American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci.

, 5 (3): 313-321, 2009 ISSN 1818-6769 © IDOSI Publications, 2009

Application of Project Scheduling in Agriculture (Case Study: Grape Garden Stabilization)
S.M. Fahimifard and A.A. Kehkha Department of Agricultural Economics Engineering, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
Abstract: Some activities of project are critical in the sense that delay in their commencement will delay the overall project completion time. Therefore, management and scheduling of projects is inevitable. In this paper, project scheduling in agriculture, for establishing 300 hectares grape garden in Agricultural Research Center of University of Zabol, is carried out by CPM (Critical Path Method) and PERT (Program Evaluation Review Technique) methods. Results show that the minimum completion time of this project, based on using Normal time and PERT method is 390 days and 364.67 days, respectively. Also the results obtained from employing CPM method indicate that the cost of reducing the project completion time to 365 days is 23643530 Rials. Key words: Project scheduling % CPM % PERT % Agriculture INTRODUCTION Project scheduling and control refers to the planning, scheduling and control of projects, which consist of numerous activities. In the other words, Scheduling issue is a frequent task in the control of various systems such as manufacturing processes [1], project management [2] and service system control (reservation systems, timetabling). Examples can be found in diverse areas such as shipbuilding, road construction, oil refinery maintenance, missile launching and auditing. The management of such projects is problematic, because certain activities must be completed in a prescribed order or sequence. This means that some of these activities are critical so that they delay in their commencement will delay the overall project completion time. In addition, because the basic input parameters for planning (time, cost and resources for each activity) are not deterministic and projects are typically characterized by: C C C Uniqueness (no similar experience) Variability (trade-off between performance measures like time, cost and quality) Ambiguity (lack of clarity, lack of data, lack of structure and bias in estimates) Project planning and scheduling is inevitably involves uncertainty. tools are used seriously by a large majority of project managers [3, 4]. In the case of simple projects we can use diagrams to identify critical activities and calculate the minimum time required for their completion and in the case of more complex projects, a simple algorithm is used to identify critical activities and the minimum project completion time. Two techniques associated with the algorithm are the CPM (Critical Path Method) (for developing strategies to complete a project in less than what would normally be regarded as the minimum time) and the PERT (Project Evaluation Review Technique) (for determining probabilities associated with completion times when the activity durations are unknown). Therefore, the purpose of this paper is studying the application of project scheduling in agriculture, for stabilizing 300 hectares grape garden in Agricultural Research Center of Zabol University, by CPM and PERT methods with WinQsb software. CRITICAL PATH METHOD (CPM) During the late 1950’s, Engineers from the DuPont Company developed a scheduling technique called CRITICAL PATH PLANNING and SCHEDULING “CPPS” to assist them in minimizing the downtime of industrial facilities during renovations. In 1963, the Associated General Contractor of America “AGC” began a series of conventions devoted to the use of CPM, which

Many different techniques and tools have been developed to support better project planning and these

Corresponding Author: S.M. Fahimifard, Department of Agricultural Economics Engineering, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran

313

they can use the CPM. Herrerias [24]. 29] does incorporate uncertainty in a restricted sense. Pulido et al. Troutt [25]. questioning the reasoning behind the classical values of the PERT parameters. = b²v w/ (v+w) 2/ (v+w+1). identify an activity on each path (perhaps a shared activity) such that the total of the crash-time costs per unit of time is a minimum. PROGRAM EVALUATION REVIEW TECHNIQUE (PERT) Ever since PERT method was first used in the 1950s to estimate the duration of tasks in a ballistic missile program. & Environ. another well-used technique Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) [5. MacCrimmon and Ryavec [16]. this technique has been satisfactorily used by experts both for the theoretical treatment of the duration of tasks within a project and for the cash flow within an investment. numerous authors have participated in the same debate expressing similar doubts Farnum and Stanton [23]. including General Services Agency and the Corp of Engineers. Kelley [8]. which is the earliest time for project completion. Clark [14]. When project managers are required to complete a project in a time that is shorter than the length of the critical path. Chae and Kim [26]. The best-known technique to support project scheduling is the Critical Path Method (CPM). optimistic and most likely) are approximated. J.Am-Euras. which are bounded from below (crash duration) and from above (normal duration). Results in PERT are more realistic than CPM but PERT does not address explicitly any of the sources of uncertainty listed above. Maghraby and Salem [12]. b is the scale parameter. Revise the network and determine the critical path. In the 1980s. 5 (3): 313-321. Sci. Agric. Then the ‘critical path’ and the start and finish date are calculated by use of distributions’ means and applying probability rules.0's help) f(x)=P(x/b. The two types of cost associated with an activity are the normal-time cost and the crash time cost.v-1)P(1-x/b. [17]. for 0 x b. which follows a Beta distribution1. Immediate replies carne from Gallagher [20]. v>0. Goyal [11]. Littlefield and Randolpli [21]. With the acceptance of CPM scheduling by several Federal Government Agencies. Repeat steps 1 to 3 until all critical activities have been crashed. as well as for other types of problem..w-1)/b/B(v. calculates the earliest network (the ‘critical path’). Under this assumption it can be shown that the means and variances of the activity times can be respectively approximated by: C C C 1 Beta distribution: (WinQSB 1. Berny [23]. Also. If there is more than one critical path. Different costs are typically incurred in crashing different activities. Siemans [10]. is purely deterministic. it is often circumspect to crash by increments of one time unit). Sasieni [19] reopened the debate. Keefer and Verdini [28] and many more. 314 . CPM [5] is a deterministic technique. However. the activity costs are a function of the activity durations. Completing a project in a shorter period of time can be achieved by crashing one or more critical activities by devoting additional resources to these activities so that they are completed in less than normal time. w>0.w). during the 1960s and 1970s. The CPM technique for crashing project activities while minimizing cost is as follows: [5] C Identify the activity on the critical path with the minimum crash-time cost per unit of time. The foregoing has assumed that the activity times are known with certainty. It makes no attempt to handle or quantify uncertainty. Vazsonyi [18]. various authors proposed a revision of the hypotheses put forward by the creators of the PERT method: Heally [13]. Fulkerson [7]. If they are not known with certainty they should be treated as random variables. which. which is incorporated into the most widely used project management software tools. Crash the activity(s) identified in step 1 to the point where another path in the network becomes critical or the activity(s) have been crashed to their the lowest possible values (to avoid over-crashing. Ford and Fulkerson [9]. Where f(x) is Probability density function (pdf). 2009 were followed by publications. among others. v and w are the shape parameters and b>0. Solution procedures for the linear case are proposed by Kelley and Walker [6]. Grubbs [15]. Instead of having a single deterministic value. The intent was to establish CPM methodology for the contracting community. three different estimates (pessimistic. µ = bv/ (v+w). In the Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT) it is assumed that each activity time is a random variable. by using a probability distribution for each task. by use of a network of dependencies between tasks and given deterministic values for task durations. Since then. This technique. so the problem arises as to which activities to crash and by how much. the CPM’s place in the contracting industry was finally established. However. using normal activity times for non-crashed activities and crash times for crashed activities. Moitra [27].

$30). 2009 E{t i }= a+4m+b 6 E{T} = ∑ E{t } . (i. Sci. sum of E{t } over all activities i i iεG and Var{t i }= (b-a) 2 36 Where: ai = is the optimistic time and is an estimate of the shortest possible time in which activity i can be accomplished. (i. Critical Activities. mi = is the most probable time and is an estimate of the time which would occur most often if activity i were repeated a large number of times. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Minimum Project Completion Time (Using Normal Time): The results of Activity Analysis for Project Scheduling (Minimum Project Completion time. In practice. If the activity times are statistically independent then the mean and variance of T can be approximated by: in group G) and Var{T} = Var{ti . the mean activity time E{ti} is substituted for the unknown activity time ti in our algorithms and T denote the time required to complete a group G of activities. sum of Var{ti} over activities in group G) If there are enough activities in the group (i. J. & Environ.e. have been shown in Table 1.Am-Euras. Earliest and Latest Start time.e.e. This means that we can make probability statements concerning T. These probability statements are of considerable use in the special case where the activities of interest are on the critical path-they are probability statements concerning the completion of the project in the minimum time. for determining such things as the critical path. Table 1: Activity Analysis for Project Scheduling of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization Activity name On critical path Activity time Earliest start Earliest finish 1 Yes 36 0 36 2 Yes 10 36 46 3 Yes 7 46 53 4 Yes 33 53 86 5 Yes 147 86 233 6 Yes 10 233 243 7 Yes 147 243 390 8 No 21 243 264 9 No 10 53 63 10 No 14 264 278 11 No 5 278 283 12 No 2 63 65 13 No 148 65 213 14 No 2 65 67 15 No 198 67 265 16 No 4 67 71 17 No 148 71 219 18 No 148 71 219 19 No 2 71 73 20 No 298 73 371 21 No 2 73 75 22 No 98 75 173 23 No 4 75 79 24 No 298 79 377 25 No 298 79 377 26 No 2 79 81 27 No 73 81 154 28 No 60 264 324 29 No 38 324 362 Project Completion Time = 390 days Number of Critical Path(s) = 32 Latest start 0 36 46 53 86 233 243 271 66 333 347 76 242 78 192 80 242 242 84 92 86 292 88 92 92 290 317 292 352 Latest finish 36 46 53 86 233 243 390 292 76 347 352 78 390 80 390 84 390 390 86 390 88 390 92 390 390 292 390 352 390 Slack(LS-ES) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 13 69 69 13 177 13 125 13 171 171 13 19 13 217 13 13 13 211 236 28 28 315 . 5 (3): 313-321. bi = is the pessimistic time and is an estimate of the longest time which activity i could take if "everything went wrong".. then the Central Limit Theorem can be used to demonstrate that T is approximately normally distributed. Agric. by using WinQsb software and based on using Normal time. Earliest and Latest Finish time and Slack time) of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization in Agricultural Research Center of Zubol University.

Normal time. 2. the Gantt chart shows that the activities 1. Agric. each activity is listed on the vertical axis and a horizontal bar is drawn to depict activity start. On the other word. while latest start and finish times are depicted using green bars and for Critical Activities. crashing analysis is a process of reducing the activity time to meet the desired completion time. & Environ. 2. J. Sci. earliest start and finish times are depicted using the blue bars. 2. 21. 3. Gantt Chart: Gantt chart was originated by Gantt [30]. the cost of reducing the project completion time to 360 days is 23643530 Rials. In a Gantt chart. Because their Earliest and Latest Start time and Earliest and Latest Finish time are coincident. The results of Crashing Analysis for Project Scheduling (new Critical activities. 1: The Gantt Chart for Project Scheduling of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization The Table 1 shows that. 2009 Fig. It is a graphical tool to show the start and finish times of each activity. And the activities 1. 14. there are 32 Critical Paths and the activities 1. 6 and 7 are Critical Activities. Similarly. 5.Am-Euras. 3. Suggested time. 9. the Table 1 shows that the minimum project completion time is 390 days. 6. CPM Analysis: For the project with deterministic activity times. 1. for non-critical activities. 24 and 25 become the Critical Activity. Crash time. 316 . 5 (3): 313-321. time is measured on the horizontal axis. have been shown in Table 2. A Gantt chart for Project Scheduling of stabilizing 300 hectares grape garden in agricultural research center of Zabol University by using of WinQsb software is presented in Fig. 16. 4. delays in their commencement will delay the overall project completion time. we solve the LP model to obtain the crashing solution. 5. 4. 12. 3. 23. In this means that. earliest start and finish times are depicted using the red bars. Suggested cost and total cost of reducing the project completion time to 365 days) by using of WinQsb software. 19. 6 and 7 are Critical. 7. Additional cost. finish and duration times. The Table 2 shows that. In addition. while latest start and finish times are depicted using pink bars. 5. In PERT-CPM. their Slack time is zero. Therefore. In this Gantt chart.. Managers find Gantt charts useful because they can simply glance at the chart on a given date to see if the project is being completed on schedule. 4.

