Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 23

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1.

GENERAL

Construction projects are characterized by their complexity, uniqueness, and the fact that
there are various types of constraints imposed by stakeholders. This includes numerous
constraints of various types, including contractual due dates, resource limitations, safety,
financial, and managerial constraints. Satisfying project constraints is one of the most
challenging tasks in the construction scheduling process. The practicality of a schedule
depends considerably on the degree to which these constraints are satisfied. Previous
scheduling systems primarily employed the critical path method to produce schedules. CPM
in its present form has proven inadequate for the consideration of constraints in real-life
construction projects. This paper views construction scheduling as a constraint satisfaction
problem. CSP gradually generates valid schedules using constraint propagation and constraint
consistency checking techniques. These techniques are useful for handling constraints that are
predetermined as well as those that become apparent during schedule development. A CSPbased scheduling method has been developed to facilitate expressive constraint representation
and to provide effective generation of practical, valid project schedules.
The nature of the constraints varies. The most commonly encountered constraints in the case
of high rise buildings includes time, technological, managerial, logistic, resource and space
constraints. Technological constraints, such as the placement of formwork and rebar must be
completed before pouring concrete, are rigid. Some constraints are imposed to ensure that
certain activities cannot be executed concurrently for safety reasons. These constraints do not
specifically dictate which activity is the predecessor or successor. They can be classified as
conditional constraints. Organizational policies can be regarded as managerial constraints.
Some of them are rigid while others may be treated as preferential (i.e., soft constraints).
Constraints play an important role in the scheduling generation process. Rigid constraints
impose a fixed logic, whereas conditional and preferential ones signifies flexible and multiple
logics in the project network. The quality of schedules produced depends largely on the
degree to which project constraints are satisfied.
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Construction scheduling has been an active research area over the last five decades. Many of
the previous efforts use the critical path method (CPM) to determine the overall project
duration as well as the activity start and finish times. CPM is based on the assumption that the
duration and cost of activities in a project network are deterministic. Traditional CPM
scheduling methods have proven to be helpful only when the project deadline is not fixed and
the resources are not constrained by either availability or time. These methods have been
widely criticized for their inability to cope with non technological constraints. In addition,
CPM-based methods can primarily handle a predetermined and rigid logic. In the later stage,
Precedence Network Analysis (PNA) framework is developed to manage constraints that
arise from static and dynamic construction requirements. This PNA technique is commonly
used for time planning of construction projects. They introduce a concept called meta
intervals to represent the complex requirements that cause conditional relationships. The PNA
framework, however, does not address the treatment of constraints in the situation in which
they cannot be satisfied.
In this study, a new scheduling method called Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) method
is discussed with the intent of overcoming this major drawback inherent to most CPM-based
methods. The proposed method views construction scheduling as a constraint satisfaction
problem (CSP). CSP views this problem as a set of decision variables, each having a set of
possible values and a set of constraints restricting the values to variables. The task of CSP is
to instantiate the variables with the values while satisfying all the constraints. Efficient CSP
formulation and solution generation techniques are described. A practical case example that
incorporates both technological and non technological constraints is used to demonstrate the
practicality of the proposed method
1.2.

OBJECTIVES
To develop a comprehensive knowledge about the various categories of constraints
faced in a construction project.
To know about the various scheduling processes employed in construction projects.
To identify the inadequacies of construction scheduling using Critical Path Method

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

To develop a comprehensive knowledge about the construction scheduling using the


constraint satisfaction problem.
To compare the schedules developed using Critical Path Method and Constraint
Satisfaction problem Method.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Construction projects are subjected to numerous constraints of various types including
contractual due dates, resource limitations, safety, financial, and managerial constraints.
Satisfying project constraints is one of the most challenging tasks in the construction
scheduling process. The practicality of a schedule depends considerably on the degree to
which these constraints are satisfied. For the literature review related to the current study,
articles from the following journals were reviewed.
According to Pasit Lorterapong and Mongkol Ussavadilokrit (2013), Construction
projects are characterized by their complexity, uniqueness, and the fact that there are various
types of constraints imposed by stakeholders. The nature of these constraints varies. They
identified six types of constraints that are commonly encountered in most high-rise building
constructions, including time, technological, managerial, logistic, resource, and space
constraints. Technological constraints, such as the placement of formwork and rebar must be
completed before pouring concrete, are rigid. Some constraints are imposed to ensure that
certain activities cannot be executed concurrently for safety reasons. These constraints do not
specifically dictate which activity is the predecessor or successor. They can be classified as
conditional constraints. Organizational policies can be regarded as managerial constraints.
Some of them are rigid while others may be treated as preferential (i.e., soft constraints).
Constraints play an important role in the scheduling generation process. Rigid constraints
impose a fixed logic, whereas conditional and preferential ones signify flexible (i.e., soft) and
multiple logics in the project network. The quality of schedules produced depends largely on
the degree to which project constraints are satisfied.
Claude Le Pape defined Constraint Satisfaction Problem as a programming method based on
three principles. The problem to be solved is explicitly represented in terms of variables and
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

constraints on these variables. In a constraint-based program, this explicit problem definition


is clearly separated from the algorithm used to solve the problem. Given a constraint-based
definition of the problem to be solved and a set of decisions, themselves translated into
constraints, a purely deductive process referred to as constraint propagation is used to
propagate the consequences of the constraints. This process is applied each time a new
decision is made, and is clearly separated from the decision-making algorithm. The overall
constraint propagation process results from the combination of several local and incremental
processes, each of which is associated with a particular constraint or a particular constraint
class.
Construction scheduling has been an active research area over the last five decades. Many of
the previous efforts use the critical path method (CPM) to determine the overall project
duration as well as the activity start and finish times. CPM is based on the assumption that the
duration and cost of activities in a project network are deterministic (Sakka and El-Sayegh
2007). Traditional CPM scheduling methods have proven to be helpful only when the project
deadline is not fixed and the resources are not constrained by either availability or time
(Hegazy 1999). These methods have been widely criticized for their inability to cope with
nontechnological constraints (Jaafari 1984; Pultar 1990; El-Bibany 1997; Choo et al.
1999). In addition, CPM-based methods can primarily handle a predetermined and rigid
logic. Chua and Yeoh (2011) develop a PDM++ framework to manage constraints that arise
from static and dynamic construction requirements. They introduce a concept called
metaintervals to represent the complex requirements that cause conditional relationships. The
PDM++ framework, however, does not address the treatment of constraints in the situation in
which they cannot be satisfied.
Pasit Lorterapong and Mongkol Ussavadilokrit (2013) developed a new scheduling
method with the intent of overcoming this major drawback inherent to most CPM-based
methods. The proposed method views construction scheduling as a constraint satisfaction
problem (CSP). CSP views this problem as a set of decision variables, each having a set of
possible values and a set of constraints restricting the values to variables. The task of CSP is
to instantiate the variables with the values while satisfying all the constraints. Efficient CSP
formulation and solution generation techniques are described. A practical case example that

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

incorporates both technological and non technological constraints is used to demonstrate the
practicality of the proposed method.

CHAPTER 3
CONSTRAINT SATISFACTION PROBLEM
3.1. CSP AN OVERVIEW
In general, a Constraint Satisfaction Problem or CSP is defined by a set of variables Xi = {x1,
x2, x3,..........xn}, and a set of constraints C1, C2, C3.........Cm. Each variable Xi has a non empty
domain Di of possible values. Each constraint is defined over a subset of variables, and it
restricts the combination of values that these variables can assume. A CSP can be visualized
as a constraint graph consisting of nodes and arrows. A state of the problem is defined by an
assignment of values to some or all of the variables, {Xi = vi, Xj = vj,.}. The nodes of the
graph correspond to variables, and the arcs correspond to project constraints. Typical
variables in the scheduling problem are the start and finish times of project activities.
Variables SA and FA represent the start and finish times of activity A, respectively. Scheduling
constraints can be imposed on the scheduling variables introduced in two formats
unary or non unary. The unary constraint is used to restrain a set of possible values for each
variable. The non unary constraint, on the other hand, is applied between any two scheduling
variables. Interactions among scheduling variables and constraints are modeled using a
project graph. The figure given below shows an example of a project constraint graph
consisting of four activities A, B, C, and D, and their representative scheduling variables. The
figure shows the way in which unary and non unary constraints are imposed on the

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

scheduling variables. For instance, the unary constraint S A > 20 indicates that the domain of
SA must be greater than day 20.
The non unary constraints SA + 2 = FA, FB SC, and SB + 5 = FB, each represented by an arc,
signify a constraint from one variable to another. Conditional constraints, such as activity C
can be performed after A or B is finished, can effectively be incorporated using a node OR
in the constraint graph.
In some situations, it is possible that activities A and B cannot be executed simultaneously.
Their precedence relationships are interchangeable. This situation generates a condition by
which A can precede B or vice versa.
Logical operators such as , , =, and are used to specify the relationships between
variables. A solution to the CSP problem is the assignment of a value from its domain to
every variable in such a way that all imposed constraints are satisfied. Partial solutions are
progressively generated and tested through the use of CSP and search techniques. Two widely
used CSP techniques, node and arc consistency checking, are employed to ensure that all
imposed constraints are locally satisfied. In a network-type problem, however, the assignment
of a value to one variable can affect the domain of the others. A technique called constraint
propagation is then used to disseminate the effect of such an assignment to others. The
effectiveness of any CSP depends on how well constraints are represented and the techniques
used to propagate them.

Figure. 3.1. Project Constraint Graph (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)


Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

3.2. DEVELOPMENT OF CSP BASED SCHEDULING METHOD


This study demonstrates a newly developed CSP-based scheduling method capable of
satisfying various types of constraints encountered in construction projects. The proposed
method utilizes Allens constraint modeling techniques and employs widely used searching
techniques to produce schedules that satisfy project constraints. Activity start (S i) and finish
(Fi) times are set as scheduling variables. Project constraints that are predetermined and rigid
as well as those conditional and situational in nature can be incorporated. Tables 3.1 and 3.2
show the scheduling variables and constraint representations utilized in the proposed method.
Table 3.1. Scheduling Variables Representation (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
Scheduling Variables

CSP Model

Remarks

Activity Start (Si)

Si = [l , u]

L, u are lower and upper bounds of Si

Activity Finish (Fi)

Fi = [l , u]

L, u are lower and upper bounds of Fi

Table. 3.2. Scheduling Constraint Representations (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)


Unary
Constraint

Examples

Constrain
t

Time

Project start and finish dates,


activity duration, milestones
Precedence relationships between

Non
unary
Constrain
t

Conditiona
l
Constraint

activities exists due to requirements


Technological

for structural integrity, regulations,

and other technical requirements


signifies that the activities must

Managerial

take place in a particular sequence


Managerial
constraints
are

dependency relationships emerged


because

of

decision

by

management. This often occurs in


the form of policy or preferences
required by clients preferential
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

constraints allow multiple planning


alternatives
Logistic constraints are numerous
interferences between configuration
of
Logistic

construction

construction

work

site
such

and
as

in

consequence disorganized material


storage causes extra time for the
search of material or to rearrange
storage areas
Site safety rules: pipe welding
activities must be performed in

Safety

isolation

because

it

produces

sparks, which might be hazardous


for others
Resource constraints relate to lack
Resource

Space

of needed resources, which may


force

parallel

activities

to

be

performed in sequence
Space constraints are introduced to
prevent any trade interference

Each variable is characterized by its domain interval (i.e., its lower and upper bounds [l, u]).
CSP scheduling involves modifying the domains of all scheduling variables by successively
imposing project constraints in a stepwise manner. A CSP scheduling procedure is generally
performed in the five stages: initialization, propagation, backtracking search, relaxation, and
realization.
Stage 1: Initialization
Formulate the problem by identifying project constraints and activities. Scheduling variables
(i.e., Si and Fi) are generated. The overall project duration specified in the contract is used to
generate the initial domain values [l, u] of Si and Fi.
Stage 2: Propagation

