Schedule compression using the direct stiffness method

OSAMAMOSELHI
Construction Engineering and Management, Centre for Building Studies, Concordia University,
1455 de Maisonneuve Boulevard West, Montreal, Que., Canada H3G 1M8
Received September 25, 1991
Revised manuscript accepted May 5, 1992

This paper presents a new method for critical path (CPM) scheduling that optimizes project duration in order to
minimize the project total cost. In addition, the method could be used to produce constrained schedules that accom-
modate contractual completion dates of projects and their milestones. The proposed method is based on the well-known
"direct stiffness method" for structural analysis. The method establishes a complete analogy between the structural
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12

analysis problem with imposed support settlement and that of project scheduling with imposed target completion date.
The project CPM network is replaced by an equivalent structure. The equivalence conditions are established such that
when the equivalent structure is compressed by an imposed displacement equal to the schedule compression, the sum
of all member forces represents the additional cost required to achieve such compression. T o enable a comparison
with the currently used methods, an example application from the literature is analyzed using the proposed method.
The results are in close agreement with those obtained using current techniques. In addition, the proposed method
has some interesting features: (i) it is flexible, providing a trade-off between required accuracy and computational
effort, (ii) it is capable of providing solutions to CPM networks where dynamic programming may not be directly
applicable, and (iii) it could be extended to treat other problems including the impact of delays and disruptions on
schedule and budget of construction projects.
Key words: construction scheduling, time-cost trade-off, project cost optimization, scheduling with constraints, project
acceleration.

Cet article prCsente une nouvelle methode de cheminement critique qui permet d'optimiser la duree du projet afin
d'en reduire le coiit global. En outre, cette methode pourrait servir a produire des calendriers qui tiennent compte
For personal use only.

des dates de rialisation des projets et de leurs diverses Ctapes. La mCthode proposie est inspirCe de la cilibre (( mithode
de rigiditi directe D. Cette mithode etablit une analogie complite entre le problime d'analyse structurale et celui de
l'ordonnancement de projet avec date de realisation cible imposie. Le rCseau CPM est remplacC par une structure equi-
valente. Les conditions d'iquivalence sont Ctablies de telle sorte que lorsque la structure equivalente est comprimee
par un deplacement impose kgal a la compression du calendrier, la somme de toutes les forces des elements reprksente
le coiit additionnel requis pour realiser cette compression. A des fins de comparaison avec les mithodes prksentement
utilisees, une application type t i d e de la littirature existante a CtC analysie a l'aide de la methode proposie. On a observe
une bonne concordance entre les risultats obtenus et ceux enregistris a l'aide des techniques courantes. De plus, la
methode proposee possede d'autres caractiristiques intiressantes. Premiirement, elle est flexible et assure un compro-
mis entre la precision requise et l'effort de calcul. Deuxiimement, elle est en mesure de fournir des solutions aux rkseaux
CPM lorsque la programmation dynamique ne peut Ctre appliquee directement. Enfin, elle peut Ctre appliquke a la
rksolution d'autres problimes, dont celui de l'impact des retards et des interruptions sur le calendrier et le budget de
projets de construction.
Mots elks : ordonnancement de la construction, compromis coQt-temps, optimisation du coiit du projet, ordonnan-
cement avec contraintes, acceleration du projet.
[Traduit par la redaction]

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 20, 65-72 (1993)

Introduction
Ever since the introduction of the critical path method
(CPM) in the mid-1950s, a number of procedures have been
developed in an effort to overcome its inherent limitations.
The CPM as originally conceived could be described as a
"nonconstrained" scheduling tool, where ( i ) availability of
needed project resources is assumed and (ii) target or con-
tractually imposed project completion date cannot be
directly incorporated. This led to considerable efforts made
by many researchers to transform the CPM from a
theoretical and special nonconstrained scheduling tool to a
practical and more general constrained-capable one.
Resource levelling and time-cost trade-off or schedule
compression techniques are perhaps the most important
practical improvements made as a result of these efforts.
NOTE:Written discussion of this paper is welcomed and will be
received by the Editor until June 30, 1993 (address inside
front cover).
Primed in Canada / lmprimc au Canada
Resource-levelling techniques enable CPM to account for
project real-life environments where required resources
(labour, material, and equipment) may exceed those avail-
able. Time-cost trade-off techniques, on the other hand,
allow CPM to consider contractually imposed completion
dates of the project and its milestones. It is generally
recognized that the time-cost trade-off problem is more
complex than the resource-levelling one (Stark and Nicholls
1972). This paper deals with the former problem, which is
also known as schedule compression, project time reduction,
least-cost expediting, project compression, least-cost
scheduling, project cost optimization, optimized scheduling,
scheduling with constraints, project acceleration, and project
crashing.
Apart from qualitative methods and procedures (Con-
struction Industry Institute (CII) 1988), available quan-
titative techniques for schedule compression can be grouped
in two main categories: heuristic and optimization. Heuristic
 CAN. J. CIV. EN(3. VOL. 20, 1993