Agric.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.000 0 0 0 0 204. 2: Cost-time trade-offs in crashing 300 hectares grape garden stabilization The cost-time trade-offs are depicted in Fig. The results of Activity Analysis based on PERT (Critical Activities.353 Normal cost 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Suggested cost 1.353 365 and 380 days. However. Earliest and Latest Start time. & Environ.Am-Euras.082.000 0 0 0 0 39.000 0 0 0 0 200. Sci.082.353 400. This is a similar process of CPM method.000 0 0 0 0 204. The whole procedure includes determining critical path and computing the expected project completion time. the cost of reducing the project completion time to 370 days is 10505000 Rials.000 0 0 0 0 39. have been shown in Table 3.000 0 0 0 439.000 0 0 0 439. J.364. For example. If they are not known with certainty they should be treated as random variables. which can be used to determine the cost of reducing the minimum project completion time to any value between 317 . Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT): The foregoing has assumed that the activity times are known with certainty. It also involves the probability analysis. 2009 Table 2: Crashing Analysis for Project Scheduling of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization Activity Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Oeverall Project: Critical path Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Normal time 36 10 7 33 147 10 147 21 10 14 5 2 148 2 198 4 148 148 2 298 2 98 4 298 298 2 73 60 38 Crash time 19 6 4 17 74 6 73 10 5 8 3 1 74 1 99 2 74 74 1 149 1 49 2 149 149 1 36 60 19 Suggested time 32 6 7 33 147 10 130 21 10 14 5 1 148 2 198 2 148 148 2 298 1 98 4 298 298 2 73 60 38 365 Additional cost 1. 2. 5 (3): 313-321. it is used for managing projects with probabilistic activity times.353 400. Fig. Activity mean time.000 0 0 0 0 200..000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.364. Earliest and Latest Finish time and Slack time) by using of WinQsb software.

3333 15. The above Table 4 shows that.3333 15.1667 0. respectively.5 0. 5 (3): 313-321.3333 99.5 71.6667 67.3333 0 55.49%.3333 14 Yes 2.6667 67. 2009 Table 3: Activity Analysis for Prject Scheduling of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization Activity On Critical Activity Earliest Earliest Name Path Mean Time Start Finish 1 Yes 36.3333 67.5 2 Yes 10.8409 0.6667 15. 16.6667 73.5 214 18 No 134.3333 78 265.8410 0.67 days.3748 1 --> 9 --> 12 --> 14 --> 16 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5. 370 and 365 days are (1->19-->21-->23-->25).1667 2.3333 343 8 No 20.8333 Completion Probability in 380 days 0.5248 0.3333 327.5 75.8333 78 24 No 283.0000 67.5 0 36.3333 Project Completion time = 364.1667 80.8333 22 No 95.6667 20 No 26.3333 62.3437 1 --> 14 --> 16 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.5 Latest Finish 36.1667 27 No 68.1667 222.5245 The Table 3 shows that. 9.5 62.6667 327.8333 231. 23 and 25 are Critical Activities.3333 15.6667 5 0.1667 15 No 181.8333 0 150.9978 0.3333 15.6667 267.6667 0 3.3333 5.1667 9 Yes 9.1667 6.6667 237.0000 0 264.1667 248.5249 0. 370 and 380 days according to different Critical Paths.5 0.6667 75.5 84. 19.6667 75.4391 Critical Path Completion Time Std. Dev 1 --> 12 --> 19 --> 21 --> 25 5.3955 1 --> 9 --> 12 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.3333 216.Am-Euras.1667 148. the maximum probability of completion this project in 380.8408 Completion Probability in 365 days 0.5 65 364.5 338 73.3333 46.4365 Latest Start 0 36.8333 364. 3.6667 78 364.8333 65 13 No 138.4135 1 --> 3 --> 9 --> 19 --> 21 --> 25 5. 14.6667 19 Yes 2.3333 0. Dev 1 --> 14 --> 16 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.6667 3 Yes 6.3463 1 --> 3 --> 19 --> 25 5.8333 0 0.3333 78 361.8333 10 No 14.3333 5 No 137.1667 71. Dev 1 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.67 days Number of Critical Path(s) = 384 Table 4: Probability Analysis for Project Scheduling of 300 hectares grape garden stabilization Critical Path Completion Time Std.3463 Critical Path Completion Time Std.1667 36.3333 65 203. has been shown in Table 4.3333 53 84.5 205.5 364.6667 322.6667 26 No 2.5 267. 318 .1667 62.(1-->12-->19-->21-->25)and(1-->14->16-->19-->21-->23-->25).8412 0.6667 100. respectively.3333 28 No 60 252.8333 53 62.6667 78 364.8333 1 0. 84.3980 1 --> 3 --> 9 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5. Sci.8414 0.9979 0.3697 1 --> 3 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.1667 312.8333 16 Yes 4.1667 349.3333 296.8333 322.8333 5. 12.1667 65 67. & Environ.1667 1.3333 0 115.1667 266.3333 21.1667 75.6667 53 307. the Table 4 shows that.5 0 161.1667 71.6667 1.5 17 No 142. 370 and 365 days.8333 5 1.1667 230.3333 7 No 111.6667 Slack (LS-ES) 0 0 0 15.8333 1.9976 Completion Probability in 370 days 0.8333 6 No 9.1667 75.5 327.5 71.3411 1 --> 9 --> 12 --> 23 --> 25 5.6667 364.3333 21 Yes 2. J.6667 68.5 364.5 46.8333 81.6667 53 99.3333 25 Yes 286.5 73.5 364.3333 0. the best Critical Paths for completion this project in 380.1667 78 80.3333 65 183. 2.6667 159.5 0.1667 73.6667 252.9980 0.9977 0. Agric.3359 1 --> 12 --> 16 --> 23 --> 25 5.3333 221.3411 1 --> 12 --> 14 --> 16 --> 19 --> 25 5. Also.5000 55.1667 266.14% and 52.5 46.1667 312.6667 73.1667 5 0.8333 171 23 Yes 2.1667 8.6667 364. In addition the Table 3 shows that.5 46.6667 5.8333 226.3333 252..5246 0. the probability of project completion time in 365.6667 269.8333 0.80%. the minimum probabilistic project completion time is 364.1667 29 No 37.6667 231.6667 237. 21.3333 0 187.3333 Standard Devietion 1.3333 0 193.6667 267. Also.3333 1 --> 16 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.1667 1.8333 0.1667 246.6667 71.8333 272 12 Yes 2.1667 364.8333 11 No 5.6667 53 4 No 31.3333 1 --> 12 --> 19 --> 21 --> 23 --> 25 5.1667 253 246.5247 0.6667 364. is 99.1667 71.6667 364.5 221. there is 384 Critical Paths and the activities 1.8333 231.

2. 3. 21. 2. 4. 12. In this paper. 3. 12. scheduling and control of projects. 2. `16. 9. 2. In addition. 3. 3. 21 1. was studied by CPM and PERT methods with WinQsb software. 370 and 365 days. 19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to thank A..49%. 16 1. 9. 12. which consist of numerous activities. 9 1. 2009 CONCLUSIONS Project scheduling and control refers to the planning. 3. 6 1. 16. 10. respectively. 12. 9 1. 3. the application of project scheduling in agriculture. base on using Normal time and PERT method was 390 days and 364. 26 1.80%. 3. 8. 5 1. 26 1. 3 1. 12. Therefore management and scheduling of projects is inevitably. Moghaddamnia for helpful comments and suggestions on this paper. 19. Soil Sampling and Analysis Location Identification and Land Map Preparation Determination of Irrigation System Type Land Digging and Initial Fixation of Pipes and Links Continue to Fix Pipes and Links Main Pipe Burying and Primary Welding of Secondary Pipes Continue to Secondary Pipes Welding Pipes Checkout and Burying Land Surveying and Ripping for Windbreak Fixation Ditch Fix and Windbreaks Drenching Plantation of Windbreak Seedlings Plantation Lines Primary Survey Continue to Plantation lines Survey Primary Heavy and Semi Heavy Ripping Continue to Heavy and Semi Heavy Ripping Primary Location Survey and Digging of Pits Continue to Pits Location Survey Continue to Pitts Digging Arable soil. 16. Agric. 9. 9. 2. 16. for stabilizing 300 hectares grape garden in Agricultural Research Center of Zabol University. 23. 84. 2. 3. 3 1. 4. 2. 9. 5.14% and 52. 3. 9. The main results are as follow: C C C Minimum completion time of this project. Results of CPM method showed that the cost of reducing the project completion time of this project. 2. 23 1. 12. 10 1. Appendix 1: The Activities list of Project Scheduling of 300 hectares Grape Garden Stabilization in Agricultural Research Center of Zabol University Activity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Land Preparation. 5. 12 1. 2 1. 19 1. 12. 6. 3. Gravel and Fertilizer Transfer to Farmland Primary Preparation of Mixed Soil Continue to Mixed Soil Preparation Mixed Soil Primary Transfer to Farmland and Primary Filling of Pits with them Continue to Mixed Soil Transfer to Farmland Continue to Pits Filling with Mixed Soil Primary Setting of Pipes (16inches) and Droppers Continue to Setting of Pipes (16inches) and Droppers Heavy Irrigation Predecessor … 1 1. 8. 12. to 365 days is 23643530 Rials. 3. 9. 28 Normal time 36 10 7 33 147 10 147 21 10 14 5 2 148 2 198 4 148 148 2 298 2 98 4 298 298 2 73 60 38 Crash time 19 6 4 17 74 6 73 10 5 8 3 1 74 1 99 2 74 74 1 149 1 49 2 149 149 1 36 60 19 Crash time cost 4600000 400000 3000000 450000 10950000 720000 888000 420000 1648000 125000 120000 39000 2886000 320000 31680000 439000 2886000 29600000 600000 89400000 200000 9800000 1200000 119200000 59600000 48000 1776000 0 9120000 Optimistic Most time likely time 34 9 5 29 125 8 100 18 9 13 4 2 130 2 160 4 130 125 2 24 2 90 2 270 275 2 65 60 35 35 9 6 30 135 9 110 20 9 14 5 2 135 2 180 4 140 130 2 26 2 94 2 280 285 2 67 60 37 Pessimistic time 45 16 9 39 160 13 130 27 14 19 7 3 160 3 210 6 165 160 3 32 3 105 3 310 305 3 76 60 40 29 Plantation of Grape Seedlings 319 . 6. Results of PERT method showed that the maximum probability completion of this project during 380.Am-Euras. 6 1. 16. 2. 16. 4. 2. 21. 3. 9. 19. 4. 3. 2. 8. 2. 12. 2.67 days. 9. 4 1. 16 1. 19. 2. Gravel and Fertilizer Primary Transfer to Farmland Continue to Arable soil. respectively. 2. 2. 9. 9. 2. 2. 21. 9. 3. 4. 23. J. 3. 16 1. 21 1. 3. 3. 19. 9. 23. 26. 3. 12. 2. 12. 12. 12 1. 16. 2. 14 1. 2. 19 1. 19. 19. 23 1. 2. 14. 9. 21. Sci. 12. 3. 12. 3. 21. R. 3. some activities of project are critical in the sense that delays in their commencement will delay the overall project completion time. is 99. 2. 9. 6. 3. 2. & Environ. 11. 16. 9. 2. 16. 23 1. 8. 5 (3): 313-321. 2. 16. 19. 9. 9. 14 1. 4. 3. 21. 6. 3. 12. 4.

and J.E. 1962. Precedence Relation: It tells which activity must be completed before another can be started. C. and A. Sci. Mgmt. Confederacion Espanola de Cajas de Ahorros. & Environ. 1970.. 1996. G. 17: 354-363. Princeton University Press: New Jersey. 320 . Pulido. Fox.B. Ford. 1962. A. Grubbs. Cortiijas. pp: 45-138.. Moder. 7..R.W. The activity time can be deterministic or uncertain (probabilistic).. The PERT model for the tile distribution of an activity. Critical Activity: Any activity on the critical path. 1961. A. Critical path planning and scheduling: Mathematical basis. Res.R.. Elmaghraby. Fulkerson. Inc. 10: 912-915. 3. Tools of the trade: A survey of project management tools.. Doblado JM (Ed. 11. Ryavec. 1961. Heally. pp: 324-373... If the earliest start and latest start times are the same then the activity is critical.. Kelley..L. Fulkerson. Operations Res.Am-Euras.. T. 21: 718-722. 13. Goyal. Earliest start (ES): this is the earliest possible time that an activity can begin. Network techniques in project management. S. and M.V. 1988.0.. 29: 20-28. 1959.. When the activity time is deterministic.L. Sci. J. K. 6. Activity Networks: Project Planning and Control by Network Models. An analytical study of the PERT assumptions. Operations Res. J. A simple CPM time/cost trade-off algorithm”. OR Technical Report 171. 1962. Berlin: Springer Verlag. Sci. Clark. Optimal linear approximation in project compression. Salem... 4. J. 15. Vazsonyi.. Slack = LS-ES = LF-EF C Start Activity: The activity that has no immediate predecessor is called a start activity of the project. 1964. Un método de la 1. 12(1): 16-37. Mauchly Associates. 1977. Pollack. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 1964. 1971.. In: Matematicas para economistas 2. 1975.H. Mgmt. and D. Wallker. K.R. A network flow computation for project cost curves. Scheduling Computer and Manufacturing Processes. C C C C Path: A sequence of activities in a project leading from the start activity to the completion activity of the project. As with start times. 9. REFERENCES 1. Attempts to validate certain PERT statistics or picking on PERT. 29: 19-29. New York: John Wiley and Sons. S. 9: 341-348.. J. Operations Res. N. Critical path planning and scheduling: An introduction. Weglarz. Sci. 5 (3): 313-321. C C C C C C C C Critical Path: A path that has the longest total activity time... the activity is completed in a constant time. 8. Ecker. 1998. 10: 405-406. 10. Project management software usage patterns and suggested research directions for future development.E. 16.e. Project Management Handbook. 1961. Project Manage. Earliest finish (EF): this is the earliest possible time that an activity can be finished (= earliest start time + activity completion time).A. 18. 17. Operations Res. J. Mgmt.. 14. J.. All immediate predecessors must be finished before an activity can start. 9: 296-320. Immediate Predecessor: The immediate predecessors of an activity are the activities that must immediately precede the activity.. Project Manage. Sci. Maccrimmon. Elmaghraby. When the activity time is probabilistic. Kelley. 7: 167-178. T. Spence.). the activity is completed in a random time value that may have a certain probability distribution.E.. 2nd Edn. C Latest start (LS): this is the latest time that an activity can begin and not delay the completion time of the overall project. i. Madrid. Activity subdivision and PERT probability statement. Ambler. Deterministic Project: A project that all activities finish in constant times. the activity is critical if the earliest finish and latest finish times are the same. A note on the paper: A simple CPM time/cost trade-off algorithm. Blazewicz. Siemans. Flows in networks.E. Schmidt and J. 5. Ops. 1998. 1981.. D. End Activity: The activity that is not a predecessor of any other activity is called an end activity of the project.E. Garcia and G. Slack time: this is the difference between the earliest start time and the latest start time (which in turn is equal to the difference between the latest start time and the latest finish time). PA. F. 12. Probabilistic Project: A project that has activities finish in uncertain times. and C.R. Manage.E. 2. S. J. L.R. L’Histoire de grandeur et de la decadence de la méthode PERT. Latest finish (LF): this is the latest time that an activity can be finished and not delay the completion time of the overall project (= latest start time + activity completion time). North Carolina State University at Raleigh. Agric..: Teoria de grafos. 2009 APPENDIX 2 (Glossary) C Activity Time: The time to complete a particular activity. J. J. 16(8): B-449 B-455..K.

