Ladder construction

Considering the construction of a simple, but long, reinforced concrete retaining

wall, it might be possible to employ only one gang of steel-fixers, one gang of
carpenters, and one gang of concretors. This might be necessary because the wall
forms part of a much larger contract; but there may be many other reasons. It may
be desirable to divide the wall up into a number of lengths so as to provide, as far
as possible, continuity of working for the gangs selected to do the work, as well as
to break the work down into areas which can be dealt with more easily. A network
diagram to illustrate how the wall would be constructed if it were divided into four
such sections is illustrated in Fig. 9.6.
When the diagram is examined, it will be seen that initially the reinforcement for
the first section is fixed (S1 ) and is described by activity 1—2. The duration of this
activity is two working days. Having completed the fixing of the reinforcement,
the formwork for the first section of wall can be erected, and the gang of steel-
fixers can be moved to the second section of the wall. The second operation of the
steel-fixers is represented by activity 2—3 (S2). The activity of erecting the
formwork emerges from event 2 and is represented by arrow 2—4, having a
duration of four days (J1 ). Similarly, the pouring of concrete for the first section
can start when event 4 is completed, and the carpenters employed upon erection of
the formwork for the first section can now be moved to erection of formwork for
the second section, arrow 5—6.
The logic of the diagram so far described is not complete inasmuch as no
indication has been given that the erection of the formwork for the second section
depends upon the completion of the fixing of the reinforcement for that section. A
dummy arrow is therefore inserted between events 3 and 5 to illustrate this
dependency. The whole of the work by the three trades is represented over the four
sections of wall by the complete diagram Fig. 9.6, and it will be noted that the
overall duration for the project is nineteen days. Having decided that this is a
suitable target at which to aim, the backward pass computation can be made in
order to determine the critical path. This follows the path 10— 12— 13— 14, and,
as one would expect, it passes through the carpenters' work for most of its path, the
carpenters taking four days to erect the formwork on a particular section of wall
and, therefore, longer than the time required by any other trade.
This network diagram has been constructed for a simple project and only three
trades have been considered in the light of splitting the wall into four sections. It
can be envisaged that a diagram for a twenty-storey block of flats involving
perhaps as many as fifteen or so trades would become an extremely complex
diagram to understand and considerable repetition would be involved. A
simplification can be made involving the use of lead and lag arrows.
Figure 9.7 represents the simplification in diagrammatic form. The repetitive work
of one trade is now represented by a single horizontal arrow. Since there are three
trades involved, there are three horizontal arrows, 50—51, 52—53, and 54—55.
The duration which is shown against each of these arrows is the summation of the
durations for individual activities within that trade of Fig. 9.6. In the case of the
steel-fixing the total time taken equals" 2 days = JO days duration. Similarly with
the other two trades involved.
In order to maintain the logic of the diagram, allowance must be made for the fact
that the erection of the formwork on the first section is not commenced
until the fixing of the reinforcement is completed.

This can be represented by a lead arrow, that is, an arrow which connects the
leading events of two activities These are dummy arrows with a duration allocated
to them and are represented on the diagram by a chain-dotted line. In the case of
Fig. 9.7, formwork erection can be commenced two days after the start on the wall
as a whole so that the lead arrow 50—52 bears a duration of two days. Similarly,
the pouring of concrete in the first section cannot be started until at least four days
after the commencement of the erection of formwork — assuming that this work
goes in accordance with the plan — so that the lead arrow, in this case 52—54,
bears a duration of four days.
The end events of each of the arrows concerned are joined by lag arrows. Activity
51—53 is such a lag arrow and bears the duration of four days because the erection
of the formwork to the last section of wall cannot be completed until four days
after the completion of reinforcement fixing to the last section.
Similarly, arrow 53—55, another lag arrow, bears a duration of one day.
By carrying out the backward and forward passes through the ladder diagram, the
completion time for the project is calculated as nineteen days, being the same as
that of Fig. 9.6. However, it should be noted that, in using such a technique, some
sacrifice of internal logic is made when compared with the detailed diagram of Fig.
9.6.
If some of the activities, for example, 5—6 or 9—10, were to become unbalanced
in the duration of time required for their completion, it would be possible for the
critical path to run through other activities than those shown. Also, if the overall
duration of the completion for all the similar activities within their master arrow of
the ladder diagram remained the same, this changed path would not become
obvious with the use of the ladder technique.
Lead arrows may be used in another context within the network diagram. Certain
activities can be allocated, for one reason or another, a far greater duration than is
absolutely necessary for their completion; in other words, there is considerable
leeway at one end or the other of the arrow. It is better for the activity to be defined
in duration and time more closely, and this will be particularly advantageous if the
activity is one which can be best carried out at one particular time of the year. For
example, in the seeding of the banks to a motorway cutting or embankment, it may
be desirable to sow the seed during September or October or during April or May.
If the network diagram indicates that there is considerable leeway for this
operation as a whole because it is not critical, without indicating time against a
calendar, then it is possible to absorb part of the activity duration for sowing seed
in such a way that the timing of the activity is more closely defined. This time may
readily be absorbed with a lead arrow or a lag arrow. In effect, the activity arrow is
being divided into two arrows — one a lead or lag arrow and the other the activity.
One of the advantages of using the ladder technique arises from the fact that trades
or departments can be banded through the diagram. In Fig 9.7, horizontal lines
have been drawn across the diagram dividing activity 50—51 from activity a 52—
53 and, again, dividing activity 52—53 from 54—55. This means that if the plan is
to be communicated to, say, the foreman carpenter he needs only to look between
the band which is labelled with his name on the left hand side to see the work in
which he or his men are involved. This technique can be used in many other fields
particularly where the design processes, as they should be, are shown on the same
diagram as those of the construction. For example, the work to be carried out by
the architect or the engineer is readily portrayed in this way, the work of the
contractor is highlighted, and it is often desirable to illustrate the work of various
sub-contractors so that they, too, may be readily informed of their part in the
complete process.