Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation

IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds)

Mathematical Model for Minimizing Idle Resources in Non-Sequential Linear

Construction Project Using Integer Programming
Agung Budiwirawan1, Shu-Shun Liu2*
1
Doctoral Candidate, Graduate School of Eng. Sci. & Tech., National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, No. 123,
Section 3, University Road, Douliou, Taiwan
2
Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, National Yunlin University of Science and
Technology, No. 123, Section 3, University Road, Douliou, Taiwan
Email: liuss@yuntech.edu.tw

Abstract necessary in a construction project because a construction

Resources in construction project are often limited,
expensive, and scarce. Thus, allocating resources to project
activities plays an important role in construction project
management. Getting the shortest project duration sometimes
is not necessary in a construction project because a
construction project usually has a predefined project duration
based on its contract. In the other hand, utilizing resources
efficiently during project execution is more important.
This paper presents an Integer programming (IP) model for
minimizing idle resources in a non-sequential linear
construction project. The model objective is minimizing idle-
resource values among multiple types of resources used in a
construction project within project duration. Constraints are
defined to regulate resource allocation limitations, activities’
precedence relationship, and idle-resource values calculation.
Many types of resources are used in construction project.
Each type of resources has its characteristics such as
procurement value, operational cost, and scarcity value. These
conditions make resource values different among them.
Weighting values are used to calculate uniformed resource
values minimized by the model.
The model was applied to an instance of road-network
resurfacing project. The result was compared to IP model result
for minimizing project duration as a benchmarking model. The
model showed idle resource values of 47 compared to idle
resource values of 69 from the benchmarking model. It
succeeded to minimize idle resource values.
Based on the results, this model can help project managers
in utilizing project’s resources efficiently.
Key words: integer programming, linear scheduling, resource
idleness, road maintenance
Introduction
A. Background
Construction project consists of multiple tasks supporting
each other in certain sequences to achieve the project's goal.
Each of those tasks has its resource requirements to fulfill.
Resource requirements may take many forms. These resources
may be machines, crews, materials, and so on [1]. Resources
are often limited, expensive and scarce. Thus, resource
scheduling’s main purpose, allocating resources to those
activities, plays an important role in construction project
management. This scheduling scheme is called resource-
constrained project scheduling problem (RCPSP).
Getting the shortest project duration sometimes is not
project usually has a predefined project duration based on its
contract. In the other hand, utilizing resources efficiently
during project execution is more important.
Linear construction project execute tasks in linear fashion
and usually require similar operations in each section [2].
production rate for each activity in linear construction project
is significantly influenced by resource availability [3].
Some construction projects have the characteristics of linear
construction projects without predefined sequences. Road-
network resurfacing project is an example of such projects. It
consists of multiple sections (road links), with similar activities
conducted on each section. However, road-network
resurfacing projects differ from regular linear construction
projects in the following ways: each section doesn't have
predefined execution sequence, (2) sections can begin work
without others first being completed, and (3) work on one
section must be completed without any idle time. Such projects
are referred to as non-sequential linear construction projects.
B. Objectives
Based on the characteristics of non-sequential linear
construction projects, this research develops a modified linear
scheduling model which: determines the optimal execution
sequences for each section, can initiate work on a section as
long as resource availability and precedence requirements are
met, can eliminate idle time during work execution, and
minimize idle equipment. Therefore, this research proposes a
non-sequential linear scheduling method (Non-sequential
LSM) to accommodate these characteristics.
C. Literature review
Main consideration of traditional RCPSP is how to deal with
a set of n activities which need to be scheduled to minimize the
project completion time and meet two main constraints: the
precedence constraint, and the limited availability of resources
[4].
Traditional RCPSP uses given and normally constant
resource allocation over the duration of each activity. Kolisch
et al [5] proposed a different model than the traditional RCPSP
in which the resource allocation must be determined. This
resulted in different “work profile” which was not limited to a
rectangular shape as the traditional RCPSP has. Fundeling and
Trautmann [6] introduced “work content” related to “work
profile”. It was defined as the total amount of resource required
to finish an activity. For more general uses, ``Resource profile''
and ``resource requirement'' are used instead of ``work profile''
and ``work content'' respectively since resources are not
restricted only to human resources.

ISBN 978-1-5090-4897-7 - 869

Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation
IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds)

Computer technology has opened many opportunities in collecting and disposing work of stripped asphalt. In this model,
solving large-scale and difficult mathematical models several dump trucks serve one asphalt milling machine to
efficiently. Taking advantage of this condition, new ensure the asphalt stripping work will not be delayed due to the
mathematical models for RCPSP were formulated and absence of the dump trucks.
extensively compared by experts [7]–[9].
Some researches on RCPSP have different objective than
minimizing project completion time. Liu and Wang [10]
introduced a RCPSP model based on constraint programming
using combinatorial optimization algorithm. This model
optimizes project cash flow and maximizes project profit from
the perspective of contractors. Two stage profit optimization
model for linear scheduling problem was also introduced by
Liu and Wang [11] using constraint programming method. The
objective of this model are (1) optimizing the primary objective
(project profit), and (2) minimizing total interruption time,
given the optimized value of the primary objective. This model
could achieve maximum project profit and minimizing total
interruption time to ensure the work continuity of repetitive Fig. 1 Work sequence
activities. Chen and Weng [12] and Ghoddousi et al [13]
proposed time-cost trade-off resource constrained scheduling Asphalt resurfacing is started after the asphalt stripping work
models based on genetic algorithm. These models intended to finished. Asphalt finishers (AF), pneumatic rollers (PR), and
achieve an optimum condition between project completion dump trucks (DT) are used in this asphalt resurfacing work.
time and cost that suitable to the condition of the project. Asphalt finishers do the overlaying work of the new pavement
Numerous techniques have been developed in LSM. Several surface. Pneumatic rollers compact the new pavement surface.
researches have adopted mathematical programming such as Several pneumatic rollers serve one asphalt finisher to achieve
linear programming and integer programming [10], [11]. the same speed between overlaying new pavement surface and
Selinger [12] utilized dynamic programming approach for compacting it. Dump trucks supply hot-mixed asphalt from an
minimizing project duration for linear construction project for asphalt mixing plant to the asphalt finisher. Several dump
the first time. Other researches have utilized dynamic trucks are also dedicated to one asphalt finisher to make a
programming in minimizing total cost or project duration by continuous supply of hot-mixed asphalt.
integrating cost, time categories, or heuristic rules [13]–[17]. Road marking is the last work to conduct in each section.
Rapid development of computer-based techniques encouraged Road marking is begun after the asphalt resurfacing work
researchers to use artificial intelligence techniques such as finished. Road marking machines (ME) are assigned in this
genetic algorithms for solving the increasing complexity of road marking work.
construction projects [18]–[22]. Constraint programming was
recently applied as a new technique for handling combinatorial
problems.
Although RCPSP and LSM has already been extensively
studied by researchers for the past decades, existing models
have a predefined sequence of section execution. Motivated by
those condition, we proposed an IP model of a non-sequential
LSM with flexible resource profile for minimizing project
duration of a non-sequential linear construction project

Scope of the model

An Integer Programming (IP) model was applied to a

representation of road resurfacing project of multiple road-
links/sections in a road network. The project representation
consisted of 5 road resurfacing sections. Each section consisted
of several sequential works.
Works of each section are identical. The execution priorities
between sections are equal. Thus, each section could be started
anytime without any predefined sequence. The only constraint
involved in the start time of each section is the availability of
resources. The flow of works is shown on Fig. 1.
Each section has three consecutive works. Those works are:
asphalt stripping, asphalt resurfacing, and road marking
Asphalt stripping is the first work to do in each section.
Asphalt milling machines (AM) and dump trucks (DT) are
needed during this asphalt stripping work. Asphalt milling
machines do the stripping work and dump trucks do the
Fig. 2 Equipment allocation concept
A set of mathematical equation was defined to create an
objective function and constraints of an integer programming
optimization model. This model would determine: start time of
each work, end time of each work, resource usage of each work
per unit time, and minimum project completion time or
minimum value of idle equipment which would satisfy the
objective function. Fig. 2 shows the equipment allocation
diagram of this model.
Model concept and formulation
Mathematical model for achieving minimum idle equipment

870 - ISBN 978-1-5090-4897-7

 Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation
used the same variables and constraints which were used in the
model for minimizing project duration with several additional
variables and constraints. Weighing variables were used in this
model to prioritize among the types of equipment.
A. Indices:
w : index of sections
t : index of periods
k : index of renewable principal resources
m : index of renewable dependent resources
p : index of predecessor resources
s : index of successor resources
B. Parameters:
W : number of sections
𝑑𝑑̅ : deadline for project duration
K : number of principal resources
M : number of dependent resources
Rk : number of available units of renewable resource k
Esp : binary number stating relation between predecessor
resource p and successor resource s
C. Set:
W : set of sections (1 … 𝑊𝑊)
T : set of periods (1 … 𝑑𝑑̅ )
T-1 : set of [1 … (𝑑𝑑̅ − 1)]
K: set of renewable principal resources (1 … 𝐾𝐾)
M: set of renewable dependent resources [(𝐾𝐾 + 1) … (𝐾𝐾 +
𝑀𝑀)]
R: set of renewable resources [1 … (𝐾𝐾 + 𝑀𝑀)]
D. Variables:
𝜑𝜑𝑘𝑘 : weighing value for resource k (integer).
ukw : number resource k required by section w (integer)
𝜔𝜔𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 : number of dependent resource m needed to support one
unit of principle resource k (integer)
E. Decision variables:
Skwt : binary variable of principal resource k assignment for
section w, on period t.
rkwt : number of principal resource k allocated for section w,
on period t (integer).
rmwt : number of dependent resource m allocated for section
w, on period t (integer).
rkt : amount of resource k allocation on period t (integer)
rk : maximum amount of periodically allocation of
resource k (integer)
vkt : amount of idle resource k on period t (integer)
Tkt : identifier of idle resource k on period t (integer)
Tt : identifier of resource allocation on period t (binary)
F. Objective function
The objective of this model was minimizing the value of idle
equipment within project time-duration. In this model, idle
equipment was defined as the difference between the
maximum amount of equipment allocation per day and the
actual amount of equipment allocation each day. Minimized
value of idle equipment were achieved by accumulating the
idle value of each equipment within the project time-duration.
Because of each type of equipment had a certain idle value
which was different than the idle value of other type of
ISBN 978-1-5090-4897-7
IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds)
equipment, weighing variables (𝜑𝜑𝑘𝑘 ) were used in the objective
function (equation 1). These variables gave different weighing
value to each type of equipment.
This objective function also employed variable Tkt. Variable
Tkt, a binary variable, identified whether on day t had an
allocation of equipment k or not. This variable prevented the
objective function to accumulate the idle value of equipment k
on day t if the equipment k was not allocated on that day.
Mathematical function of the objective function for
minimizing idle equipment value is shown (1).
Minimize:
∑ ∑ 𝜑𝜑𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑇𝑇𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑣𝑣𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘 ∈ R , 𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (1)
𝑡𝑡 𝑘𝑘
G. Constraints
Constraints for equipment allocation
Several additional constraints regulated the equipment
allocation for this model. The first additional constraint for this
model made sure of the continuity of the project workflow
shown by (2).
𝑡𝑡
𝑟𝑟1𝑡𝑡
𝑟𝑟1,𝑡𝑡+1 ≥ 1 − ∑ ∀𝑤𝑤 ∈ W, ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T − 1 (2)
∑𝑤𝑤 𝑢𝑢1𝑤𝑤 ∙ 1.0
𝜏𝜏=1
Total number of principal equipment allocation on day t (rkt)
was a sum of multiplication between the switch variable of
principal equipment (Skwt) and the number of principal
equipment (Rkwt) of all sections/roads. Mathematical equation
for this constraint is shown by (3).
𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = ∑ S𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑅𝑅𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∀𝑘𝑘 ∈ K, 𝑤𝑤 ∈ W, ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (3)
𝑤𝑤
Total number of dependent equipment allocation on the day
t (rmt) was a sum of the number of dependent equipment
allocation (Emwt) of all sections/roads. This constraint was
formulated by (4).
𝑟𝑟𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = ∑ 𝐸𝐸𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ∀𝑚𝑚 ∈ M, 𝑤𝑤 ∈ W, ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (4)
𝑤𝑤
Maximum daily allocation of equipment k is the highest
number of daily allocations of equipment k. Equation (5)
represents this condition.
𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘 ≥ 𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∀𝑘𝑘 ∈ R , ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (5)
Idle equipment on day t is the difference between the
maximum daily equipment allocation and the allocated
equipment on day t. Equation (6) formulates this condition.
𝑣𝑣𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 = 𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘 − 𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∀𝑘𝑘 ∈ R , ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (6)
Idle equipment value of equipment k was only calculated
when there were any allocation of equipment k on day t.
Equipment allocation identifier variable (Tkt), a zero-one
variable (binary), identified whether there were any
assignments of equipment k in day t. This variable will have
the value of ‘1’ if equipment k was allocated on day t and will
the value of ‘0’ if equipment k was not allocated in day t.
Mathematical equation for this condition is shown by (7).
𝑟𝑟𝑘𝑘 − 𝑣𝑣𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
𝑇𝑇𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ≥ ∀𝑘𝑘 ∈ R , ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (7)
100.0
Equipment 1 allocation needed to start on the first day.
Equation (8) formulates this condition.
𝑟𝑟1,1 > 0 (8)
Constraints for counting days
Constraints for counting days prevented equipment
- 871
Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation
IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds)
allocation from exceeding the project time-duration.
Equipment allocation identifier variable (Tj), a zero-one
(binary) variable, was used for this purpose. It would have the
value of ‘1’ when there were some equipment allocations on
day t and would have the value of ‘0’ when there weren't any
equipment allocations on day t. Equation (9) and (10)
formulates this condition.
𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡 ≥ 𝑇𝑇𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∀𝑘𝑘 ∈ R , ∀𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (9)
∑ 𝑇𝑇𝑡𝑡 ≤ 𝑑𝑑̅ 𝑡𝑡 ∈ T (10)
𝑡𝑡
Result
Mathematical model for minimizing idle-equipment value,
was applied into two conditions of the project time-duration.
The first condition was the shortest project time-duration. The
second condition was a longer project time-duration, 7 days.
In the first condition, 6 day project time-duration, the value
of idle equipment resulted by the model was 69. In the second
condition, 7 day project time-duration, the value of idle
equipment resulted by the model was 47. Equipment
allocations resulted by both models in several condition have
differences in the terms of project time-duration, equipment
utilization, and idle-equipment value. Table 1 shows the
difference.
Table 1 Idle equipment values of different project duration
Duration Utilized equipment Idle
AM AF ME DT PR equipment
6 days 5 10 5 57 20 69
7 days 5 8 5 43 16 47
Equipment allocation of the minimized project time-duration
resulted the shortest project time duration. In the other hand,
idle equipment in this project reached the value of 69.
Idle-equipment minimization model could reduce more of
the equipment utilization and the idle-equipment value when it
was implemented to a longer project time-duration. In 7 days
project time-duration, this model could reduce the utilization
of asphalt finisher (AF) from 10 units to 8 units, dump trucks
(DT) from 55 units to 43 units, and pneumatic roller (PR) from
20 units to 16 units. This model also reduced the idle-
equipment value from 59 to 47. In this condition, the project
manager could provide less amount of equipment to finish the
project within a longer project time-duration and could reduce
the number of idle equipment on the project site.
Conclusion
This model succeeded to minimize the idle-equipment value
within a certain time-duration and reduce the equipment
utilization. MMMIE can help the project manager to optimize
the usage of equipment by minimizing the idle-equipment
value and minimize the amount of equipment need to be
provided.
References
[1] M. L. Pinedo, Scheduling: Theory, Algorithms, and Systems,
vol. 4. 2012.
[2] K. G. Mattila and A. Park, “Comparison of Linear
872 - ISBN 978-1-5090-4897-7
Scheduling Model and Repetitive Scheduling Method,” J.
Constr. Eng. Manag., vol. 129, no. 1, pp. 56–64, 2003.
[3] S.-S. Liu and C.-J. Wang, “Optimization model for resource
assignment problems of linear construction projects,” Autom.
Constr., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 460–473, 2007.
[4] P. Brucker, A. Drexl, R. Möhring, K. Neumann, and E. Pesch,
“Resource-constrained project scheduling: Notation,
classification, models, and methods,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol.
112, no. 1, pp. 3–41, 1999.
[5] R. Kolisch, K. Meyer, R. Mohr, C. Schwindt, and M.
Urmann, “Ablaufplanung für die Leitstrukturoptimierung in
der Pharmaforschung,” Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft, vol.
73, no. 8, pp. 825–848, 2003.
[6] C.-U. Fündeling and N. Trautmann, “A priority-rule method
for project scheduling with work-content constraints,” Eur. J.
Oper. Res., vol. 203, no. 3, pp. 568–574, Jun. 2010.
[7] O. Koné, C. Artigues, P. Lopez, and M. Mongeau, “Event-
based MILP models for resource-constrained project
scheduling problems,” Comput. Oper. Res., vol. 38, no. 1, pp.
3–13, Jan. 2011.
[8] L. Bianco and M. Caramia, “A new formulation for the
project scheduling problem under limited resources,” Flex.
Serv. Manuf. J., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 6–24, 2013.
[9] A. Naber and R. Kolisch, “MIP models for resource-
constrained project scheduling with flexible resource
profiles,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 239, no. 2, pp. 335–348,
Dec. 2014.
[10] S.-S. Liu and C.-J. Wang, “Resource-constrained
construction project scheduling model for profit
maximization considering cash flow,” Autom. Constr., vol.
17, no. 8, pp. 966–974, 2008.
[11] S.-S. Liu and C.-J. Wang, “Two-stage profit optimization
model for linear scheduling problems considering cash flow,”
Constr. Manag. Econ., vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1023–1037, 2009.
[12] P.-H. Chen and H. Weng, “A two-phase GA\ model for
resource-constrained project scheduling,” Autom. Constr.,
vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 485–498, 2009.
[13] P. Ghoddousi, E. Eshtehardian, S. Jooybanpour, and A.
Javanmardi, “Multi-mode resource-constrained discrete
time–cost-resource optimization in project scheduling using
non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm,” Autom. Constr.,
vol. 30, no. 0, pp. 216–227, 2013.