How to plan and control with PERT.. Farnum. Manage. pp: 89-112. J. 33(10): 1360. Stanton.. 1989. 5 (3): 313-321.Am-Euras. 40: 1121-1127. A new distribution function for risk analysis. 29. Moitra. On the generality of the PERT average time formula.. 25. M. Soc. Op. 1989. D. A note on PERT assumptions. Estimating the mean and variance of PERT activity time using likelihood-ratio of the mode and the midpoint.L. 20.. H. Sasieni. 30. R. J. Littlefield. Res. Skewness and the beta distribution. Res. Decision Sci. and L. Utilizacion de modelos probabilisticos alternativos para el método PERT.. Kim. 23. J. Sci. Berny.1653. Agric. 32: 1652. 24. 1993. LIE. 1990. 321 . Aplicacion al anaisis de inversiones. Keefer. & Environ.R. Soc. A note on PERT times. Troutt. N. 2009 19. 41. Manage. 1962.. 27.D. J. Miller. Some results concerning the estimation of beta distribution parameters in PERT. Soc. 33: 1357-1359. 21. Sci. Sci.W. Harvard Business Rev. 109: 953-961.W. Herrerias. D. Sci.K. 26. 1987.. 38(3): 287-290. and S. and R.. Sci. K. pp: 93-104... Manage.H.M.. Randolpli.C.L. Op. Secretariado de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Valladolid. 22. 1989. Gallagher. T.W.. C. 1916. 1987.. 28. 1986. R.A.. An answer to Sasieni’s question on PERT times. September 1916. Transaction. Verdini. Manage. 39: 1086-1091.. and W. Chae. J. What is Preparedness? The Engineering Magazine. S.. Op. Better estimation of PERT activity time parameters. 22(3): 198-203. EstudiosdeEconomla Aplicada. 1990. 1987. Res. Gantt. 20: 410-412.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful