整合總浮時管理與實獲工期管理進行工期延遲分析之實證研究

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	何莫函 Mohammad Raihan Hamzah
論文名稱：	整合總浮時管理與實獲工期管理進行工期延遲分析之實證研究 An Empirical Study of Integrating Total Float Management and Earned Duration Management for Delay Analysis
指導教授：	楊智斌博士 Prof. Jyh-Bin Yang, Ph.D. Ir. Kartika Puspa Negara, ST., MT., Ph.D.
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	工學院 - 土木系營建管理碩士班 Master's Program in Construction Management, Department of Civil Engineering
論文出版年：	2025
畢業學年度：	113
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	120
中文關鍵詞：	One keyword per line 、總浮時管理（TFM）、實獲工期管理（EDM）、預測性延遲浮時分析（FDFA）、時程管理、自動化程式
外文關鍵詞：	One keyword per line, Total Float Management (TFM), Earned Duration Management (EDM), Forecasted Delay Float Analysis (FDFA), Schedule Management, Automation Program
相關次數：	點閱：69 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

總浮時管理（Total Float Management, TFM）是一種延遲分析方法，與其他延遲分析方法相比，提供了較為完善的功能。鑒於時間是確保工程專案順利達成目標的關鍵因素之一，而TFM方法在營建產業中的應用已日益普及，對於解決時程延遲分析提供普遍可以被爭議方接受的分析結果。然而，實務上該方法通常僅用於延遲已發生或正在發生的情況，尚無其在延遲發生前的預測分析中應用的明確證據。此外，手動執行TFM也需耗費大量時間，與延遲分析應儘速完成的實務需求存在落差。本研究結合了 EDM(t)+（時間型實獲工期管理）方法與TFM的基本概念，提出一種新的方法，稱為預測性延遲浮時分析（Forecasted Delay Float Analysis, FDFA）。此方法自預測潛在延遲著手，進一步分析延遲對專案時程所造成的影響。同時，本研究亦開發了一套自動化程式，以有效執行 FDFA 方法的計算。該程式所產生的結果已透過人工計算與既有公式進行驗證，證實其正確性。FDFA 方法的產出包含各作業項目的預測延遲及其延遲持續時間，並呈現此等延遲對整體專案時程造成的影響。研究結果顯示，FDFA 方法在效能上優於作為其基礎的兩種分析方法。本研究亦指出本研究之限制，特別是在取得真實工程案例以及預測可能導致延遲的責任歸屬方面。因此，建議後續研究能以更多實務專案為基礎進行驗證，以提升 FDFA 方法的可靠性。

Total Float Management (TFM) is a delay analysis method that offers the better functions compared to other delay analysis methods. TFM provides acceptable analysis outcomes of schedule delay analysis for the parties to dispute. The application of TFM method in the construction industry has become widespread, considering that time is one of the critical factors in ensuring the success of a construction project in achieving its objectives. However, in practice, this method is commonly applied when the delay is already occurring or has occurred, with no recorded evidence of its use for pre-delay analysis. Moreover, conducting TFM manually also requires a considerable amount of time, while delay analysis is expected to be completed as quickly as possible. This study adopts the fundamental concepts of both the EDM(t)+ method and TFM to develop a new approach called FDFA (Forecasted Delay Float Analysis), where the calculation process begins with forecasting potential delays, followed by analyzing the impact of those delays on the project schedule. An automation process was also developed to perform the FDFA calculations efficiently. The accuracy of the results generated by this automation process was verified by performing manual calculations based on the available formulas. The output produced by the FDFA method consists of the forecasted delay of project activities along with their respective durations, as well as the delay impact resulting from those forecasts on the project schedule. The results demonstrated that the FDFA method successfully outperforms both previous methods, which were used as the foundation for developing this new approach. This research acknowledges certain limitations, particularly in obtaining real-world project case studies and in predicting which party would be responsible for the potential delays. Therefore, it is recommended that future studies conduct validation using a broader range of practical projects to ensure the reliability of the FDFA method.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT    i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT    i
TABLE OF CONTENTS    i
LIST OF FIGURES    iv
LIST OF TABLES    vi
ABBREVIATIONS    vii
Chapter 1    : Introduction    1
1    Research Background    1
2    Problem Statement    2
3    Research Objectives    3
4    Research Methodology    3
5    Limitations    5
6    Thesis Structure    5
Chapter 2    : Literature Review    6
1    Project Management Overview    6
2    Project Schedule in Construction Project    6
2.1    As-Plannned Schedule    9
2.2    Adjusted Schedule    9
2.3    As-Built Schedule    9
2.4    Baseline Schedule    9
2.5    Analysis Schedule    10
2.6    Total Float Entitlement Schedule    10
3    Float Ownership Concept    11
3.1    Owner Float Concept    11
3.2    Contractor Float Concept    11
3.3    Project Float Concept    12
3.4    Bar Concept    12
3.5    50/50 Pre-allocation Concept    12
3.6    Commodity Concept    13
3.7    Contract Risk Concept    13
3.8    Path Distribution Concept    13
3.9    Day-by-day Concept    14
4    Total Float Management as a Delay Analysis Method    14
4.1    Type of Delay Events    15
4.2    Concurrent Delay Issues    15
4.3    Pacing Delay Issues    16
4.4    Acceleration in Delay Claims    17
5    Earned Duration Management(t)+ as a Duration Analysis Method    17
5.1    Project Performance Indexes    19
5.2    Comparison Between EDM and EDM(t)+    20
6    MAPE Calculation for Accuracy Verification    22
7    Project Management Software Overview    22
Chapter 3    : Methodology    26
1    The Forecasting Approach for Predicting Potential Delays    28
1.1    Formula of TPDi+ and TEDi+    29
1.2    Formula of TED++    29
1.3    Formula of ED(t)+    30
1.4    Calculation of Progress and Performance Indicator    30
2    The Total Float Approach for Delay Analysis    31
2.1    Non-Concurrent Delay or Acceleration Analysis    33
2.2    Concurrent Delay or Acceleration Analysis    33
2.3    Total Float Analysis    34
2.4    Updating OETF and CETF After the Changing of Total Float    34
3    Steps for Implementing the Forecasted Delay Float Analysis Method    37
4    Development of an Automated Calculation Process    40
4.1    The Custom System    40
4.2    The Execution of the Custom System    43
4.3    The Result of the Custom System    44
Chapter 4    : Result and Discussion    46
1    Limitation of the New Approach    46
2    Validation    48
3    The New Approach Analysis Using the Automation Process    55
3.1    The Procedure of Using the Automation Process    56
3.2    Rules for Using the Automation Process    67
3.3    Research Results of the Project Simulation    68
3.4    Cumulative Results of Float Analysis    83
3.5    Determining the Responsible Party and the Occurrence of Concurrent Delay    83
3.6    Efficiency Evaluation: Automated vs. Manual Float Analysis    85
3.7    Accuracy of Calculation Results Using the Forecasted Delay Analysis Method    86
Chapter 5    : Conclusions and Recommendations    103
1    Conclusions    103
2    Recommendations    104
REFERENCES    105
                                

REFERENCES
1. Assaf, S.A. and S. Al-Hejji, Causes of delay in large construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2006. 24(4): p. 349-357.
2. González, P., et al., Analysis of Causes of Delay and Time Performance in Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2014. 140(1): p. 04013027.
3. Al-Gahtani, K. and S. Mohan, Delay Analysis Techniques Comparison. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 2011. 5: p. 740-747.
4. Yang, J.-B. and M.-K. Tsai, Computerizing ICBF Method for Schedule Delay Analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2011. 137(8): p. 583-591.
5. Khamooshi, H. and H. Golafshani, EDM: Earned Duration Management, a new approach to schedule performance management and measurement. International Journal of Project Management, 2014. 32(6): p. 1019-1041.
6. 葉安娜, 建構用於提升專案工期預測準確性之方法, in 土木系營建管理碩士班. 2024, 國立中央大學.
7. Al-Gahtani, K.S., A comprehensive construction delay analysis technique: Enhanced with a float ownership concept. 2006, State University of New York at Buffalo: United States -- New York. p. 387.
8. Institute, P.M., A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide) / Project Management Institute. 6th edition ed. 2017, Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073-3299 USA: Project Management Institute, Inc.
9. Bryde, D., Methods for Managing Different Perspectives of Project Success. British Journal of Management, 2005. 16: p. 119-131.
10. Nicholas, J. and H. Steyn, Project Management for Engineering, Business and Technology. 2017.
11. Nagata, M.F., et al., Chapter One - Project Scheduling, in Construction Delays (Third Edition), M.F. Nagata, et al., Editors. 2018, Butterworth-Heinemann. p. 1-12.
12. Alkass, S., M. Mazerolle, and F. Harris, Construction delay analysis techniques. Construction Management and Economics, 2010. 14: p. 375-394.
13. Al-Gahtani Khalid, S., Float Allocation Using the Total Risk Approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2009. 135(2): p. 88-95.
14. De La Garza Jesus, M., C. Vorster Michael, and M. Parvin Cordell, Total Float Traded as Commodity. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1991. 117(4): p. 716-727.
15. Householder Jerry, L. and E. Rutland Hulan, Who Owns Float? Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1990. 116(1): p. 130-133.
16. Wang, M.T., et al., A comparison of float ownership issues for construction projects between Taiwan and China. Journal of Marine Science and Technology (Taiwan), 2015. 23: p. 69-77.
17. Prateapusanond, A. A Comprehensive Practice of Total Float Pre-Allocation and Management for the Application of A CPM-Based Construction Contract. 2003.
18. Arditi, D. and T. Pattanakitchamroon, Selecting a delay analysis method in resolving construction claims. International Journal of Project Management, 2006. 24(2): p. 145-155.
19. Al-Gahtani, K.S. and S.B. Mohan, Total Float Management for Delay Analysis: a Publication of the American Association of Cost Engineers. Cost Engineering, 2007. 49(2): p. 32-37.
20. Vo, H., Total Float Management Technique Under the Float and Resource Loading. Tra Vinh University Journal of Science; ISSN: 2815-6072; E-ISSN: 2815-6099, 2023: p. 28-37.
21. Bramble, B.B. and M.T. Callahan, Construction Delay Claims. 1999: Aspen Law & Business.
22. Kraiem Zaki, M. and E. Diekmann James, Concurrent Delays in Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 1987. 113(4): p. 591-602.
23. Zack, J.G., Jr., Pacing delays-the practical effect: a Publication of the American Association of Cost Engineers. Cost Engineering, 2000. 42(7): p. 23-28.
24. Shumway, R., A. Richard, and J. Ritti, New Trends and Bad Results in Construction Contracts, Part I. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 2004. 4(3): p. 93-98.
25. Acebes, F., et al., Stochastic Earned Duration Analysis for Project Schedule Management. Engineering, 2022. 9: p. 148-161.
26. Vanhoucke, M., et al., Introduction to earned duration. 2015.
27. Mareels, E. and J. Martens, Earned Duration Management: Evaluation and extension of a novel project control technique for the time dimension. 2018, 2018.
28. Batselier, J. and M. Vanhoucke, Empirical Evaluation of Earned Value Management Forecasting Accuracy for Time and Cost. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2015. 141(11): p. 05015010.
29. Jurison, J., Software project management: the manager's view. Commun. AIS, 1999. 2(3es): p. 2–es.
30. Nguyen, T.D., D. Nguyen, and T. Nguyen, Information Systems Success: The Project Management Information System for ERP Projects. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, 2016.
31. Kostalova, J., L. Tetrevova, and J. Svedik, Support of Project Management Methods by Project Management Information System. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015. 210: p. 96-104.
32. Gharaibeh, H., Evaluating Project Management Software Packages Using a Scoring Model—A Comparison between MS Project and Primavera. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, 2014. 07: p. 541-554.
33. Kalwar, M., Optimization of Procurement & Purchase Order Process in Foot Wear Industry by Using VBA in Ms Excel. 2020. 5: p. 80-100.
34. Al-Gahtani, K.S., I.A. Al-Sulaihi, and A. Iqupal, Total float management: computerized technique for construction delay analysis. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 2016. 43(5): p. 391-401.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文