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Impose project constraints input in Stage 1 in a sequential manner. The order in which those
constraints are imposed is not restricted. To facilitate faster schedule generation, however, it
is recommended that activity duration constraints are imposed first. Then, proceed with rigid
constraints (i.e., constraints that cannot be relaxed such as technological, safety, and
managerial), conditional, and soft constraints, respectively. The widely known depth-first
search algorithm is employed to identify the relevant constraints. Each constraint is checked
to ensure its consistency. The successful constraint is then propagated to the scheduling
variables involved where their domain values are updated (i.e., being reduced). Each time a
new domain value of any scheduling variable is obtained, the related node and arc checks
must be performed to ensure consistency.
Stage 3: Backtracking Search
In the situation in which no possible domain values can be found, a backtracking search is
performed to locate the decision point at which a non explored alternative path exists (i.e., the
OR gate in the project constraint graph). Stage 2 is then repeated for the new path.
Stage 4: Relaxation
In the situation in which a valid schedule cannot be obtained, some constraints will have to be
relaxed. This stage allows planners to involve in the constraint relaxation process. The newly
relaxed constraint must then be re-propagated by repeating Stage 2. The scheduling process
ends when all project constraints have been satisfied and S i and Fi have been assigned valid
domain intervals. Upon exhausting all paths in the constraint graph, and still, some
constraints are not satisfied, it can be stated that the project is so constrained that no valid
schedule can be obtained.
Stage 4: Realization
If a solution exists, the next step is to convert the final domains of each Si and F i to the
common activity start and finish times, [ES i, EFi], respectively. Accordingly, ESi takes the
lower bound of Si, while EFi assumes the lower bound of Fi. Similarly, the latest possible
timeline of activity i, [LSi, LFi], can be determined using the upper bounds of Si and Fi.

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Figure. 3.2. CSP based scheduling Algorithm (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)

CHAPTER 4
CASE STUDY
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

10

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

4.1. DEFINITION
The management of a general hospital has decided to construct new buildings just opposite to
the old buildings. The figure given below shows the site layout of this project. A solid line
divides the existing buildings from the new construction area. At present, the existing road R1
and Gates G1 and G2 are used to serve the hospital, while G3 is used as a spare gate. The
scope of the work described in this case study includes overhauling the existing road R1
(Sections 1-1, 1-2, 1-3) and constructing two new roads, R2 (Sections 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-4) and
R3 (Sections 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5). The management of this hospital demands that existing
hospital buildings must be fully accessible during the twenty-week construction period (i.e.,
time constraint). In other words, at least one road and one gate must be available to serve the
hospital at any time. Decisions regarding which road and which gates be in-service at what
time are left to the authority at the project level. Such a policy can be regarded as managerial
constraints. These managerial constraints have created several planning alternatives for this
project. Construction activities that take place in front of any gate necessitates the closure of
that gate. For demonstration purposes, only the time, managerial, and the common
technological constraints are imposed on the case example.

Figure. 4.1. Project Site Layout (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)

Table. 4.1. Technological Constraints among Project Activities


Dept. Of Civil Engineering

11

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Road Sections
R1

R2

R3

1-1
1-2
1-3
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
34
35

Seminar Report - 2014

(Pasit Lorterapong et.al . 2013)


Duration (Di)
Predecessors
(weeks)
2
2
11
3
1-2
2
4
21
3
22
2
2-3
4
21
5
31
3
32
2
33
1
3-4

Remarks
Overhaul the
existing road
Construct a new
road

Construct a new
road

4.2. SOLUTIONS GENERATED USING CPM


The CPM has been used to generate project plans in this case example. The CPM allows
planners to explore one project plan at a time. To enable a realistic schedule, however, the
planner must generate a comprehensive project network as input for CPM calculations. A
schedule is then generated and assessed for its practicality. Alternative schedules necessitate
various degrees of modifications to the original project network. The previous process can be
repeated in a trial manner until acceptable schedules are obtained. The CPM solutions for the
case example are described subsequently
Trial 1: It is decided that G1 and G2 will be opened such that construction can begin at R2
and R3. Upon completion of R3, G1 and G3 will be in service and construction can begin on
R1. The calculated project duration is 24 weeks, 4 weeks greater than the required 20 week
project duration. Therefore, this alternative is not acceptable.
Trial 2: Similar to the first trial, construction will start on R2 and R3 simultaneously. This
time, R1 will start once R2 is finished. The construction of section R3 (3-5) requires the
closing of G2. To maintain the given managerial constraints, section R1 (1-3) can begin once
section R3 (3-5) is completed. CPM calculations yield 20 - week project duration. This

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

12

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

alternative satisfies the given project constraints. Actually, the planning process can end once
a satisfied schedule is discovered. More alternatives can, however, be explored if desired.
Trial 3: Suppose that the planner would like to explore other planning option based on Trial
2. This time, it is decided that R1 (1-3) is the predecessor of R3 (3-5). The project duration is
calculated to be 19 weeks (i.e., one week shorter than the required project duration).

Figure 4.2. Project networks using the Critical Path Method :


(a) Project Network Trial 1; (b) Project Network Trial 2 ; (c) Project Network Trial 3
(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)

As illustrated, the critical path method can be employed to calculate project schedules.
However, the challenging task of generating a project network that satisfies all project
constraints is still borne by the planner. This task is very challenging, especially for the
projects that are complicated, subjecting it to numerous and a variety of constraints.
4.3. SOLUTIONS GENERATED USING CSP
The proposed CSP-based scheduling procedure has been applied to the case example.
Technological constraints are also considered along with the other constraints. The
managerial constraints regarding the accessible road and gates needed to maintain the
hospitals functionality are formulated, and their representations modeled in the CSP format
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

13

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

are illustrated in tables 4.2 & 4.3 shows the CSP functions classified by the types of
constraints.
Table 4.2. Managerial Constraints and their CSP representations
(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
Managerial Constraint

Resulting Precedence

Description

Relationship

Constraint Function

Section R1 ( 1 1)can start after


Section R2 (2 4) or Section R3

At least one road (R1, R2 or


R3) must be available to serve

(3-5) has finished


Due to physical constraint, the

the

overhauling of R1 will always

hospital

during

the

begin at section R1 (1 1) and

construction period

F2-4 S1-1 v F3-5 S1-

F1-1 S1-2 , F1-2 S1-3

proceed toward section R1 ( 1


3)

Consequently, Section R1 (1
3) and Section R3 (3 5) cannot

At least one gate (G1 or G2)

be constructed simultaneously.

must be available at any time

[Constructing Section R1 (1 3)

for hospital entrance and exit

caused G1 to be closed while

F3-5 S1-3 v F1-3 S35

constructing Section R3 (3 5)
causes G2 to be closed]

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

14

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Table 4.3. CSP Constraint functions of the Case Study (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
Constraint Number

Constraint Function

Type of Constraint

All Variables 20

Time - related

S2-1 + D2-1 = F2-1

Time - related

S2-2 + D2-2 = F2-2

Time related

S2-3 + D2-3 = F2-3

Time related

S2-4 + D2-4 = F2-4

Time related

S3-1 + D3-1 = F3-1

Time related

S3-2 + D3-2 = F3-2

Time related

S3-3 + D3-3 = F3-3

Time related

S3-4 + D3-4 = F3-4

Time related

10

S3-5 + D3-5 = F3-5

Time related

11

S1-1 + D1-1 = F1-1

Time related

12

S1-2 + D1-2 = F1-2

Time related

13

S1-3 + D1-3 = F1-3

Time related

14

F2-1 S2-2

Technological

15

F2-1 S3-1

Technological

16

F2-2 S2-3

Technological

17

F2-3 S2-4

Technological

18

F3-1 S3-4

Technological

19

F3-2 S3-3

Technological

20

F3-3 S3-4

Technological

21

F3-4 S3-5

Technological

22

F1-1 S1-2

Technological

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

15

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

23

F1-2 S1-3

Technological

24

F2-4 S1-1 v F3-5 S1-1

Managerial

25

F3-5 S1-3 v F1-3 S3-5

Managerial

4.4. SCHEDULE DEVELOPMENT USING THE PROPOSED CSP METHOD


The schedule of the project is developed using the CSP method by following the five
procedural stages.
Stage 1: Initialization
1. Initiate the domain of all activity start and finish times (i.e., Si and Fi) by imposing
Constraint 1 (project duration constraint), resulting in the initial domains of [0, 20] for all
scheduling variables.
Stage 2: Propagation
1. Impose the activity duration constraints (i.e., Constraints 213) on all scheduling variables.
Constraint 2 (i.e., S2-1 + D2-1 = F2-1) is selected for demonstration purposes. The initial
domains of S2-1 and F2-1 obtained from step 1 are [0, 20]. Upon imposing Constraint 2, the
lower bound of S2-1 remains unchanged. The upper bound of S 2-1, however, must be
reduced by 2 weeks (i.e., D2-1 = 2 weeks). Consequently, the upper bound of S2-1 is reduced
to week 18 after constraint propagation, resulting in a newly reduced domain [0, 18]. Node
and arc consistency are then checked to ensure that other constraints associated with S 2-1
are satisfied. Similarly, the upper bound of F2-1 remains unchanged at week 20. The lower
bound of F2-1 is increased by the amount specified by D 2-1, to week 2. The resulting
domains for F2-1 are [2, 20]. This process is repeated for Constraints 313.
2. Next, impose the technological constraints (14 23). Considering, for example, Constraint
14 (i.e., F2-1 S2-2), the domains of F2-1 and S2-2 obtained from the previous process are [2,
20] and [0, 16], respectively. By propagating Constraint 14, the domains of F 2-1 and S2-2 are
further reduced to weeks [2, 16]. Node and arc are checked and found to be consistent.
This propagation is considered to be successful. This process is repeated for Constraints
1523
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

16

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Figure 4.3. Satisfaction of Activity Duration Constraints (Constraint 2)


(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)

Figure 4.4. Satisfaction of Technological Constraints (Constraint 14)


(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
3. Impose managerial constraint (i.e., 24, the service road requirement). To maintain at least
one accessible road during the construction, R1(1 - 1) can start once R 2(2 - 4) or R3(3 - 5)
has completed (i.e., F2-4 S1-1 or F3-5 S1-1). Take, for example, the scenario in which R 1 (1
- 1) can begin once R2 (2 - 4) has finished. The figure given below illustrates the domains
of F2-4 and S1-1 before and after Constraint 24 is propagated. Before propagation, the
domains of F2-4 and S1-1 were [11, 20] and [0, 13], respectively. Constraint 24 (i.e., F 2-4 S1) indicates that the domain of F2-4 must be smaller than or equal to that of S 1-1. As a

result, the domains of both F2-4 and S1-1 are reduced to [11, 13]. Node and arc consistency
is checked to ensure that these new domains do not cause any violation to other
constraints. This process is repeated for Constraint 25.

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

17

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Figure 4.5. Satisfaction of Managerial Constraints (Constraint 14)


(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
Stage 3: Backtracking Search and Stage 4: Relaxation
1. Backtracking search and relaxation are required when any constraint is violated. For this
case, no violation has been encountered. As such, there is no need to perform backtracking
or relaxation.

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

18

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

Figure 4.6. Final Domains of all scheduling variables (Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
Stage 5: Realization
1. Finally, it is necessary to convert the domain of all Si and Fi to their respective start and
finish times. As this figure demonstrates, the final domains of S 2-2 and F2-2 for this
alternative are [2, 3] and [6, 7], respectively. Thus, section 2-2 can start at any time
between the end of weeks 2 and 3, and it can finish at any time between the end of weeks 6
and 7.
2. Combine the domains of the activity start and finish times into early or late Gantt charts.
Figure 4.7 illustrates the resulting early Gantt chart obtained from the combination. As
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

19

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

explained in Stage 5, the early start time (ES) for R 2 (2-2) assumes the lower bound of
domains of S2-2 [2,3], which is day 2. Similarly, the early finish time (EF) takes the lower
bound of F2-2 [6, 7], which is day 6. Figure 4.7 also illustrates the earliest possible start
and finish times of all activities.

Figure 4.7. Resulting earliest possible times for all project activities
(Pasit Lorterapong et.al 2013)
4.5. DISCUSSIONS
Construction projects are well known for their complexities, and they are subject to numerous
constraints of various types. The proposed CSP-based scheduling method focuses on the
satisfaction of project constraints, whereas most CPM-based methods focus on scheduling
activities according to a predefined and fixed logic. As indicated in the case example, CPM
generally requires planners to comprehend all project constraints at the outset of the
scheduling process. These constraints are then used to formulate a project network for
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

20

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

forward and backward CPM calculations. Conditional constraints, such as Road 1 can begin
as soon as Road 2 or Road 3 is finished, cannot be incorporated into one network logic.
Multiple logics will have to be modeled separately in different networks. For large projects,
this process can be time consuming. More importantly, this drawback can limit the
opportunity to obtain schedules of better quality.
The CSP-based scheduling method, on the other hand, allows constraints to be imposed in a
more flexible and expressive manner. The conditional constraints can be effectively
incorporated. The less rigid constraint such as G1 and G2 cannot be closed at the same time
can effectively be modeled. This type of constraint naturally causes multiple logics that
cannot be effectively modeled by CPM-based methods. To produce schedules, the proposed
CSP based method propagates constraints and performs consistency checking to ensure the
production of a valid schedule. When inconsistencies are detected, backtrack searching can
be performed to find an alternative logic

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

21

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
Construction projects are subjected to numerous constraints of various types including
contractual due dates, resource limitations, safety, financial, and managerial constraints.
Satisfying project constraints is one of the most challenging tasks in the construction
scheduling process. The practicality of a schedule depends considerably on the degree to
which these constraints are satisfied. Most scheduling methods based on Critical Path Method
require that all projects constraints should be arranged in to a single logical network for
developing project schedule. CPM in its present form has proven inadequate for the
consideration of constraints in real-life construction projects. This study considered
construction scheduling as a constraint satisfaction problem. CSP gradually generates valid
schedules using constraint propagation and constraint consistency checking techniques. These
techniques are useful for handling constraints that are predetermined as well as those that
become apparent during schedule development. A CSP-based scheduling method has been
developed to facilitate expressive constraint representation and to provide effective
generation of practical, valid project schedules. CSP method can be performed in five stages
initialization, propagation, backtracking search, relaxation, and realization. An application
example is analyzed to illustrate the use of the proposed method and to demonstrate its
capability in comparison to CPM. CSP exhibits a close resemblance to construction
scheduling problems; the variables of the CSP correspond directly to the scheduling
information related to project activities. In addition, CSP allows constraints to be explicitly
expressed and satisfied. This process helps to facilitate the formulation of solutions and the
selection of search algorithms to guide the solution. The present method is superior to CPM
because of its more expressive constraint representations and ability to handle multi logic
project networks. Alternative schedules can be obtained with relative ease. Comparing with
the traditional CPM-based methods, the proposed method has the potential to transform the
Dept. Of Civil Engineering

22

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Construction Scheduling Using Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method

Seminar Report - 2014

way construction schedules are generated and managed. A computerized CSP method
supports humanmachine interactions in generating a more realistic schedule.

REFERENCES
1. Pasit Lorterapong and Mongkol Ussavadilokrit (2013), Construction Scheduling Using
the Constraint Satisfaction Problem Method Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 2013.139 (ASCE), pp. 414 422 (9).
2. Ioana Cobeanu, Vasile Comnac (2012), Multi-Agent Scheduling using Constraint
Satisfaction Problem, 11th International Conference On Development And Application
Systems, pp. 183 186 (4)
3. Chan, W. T., and Hu, H. (2002), Constraint programming approach to precast production
scheduling, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, pp. 513521(9)
4. Liliana Cucu - Grosjean & Olivier Buffet, Global Multiprocessor Real-Time Scheduling
as a Constraint Satisfaction Problem, pp. 01 08
5.

Claude Le Pape, Constraint-Based Scheduling: A Tutorial pp. 01 - 33

Dept. Of Civil Engineering

23

M.E.S.C.E, Kuttippuram

thjkhj

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi