Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorTrang Dang
dc.contributor.authorHans-Joachim Bargstädt
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-08T22:27:34Z
dc.date.available2017-05-08T22:27:34Z
dc.date.copyrightFebruary 2016
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.other45766141.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/80948
dc.description.abstractFour-dimensional (4D) schedules have proven successful in planning with their visualization capabilities allowing for coordination and time-space conflict detection. However, when considered in depth, internal aspects of 4D scheduling techniques have not made significant advances from traditional two-dimensional (2D) scheduling. What is missing from 4D scheduling? Why has the interaction between activities, their relationships, and three-dimensional (3D) components not been flexible and adaptive enough? In light of these questions, this paper analyzes the current state of 4D scheduling. The missing element in 4D scheduling is found to be 4D relationships (4DRs). A prototype of 4DRs has therefore been developed to improve 4D scheduling. Finally, guidance on the application of 4DRs in 4D scheduling is presented to help the users come to a thorough understanding of its advantages and disadvantages and potential applications.
dc.publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
dc.title4D Relationships: The Missing Link in 4D Scheduling
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume142
dc.journal.issue2
dc.journal.titleJournal of Construction Engineering and Management
dc.identifier.doi10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001007
dc.treeJournal of Construction Engineering and Management:;2016:;Volume ( 142 ):;issue: 002
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record