Publicación:
Comparing three scheduling methods using BIM models in the Last Planner System

dc.contributor.author Brioso, X es_PE
dc.contributor.author Murguia, D es_PE
dc.contributor.author Urbina, A es_PE
dc.date.accessioned 2024-05-30T23:13:38Z
dc.date.available 2024-05-30T23:13:38Z
dc.date.issued 2017
dc.description This study was partially funded by the Dirección de Gestión de la Investigación at Pontifical Catholic University of Peru and the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica del Perú (CONCYTEC from its acronym in Spanish), according to the Convenio de Gestión N° 232-2015-FONDECYT. We would also like to thank to Dilmer Dueñas, who kindly participated as instructor in the workshops
dc.description.abstract This article present strategie for teaching scheduling methods such as takt-time, flowlines, and point-to-point precedence relations (PTPPRs) using build-ing information modeling (BIM) models in the Last Planner System. This article is the extended version of the article entitled “Teaching Ta k t-Time, Flowline and Point-to-point Precedence Relations: A Peruvian Case Study,” which has been published in Procedia Engineering (Vol. 196, 2017, pages 666–673). A case study is conducted in final year students of civil engineering at the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru. The mock-up project is an educational building that has high repetitive processes in the struc-tural works phase. First, traditional tools such as Excel spreadsheets and 2D drawings were used to teach produc-tion system design with takt-time, flowlines, and PTPPR. Second, 3D and 4D models with Revit 2016 and Navis-works 2016 were used to integrate the previous schedules with a BIM model and to identify its strengths and weak-nesses. Finally, Vico Office was used for the automation of schedules and comparison of the methods in 4D and 5D. This article describes the lectures, workshops, and simu-lations employed, as well as the feedback from students and researchers. The success of the teaching strategy is reflected in the survey responses from students and the final perceptions of the construction management tools presented
dc.description.sponsorship Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica - Concytec
dc.identifier.doi https://doi.org/10.1515/otmcj-2016-0024
dc.identifier.isi 427301900003
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12390/1202
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher Sciendo
dc.relation.ispartof Organization Technology and Management in Construction
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subject teaching
dc.subject Last Planner System es_PE
dc.subject BIM es_PE
dc.subject flowline es_PE
dc.subject point-to-point precedence relations es_PE
dc.subject takt-time es_PE
dc.subject.ocde https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#1.02.00
dc.title Comparing three scheduling methods using BIM models in the Last Planner System
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dspace.entity.type Publication
oairecerif.author.affiliation #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
oairecerif.author.affiliation #PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
Archivos