TABLE1. Equivalent characteristic parameters

No. Project compression Structural analysis

Project
Project CPM network
Project activity
Project event
Activity cost slope
Event early start times
Activity available time
(activity duration + float)
Activity compression
Crashed activity cost
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12
Structure
Structure's geometry
Structural member
Structural node
Member stiffness
Nodal coordinates
Member length
Member axial displacement
Member axial force

The method could also be used to identify the impact of

FIG. 1. 5-Activity network.
algorithms aim at providing "good solutions" or near
optimal solutions with reasonable accuracy suitable for prac-
tical applications. These algorithms require less computa-
tional effort than optimization techniques, and provide a
trade-off between desired accuracy and required computa-
tional effort. Unlike optimization techniques, these algo-
rithms frequently provide practical solutions to large project
For personal use only.
delayed and disrupted activities on the project schedule and
estimate the direct cost of acceleration for a given level of
schedule compression.
Proposed method
The direct stiffness method
The proposed method is based on the direct stiffness
method (also known as matrix-displacement method) for
structural analysis, where applied forces are directly linked
to the resulting structural deformations or displacements
through the stiffness matrix of the structure (Przemieniecki

networks. Heuristic algorithms may either be capable of 1968):

tracking project activities in networks having only one
critical path (Pagnoni 1990) or more critical paths, including
those newly formed as the solution progresses (Ahuja 1984;
Handa 1964; Ford and Fulkerson 1962).
Optimization techniques, on the other hand, aim at pro-
viding "best or optimal solutions" and require considerably
more computational effort than heuristic methods. These
are operations research-based techniques and include linear
programming (Hendrickson and Au 1989; Pagnoni 1990)
and dynamic programming (Butcher 1967). It is interesting
to note that despite the complexity involved, their fairly large
formulation, and extensive computational effort, even
dynamic programming is not directly applicable to networks
without pure combinations of sequential and parallel activ-
ities, such as the 5-activity network shown in Fig. 1 (Butcher
1967).
In this paper a new method is presented. The method is
direct and flexible enough to allow the generation of both
"good solutions" and "best solutions," depending on the
computational effort and the type of network being con-
sidered, as will be described later. The method is based on
the well-known direct stiffness method for structural anal-
ysis. A complete analogy is first established between the
project CPM network and the geometry of the equivalent
structure. Schedule compression data (i.e., normal and
crashed activity durations and their associated costs) are used
to establish the material properties of all elements in the
equivalent structure. A nonlinear static analysis under
imposed displacement (equivalent to the magnitude of
schedule compression) is then performed. As the analysis
progresses, in each iteration, the sum of all members' axial
forces represent the added cost required to crash the project
schedule with a time equal to the imposed displacement in
that iteration. A numerical example is worked out in order
to illustrate the use and capabilties of the proposed method.
in which { F } is the applied nodal load vector, {A} is the
resulting nodal displacement vector, [ a is the global struc-
ture stiffness matrix, and n is the number of degrees of
freedom (DOF) of the structure.
In the present formulation, the structure will represent
the project: its geometry will represent the project CPM
network (the arrow diagram), its elements will, accordingly,
represent the project activities, and its nodes will represent
the projects events (see Table 1). Each node will be assigned
one DOF, representing axial displacement or activity com-
pression. As such, if all project activities can be crashed,
n in eq. [I] will be
[2] n = m - 1
in which m is the total number of events in the project CPM-
type network.
Activity representation
Activities, in general, could either be crashed, i.e., their
duration reduced, or not. In this paper, activities that can
be crashed will be called "crashable," and those that cannot
be crashed will be termed "non-crashable." For the purpose
of the proposed analysis, each of the project activities are
classified under one of three basic and distinct types: (i) non-
critical, (ii) critical and crashable (and will be referred to
later, for simplicity, as critical), and (iii) critical and non-
crashable (and will be referred to later as non-crashable).
Dummy activities are basically non-crashable with a zero
duration. Noncritical activities, obviously, are crashable, at
least up to their float time. In general, each of the three basic
types is represented by a "truss member," i.e., a straight
bar having one DOF at each end. However, for the third
type of activities (the non-crashable), these DOFs are set
 -(WF)i

i.II I I I..
(Wi
v
1

normal duration=
crashed duration= I
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12

(a) critical & non crashable (b) dummy

--
I4
crashed duration

normal duration I
#
-
14
crashed duration

normal hration float

4
For personal use only.

(c) critical & crashable (d) non-critical

AE crashed cost - normal cost ' or very small numerical value if computer
k=-
-
P
I normal duration crashed duration program used does not accept 0.0
FIG. 2. Activity representation.

equal or made identical, rendering it a rigid member (see
Fig. 2). The truss members representing the other two types
are envisaged to be made of an artificial material such that
their axial stiffness varies as a function of their axial defor-
mation, as shown in Fig. 3. The member axial stiffness, K,
can be expressed as
[3] K = AE/l
in which A is the cross-sectional area of the member, E is
the Young's modulus of the member's material, and 1 is the
length of the member.
By making the cross-sectional area of each member
numerically equal to its length, the variation in the member
stiffness can be expressed solely in terms of the elastic
modulus, E, of its material (Fig. 4). Accordingly, for the
case most frequently considered in current techniques for
schedule compression, where the added cost of shortening
an activity duration increases linearly with the activity com-
pression, the E value of its equivalent member will be
assigned a zero or a very small value when the member's
axial deformation is < 61, and a value equal to the member
stiffness when the member's deformation is between 61 and
62, as shown in Fig. 4. Notice that 61 equals the float and,
therefore, will be set to zero for elements representing critical
activities. The member displacement, A2, represents the
maximum possible deformation (the "crash limit"), beyond
which the member becomes rigid, indicating no further
reduction or compression is possible.
It should be noted that the stress-strain relationship shown
in Fig. 4 need not follow a linear or a piecewise linear form.
Discrete, or step, functions, nonlinear continuous functions,
and any combinations of these relationships could be used.
If it is desirable to avoid fractions or part days in compress-
ing activities and rounding them up to full days, a step func-
tion stress-strain relationship could be used. Fractions or
part-days compression of normal durations of activities
could also be useful, providing a practical help in for-
mulating an overtime policy and other forms of acceleration.
Solution protocol
Once a CPM analysis has been performed, needed activity
data can be extracted. This includes early start event times,
float, and hence activity status (critical or noncritical). These
data are directly used to input the geometry of the equivalent
structure (i.e., nodal coordinates and member connectivity).
Project compression data (normal cost, crashed cost, normal
duration, crashed duration for each activity) are then used
to prepare the input for material properties (modulus of
elasticity). The first node (the project start event) is fixed
or restrained, while displacement is imposed incrementally
at the last node (the project end event).
A nonlinear static analysis is performed. In each itera-
tion, members' axial deformations (6) are checked against
 CAN. J. CIV. ENG. VOL. 20, 1993

member axial force

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12

, crashed i
:
9
float normal duration duration 1c:
'
I

1
total time available = ESj - ES'
*
FIG. 3. Member stiffness variation. (I = length of equivalent member.)
For personal use only.

E
I modulus of
elasticity of i I rigid
(D0F)i = (D0F)j
the member's i
I material j

member axial
deformation
__t

& deformation
= max perm~ss~ble
(crash I ~ m i t )

crashed durat~on
t
L
float normal durat~on

C total time available

ti

FIG. 4. Modulus of elasticity variation.

and 62 values, and the appropriate E is used for the next
iteration. When 6 exceeds 82, the member becomes rigid,
indicating that no further reduction is possible. For the ith
iteration, the sum of all member forces, Fi, represents the
added direct cost required to crash the project duration by
a time equal to the imposed displacement A,. The analysis
continues until no further increase in member forces is
obtained. At this point, maximum schedule compression is
attained. During the analysis, noncritical activities may
become critical and new critical path(s) may be formed, and
some crashable activities may not be completely crashed.
This is achieved automatically through the CPM-network
logic (i.e., structural geometry, including member connec-
tivity) and the equilibrium and compatibility conditions
 MOSELHI

0 START

1 (**I 1
Perform
For each imposed increment displacement h,
calculate the axial deformation in each member 6;.
Fi = Z member forces, and store Fi & Ai

+
Prepare
h = Project compression
Fi = Crashed direct cost
ES Bar chart
non-critical activities
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12

by two members
(float & duration), Calculate Project total cost at each h
FTi = Fi + (Fi)id
Compression data (Fi)d = indirect cost at h
(i.e., normal cost, normal duration,
crushed cost, and crashed duration
for each activity)
Based on 6i of each member,
modify its properties, if needed
I
Calculate
Member properties
based on direct cost only

Input geometry
For personal use only.

fix the start event and get a

Nonlinear static solution,
imposing an incremental compression
(axial displacement) Get O m i n =Least project cost
at the project last (fmish) event & corresponding A = Optimum project duration

Procedure used in the present method.

inherent in the structural analysis technique. Figure 5 sum- TABLE2. Schedule compression data
marizes the flow of operations performed in the proposed
method. Activity
Where resource levelling or even resource allocation Normal Crash Normal Crash Cost
No. i-j duration duration cost ($) cost ($) slope
becomes necessary, to account for project resource limita-
tions, the revised CPM network resulting from these anal- 1 1.2
yses should be used to input the geometry of the equivalent 2 2.3
structure. It should be noted that, in this case, although some 3 2.4
noncritical activities may become critical and other activi- 4 3.4
ties may have their early start time modified, this constitutes 5 3.5
no change in the protocol described herein. 6 3.8
The proposed solution protocol could be applied using 7 4.5
existing software systems for structural analysis with 8 4.6
9 5.6
nonlinear capabilities. Alternatively, the protocol could be 10 5.7
coded specifically for the time-cost trade-off analysis 11 6.7
described in this paper. In either case, in order to automate 12 6.8
the process, the generated CPM analysis results could be 13 7.8
directly processed to input the geometrical data of the Total
equivalent structure. This could be achieved by coding a pre-
processor to the solution protocol or an interface programme
between the CPM analysis software and the structural anal- process and make it efficient for practical applications that
ysis software. In this paper, however, the input data were involve large networks.
keyed in using the CPM analysis results. Although this is
adequate for demonstrating the use of the theory developed Example application
in this paper and its capability, the development of the inter- T o demonstrate the use of the proposed method and
face programme is needed in order to automate the entire illustrate its capabilities, the time-cost trade-off example
 CAN. J. CIV. ENG. VOL. 20, 1993

,45
10/8 .~
',

Critical
63-43 Activity

15/15
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12

5/2

-
A c t i v i t y number

X/Y - Float

Crashed Duration
Normal Duration
19/11

12/10

FIG. 6. Example project: CPM network.

3,20
For personal use only.

19,15

6,45

Non-critical
A c t i v i t y No.,Float
-
m

F
-I
=
+b Critical
Critical &
a Duration -DW,CrashedD
"ma
j

Non-crashable

FIG. 7. Time-scaled project CPM.

analyzed by Ahuja (1984) is considered. The project CPM
consists of 13 activities connected through 8 events, as shown
in Fig. 6. Activity durations and associated costs required
for the analysis are summarized in Table 2. The project has
a normal duration of 70 days and a direct normal cost of
$6600. Indirect cost is estimated to be $1000 over the first
60 days and runs at a rate of $100 per day to the end of
the project duration. It is required to find the project mini-
mum total cost and the associated duration. The solution
reported by Ahuja (1984) was performed using a heuristic
algorithm that utilizes the criticality theorem developed
earlier by Handa (1964).
The example was analyzed using the proposed method,
following the procedure summarized in Fig. 5. Early start
event times are directly used to input the nodal coordinates
of the equivalent two-dimensional (planar) structure (e.g.,
the coordinates of node no. 4 are x = 30.0 and y = 0.0).
Activity number and its i-j events' numbers (i-e., the project
CPM network logic) are used directly to describe the member
connectivity of the equivalent structure, as shown in Fig. 7
(e.g., member no. 8 connects nodes nos. 4 and 6). The cross-
sectional area of each member is considered equal to its
length (e.g., the cross-sectional area of member 8 is 20.0).
Material properties of the structural members are derived
from the data summarized in Table 2. For example, the E
value for member PO. 8 equals approximately to 0.0 for 6
< 1.0, and equals 70.0 for 1.0 5 6 I9.0; the member is
considered rigid for 6 > 9.0. The first node was fixed and
the structure analyzed under an imposed displacement of
10.0, applied incrementally at node no. 8. The solution is

L
8000 - "Z?%"
........
A h l ~ i ailggq <-.
7000 -
I-
cn 6000 -
0
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12
20
-
1000
59 60 61
-.-.-D = Direct C o s t LIndirect C o s t
FIG. 8. Comparison of results.
For personal use only.
performed using a total of 20 iterations. The sum of all-
member forces directly represents the added direct cost
required to reduce the project duration by a time equal t o
the imposed displacement. The results are obtained and
compared with those reported by Ahuja (1984). Figure 8
indicates close agreement between the two methods. Each
predicted the optimum project duration to be 69 days and
the project minimum total cost to be $6650 (Ahuja 1984)
and $6600 (present method). Clearly the indirect costs are
identical in the two solutions and the difference in the total
costs is directly related to the direct costs predicted by the
two methods.
It should be noted that the proposed method, as described
earlier, will yield optimum (best) and near optimum (good)
solutions for project networks known as parallel nets and
nets with pure sequential-parallel links, respectively (Stark
and Nicholls 1972). The accuracy may deteriorate, however,
in pure sequential nets, depending on the variations in
member stiffnesses. The higher the variation, the lower the
accuracy. For members with equal stiffness, the results will
be identical to the optimum values. It is interesting to note
that even for these sequential networks, the present method
with some adjustments can yield optimum solutions. This
requires the identification and ranking of member stiffnesses
(i.e., activity cost slopes) and considering first only those
having the lowest stiffness as elastic, while keeping the rest
temporarily rigid, and progressing with the solution as
described earlier. It is important, however, to note that pure
sequential nets of real-life projects normally consist of a few
activities, all critical, and schedule compression can easily
be performed by hand.
Summary and concluding remarks
A new method for time-cost trade-off analysis has been
developed. The method is based on the well-known direct
stiffness method for structural analysis. The project CPM
MOSELHI
MFthW
.-.
......
;-
I \-.---
.-;--.. .-;...
%-<:....
--<;.- -
.................
C
62 63
TIME
64 65 67 68 69 70
,...,....
T,.:Total Cost
network is replaced by an equivalent structure having
geometry identical to that of the network and member
properties derived from activity cost slopes. Based on the
established analogy, the sum of all member forces represents
the added cost required to reduce the project duration an
amount equals to the imposed displacement at its finish or
end event.
An example application from the literature is worked out
to demonstrate the use of the proposed method and illustrate
its capability. The results are in close agreement with those
obtained employing the most widely used heuristic algorithm
and the criticality theorem (Ahuja 1984). Unlike heuristic
algorithms, the proposed method, as described herein, is
capable of generating optimum solutions for certain types
of project networks and, with additional computational
effort, for all types of networks. The method could also be
used to study the impact of delays and disruptions o n the
project schedule and estimate the direct cost of imposed
acceleration at any stage of the project progress.
Acknowledgement
The financial support for this work provided by the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada under grant no. A4430 is gratefully acknowledged.
Ahuja, H.N. 1984. Project management: technique in planning
and controlling construction projects. John Wiley & Sons,
New York, N.Y.
Butcher, W.S. 1967. Dynamic programming for project cost-time
curves. ASCE Journal of Construction Division, 93(C01): 59-73.
Construction Industry Institute. 1988. Concepts and methods of
schedule compression. Publication 6-7, Construction Industry
Institute, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Tex.
Ford, L.R., and Fulkerson, D.R. 1962. Flows in networks.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
Handa, V.K. 1964. Project cost minimization. University of
Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ont.
 72 CAN. J . CIV. ENG. VOL. 20, 1993

Hendrickson, C., and Au, T. 1989. Project management for Przemieniecki, J.S. 1968. Theory of matrix structural analysis.
construction. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, N.Y.
Pagnoni, A. 1990. Project engineering: computer oriented planning Stark, R.M., and Nicholls, R.L. 1972. Mathematical foundations
and operational decision making. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, for design. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, N.Y.
Heidelberg.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIV CALGARY on 09/30/12
For personal use only.