban Conditions in the Aspect
of Historical Background of Its Location. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 471, 112054. [CrossRef]
14. Laufer, A.; Shapira, A.; Goren, I. Implementing an Integrative Approach to Project Schedule Compression. Eng. Constr. Archit.
Manag. 1998, 5, 82–92. [CrossRef]
15. Biruk, S.; Jaskowski, P. Scheduling Linear Construction Projects with Constraints on Resource Availability. Arch. Civ. Eng. 2017,
63, 3–15. [CrossRef]
16. Arık, O.A. Credibility Based Chance Constrained Programming for Project Scheduling with Fuzzy Activity Durations. Int. J.
Optim. Control Theor. Appl. 2019, 9, 208–215. [CrossRef]
17. Biruk, S.; Rzepecki, Ł. Simulation Model for Resource-Constrained Construction Project. Open Eng. 2019, 9, 37. [CrossRef]
18. Sahu, K.; Sahu, M. Cost & Time and Also Minimum Project Duration Using Alternative Method. Int. Rev. Appl. Eng. Res. 2014, 4,
403–412.
19. Georges, N.; Semaan, N.; Rizk, J. Crash: An Automated Tool for Schedule Crashing. Int. J. Sci. 2007, 3, 374–394.
20. Anysz, H.; Krzemiński, M. Cost Approach to the Flow-Shop Construction Scheduling. E3S Web Conf. 2019, 110, 02048. [CrossRef]
21. Moselhi, O. Schedule Compression Using the Direct Stiffness Method. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 2011, 20, 65–72. [CrossRef]
22. Radziszewska-Zielina, E.; Sroka, B. Planning Repetitive Construction Projects Considering Technological Constraints. Open Eng.
2018, 8, 500–505. [CrossRef]
23. O’Regan, N.; Ghobadian, A.; Sims, M. Fast Tracking Innovation in Manufacturing SMEs. Technovation 2006, 26, 251–261. [CrossRef]
24. Bissiri, Y.; Dunbar, S. Resource Allocation Model for a Fast-Tracked Project. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference
on Intelligent Processing and Manufacturing of Materials, IPMM’99 (Cat. No.99EX296), Honolulu, HI, USA, 10–15 July 1999;
Volume 1, pp. 635–640.
25. Ng, T.; Cheung, S.O.; Kumaraswamy, M.M.; Choy, K.K.M. Selection of Activities to Be Crashed for Mitigating Construction
Delays. HKIE Trans. 2004, 11, 42–47. [CrossRef]
26. Biruk, S.; Jaśkowski, P. Selection of the Optimal Actions for Crashing Processes Duration to Increase the Robustness of Construction
Schedules. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8028. [CrossRef]
27. Tomczak, M.; Jaśkowski, P. Crashing Construction Project Schedules by Relocating Resources. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 224522–224531.
[CrossRef]
28. Goldratt, E.M. Critical Chain: A Business Novel; Routledge: London, UK, 2017; ISBN 978-1-351-21896-2.
29. Deacon, H.; Lingen, E. van der The Use of the Critical Path and Critical Chain Methods in the South African Construction
Industry. Acta Structilia 2015, 22, 73–95.
30. Herroelen, W.; Leus, R. On the Merits and Pitfalls of Critical Chain Scheduling. J. Oper. Manag. 2001, 19, 559–577. [CrossRef]
31. Yang, Q.; Lu, T.; Yao, T.; Zhang, B. The Impact of Uncertainty and Ambiguity Related to Iteration and Overlapping on Schedule
of Product Development Projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2014, 32, 827–837. [CrossRef]
32. Koyuncu, E.; Erol, R. PSO Based Approach for Scheduling NPD Projects Including Overlapping Process. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2015,
85, 316–327. [CrossRef]
33. Wang, J.; Lin, Y.-I. An Overlapping Process Model to Assess Schedule Risk for New Product Development. Comput. Ind. Eng.
2009, 57, 460–474. [CrossRef]
34. Roemer, T.A.; Ahmadi, R. Concurrent Crashing and Overlapping in Product Development. Oper. Res. 2004, 52, 606–622.
[CrossRef]
35. Hau Yee, S.; Murata, T. Risk Assessment of New Product Development Process with Concurrent Engineering Based on Stochastic
Network Model. Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. 2019, 7, 133–139.
36. Gerk, J.E.V.; Qassim, R.Y. Project Acceleration via Activity Crashing, Overlapping, and Substitution. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag.
2008, 55, 590–601. [CrossRef]
37. Terwiesch, C.; Loch, C.H. Measuring the Effectiveness of Overlapping Development Activities. Manag. Sci. 1999, 45, 455–465.
[CrossRef]
Sustainability 2021, 13, 5795 13 of 13

38. Meier, C.; Yassine, A.A.; Browning, T.R.; Walter, U. Optimizing Time–Cost Trade-Offs in Product Development Projects with a
Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm. Res. Eng. Des. 2016, 27, 347–366. [CrossRef]
39. Ballesteros-Pérez, P. Modelling the Boundaries of Project Fast-Tracking. Autom. Constr. 2017, 84, 231–241. [CrossRef]
40. Dehghan, R.; Ruwnapura, J.Y. Model of Trade-Off between Overlapping and Rework of Design Activities. J. Constr. Eng. Manag.
2014, 140, 04013043. [CrossRef]
41. Hossain, M.A.; Chua, D.K.H. Overlapping Design and Construction Activities and an Optimization Approach to Minimize
Rework. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2014, 32, 983–994. [CrossRef]
42. Pena-Mora, F.; Park, M. Dynamic Planning for Fast-Tracking Building Construction Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2001, 127,
445–456. [CrossRef]
43. Berthaut, F.; Grèze, L.; Pellerin, R.; Perrier, N.; Hajji, A. Optimal Resource-Constraint Project Scheduling with Overlapping Modes.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Systems Management IESM’11, Metz, France, 25–27
May 2011; pp. 299–308.
44. Bogus, S.M.; Diekmann, J.E.; Molenaar, K.R.; Harper, C.; Patil, S.; Lee, J.S. Simulation of Overlapping Design Activities in
Concurrent Engineering. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2011, 137, 950–957. [CrossRef]
45. Cho, S.-H.; Eppinger, S.D. A Simulation-Based Process Model for Managing Complex Design Projects. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag.
2005, 52, 316–328. [CrossRef]
46. Srour, I.M.; Abdul-Malak, M.-A.U.; Yassine, A.A.; Ramadan, M. A Methodology for Scheduling Overlapped Design Activities
Based on Dependency Information. Autom. Constr. 2013, 29, 1–11. [CrossRef]
47. Hossain, M.A.; Chua, D.K.H.; Liu, Z. Optimizing Concurrent Execution of Design Activities with Minimum Redesign. J. Comput.
Civ. Eng. 2012, 26, 409–420. [CrossRef]
48. Lim, T.-K.; Yi, C.-Y.; Lee, D.-E.; Arditi, D. Concurrent Construction Scheduling Simulation Algorithm. Comput. Aided Civ.
Infrastruct. Eng. 2014, 29, 449–463. [CrossRef]