Olano Alarcon Razuri 2009 Understanding the Relationship Between Planning Reliability and Schedule Performance Presentation

UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PLANNING RELIABILITY

AND SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE

RICARDO OLANOProject Superintendent at Freeport McMoran Americas. Perú.

LUIS F. ALARCÓNProfessor of Civil Engineering, School of Engineeri ng ,Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, C hile.

CARLOS RAZURIM.Sc. School of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad C atólica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

17th International Conference of theInternational Group for Lean ConstructionJuly 15th -17th 2009,Taipei, Taiwan

IGLC

17 T

AIP

EI

IGLC

17 T

AIP

EI

17th International Conference of the International Group for Lean ConstructionJuly 15th -17th 2009,Taipei, Taiwan

Introduction

• Is the Earned-Value Method an Enemy of Work Flow? (Yong-Woo and Ballard, 2000)

• What can Learned from Studies on Delay in Construction? (AlSehaimi and Koskela, 2008)


3

Project Feature: New HighwayProject Feature: New Highway


Project Feature: New Highway

• 7.1 Km of highway

• Budget about on the US$ 7 million • Execution schedule of up to 44 weeks.

• The main volumes of work are:– an structure of asphaltic pavement of 7,500

m3 ;

– 2,000 m3 of concrete works;– 494,875 m3 of earthworks, which included

330,627 m3 of rock excavation with explosives.


5

Project Feature: Leaching PadProject Feature: Leaching Pad


Project Feature: Leaching Pad

• 48 million m3 of capacity• budget about US$ 20 million • schedule of construction of up to 60 weeks • The main volumes of work are:

– 1´980,556 m3 of earthworks;– 600,986 m2 of geosynthetic;

– 22,6 Km of HDPE pipe installation;


Projects Features

• Both projects were developed in Peru, in middle of: – adverse weather conditions, – strikes,

– possibility to find archaeological remains, – strict governmental control for the use of

explosives,

– uncertain soil conditions, and – changing market conditions.


Project Control Methodology

• Weekly measurement of performance throughout the project execution.

Use of methodologies and tools recommended by:

• The Project Management Institute (PMI): Earned Value Analysis (EVA)

• Lean Construction Institute (LCI): Last Planner System (LPS).


Earned Value Analysis (EVA)

• SPI: Earned Hours / Planned Hours• Earned Hours = QTYToDate (MHRSBDG / QTYBDG)

Where: – QTYToDate = quantity executed to date. – QTYBDG = quantity budgeted. – MHRSBDG = man-hours budgeted.

Man

Hou

rs

Time

Planned hours (baseline)

earned hours


Last Planner System (LPS)

• PPC = ∑ nº of completed activities / ∑ nºof planned activities


Data Collection: Highway Construction

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43

Number of Week

PPC

SPI (

%)

PPC

SPI

Figure 1: Highway Construction - Time Evolution of the PPC and SPI


Data Collection: Leaching Pad

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43

Number of Week

PPC

SPI (

%)

PPC

SPI

Figure 2: Leaching Pad - Time Evolution of the PPC and SPI


Data Analysis: Highway Construction

.434 .113 .529 3.842 .000

.619 .063 9.818 .000

PPC

(Constant)

B Std. Error

UnstandardizedCoefficients

Beta

StandardizedCoefficients

t Sig.

Table 1: Regression Analysis Results

Scatter Plot for SPI and PPC

SPI= 0.434xPPC + 0.619R2 = 0.28

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

0.10 0.30 0.50 0.70 0.90PPC

SPI

Figure 3: Highway Construction – Scatter Plot for SPI and PPC

R = 0.529


Data Analysis: Leaching Pad

.156 .061 .397 2.562 .015

.844 .042 20.332 .000

PPC

(Constant)

B Std. Error

UnstandardizedCoefficients

Beta

StandardizedCoefficients

t Sig.

Scatter Plot for SPI and PPC

SPI = 0.156xPPC + 0.844R2 = 0.158

0.60

0.65

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00PPC

SPI

Figure 3: Leaching Pad – Scatter Plot for SPI and PPC

Table 2: Regression Analysis Results

R = 0.397


Relationship Between PPC and Overall Schedule

Project SPI (av)

PPC (av) R Comment

Leaching Pad 0.95 66% 0.397 Project completed on time

Highway 0.84 51% 0.529 Increased time in 16%

Table 2: Relationship between SPI, PPC and R


CONCLUSIONS

• It has been confirmed, that workflow reliability and schedule performance were statistically significantly correlated.

• The methodologies of project management such as the EVA and production management as the LPS can be complemented and managed together to ensure project success.

• Like the findings of Liu and Ballard (2008), the understanding of this relation can help the contracts administrators to demonstrate responsibilities at the time to support a claim for extension of time.

UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PLANNING RELIABILITY

AND SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE: A CASE

STUDY

RICARDO OLANOProject Superintendent at Freeport McMoran Americas. Perú.

LUIS F. ALARCÓNProfessor of Civil Engineering, School of Engineeri ng ,Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, C hile.

CARLOS RAZURIM.Sc. School of Engineering, Pontificia Universidad C atólica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

17th International Conference of theInternational Group for Lean ConstructionJuly 15th -17th 2009,Taipei, Taiwan

IGLC

17 T

AIP

EI

IGLC

17 T

AIP

EI

Documents

Olano Alarcon Razuri 2009 Understanding the Relationship Between Planning Reliability and Schedule Performance Presentation