Skip to main content

Comparison between Critical Path Method (CPM) and Last Planners System (LPS) for Planning and Scheduling METRO Rail Project of Ahmedabad

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
CIGOS 2019, Innovation for Sustainable Infrastructure

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 54))

  • 204 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to compare Critical Path Method (CPM) and Last Planner System (LPS) with respect to Planning and Scheduling of METRO Rail Project, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Critical Path Method emphasises on updating the network for tracking the progress as well as to identify the delays. Last Planner System works on the weekly schedules prepared from the Master Plan and Look-ahead schedules to avoid the delays. One of the stretch from North-South Corridor was selected for the study from Vijaynagar to Usmanpura. The data such as activities, duration of activities, sequence and inter-relation of activities etc. were collected to prepare the network as well as weekly schedules. The network was updated and original network was compared with the updated one and the delays were spotted for the stretch selected. Weekly plans were also prepared for the selected stretch from the look-ahead schedule and Master Plan. PPC (Percent Plan Complete) were calculated to track the progress as per planned schedule. The data were collected by conducting interviews of various personnel and visual observations. Both the approaches (CPM and LPS) have been applied on the selected stretch by action research process. The delays were calculated and studied for both the methods and it was observed that Last Planner System is more appropriate to use for big infrastructure projects like this to avoid time-overrun and consecutive cost over-run. Resources can be well utilized with the Last Planner System, too. The type of this paper is a Case Study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ballard, G. (2000), “The Last Planner System of production control”, PhD thesis, School of Civil Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ballard, G. and Howell, G. (2003), “An update to Last Planner”, Proceedings of the 11th IGLC Conference, Blacksburg, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ballard, G., Howell, G. and Casten, M. (1996), “PARC: A case study”, Proceedings of the 4th IGLC Conference, Birmingham, reprinted in Alarcon (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Garnett, N., Jones, D. and Murray, S. (1998) “A strategic application of lean thinking”, Proceedings of the 6th IGLC Conference, Brazil.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Junior, A., Scola, A. and Conte, A. (1998), “Last Planner as a site operations tool”, Proceedings of the 6th IGLC Conference, Guaruja, Sao Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ballard, G. (2000), “The Last Planner System of production control”, PhD thesis, School of Civil Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fiallo, C. and Revelo, V. (2002), “Applying LPS to a construction project: a case study in Quito, Ecuador”, Proceedings of the 10th IGLC Conference, Gramado.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Thomassen, M., Sander, D., Barnes, K. and Nielsen, A. (2003), “Experience and results from implementing Lean Construction in a large Danish contracting firm”, Proceedings of the 13th IGLC Conference, Blacksburg, VA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Parekh, V., Asnani, K., Bhatt, Y., Mulchandani, R. (2020). Comparison between Critical Path Method (CPM) and Last Planners System (LPS) for Planning and Scheduling METRO Rail Project of Ahmedabad. In: Ha-Minh, C., Dao, D., Benboudjema, F., Derrible, S., Huynh, D., Tang, A. (eds) CIGOS 2019, Innovation for Sustainable Infrastructure. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 54. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0802-8_81

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0802-8_81

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0801-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0802-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics