UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An automated corrective action selective assistant Fayek, Aminah 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1992_fall_fayek_aminah.pdf [ 6.77MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0050507.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0050507-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0050507-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0050507-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0050507-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0050507-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0050507-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0050507-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0050507.ris

Full Text

AN AUTOMATED CORRECTIVE ACTIONSELECTION ASSISTANTbyAMINAH FAYEKB.Eng., McGill University, 1991A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF APPLIED SCIENCEinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIESDEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERINGWe accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAJune 1992© Aminah Fayek, 1992In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.Department of 	Civil EngineeringThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate	 June 29, 1992DE-6 (2/88)iiABSTRACTAutomated daily site reporting as an integral part of aproject management system has the potential to be the missing linkfor effective construction project monitoring and control. Problemtrends over time can be detected more readily through themaintenance of daily site records that track problems occurringagainst activities; timely corrective action can thus be initiatedmore quickly. The goal of this thesis is to develop a schema toperform the automated interpretation of daily site records toidentify activities that are experiencing difficulties; to identifythe source(s) of these problems; to identify the types of problemsresulting; to find collaborating information from the daily siterecords to validate the causes of these problems; and to suggestlikely corrective actions.A framework is presented wherein each component of theanalysis schema is defined. Fuzzy logic is used to define theimprecise relationships that exist between these components. Aprototype system is developed to implement and test the schema.The components of the prototype are: a user interface; data files;an application program; an inference engine; and an expert rulebase. The prototype is validated by way of several simple examplessolved both manually and by the computer. A case study of ahypothetical construction project is also treated by automatedinterpretation to demonstrate the workability of the prototype ona multi-activity project.iiiThe model developed in this thesis would benefit from additionto and refinement of the expert rule base, and furtherinvestigation of the use of fuzzy logic to incorporate in theanalysis other items of information that can be collected on site.A future system would make use of user feedback, reporting on whichcorrective actions have been implemented and their impacts onperformance.ivTABLE OF CONTENTSABSTRACT 	  iiLIST OF TABLES 	  viiLIST OF FIGURES 	  viiiACKNOWLEDGEMENT 	1.0 INTRODUCTION 	 11.1 Introduction 	 11.2 Goals 	 11.3 Overview of the Control Problem 	 51.4 Focus of the Thesis 	 91.5 Research Methodology 	 131.6 Overview of the Thesis 	 152.0 FRAMEWORK 	 162.1 Introduction 	 162.2 Generic Activity Description 	 162.3 Other Data Recorded 	 192.4 Problem Sources 	 202.5 Corrective Actions 	 272.6 Automated Interpretation 	 323.0 FUZZY ANALYSIS 	 363.1 Reasons for Use of Fuzzy Set Theory 	 363.2 Fuzzy Logic Framework 	 37V4.0 SYSTEM PROTOTYPE 	  604.1 Introduction 	  604.2 Prototype Overview 	  614.2.1 User Interface 	  624.2.2 REPCON Data Files 	  704.2.3 Application Program 	  714.2.4 Inference Engine 	  914.2.5 Rule Base 	  924.3 Interaction Between Application Program,Inference Engine, and Rule Base 	  944.4 Processing Considerations 	  965.0 APPLICATION IN PRACTICE 	  1005.1 Sequence of Steps for the AutomatedInterpretation 	  1005.2 Procedure for Validating the Prototype 	  1015.3 Case Study 	  1226.0 CONCLUSION 	  1456.1 Thesis Review 	  1456.2 Recommendations for Future Work 	  146BIBLIOGRAPHY 	  152viAPPENDIX A:	 DAILY SITE FORM 	  154APPENDIX B: 	 STANDARD STRENGTH BETWEEN PROBLEMSOURCES AND USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES 	  156APPENDIX C:	 DIAGNOSING CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FORPROBLEM SOURCES: EXAMPLES 	  165APPENDIX D:	 EXPERT RULE BASE 	  239viiLIST OF TABLES2.1 User-Assigned Activity Attributes 	 182.2 Problem Sources 	 21-252.3 Selected Problem Sources Used in thePrototype 	 262.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions 	 28-323.1 Standard Strength Between a Problem Source andUser-Assigned Activity Attributes 	 423.2 Rules to Determine the Type of Problem (Yd)Arising out of a Given Problem Source (Xj) 	 46,474.1 Predicates and Conditions that Returna Value TRUE 	 74-775.1 Characteristics of Activities in Test Project ... 103-106viiiLIST OF FIGURES2.1 Relationship Between the Data Elements Usedin Automated Interpretation 	  333.1 Fuzzy Membership Function 	  403.2 Analysis Schema A 	  413.3 Analysis Schema B 	 453.4 Frequency Function for Problem Sources 	  494.1 Prototype Components 	  614.2 REPCON Main Menu 	  624.3 Enter Standard Daily Site Problem Codes 	  644.4 Assign Activity Attributes to Problem Sources 	  644.5 Define Corrective Action Categories 	  654.6 Define Corrective Actions(Constituents of Categories) 	  654.7 Assign User-Assigned Activity Attributes 	  664.8 Enter Daily Status Data 	 674.9 Enter Work Environment Data 	 674.10 Enter Work Force Data 	  684.11 Enter Daily Status for Activity 	 684.12 Enter Problem Data for Activity 	 694.13 Initiate Data Interpretation 	  704.14 Future Addition to the Daily SiteAnalysis Report 	  814.15 ASCII File of Rule Base 	  924.16 Rule Nesting Structure 	  98ix5.1 Activity Report for Examples 	 1095.2 Work Environment Data Report for Examples 	 1105.3 Work Force Data Report for Examples 	 1115.4 Problem Listing for Examples 	 1125.5 Daily Site Analysis Report for ExamplesUsing Max-Min Rule 	 1145.6 Daily Site Analysis Report for ExamplesUsing Cum-Min Rule 	 1185.7 Bar Chart for Case Study 	 1235.8 Activity Report for Case Study 	 1245.9 Work Environment Data Report for Case Study 	 1285.10 Work Force Data Report for Case Study 	 1295.11 Problem Listing for Case Study 	 1305.12 Daily Site Analysis Report for Case StudyUsing Max-Min Rule 	 1325.13 Daily Site Analysis Report for Case StudyUsing Cum-Min Rule 	 138xACKNOWLEDGEMENTI would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor,Dr. Alan D. Russell, for his guidance, knowledge, insight, andcontinuous encouragement and support. His dedication and patiencewere much appreciated.I would also like to thank greatly the employees of theUniversity of British Columbia Construction Management Laboratory,Luong Pham, Sylvia Dodd, and particularly William Wong, who wasresponsible for writing the code for the application program.I would like to express the fact that the commitment andcontribution of the above mentioned people has been a significantfactor in conducting this research.I would like to thank Dr. William Caselton for sharing hisknowledge and resources on the topic of fuzzy logic.I would also like to express my gratitude to Wendell Fong,Doug Kazakoff, Tim Singbeil, and Jim Turnham, all of SCIEngineering and Constructors Inc., for sharing their valuablepractical experience.Finally, I would like to thank the University of BritishColumbia and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Councilof Canada, without whose financial support this work would not havebeen possible.11.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 IntroductionThis chapter introduces the problem of automated projectcontrol in construction and gives an overview of the controlproblem. The focus of this thesis is explained, as well as theresearch methodology employed. Finally, an overview of the thesisis given.1.2 GoalsAutomated daily site reporting as an integral part of aproject management system has the potential to be the missing linkfor effective construction project monitoring and control.Demonstrated benefits include faster response time in dealing withproblems, speedier schedule updating leading to increased schedulecredibility, help in dealing with claims, and documentation ofexperience in a form useful for future projects. Problem trendsover time can be detected more readily through the maintenance ofdaily site records that track problems occurring againstactivities; timely corrective action can thus be initiated morequickly. Automated schedule updating can be performed if activitystatus is recorded on a daily basis and used to periodically updatethe schedule. Documentation of activity progress, problems2encountered with activities, and environment, site, and work forceconditions is useful in the preparation of claims and as evidencein court. As each project is documented through daily sitereporting, as it progresses, a company accumulates a knowledge baseof experience that can be referenced for future projects. Russell(1991) describes an automated approach for collecting andprocessing site information.Various items of information are recordable: work environmentdata, such as weather and site conditions; work force data for eachtrade involved in the job (e.g. number, skill, and turnoverlevels); activity status of all work scheduled (e.g. started,ongoing, finished, idle, or postponed); and problem sourcesexperienced by activities (e.g. too much precipitation,insufficient/incomplete drawings), as well as their time and costimpacts. The issue arises as to what is recordable, and at whichlevel. Some recording can be automated because reasonably straightforward measurement is involved, such as the recording oftemperature highs and lows, daily precipitation, maximum windvelocity, and the number of workers on the site for each trade.Other items require judgement and therefore pose difficulties;these items include activity status, problems encountered, and theskill level of the workers on site.All of this data forms an image of the job versus time. Howuseful this data is for purposes of explaining root problem sourcesand thus identifying effective corrective actions, if any, is afunction of:3(i) the ability to standardize the classification and reportingof information;(ii) the ability of management personnel to review and digest thelessons contained within masses of data; and(iii)the ability to relate project variables such as environmentconditions, site conditions, work force data, and problemsources to performance.A review of the literature revealed several studies onstandardizing the measurement of productivity and developingfunctions and parameters to predict productivity. In particular,Thomas, Sanders, and Horner (1988) have developed a manual thatdescribes a methodology for collecting and documenting the stateor condition of various factors that have been reported to affectlabour productivity. Chang (1991) presents a case study based onthe application of Thomas, Sanders, and Horner's manual. Russell(1990) outlines a framework for productivity analysis andimprovement. Other attempts at developing standards for measuringand predicting productivity are found in Neil and Knack (1984);Thomas and Yiakoumis (1987); Russell and Chang (1987); Jansma(1988); and Rahbar, Yates, and Spencer (1991).No robust mathematical production functions exist that arevery useful in terms of demonstrating sensitivity of performanceto one or more changes in exogenous or endogenous variables.Because of these very imperfect understandings, tools such as fuzzylogic could prove to be useful for the problem at hand. Recentdevelopments dealing with knowledge-based and fuzzy process control4systems point the way to the automation of the interpretation ofjob records and the suggestion of appropriate corrective actions.Because the production functions alluded to previously do not existin comprehensive form, fuzzy logic is most appropriate for relatingproject variables to activity performance. Fuzzy logic and itsapplication to this work are explained in Chapter 3.For construction, such a system should be able to diagnose:(i) that an activity or trade is experiencing difficulty,(ii) what the most likely causes of the difficulty are,(iii)what collaborating information validates these causes, and(iv) what are the most appropriate corrective actions.In this way, the system can detect likely performance trends earlyin the construction process so that timely remedial measures canbe implemented to correct problems while they still exist.The primary goal of this system is to create an awareness onthe part of the construction project manager of recurring problemsand their most likely sources, and to suggest corrective actionsfor these problems. A secondary aim is to perform a check amongstdata items input to the system in order to validate theirconsistency and to feed back an analysis of the input, with the aimof improving the quality of the data collected. This thesis willoutline a framework for such a system and will demonstrate it byway of a small-scale working model.51.3 Overview of the Control ProblemThe construction industry is based on numerous heuristicprinciples, rules-of-thumb, and knowledge that is often documentedin memory rather than on paper. Furthermore, there is the issueof pattern recognition; the seasoned superintendent or projectmanager has "seen" a situation before, and he now attempts to headoff its consequences based on his past experience. In order toestablish automated procedures and standards for dealing withproblems, some of this knowledge and experience must be codified."The purpose for defining a specific procedure is to clarify,document, and quantify the intuition or experience of the relevantparticipants." (Smith and Hancher, 1989, p. 555). The benefits ofsuch codification include even earlier detection of problems, anda more consistent quality of management across a firm's projects.There are six steps involved in the process of monitoringprogress and implementing control:(i) defining a base against which to monitor;(ii) selecting the items of information that are to be collectedin order to monitor progress;(iii)designing and calibrating the sensors;(iv) detecting in the field;(v) interpreting and analyzing the field data; and(vi) diagnosing problems and suggesting corrective actions.The first step is to establish a base against which progresscan be monitored. In construction, this involves establishing or6assuming a base productivity for activities, as well as the levelof resource inputs, unit cost, the pace of work, and the requiredquality or tolerance. Productivity, which is defined here as inputover output (e.g. manhours/square metre of formwork installed), isestimated based on past experience and previous job records,combined with modifications for advances in the state-of-the-art.Once these factors for each activity have been defined, a scheduleis built based on activity logic and the estimated durations ofeach activity. This schedule and the estimates for these factorsform a baseline against which progress can be monitored anddeviations recorded.The second step is to select the information needed to monitorwork progress. The information chosen for this work is thatcontained in the daily site records of a research version of acommercial software system called REPCON, which is explained inChapter 2. This information includes work environment data, suchas weather and site conditions; work force data for each trade;daily activity status; problem sources associated with activitiesand the trade responsible for the problem source; and an estimateof manhours and/or days lost on an activity due to a problemsource. A copy of a daily site form used for recording thisinformation is found in Appendix A.An additional performance measure against each activity wasinitially desired. This additional sensor would have been a dailyperformance rating of each activity as to whether the work beingperformed on it was less than satisfactory, satisfactory, or more7than satisfactory, in terms of productivity and/or production rate.Field experience showed that it would be difficult to collect suchinformation for two reasons. Firstly, foremen or superintendentsare generally hesitant about rating their crews for fear ofadmitting that their workers were not performing satisfactorily,which would reflect badly on both the crew and on themselves.Secondly, a daily performance rating at the activity level isdifficult to give on large jobs, since there is rarely a siteperson dedicated to this task. This would fall under thejurisdiction of the superintendent or foreman, who has a multitudeof other responsibilities. At best, he is able to calculate actualproductivities on a weekly basis in order to detect overruns orunderruns. Considering the physical span of most projects and themultitude of activities involved, to achieve a daily rating wouldrequire a dedicated resource in an industry where resources areusually stretched to their limit. The utility of this informationin an automated analysis schema does not appear, at this time, tojustify the amount of effort required to collect it.The third step involves designing and calibrating the sensorsto monitor progress. The sensors are the field personnel recordingthe daily site information. Calibrating the sensors involvestraining the recorders to achieve consistent reporting skills.The issue of detection in the field, the fourth step, containsthe greatest degree of uncertainty and inconsistency. Firstly, thefield sensors are the field personnel, each of which has adifferent level of education and experience as well as a different8attitude towards recording daily site information. From theauthor's experience, on a typical heavy-civil construction job, thecross-section of site personnel responsible for recording dailysite information covers a wide spectrum: those that are botheducated (e.g. engineers) and experienced yet unwilling to recordproblems; those that are uneducated but experienced and willing todocument work progress, productivity, delays, and problems; thosethat are both educated and experienced and comfortable with keepingcomplete daily site records; and those that are uneducated and havedifficulty in writing and therefore in documenting daily siteinformation. Not only does the level of reporting skill varyamongst these men, but their willingness to record problems in thework also varies and is related to their tendency to alignthemselves with either the field or the office. Those that were"pro-field" and "anti-management" tended to shun paperwork. On theother hand, as the number of subcontractors increases on a project,so too does the willingness of the General Contractor's forces torecord problems caused by these subcontractors. All of thesefactors result in a great deal of variation in the quality ofinformation collected in the field.A second detection issue involves compiling a set of problemsources from which field personnel can choose to record againstactivities that achieves a balance between being concise yet all-inclusive. The smaller the set of problems, the easier it is toselect from it, yet the more likely it is that a problem will occuron the site that is not contained in the problem set.9Thirdly, detection and representation of information can bebiased. As often happens in construction, each party is interestedin representing selective truth for their own benefit.Once data has been collected, it must be interpreted (step 5)in order to derive benefits from the knowledge recorded. Automatedinterpretation is necessary if large amounts of data are beinganalyzed. From the analysis, problems interfering in work progresscan be diagnosed and corrective actions suggested (step 6).1.4 Focus of the ThesisThe focus of this thesis is the automated interpretation andanalysis of the field data collected in order to diagnose problemsand to suggest timely remedial measures. It builds on an automateddaily site reporting system integrated with a project managementsystem called REPCON, which provides a basis against which tomonitor progress and the tools to do so; relevant features ofREPCON are described in Chapter 2. Nevertheless, considerably moreeffort must be devoted to developing production functions forproductivity; the sensor issue; and the field detection issue.Problem sources and their corrective actions are interpretableat several levels: the individual activity; a group of activities;a responsibility or trade; or the entire project. The focus ofthis work will be on the individual activity level.Furthermore, one of two approaches can be used to interpret10information recorded against an activity: the generic approach,or the knowledge-rich approach. The generic approach codifiesknowledge using the concept of a generic activity, wherein themeaning of the activity is not taken into account. It does notpossess any knowledge about the characteristics of the activity.The knowledge-rich approach, on the other hand, is activity-specific, in which meaning is attached to the actual words (i.e.verb, noun, adverb) that describe an activity. The knowledge-richapproach can reason from a vocabulary and knowledge of the worldto infer characteristics of the activity. For example, if anactivity is "place concrete in footings", then knowledge about theactivity and its characteristics can be drawn from the words thatdescribe the activity: concrete is sensitive to temperature andto precipitation; it may require a controlled environment. Theadvantage of the former as opposed to the latter approach is thatthe resulting system can process all activities in any projectwithout requiring the activities to be phrased in a specific waythat the processor would understand. The disadvantage of thegeneric versus the knowledge-rich approach is that the genericapproach does not take the activity into account when diagnosinga problem or suggesting a corrective action, thus leading tosuggested corrective actions that may not be wholly suitable forthe activity under analysis.Although the knowledge-intensive approach is richer and a morefundamental one (it is also vast in scope), a modified genericapproach is used in this research since it bounds the amount of11effort required and is within the scope of this work. The modifiedapproach adopted operates on a restricted set of activityattributes in order to infer knowledge about activities. Theseattributes, which are described in Chapter 2, are defined partiallyby the computer system and partially by the user. For example, theuser can specify if and to what degree an activity is sensitive totemperature or to precipitation, and if it requires a controlledenvironment. Rather than having the system infer these qualitiesfrom the words that make up the activity, the user must specifythem. An example of an attribute derived by the system is thecriticality of an activity.An underlying premise of this thesis is that there exists acommonality between construction projects in that there is arecurring set of problem sources, problems, and corrective actions.In addition, most activities can be defined in terms of a set ofattributes. These standard sets of activity attributes, problemsources, problems, and corrective actions are incorporated as partof the system. By defining a body of knowledge that spans overmost projects, one does not have to specify such knowledge in eachnew case. The premise used is that there are sufficientsimilarities between projects in terms of problem sourcesencountered and actions open to management that it is possible tocreate a universal interpreter which needs only modestcustomization for each individual project. In the system developedfor this thesis, this knowledge is not inferred from the actualwords that describe an activity; rather, it is incorporated into12the system and modified by the user to tailor it to the specificproject or activity at hand. Unlike the simple generic approach,the modified generic approach possesses some knowledge about thecharacteristics of the activity and the project under analysis.Since a modified generic approach is used for developing thissystem, the issue of the degree of user-intervention requiredarises. User-intervention is the information that the user isrequired to provide to the system in order for the automatedinterpretation to be performed. An example of user-interventionis asking the user to specify the degree of applicability ofactivity attributes to an activity under analysis. In order totailor the automated interpretation to the project and the activityat hand, without resorting to a full knowledge-intensive approach,the user is required to provide some input to the process, as willbe outlined in Chapter 2 and in Chapter 4. The advantage of user-intervention is that it makes the analysis more intelligent andmore applicable to the activity at hand, thus achieving themodified generic approach. Consequently, however, the user mustbe knowledgeable of construction.The modified generic approach can be viewed as a knowledge-rich approach with its reasoning made external. In other words,the rules and reasoning that would be internal to the system in aknowledge-rich approach are made accessible to the user who isrequired to provide some of the knowledge and reasoning that thesystem would do in a fully-automated process.For purposes of this research, corrective actions will only13be suggested if a problem source has been recorded. Another useof the system could be to examine activity attributes incombination with project and work environment conditions to suggestto the user that a potential problem source exists which may nothave been recorded. In such a mode, the system could serve as aconsistency check for the improvement of the data being collected.This latter development, however, is beyond the scope of this workand will require further development of the system. Nevertheless,it does point to the richness of this problem and its potential forfuture research and development.1.5 Research MethodologyThe first stage of research involved a thorough literaturesearch of several fields of study: expert systems, control theory,claims, risk, construction productivity, fuzzy logic, and civilengineering computing. This search aided in the accumulation ofactivity attributes, problem sources, and corrective actions. Italso helped in the development of the framework and in thesubsequent fuzzy manipulations involved. In searching through theliterature, several state-of-the-art systems were discovered thatwere along the same lines of research as this one, in particularthat described by Al-Tabtabai (1989); Rahbar, Yates, and Spencer(1991); Rahbar and Yates (1991); and Diekmann and Al-Tabtabai(1992).14The next stage of research entailed field experience in theconstruction industry to get a realistic grasp of the problem. Thefirst experience was on a small-scale residential project andinvolved collecting daily site records and videotaping workprogress. The second project was heavy civil and consisted of theconstruction of a cut-and-cover tunnel as well as several roads andinterchanges. The involvement on this job entailed collectingdaily site information from various field personnel and processingthis information. The experience gained from both of theseprojects helped in the accumulation of activity attributes, problemsources, and corrective actions. They also provided a realisticview of how much information could feasibly be collected and ofwhich items of information justified the amount of effort requiredto collect them. These projects helped in revealing what the field"sensors" were to monitor activity progress and the degree ofaccuracy of the information provided by such "sensors". They alsodemonstrated the challenge that exists to train site personnel torecord information in a useful yet simple manner. The datacollected from the daily site records of both projects was used asa basis for the sample data set created for the purposes of testingthe model.The software system upon which this work is based is calledREPCON: REPresenting CONstruction, and in particular the daily siteportion of it. REPCON is an integrated construction managementtool developed specifically for construction by Dr. Alan D. Russellof the University of British Columbia (Russell, 1991). The15prototype model developed for this research is part of Version 2.0,a research version of REPCON.1.6 Overview of the ThesisChapter 2 presents the framework upon which this work is basedand describes its components. Chapter 3 describes the use of fuzzyset theory in this work and presents the fuzzy logic frameworkemployed for the analysis, as well as a justification for the useof this analysis schema. Chapter 4 describes the computerprototype and its components, as well as outlining some processingconsiderations. Chapter 5 demonstrates the application inpractice. It outlines the user procedure required in performingthe data interpretation. The prototype is validated on a simpleproject as well as on a more complete case study, both of which arepresented in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 presents a review of the thesis,discusses its findings and conclusions, outlines deficiencies inthe model, and gives recommendations for future work.Appendix A contains a sample daily site form used forcollecting data. Appendix B contains the reasoning behind thelinkages between problem sources and user-assigned activityattributes. 	 Appendix C contains complete examples diagnosingcorrective actions for various problem sources. 	 Appendix Dcontains the expert rules and the weights that link user-assignedactivity attributes to corrective actions and problem types tocorrective actions, for several problem sources.162.0 FRAMEWORK2.1 IntroductionSeveral of the basic building blocks which form an integralpart of the overall analysis schema are described in this chapter.These blocks deal with a rich description of a generic activity,data collected from the site describing site conditions and workforce attributes, problem sources tracked in the field, andcorrective actions that might be appropriate, given one or moreproblem sources. How these blocks are integrated using a fuzzycontext approach is treated in Chapter 3.2.2 Generic Activity DescriptionThe individual activity forms the central focus of the work.While the system attaches no direct meaning to the description ofan activity and thus does not reason about the description, anattempt is made to differentiate one activity from another bydescribing it in terms of a prescribed attribute list.Two types of attributes describe an activity: user-assignedones, and system-prescribed ones.Existing user-prescribed attributes in REPCON include thefollowing:1. 	 the trade responsible for the activity172. the logic relationship(s) to other activities3. the duration of the activity4. the remaining duration of the activity as of the last progressdate5. the percentage supplied (%S), and the percentage installed(%I) as of the last progress date6. 	 the imposed start and finish dates for the activity.System-prescribed attributes are calculated based on theseuser-prescribed attributes. They include:1. if an activity is critical or non-critical2. the amount of float an activity possesses.From the daily site module, users input the followingattributes on a daily basis:1. daily status (postponed, started, ongoing, idle, finished)2. problem sources and a description of the circumstances3. the trade responsible for the problem source, if applicable4. the days lost and/or manhours lost due to the problem source.To assist in the interpretation of activity problems for thepurpose of suggesting corrective actions, an additional user-assigned attribute set was implemented as part of the researchprogram described herein. By assigning values over the range of0.0 to 1.0 (0.0 no effect; 1.0 significant effect), it is possibleto distinguish activities one from another in terms of theirrelative sensitivity to various site conditions. The use of anumerical rating for each attribute per activity was selectedinstead of a linguistic variable (e.g. high, medium, low) because18it avoids the need to specify membership functions. A case couldbe made that different membership functions may be required for thesame attribute for different activity types (e.g. exterior versusinterior work, etc.). Thus, by using a numeric scale, the user iseffectively employing his own membership function for eachactivity. The issue of membership functions is further addressedin Chapter 3.The attribute set devised to date is shown in Table 2.1. Thisset is not yet definitive. Additional attributes may beappropriate - for example, design complexity as it relates to theactivity at hand. Extension of the list is left to futureresearch.SENSITIVE TO: CHARACTERISTICS:1. high precipitation 12. labour intensive2. low precipitation 13. equipment intensive3. high temperature 14. buffer activity4. low temperature 15. innovative methods5. humidity6. wind SUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:7. ground conditions 16. design changes8. storage on site 17. high inspection9. site congestion 18. contract provision10. internal access 19. controlled environment11. external access 20. low toleranceTable 2.1 User-Assigned Activity Attributes192.3 Other Data RecordedEach responsibility or trade involved in a project, includingthe General Contractor, can have work force data associated withit on a daily basis. This data consists of:1. number of superintendents2. number of workers3. sufficient number (yes, no)4. skill level (high, medium, low)5. turnover (high, medium, low)6. number of overtime hours.The overall project also has work environment data associatedwith it on a daily basis. This data is classified as weatherconditions and as site conditions. Weather conditions are:1. sky (clear, cloudy, rain, snow)2. temperature (high, low)3. precipitation (mm)4. wind speed (kph).Site conditions are:1. ground conditions (poor, fair, good)2. storage on site (poor, fair, good)3. 	 access to site (poor, fair, good)202.4 Problem SourcesA problem source is a condition which may impact on one ormore project performance measures - cost, time, safety, quality,or scope - thus creating a problem. An attempt was made to developa universal list of problem sources which could be recorded againstactivities. This list is intended to be comprehensive yet maintainan orthogonal relationship between problem sources. Orthogonalityis important for purposes both of recording data in the field andfor later analysis, since it assumes that problem sources can betreated independently and do not impact on each other; therefore,corrective actions can be suggested for each problem sourceindividually without taking the others into account. Table 2.2contains a compilation of problem sources accumulated through theextensive literature search, the field experience described inChapter 1, and numerous brainstorming and discussion sessions.21ENVIRONMENT OWNER AND CONSULTANTSTemperature too high Decision(s) requiredTemperature too low Changes requestedWind too high Interference or stop workordersToo much precipitation Extra work requestedToo little precipitation Awaiting inspections/testsExcessive humidity Excessive quality demandedFreeze-thaw cyclesTable 2.2 Problem Sources2 2DESIGN/DRAWINGS WORK FORCEDrawing errors UndermanningDesign changes/additions OvermanningDrawingsinsufficient/incompleteLow skill levelConflicting information Excessive turnoverPoor design coordination Low motivation/moraleInadequate instructions1 1Unsafe practices/accidentsFatigue (long shifts/overtime)Interference of other trades(trade stacking)1Poor trade coordinationTable 2.2 Problem Sources23WORK SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENTEstimating error Insufficient materialsError in construction Insufficient equipmentLayout error Late delivery of materialsPoor workmanship Late delivery of equipmentRework (design changes) Tools/equipment breakdownRework (workmanship) Damaged deliveriesRework (work damaged byothers)Fabrication errorsRework (inappropriate methods) Inefficient materials handlingTable 2.2 Problem Sources24SITE CONDITIONS UTILITIES/CITYInsufficient storage space Awaiting permitsInadequate external access Awaiting connectionsInadequate internal access Awaiting inspections/testsCongestion Interference of existingutilitiesSite not prepared/available Damage of existing utilitiesPoor ground conditions Unanticipated utilitiesChange in/unexpected groundconditionsWork space not cleanedTable 2.2 Problem Sources25SCHEDULE MISCELLANEOUSDelay of activitypredecessor(s)TheftImproper sequencing ofactivitiesStrikesWork done out of sequence VandalismDelay of offsite procurement WCB shutdownDelay/change in award ofcontractNoise levels too highNatural disasterEffect of drugs/alcohol onworkersTable 2.2 Problem SourcesThis list is by no means exhaustive and may benefit fromfurther additions or modifications. For this research, a subsetof these problem sources, shown in Table 2.3, was selected in orderto develop and test a working system. The literature suggests thatthis subset of problem sources represents the major recurringproblems encountered in construction (Burati, Farrington, andLedbetter, 1992).26ENVIRONMENT DESIGN/DRAWINGS WORK FORCEToo muchprecipitationDrawingsinsufficient/incompleteUndermanningWORK SITE CONDITIONS UTILITIES/CITYRework(workmanship)Inadequate externalaccessUnanticipatedutilitiesPoor groundconditionsTable 2.3 Selected Problem Sources Used in the Prototype272.5 Corrective ActionsA hierarchy of corrective actions for problem sources for ageneric construction project was developed and is found in Table2.4. These actions do not necessarily correspond one-to-one to theproblem sources identified in Table 2.3, but are intended toencompass all of these problem sources. How best to organize thislist is left for future investigation. For example, they could beorganized as to problem type (time, cost, safety, quality, scope),as to problem source, etc.. A more elaborate hierarchicalstructure may be appropriate. The way in which problem sources aremapped on to corrective actions is explained in Section 2.6 and inChapter 3. This list of corrective actions is by no meanscomplete, but it does provide a framework for inserting morecorrective actions possibilities as they are identified. The usercan add more corrective actions and/or refine the existing ones tomake the list more project-specific.280.0 DO NOTHING (Default)1.0 ENVIRONMENT1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter.1.2 Postpone the activity to a time window with betteranticipated weather conditions.2.0 WORK FORCE2.1 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them to activityXXYYZZ.2.2 Reallocate manpower from preferably a buffer or non-critical activity (XXSSTT) to activity XXYYZZ.2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.3.0 CONSTRUCTION METHODS3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations.3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions.1 	3.3 Use prefabricated elements.Table 2.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions293.4 Use an alternate construction method.3.5 Use more equipment and less labour intensive constructionmethod.4.0 MANAGEMENT4.1 Postpone the activity.4.2 Do secondary work on the activity.4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity.4.4 Postpone interfering buffer or non-critical activities.4.5 Investigate resequencing of remaining work.4.6 Employ staggered shifts for interfering trades (tradestacking).4.7 Investigate use of shift work.4.8 Investigate use of scheduled overtime.4.9 Increase or improve supervision.4.10 Improve subtrade management/coordination.1 4.11 Employ a quality control program.! 4.12 Reallocate tools/equipment from preferably a buffer ornon-critical activity to a critical one.Table 2.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions3 04.13 Purchase or rent backup equipment/tools.4.14 Establish improved equipment maintenance and managementpolicies.4.15 Make periodic visits to the fabricator's shop.4.16 Identify alternate supplier(s).4.17 Use alternate routes of access.4.18 Obtain street closure permit.4.19 Reschedule the work to hours with less traffic.4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site.4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination.4.22 Monitor the activity but do nothing in the meantime.5.0 	 CONTRACT REMEDIES5.1 	 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation).5.2 	 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities).Table 2.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions315.3 Request a time extension from the Owner for unanticipatedutilities.6.0 PROTECTIVE ACTIONS6.1 Issue a memo to the Owner to request decision(s).6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion.6.3 Open a delay claim.6.4 Open an extra work order.6.5 Open a claim for acceleration.6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.6.7 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for extrawork.6.8 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier foracceleration.6.9 Issue a memo to the supplier or fabricator requestingcorrection(s) 	 for fabrication error(s).6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities.6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by the contract.Table 2.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions327.0 MATERIALS7.1 Explore use of admixtures.Table 2.4 Hierarchy of Corrective Actions2.6 Automated InterpretationIn this section, a brief outline is provided of how the basicbuilding blocks described in Sections 2.2 through 2.5 are relatedfor purposes of automated interpretation; these relationships areshown schematically in Figure 2.1. The automated interpretationwill be performed on an activity-by-activity basis. An activitypossesses both user-assigned attributes and system-derivedattributes, as mentioned previously. The user-assigned attributesapply to the activity with varying degrees of strength, asspecified by the user. Furthermore, an activity has a daily statusassociated with it (started, finished, postponed, idle, ongoing,or started and finished on the same day), as well as thepossibility of problem sources occurring against it. Problemsources also have attributes of days lost and/or manhours lost dueto the problem source, as well as the frequency of the problemsource, as calculated by the system. Based on the attributes ofproblem sources and the type of problem source, the system candetermine whether the problem arising is one of time, cost,Acnvny_/Weather ConditionsSite ConditionsWork Force DataSystem-derivedAttributesUser-assignedAttributesStatusProblems(time, cost, quality, safety, scope)ICorrective ActionsIConsequences(days lost/manhours lost)Problem Sources33quality, any combination of these, or no problem. (Problems ofsafety and scope are not treated in the current work.) In additionto the data describing an activity, there is also project leveldata: work force data, weather conditions, and site conditions,as described previously.Figure 2.1 	 Relationship Between the Data Elements Used inAutomated Interpretation34In choosing appropriate corrective action(s) for an activityexperiencing problems, the choice is influenced by:(a) the problem source and its attributes;(b) the user-assigned and system-derived activity attributes;(c) the project conditions: 	 work force, weather, and siteconditions; and(d) the type of problem(s) arising out of the problem source.In choosing the corrective action for a problem source thatwill result in the greatest benefit to the activity, one must takeinto account two factors:1. Given that a problem source has been recorded against anactivity, what is the most likely corrective action based onthe activity attributes, the project environment conditions,and the work force data?2. Given that several consequences or problems of time, cost,safety, quality, or scope have resulted from the problemsource recorded, what is the most beneficial corrective actionbased on the ranking of the importance of these problems tothe activity? For example, if the activity is critical(derived attribute), then a corrective action addressing timeis more important than a corrective action addressing cost,since a delay in the project could result in more indirectcosts and possibly some liquidated damages.Explained in the following chapter is how the various itemsof data are manipulated using fuzzy logic in order to diagnoseproblems and to suggest corrective actions for activities.35This logic can best be illustrated by the following example.Activity XXYYZZ has a problem source of not enough manpowerrecorded against it and slow production, as indicated by the dayslost due to this problem source. Corrective actions will vary,depending on the work force data recorded for subtrade XXresponsible for this activity. Possible corrective actions forthis scenario are:1. If the manpower of subtrade XX is not sufficient, then seekadditional tradesmen and allocate them to activity XXYYZZ.2. If the manpower of subtrade XX is sufficient, then reallocatemanpower if XXYYZZ is critical or near-critical and at leastone other, preferably buffer or non-critical, activity exists.For all problem sources, a possible corrective action may besimply to do nothing (the default). This is appropriate if theactivity is near completion; if the problem is an isolated incidentrather than repetitive; and/or if the activity does not repeatitself at other locations which would benefit from an actualcorrective action.363.0 FUZZY ANALYSIS3.1 Reasons for Use of Fuzzy Set TheoryThe uncertainty and imprecision involved in assessing problemsrelated to construction activities has provided the impetus for theemployment of fuzzy sets. Furthermore, a method was required tomathematically represent linguistic approximations for therelationships amongst data items, so that they could be manipulatedby a computer. Fuzzy set theory can be used to representlinguistic variables mathematically and can be used to generatelinguistic solutions to problems which contain human subjectivity.The correspondence between linguistic variables and their fuzzy setrepresentations enables systematic analytical operations to beperformed on them. Decisions made on the basis of fuzzyinformation are expressed linguistically rather than numerically,which further exemplifies the subjective nature of these decisions.Fuzzy set theory and its applications are well-explained inSchumucker (1984) (fuzzy sets and risk analysis); Ayyub and Haldar(1984) (project scheduling); Tong and Bonissone (1984) (generatinglinguistic solutions to fuzzy decision problems); Klir and Folger(1988) (fuzzy sets, uncertainty, and information); Smith andHancher (1989) (estimating precipitation impacts for scheduling);Chang, Ibbs, and Crandall (1990) (network resource allocation);Kouatli and Jones (1991) (designing fuzzy controllers); Grivas andShen (1991) (pavement damage assessment); and Tee and Bowman (1991)37(bridge condition assessment).3.2 Fuzzy Logic FrameworkThe goal is to suggest corrective actions for activitiesencountering problems, based on reported problem sources andrecorded days and/or manhours lost due to problem sources. Asdescribed in Chapter 2, an activity is defined both by its user-assigned attributes and its system-derived attributes. An activitycan also have problem sources assigned to it, with both time (dayslost) and cost (manhours lost) impacts. (Note: In practice, fieldpersonnel may flag a problem source but not provide an estimate oftime or manhours lost even if these impacts occur. It is just thatat that time it was not possible to provide an estimate.Consequently, we do not wish to ignore problem sources that haveno apparent implications.)Problems of time, cost, quality, safety, and scope can ariseout of a problem source. In choosing corrective action(s) for anactivity, each problem source must be examined. A set ofcorrective actions can be suggested based on the activityattributes. Another set of corrective actions can be suggested byconsidering the type(s) of problem(s) arising out of the problemsource. The intersection of these two sets produces a set ofappropriate corrective actions for a problem source.The purpose of suggesting corrective actions based on two sets38of data (activity attributes and problem types) is to make use ofsupporting evidence in the form of corroborating information fromall sources to suggest the most likely or suitable correctiveaction. It is possible to suggest corrective actions based solelyon reported problem sources. Accounting for the activity'sattributes provides refinement to these suggestions. Accountingfor the type(s) of problem(s) resulting also provides refinement.Taking both the attributes and the problem type(s) into accountyields a set of corrective actions which are recommended moststrongly if both sets of data point to them. Thus, the greater theamount of supporting evidence pointing to a corrective action, themore highly it will be recommended.The user assigns activity attributes to each activity in aproject and gives each user-assigned attribute a weighting from 0.0(no effect) to 1.0 (significant effect). The default is 0.0. Letthese values be known as the 'degree of applicability', Dai, ofattribute Va to activity i.If we had adhered to the conventional approach of fuzzy logicwith respect to an activity's attributes, a membership function ofthe form shown in Figure 3.1 would have to be defined for eachattribute. Then, the user would respond to a query process dealingwith attributes using linguistic values (e.g. high, medium, low).The question that arises if this approach was adopted is - is themembership function stable across a broad spectrum of activitytypes (e.g. exterior versus interior work, labour intensive versusequipment intensive, and so forth). In construction, a diversity39of activities exists, rather than there being a small set that isseen again and again. This fact makes it difficult to definemembership functions that would encompass all activities. Eachactivity, in the context of each project or environment, couldconceivably have its own membership function. For example, 'verysensitive to high precipitation' does not have the same numericalvalue on a scale of 0.0 (not sensitive) to 1.0 (highly sensitive)for all activities. It would therefore be difficult to define ageneric membership function for sensitivity to high precipitationthat would apply to all activities, projects, and environments.One would have to define a membership function for each activityin its context and ask the user to describe the degree ofmembership in linguistic terms such as 'high'. This would be anenormous programming task and is along the lines of the knowledge-rich approach, described in Chapter 2. Consequently, the decisionwas made to have the user assign a numerical value. Effectively,this means that the user has the freedom to use a differentmembership function for the same attribute but different activity.In assigning the numerical value, the user is aware of the activityat hand. This approach also saves an enormous membership functionspecification effort.I	 1 	 I 	 i	 1 	Medium	 1.4 i3kLinguistic ValueLow401.00.90.80.7coc 	 0.6ccoli	 0.830.40.30.20.10.0Figure 3.1 Fuzzy Membership FunctionA set of corrective actions for a problem source can beselected based on the activity's attributes; this is one analysisschema (Schema A) and is represented in Figure 3.2. Problemsources are mapped on to user-assigned activity attributes byasking the question: "If an activity possesses this attribute witha strength of 1.0, how strongly would this attribute affect thechoice of corrective action(s)?" The answer to this questionyields a number ranging from 0.0 (no effect) to 1.0 (significanteffect). These linkages and their strengths can be modified by theuser. They are first assigned by the user at the system level,independent of any activity. Let the linkage between a problemsource, Xj, and a user-assigned activity attribute, Va, be knownas the 'standard strength', Bja, for that relationship. ForProblem SourceUsemilaslimedM000411.1bufte Corrective ActionsSla ■• Dal • Bla 	Strength 	18.0between a linength between an attributeproblem saws. and and a coorreedve actionan attribute41example, 	 if 	 the 	 problem 	 source 	 is 	 'drawingsinsufficient/incomplete', then the activity attribute 'subject todesign changes' would be likely to affect the choice of correctiveaction to degree 1.0 (significant effect). This attribute wouldpoint to a corrective action for this problem source that wouldimprove procedures for drawings. Table 3.1 shows how the problemsource 'drawings insufficient/incomplete' maps on to the set ofuser-assigned activity attributes. Examples of the mappingsbetween each problem source and the user-assigned activityattributes, as well as the reasoning behind them, are found inAppendix B.Figure 3.2 Analysis Schema A42PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): DRAWINGS INSUFFICIENT/INCOMPLETEUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive 0.8 Do actions that speedup issuing ofdrawings.13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delaythe activity.15. innovative methods 1.0 Do actions thatimprove procedures fordrawings.SUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes 1.0 Do actions thatimprove procedures fordrawings.17. high inspection18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low toleranceTable 3.1 Standard Strength Between a Problem Source and User-Assigned Activity Attributes43For an activity under analysis, the strength of the linkagebetween a problem source and a user-assigned attribute iscalculated by the system by multiplying the 'degree ofapplicability', Dai, of that attribute for that activity by the'standard strength', Bja; let this strength be represented by Sja= Dai * Bja. For example, if an activity XXYYZZ is highprecipitation sensitive to degree 0.8 (Dai), and a problem sourceof poor ground conditions is related to high precipitationsensitivity to degree 0.5 (Bja), then for activity XXYYZZ, theproblem source of poor ground conditions is related to theattribute of high precipitation sensitivity to degree 0.4 (Sja)(i.e. 0.8 X 0.5 = 0.4).User-assigned activity attributes are mapped on to correctiveactions (see Table 2.4), for a given problem source, with strengthsranging from 0.0 (do not do this corrective action) to 1.0 (thiscorrective action is recommended 100%). Let this strength berepresented by Tja,c. These strengths are influenced by:(a) system-derived activity attributes, such as the degree ofcriticality of the activity, and the trade responsible for theactivity;(b) project weather and site conditions;(c) project work force data; and(d) the remaining duration of the activity.Thus, unlike the problem source/activity attribute linkage process,we do not start with a standard mapping and then customize it forthe activity at hand. Instead, we use the foregoing data in the44form of a set of expert rules to determine the strength with whicha given corrective action applies under a set of conditions. Thepurpose of using this data in suggesting corrective actions for aproblem source is to perform a consistency check between reportedproblem sources and corroborating data. For example, for theproblem source 'too much precipitation' and an activity that is'high precipitation sensitive', a corrective action of 'provide aprotected environment or shelter' is suggested with a strength of:(i) 1.0, if the activity is critical; if the precipitation on siteis greater than or equal to 12 mm on any day in the timewindow under analysis; and if the remaining duration of theactivity is greater than or equal to 50% and greater than orequal to 3 days.(ii) 0.8, if the activity is non-critical; if the precipitation onsite is greater than or equal to 12 mm on any day in the timewindow under analysis; and if the remaining duration of theactivity is greater than or equal to 50% and greater than orequal to 3 days.(iii)0.4, if the activity is critical; if the precipitation on siteis less than 12 mm for each and every day in the time windowunder analysis; and if the remaining duration of the activityis greater than or equal to 50% and greater than or equal to3 days.(iv) 0.0, otherwise.A complete set of rules for the problem sources contained in Table2.3 is found in Appendix D.Pfd  Strength between aproblem source anda typo of problemCIOStrength between atype of probiem anda cornets* actionProblem Source CcorectIveAstfoneTypos of Problems45Corrective actions are also selected based on the type ofproblem arising out of a problem source; this is the secondanalysis schema (Schema B) and is represented in Figure 3.3.Problem sources are mapped on to the type of problem based on theattributes of the problem source, such as the days lost or themanhours lost, or based on the type of problem source. Let thisstrength be known as Pjd. For the purposes of this study, only aproblem source of rework due to workmanship points to a qualityproblem. The other possible problems are time, cost, and noproblem; the problems of safety and scope are not addressed in thiswork. The type of problem arising out of a problem source for anactivity is determined by the system according to the rules foundin Table 3.2.Figure 3.3 Analysis Schema B46Let the four types of problems be:(1) time(2) cost(3) quality(4) no problem,and let them be represented by the set Y.Problem source Xj points to problem Yd with a strength Pjdranging from 0.0 to 1.0, where j represents the problem sourceand d the problem type. Pjd is determined from the system-derived variables as follows:(1) DO THIS FIRST = DEFAULTIf the total number of days lost from all problem sourcesis >= total float (as of current progress date), then:Pjl = 1.0Pj2 = 0.0Pj4 = 0.0.(2) IN ALL CASESIf the problem source (Xj) is rework (workmanship), then:Pj3 = 1.0.Otherwise,Pj3 = 0.0.Table 3.2 Rules to Determine the Type of Problem (Yd) Arising outof a Given Problem Source (Xj)47(3) Let the 'degree of non-criticality' = # of days of totalfloat/remaining duration.Let the 'criticality index' = 1.0 - 4(degree of non-criticality), where 0.0 <= criticality index <= 1.0.If the total float is negative, then 'criticality index'> 1.0; therefore, set the 'criticality index' to 1.0.(4) For a given activity i and a given problem source Xj:(a) If there are days lost only (no manhours lost), thenPjl = max[default, criticality index]Pj2 = 0.0Pj4 = 0.0.(b) If there are manhours lost only (no days lost), thenPjl = 0.0Pj2 = 1.0Pj4 = 0.0.(c) If there are both days lost and manhours lost, thenPjl = max[default, criticality index]Pj2 = 1.0 - criticality indexPj4 = 0.0.(d) If there are no manhours lost, no days lost, and theproblem source is not rework (workmanship), thenPjl = Pj2 = Pj3 = 0.0Pj4 = 1.0.Table 3.2 Rules to Determine the Type of Problem (Yd) Arising outof a Given Problem Source (Xj)48Problem types are mapped on to appropriate corrective actions,for a given problem source, with strengths ranging from 0.0 to 1.0.The strength of this mapping is influenced by the frequency of theproblem source in the time window under analysis. A frequencyfunction, which is an example of a sigmoidal response curve, thatrelates the strength of the weighting to the frequency of theproblem source was selected for this purpose. It is:W = sin^2(pi*f/2), 	 0.0 <= f <= 1.0, 0.0 <= W <= 1.0where 	 f = frequency of problem source= # of days of occurrence of that problem source/# ofdays in the time window under analysis whenactivity status is recorded for that activity.and 	 W = a factor used in determining the weighting betweena problem type (Yd) and a corrective action (Zc).This function is shown in Figure 3.4. The 'W' is multiplied by afactor, that is context-dependent, to calculate the strength of theweighting between a problem type (Yd) and a corrective action (Zc).Let this strength be known as Qjd,c. For example, for the problemsource 'too much precipitation' and a problem of 'time', thecorrective action 'provide a protected environment or shelter' islinked to the problem 'time' with a strength of Qjd,c = 1.0*W. Therules used to determine the strength of the mapping between thetype of problem and the corrective action for the problem sourcescontained in Table 2.3 are found in Appendix D.491. 00.90.83‘ 	 0.7I.2ou	0.6I..CI	0.5LO1. 	 0.430.30.20.10.00 	 0.1 	 0.2 	 0.3 	 0.4 	 0.5 	 0.6 	 0.7	0.8	0.9	1Frequency of Problem Source (f)Figure 3.4 Frequency Function for Problem SourcesThis particular function was chosen for several reasons.Primarily, a simple function was required that was steepest aroundthe middle (f=0.5), so that the corresponding weightings (W) wouldbe bunched near the middle. The region beyond f=0.5 was ofgreatest interest, since once the frequency of a problem source isgreater than 0.5, then the problem source needs attention andshould be given a strong weighting. This function is symmetricalabout its midpoint (f=0.5); perhaps a better function for thispurpose would have been one that is not symmetrical, in that W(0.5)> 0.5. Beyond a certain frequency, all frequencies signal a50recurring problem source; a frequency of 0.9 has almost the sameeffect as a frequency of 1.0, and both should be given a strongweighting around 1.0. Any other function that would have satisfiedthe aforementioned criteria could be readily substituted; thisparticular one was chosen for its simplicity and convenience.A relationship was required to link two sets of data directlyto each other; the fuzzy binary relation approximates therelationship between two data items without having to resort tofuzzy membership sets, which would have been difficult to define,as described previously.Each mapping between two sets of data is a fuzzy binaryrelation that can be represented as a matrix. The elements of thematrix represent the fuzzy degrees of membership of each link. Forexample, let the relationship between problem sources, X, and user-assigned activity attributes, V, be represented by the matrixS(X,V). Each element of the matrix S(X,V) represents the strengthof the linkage between a problem source, Xj, and a user-assignedactivity attribute, Va, for a given activity i, and can berepresented by S(Xj,Va). Note that S(X,V) corresponds to thematrix of standard strengths linking problem sources with activityattributes discounted by the degree of applicability that theattribute has for the activity at hand. Similarly, let therelationship between user-assigned activity attributes, V, andcorrective actions, Z, be represented by the matrix T(V,Z). Eachelement of the matrix T(V,Z) represents the strength of the linkagebetween a user-assigned activity attribute, Va, and a corrective51action, Zc, and can be represented by T(Va,Zc). 	 As statedpreviously, the elements of T are derived through the use of a setof expert rules.A relationship was required to link two data sets throughtheir respective relationship to a third and common set; acomposition operation was employed for this purpose. A compositionoperation performed on S(X,V) and T(V,Z) is used to determine therelationship between problem sources, X, and corrective actions,Z, through their respective relationship to user-assigned activityattributes, V. The composition of these two relations is denotedby:R1(X,Z) = S(X,V) o T(V,Z)The elements of R1 correspond to the strengths linking a problemsource with a corrective action. The value of these strengths willalways lie between 0.0 and 1.0.The most common composition operation for fuzzy relations isthe maximum-minimum (max-min) composition, as outlined in Klir andFolger (1988). This operation is defined, for a given Xj and Zc,by:SoT(Xj,Zc) = max min[S(Xj,Va), T(Va,Zc)] for all Va,where SoT(Xj,Zc) defines the membership function for the elementsXj and Zc of the matrix R1(X,Z), the fuzzy binary relation betweenproblem sources, X, and corrective actions, Z.	 The max-mincomposition for fuzzy relations indicates the strength of arelational chain between elements of X and Z. "This strength isrepresented by the membership grade of the pair (x,z) in the52composition. The strength of each chain equals the strength of itsweakest link and the strength of the relation between elements xand z is then the strength of the strongest chain between them."(Klir and Folger, 1988, p. 75) This composition is used todetermine the most likely corrective action based on the strongestindicator, since corrective actions are suggested with a strengthequalling that of the strongest chain between them.Let us use the problem source 'too much precipitation' (X1)as an example. Assume that an activity possesses the followinguser-assigned attributes and degrees of applicability:ATTRIBUTE SYMBOL ATTRIBUTE DESCRIPTION DaiV1 Sensitive to high precipitation 1.0V7 Sensitive to ground conditions 0.5V12 Labour intensive 0.3Assume that the elements of the standard strength matrix specifiedat the system level with which this problem source points to eachof these attributes are:V1 V7 V12X1 [0.6 0.4 1.0)Then, the elements of the matrix S(X,V) are determined as:S(X1,V1) = 1.0*0.6 = 0.6S(Xl,V7) = 0.5*0.4 = 0.2S(X1,V12) = 0.3*1.0 = 0.3.53S(X,V) is then:V1 V7 V12X1 [0.6 0.2 0.3]Assume that, using the expert rules described previously, matrixT(V,Z) is determined to be:V\Z 1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0V7 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0V12 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Using the max-min composition:R1(X1,Z1.1) = max [min(0.6,1.0), min(0.2,0.5), min(0.3,0.4)]= max [0.6,0.2,0.3]= 0.6The resulting R1(X,Z) matrix is:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6]An alternative composition operation is the cumulative-minimum(cum-min) composition. This operation is defined, for a given Xjand Zc, by:SoT(Xj,Zc) = sum min[S(Xj,Va), T(Va,Zc)] for all Va,where SoT(Xj,Zc) defines the membership function for the elementsof the matrix R1(X,Z), the fuzzy binary relation between problemsources, X, and corrective actions, Z. The cum-min composition for54fuzzy relations indicates the strength of a relational chainbetween elements of X and Z; the strength of each chain between anytwo elements of X and Z equals the strength of its weakest link,and the strength of the relation between the two elements is thenthe summation of the strength of all chains between them. Thereasoning behind this rule is that each pointer to a correctiveaction increases the strength with which it is recommended.Various items of information can suggest that a corrective actionis suitable; the more supporting evidence that exists, the morehighly recommendable a corrective action is.Following the same example but using the cum-min composition:R1(X1,Z1.1) = sum [min(0.6,1.0), min(0.2,0.5), min(0.3,0.4)]= sum [0.6,0.2,0.3]= 1.1The resulting R1(X,Z) matrix is:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.8)Thus, note for this selection rule, a strength in excess of 1.0 canbe achieved.The same logic can be applied to link problem sources tocorrective actions, this time taking into account the type ofproblem caused by a problem source. Problem sources point to oneor more problems with different strengths, as per the set of rulesoutlined in Table 3.2. 	 Problems can be those of time, cost,quality, or no problem. 	 In turn, problems point to variouscorrective actions, again with different strengths.	 The most55appropriate corrective action depends on the type of problem thatneeds the greatest attention and on the frequency of the occurrenceof the problem source. The fuzzy binary relationships betweenproblem sources and problems and between problems and correctiveactions can be represented respectively by P(X,Y), where Xrepresents problem sources and Y represents problems, and byQ(Y,Z), where Y represents problems and Z represents correctiveactions. Thus the fuzzy max-min composition is represented by:R2(X,Z) = P(X,Y) o Q(Y,Z)where the membership function of R2(X,Z) is defined, for a givenXj and Zc, by:PoQ(Xj,Zc) = max min[P(Xj,Yd), Q(Yd,Zc)] for all Yd.Continuing the same example assume that both a time (Y1) andcost (Y2) problem result, with respective strengths of 0.6 and 0.4,as determined by the rules in Table 3.2; thus:P(Xl,Yl) = 0.6P(X1,Y2) = 0.4.P(X,Y) is then:Y1 Y2X1 [0.6 0.4]Assume that using the frequency of the problem source and theaccompanying expert rules described previously, matrix Q(Y,Z) isfound to be:56Y\Z 1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0Y2 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Using the max-min composition:R2(X1,Z1.1) = max [min(0.6,1.0), min(0.4,0.5)]= max [0.6,0.4]= 0.6The resulting R2(X,Z) matrix is determined as:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6]The fuzzy cum-min composition is also denoted, for a given Xjand Zc, by:PoQ(Xj,Zc) = sum min[P(Xj,Yd), Q(Yd,Zc)] for all Yd.Using the cum-min composition on the same example:R2(X1,Z1.1) = sum [min(0.6,1.0), min(0.4,0.5)]= sum [0.6,0.4]= 1.0The resulting R2(X,Z) matrix is:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.6]Given the two fuzzy binary relations R1(X,Z) and R2(X,Z) todescribe the relationship between problem sources, X, andcorrective actions, Z, a fuzzy binary relation R(X,Z) that combinesthe two relations can be represented, for a given Xj and Zc, by:57R(X,Z) = R1(X,Z) intersection R2(X,Z)R(Xj,Zc) = min[R1(Xj,Zc), R2(Xj,Zc)]The intersection operation was chosen since it yields theminimum of two strengths, and this is the strength with which acorrective action is suggested. A union operation, which wouldyield the maximum of two strengths, could have been used to combinethe fuzzy relations that result from the two analysis schema (A andB). Each schema yields a strength with which a potentialcorrective action is recommended. Using both schema to suggestcorrective actions makes use of supporting evidence, as discussedpreviously. The logic behind choosing the minimum is that onesuggests corrective actions based on the minimum amount ofsupporting evidence, thus erring on the side of conservatism.The most likely corrective action for the activity is thecorrective action with the strongest membership in the R(X,Z)matrix. The maximum strength with which a corrective action issuggested is 100%, even if it has a membership in R(X,Z) greaterthan 1.0, which may occur using the cum-min composition.Corrective actions can also be ranked, in terms of benefit to theactivity, based on their degree of membership in the R(X,Z) matrix.This latter approach will be used when suggesting correctiveactions for an activity. Since there is a certain degree ofimprecision and subjectivity in the information collected on siteand used in the automated interpretation, it is left to the userto select the most suitable corrective action(s) based on therankings provided by the automated analysis.58Recapping the example used, using the max-min composition:X\Z 1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1R1(X,Z) X1 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6R2(X,Z) X1 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6R(X1,Z1.1) = min[0.6,0.6]= 0.6R(X,Z) = R1(X,Z) intersection R2(X,Z) =1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6]Corrective actions 1.1 and 5.1 would be suggested with a strengthof 60%, and corrective action 3.2 would be 20% recommended.Using the cum-min composition:X\Z 1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1R1(X,Z) X1 1.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.8R2(X,Z) X1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.6R(X1,Z1.1) = min [1.1,1.0]= 1.0R(X,Z) = R1(X,Z) intersection R2(X,Z) =1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6]Corrective action 1.1 would be 100% recommended; 5.1, 60%recommended; and 3.2, 20% recommended. It is possible, using the59cum-min rule, that a corrective action would have a strengthgreater than 100% associated with it; in this case, it would be100% recommended.The present system performs the automated interpretation onan activity-by-activity basis; it also suggests corrective actionsfor a given activity for each problem source individually. Givena system potential of eighty-one problem sources, and consideringa project with two hundred activities, the volume of correctiveactions that this system can yield is massive. Although it is notcovered in this chapter, a future development is to integrate overall problem sources for a given activity to produce one set ofcorrective actions. A method of doing this is presented in Chapter4, although it has not been implemented. Furthermore, the analysiscan be rolled up to the responsibility (subtrade) level and furtherto the project level, with the aim of detecting a repetitive themeor pattern of corrective actions. Fuzzy logic may be useful inthis extension of the automated interpretation, and it is left forfuture research.Further examples for the seven problem sources contained inTable 2.3 are found in Appendix C.604.0 SYSTEM PROTOTYPE4.1 IntroductionThe computer modelling involved adding several new componentsto research Version 2.0 of REPCON. These components are used inconjunction with the Daily Site module for the automatedinterpretation of its records and will be outlined in this chapter.The goal of the prototype has been to provide proof of theconcept and the validity of the analysis schema. We were notlooking for an implementation that can be used "tomorrow" on actualprojects and which has the flexibility of large artificialintelligence or expert system packages where the user has accessto most components (e.g. rule base). Certain flexibilities in theprototype have been sacrificed; specifically, great flexibility inthe interface to allow the user to change problem sources,attributes, corrective actions, rules, and weightings has not beendone. Rather, the program has been set up with some editingcapability, which will be outlined in Section 4.2. Furthermore,the implementation has been done in a way that the prototype canbe extended and modified.REPCON DATA FILES USER INTERFACE   APPUCAT1ON PROGRAMINFERENCE ENGINE 	 TEMPORARY MEMORYh(Predicate Data Base)RULE BASE614.2 Prototype OverviewThe prototype model consists of the following components, eachof which will be described in subsequent sections:1. a user interface;2. REPCON data files;3. an application program;4. an inference engine; and5. 	 a rule base.The relationship between these components is shown in Figure 4.1and will be explained in Section 4.3.Figure 4.1 Prototype Components624.2.1 User InterfaceThe user interface provides access to the components of thesystem where the user is required to supply and/or editinformation. The main menu of REPCON, shown in Figure 4.2,displays where each of these components can be accessed.Standard COrreettiVe ManeEnter ActNil), DataStandard Daily Site Problem Codes.e 	 \REPCONVer. 2.08SYSTEM PROJECTPLANNING aSCHEDULING PROCUREMENT SUMMARYREPORTING RESOURCEMANAGEMENTProjectsStandardsUtilitiesAccessStd PrjExitDataCalendarFile MgtCost CodeReportsActivity.--ExecuteViewArchivingUpdateDaily Site-MacrosSel/SortReportsSet SequenceDefine ItemsCalculateUpdateFormatReportsGenerateReports Sat UpS BreakdownsApp PaymentCash FlouSch of ValuesLabor ControlChange OrdersCurrent Working Project: Cs■REP211W,ROJOI■TESTSelect a working project. Add/delete/backup/restore projects.(C) Copyright Alan■ D. Russell 	 198S-1992 ■Enter DataDefine Project Problem CodesData InterpretationFigure 4.2 REPCON Main Menu63'Standard Daily Site Problem Codes' allows the user to accessa standard set of programmable problem sources used for automatedinterpretation (see Figure 4.3). These problem codes can be copiedover to the project level where they can be edited by the user byaccessing 'Define Project Problem Codes' from 'Daily Site';however, those problem codes that can be used in the automatedinterpretation in the existing system are hard-coded, andcorrespond to the selected set of problem sources outlined inChapter 2. From either the Standard or the Project Problem Codesmenu, the user can assign activity attributes to each problemsource and the 'standard strength' (Bja) with which the problemsource Xj points to each attribute Va (see Figure 4.4). This'standard strength' applies to the case when the attribute has a'degree of applicability' to an activity of 1.0. The assignmentof these weights can be done at the project level or at theStandards level and then copied over to the project level, wherethey may be further edited.'Standard Corrective Actions' allows the user to define thehierarchy of corrective actions at the Standards level. Theheading for each category is inactive (see Figure 4.5); theconstituents of each category are the actions that are suggestedas a product of the automated interpretation (see Figure 4.6).Although the user can edit these corrective actions, once they areincorporated into a rule, as in the prototype, the user is not freeto modify them.SYSTEM STANDARD/PROBLEM CODESRevise Print rEport QuitCODE CATEGORY/DESCRIPTION REM ATTR CODE CATEGORY/DESCRIPTION REM ATTRZO21222324OUNER AND CONSULTANTSDecision(s) requiredChanges requestedInterf./Stop—work orderExtra work requestedNNNNN888883831323334DESIGN/DRAUINGSInsuff./Incompl. DrawingDrawing errorsDesign changes/additionsConflicting informationNNNNN0888825 Awaiting inspection/test N 8 35 Poor design coordination N 026 Excessive quality demand N 8 36 N 027 N 8 37 N 828 N 8 38 N 8Z3 N 8 39 N 040 UORK FORCE N 8 58 UORK N 841 Insufficient manpower N 0 51 Rework (Design changes) N 042 Trade stacking N 8 52 Rework (Uorkmanship) N 843 Too much manpower N 8 53 Rework (Damaged) N 044 Lou skill level N 8 54 Rework (Inapp. methods) N 845 Excessive turnover N 8 SS Estimating errors N 8Fl:Help Enter:Select Esc:Exit 	 Row: 13/55 Col:	 2/8DAILY SITE/PROBLEM CODES 	 C:\REPZ8O\PROJ81\TESTPrint rEport QuitCATEGORY/DESCRIPTION 	 REM ATTR CODE CATEGORY/DESCRIPTION REM ATTR8 ISCELLANEOUS N 8 18 ENVIRONMENT N1 Theft N 8 11 Too much precipitation M2 Strikes N 8 12 Too little precipitation PI3 andalism N 8 13 Temperature too high N4 I 	 , ture too low N5 Del 	 1. H gh prec pitation 1. •o high N6 of 	 ,,,•: 	 :,., ive humidity N7 ,I,Ihr.,T,,,t,,,, il 	 1, thaw cycles N8 Er 	 1 	 1_., 	 t,,,,,, 	 011, U. il6 N9 0 	 0i NLJJ , ,A 0 	 kRZS I,,,Altt,r 1.i;i: DRAUING5 N21 I, 0 	 0,: s insufficient N22 0.00 errors NZ3 1 ,1 . l',It 	 I 	 ,, 11 	 itk, 	 .•.1U.0 changes/additions N24 ting information NOtrrarrr1111 N 8 35ZS oor design coordination NFl:Help Enter:Select Esc:Exit 	 Row: 	 3/55 Col: 	 8/864Figure 4.3 Enter Standard Daily Site Problem CodesFigure 4.4 Assign Activity Attributes to Problem SourcesDEFINE CORRECTIVE ACTION CATEGORYRevise Constituents QuitCorrective Action CategoryI 	 II 	 I N ,	iii lllvf it NI23 MIRK FORCE33 CONSTRUCTION METHODS4] MANAGEMENT5] CONTRACT REMEDIES6] PROTECTIVE ACTIONS7] MATERIALSCorrective Action Category: _Fl:Help Alt—P:Print FlO:Confirm Esc:ExitC:\REFZOODEFINE CORRECTIVE ACTION CATEGORY C:\REPZ110CorreC 1] ENVIRONMC 2] WORK FORC 3] CONSTRUCFIRMC 6] PROTECTIC 7] MATERIALCorrective Action Code / DescriptionAdd Revise QuitMANAGEMENT	  Corrective Action Code Items4.1 ] Postpone the activity.4.2 ] Do secondary work on the activity.4.3 3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity.4.4 ] Postpone interfering buffer or non—critical4.5 ] Investigate resequencing of remaining cork.4.6 l Employ staggered shifts for interfering trades4.7 ] Investigate use of shift work.4.8 3 Investigate use of scheduled overtime.65Figure 4.5 Define Corrective Action CategoriesFigure 4.6 Define Corrective Actions (Constituents of Categories)ACTIVITY DATA/ATTRIBUTES VINDOU	 C:\REPZOO\PROJO4NTHESISAdd Edit Select Progress Date Window QuitActivity Code: GOOlOO 	 Description:Phase: 	 Type: /11111111 111.111111.Scope Desc.:Log Comment:SENSITIVE TO:High precipitation:Lou precipitation:High temperature:Lou temperature:Humidity:Wind:Ground conditions:Storage on site:Site congestion:Internal access:External access:CHARACTERISTICS:Labour intensive:Equipment intensive:Buffer activity:Innovative methods:SUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:Design changes:High inspection:Contract provision:Controlled environment:Lou tolerance:66'Enter Activity Data' allows the user to assign activityattributes (at the activity level) and the 'degree ofapplicability' (Dai) of these attributes to each activity (seeFigure 4.7). There are twenty user-assigned attributes, asoutlined in Chapter 2; they can not be modified by the user, buttheir 'degree of applicability' to an activity can be edited.Figure 4.7 Assign User-Assigned Activity Attributes'Enter Data' allows the user to enter daily status data foractivities (see Figure 4.8), such as work environment data (seeFigure 4.9), work force data (see Figure 4.10), and daily statusdata (see Figure 4.11). By accessing the daily status of anactivity, the user can record problems encountered against theactivity, as well as their time and cost impacts in the form ofdays and manhours lost (see Figure 4.12).DAILY SITE REPORTING 	 C:\REP288\PROJ84\THESISEnter Data Other Activities QuitFrom 92-86-38 to 92-87-17Activity 	 Information/ActivityCode 	 Loc 	 DescriptionJUN30TUEJUL1WEDJUL2THUJUL3FRIJUL4SATJUL5SUNJUL6MONWork Environment DataWork Force DataInspections a TestsVisitorsAccidentsSite InstructionsDeliveriesEquipment/RentalsMiscellaneous NotesG88188 18 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEET fGO8ZOO 18 INSTALL TIMBER LAGGING TO Z1FTG08300 18 INSTALL A LUL BRACING0 fdG80480 	 7 EXCAVATE TO SO FEET o o fG88488 	 8 EXCAVATE TO SO FEET o o o fFl:Help Enter:Select Esc:Exit 	 Rout 	 2/52 Col:	 2/191 JUNI JUNI JUNI JUNI JUNI JUN	Weather a Site Conditions for MONDAY. 81 JUN 92 	 6(a) AM Sky condition 	 (b) PM Sky conditionC .) Clear 	 C 	 ClearC 3 Cloudy 	 C I CloudyCX] Rain 	 CX1 RainC I Snow 	 C 	 Snot((0) Temperature (C) High: 	 Lou:(d) Precipitation (mm): 15 	 (e) Wind (kph):(f) Ground condition (g) Storage on site (h) Access to site(.) Poor (•) Poor (.) Poor( 	 ) Fair (	 ) Fair ( 	 ) Fair( 	 ) Good ( 	 ) Good ( 	 ) GoodFl:Help FlO:Confirm Alt-C:Comments Esc ExitActiviCodeG80188G80188G88180G88189 4 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETG88189 5 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETJUN7SUNDAILY SITE REPORTING 	 C(NREP288\PROJ84NTNESISOther Activities QuitFrom 92-86-01 to 92-86-18Fl:Help FlO:Confirm Alt -C:Comments Esc:Exit 	 Row: 	 2/35 Col: 	 2/1967Figure 4.8 Enter Daily Status DataFigure 4.9 Enter Work Environment DataActivityCode	 Loc1 JUNI JUNI JUNI01 JUN 92(k) CX) SufficientJUNI JUN JUN6SATJUN7SUMUork Force Data for MONDAY.Responsibility Code: 	 GTrade: GENERAL CONTRACTOR(i) Number of Supervisors: 1_(j) Number of Tradesmen: 25(1) Skill Level 	 (m) Turn OverV ( 	 ) High 	 ( 	 ) HighA •) Medium	( 	 ) MediumS ( 	 ) Lou 	 C.) LouD (n) Over Time Hours: 8.00EFl:Help FlO:Confirm Alt-C:Commonts Esc:Exit000100 	 1 ETO 21 FEET tS !A tO  '0G80188 	 2 EXCAVATEG88100 	 3 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEET !S '0 IOG82180 	 4 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETGO8108 	 S EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETDAILY SITE REPORTING 	 C:\REP2O8\PROJ84\THESISOther Activities QuitFrom 92-06-01 to 92-06-18FlsHelp F18:Confirm Alt -C:Comments Esc:Exit 	 Rout 	 3/35 Col: 	 2/19FPII■	 rtDAILY SITE REPORTING 	 C:\REPZIO\PROJO4NTHESISOther Activities QuitFrom 92-06-01 to 92-06-18m) 	 )1forDaily Status Data 	 MONDAY. ill JUN 92Activity: 680181 	 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETStatus—Daily( 	 ) Finished( 	 ) 	 Idle( 	 ) On-going( ) Postponed•) Started( ) Started a Finished( ) No StatusCXI Has Problems[-CommentsFl:Help F18:Confirm Esc:Exit. 	 .,„Fl:Help F18:Confirm Esc:Exitt 	 Rou: 11/35 	 Col: 	 2/1968Figure 4.10 Enter Work Force DataFigure 4.11 Enter Daily Status for ActivityDAILY SITE REPORTING	 C:\REP280\PROJ041\THESISOther Activities QuitFrom 92-86-81 to 92-86-18	  Problem Data for MONDAY. 81 JUN 92 	Activity: G00181 EXCAVATE TO 21 FEETProblem Code: 11 Too much precipitationProblem Source Responsibility Code:	 • (if applicable)Problem Description:Slow work due to excessive rainfall.Estimate of time lost: MHRS: FE	 ADJ 8.88 TOT 8.00DAYS: FE 8.S0	 ADJ 8.88 TOT 8.58Problem Action 	 Remarks 	 Ref One Ref TwoC 3 TelephoneC 3 LetterI MemoC I Back ChargeC I Extra Uork OrderC I Verbal InstructF1:Help F2:Choice F18:Confirm Esc:ExitFl:Hulp F2:Choice F18:Confirm Esc:Exit	 Rout 11/35 Col:	 2/1969Figure 4.12 Enter Problem Data for Activity'Data Interpretation' initiates the automated interpretationmodule. The 'Data Interpretation' screen allows the user tospecify the time window for analysis; the method of analysis (e.g.max-min or cum-min); and whether or not to include completedactivities in the report (see Figure 4.13). The product of thisprocess is a report summarizing activity attributes, the problemsoccurring against an activity, their time and cost impacts, and thesuggested corrective actions. This report, which is called a DailySite Analysis Report, can be generated on the screen and in hard-copy form. Sample Daily Site Analysis Reports are found in Chapter5.DAILY SITE INTERPRETATIONSELECTEll All ActivitiesEZl By Responsibility CodeC3] SelectivelyEnter Selection: UStart Date: 920601Use max—nine ruleInclude Completed Activities? NOUTPUT DEUICEEll ScreenEZ3 Directly to PrinterE3] Print in Background[ 413 FileEnter Selection: ElFinish Date: 928603_DAILY SITE 	 C:\REP280\PROJ81VIESTFl:Help Alt—P:Print F18 2 Confirm Esc:Exit7 0Figure 4.13 Initiate Data Interpretation4.2.2 REPCON Data FilesThe REPCON data files used in the automated interpretationconsist of activity data files and Daily Site data files. Activitydata files contain information about activities: in particular,user-assigned and system-derived attributes, such as theresponsibility, the duration, the remaining duration, the totalfloat, the logic relationships to other activities, etc.. TheDaily Site files contain work environment data, work force data,activity status, and problem sources recorded, among other things.They also contain a data base of problem source attributes: dayslost and manhours lost. The data files form an image of theproject which the application program accesses and uses for itsanalysis.714.2.3 Application ProgramThe application program consists of the following components:1. A routine to multiply the 'degree of applicability' (Dai) bythe 'standard strength' (Bja) for an activity (i) and aproblem source (Xj) under analysis to calculate the strengthSja.2. A routine to determine the type of problem(s) (Yd) arising outof a problem source, based on the attributes of the problemsource and a set of rules. This routine assigns a strength(ranging from 0.0 to 1.0) (Pjd) with which each problem typeexists, based on the system calculations. The details of thisroutine are described in Table 3.2.3. A routine to calculate the frequency (f) of a problem sourceand to calculate a value W based on the frequency functionintroduced in Chapter 3 and shown in Figure 3.4. This valueW is used in the expert rules of Schema B that link the typeof problem (Yd) arising out of a problem source (Xj) to acorrective action (Zc).4. A routine to define and evaluate all predicates used in therule base. A predicate is an expression in the form:predicate(argument 1, argument 2)where the predicate represents a characteristic of, orrelationship among, the arguments. The arguments (orparameters) are symbols representing some object in, or aspectof, the knowledge base (in this case, the REPCON data files).72A predicate expression can return a value of TRUE, FALSE, orUNKNOWN. The arguments can be constants that are defined inthe application program or variables; a variable name startswith the character @. An example of a predicate with twoconstant arguments is:activity(status, critical)If the activity status is critical, the predicate expressionactivity(status, critical) returns a value TRUE; otherwise,it returns FALSE. A '-' symbol in front of a predicate is theNOT modifier. For example:_ activity(status, critical)returns the value NOT(TRUE) (therefore FALSE) if the activityis critical and the value NOT(FALSE) (therefore TRUE) if theactivity is non-critical. An example of a predicate with oneargument variable is:site(precipitation, @)This predicate checks whether or not the precipitation on siteis at a certain level, which is specified in the expert ruleas a variable. Table 4.1 lists all of the predicatesevaluated by the application program and used in the expertrules. Below each predicate are listed the conditions thatmake the predicate return a value TRUE.It is important to note that all predicates are evaluatedon the basis of a time window that is the smaller of:(i) the number of days in the time window chosen foranalysis, and73(ii) the number of days that activity status is recorded foran activity in the time window under analysis.This accounts for the case that an activity starts at somepoint within the time window chosen for analysis and thereforedoes not span the entire period of analysis. The frequencyof occurrence of problem sources for this activity is alsocalculated based on the number of days within the time windowthat status is recorded for the activity. In evaluating thepredicates 'proportion of days in time window' implies theproportion of days out of days on which activity status isrecorded for the activity. 	 Days on which no status isrecorded for an activity are not counted in the calculationsfor that activity.7 4PREDICATE CONDITION(S) THAT RETURN A VALUETRUEactivity(status, critical) # of days of total float/# of daysof remaining duration < 0.25_ activity(status,critical)# of days of total float/# of daysof remaining duration >= 0.25activity(percent_remainingduration, 	 @B), 	 >=(@B,50)(# of days of remaining duration/total duration)*100 >= 50activity(remaining_duration, 	 @C), 	 >=(@C,3)# of days of remaining duration>= 3site(precipitation,>=(@A,12)@A), precipitation >= 12 mm on anysingle day in time window underanalysis when activity status isrecorded for that activitysite(precipitation,<(@A,12)@A), precipitation < 12 mm on all daysin time window under analysis whenactivity status is recorded forthat activityTable 4.1 Predicates and Conditions that Return a Value TRUE75manpower(number,sufficient)proportion of days in time windowwhere manpower sufficient > 0.50_manpower(number,sufficient)proportion of days in time windowwhere manpower insufficient >=0.50manpower(skill, poor) proportion of days in time windowwhere skill level of subtrade XXis low is greater than or equal tothe proportion of days where theskill level is medium or high.manpower(skill, fair) proportion of days in time windowwhere skill level of subtrade XXis medium is greater than theproportion of days where the skilllevel is low, and is greater thanor equal to the proportion of dayswhere the skill level is high.manpower(skill, good) proportion of days in time windowwhere skill level of subtrade XXis high is greater than theproportion of days where the skilllevel is low or medium._ 	 _Table 4.1 Predicates and Conditions that Return a Value TRUE76site(access, poor) proportion of days in time windowwhere site access is poor isgreater than or equal to theproportion of days where siteaccess is fair or good.site(access, fair) proportion of days in time windowwhere site access is fair isgreater than the proportion ofdays where site access is poor,and is greater than or equal tothe proportion of days where siteaccess is good.site(access, good) proportion of days in time windowwhere site access is good isgreater than the proportion ofdays where site access is poor orfair.site(ground_conditions,poor)proportion of days in time windowwhere ground conditions are pooris greater than or equal to theproportion of days where ground	 1conditions are fair or good.Table 4.1 Predicates and Conditions that Return a Value TRUE77site(ground_conditions,fair)proportion of days in time windowwhere ground conditions are fairis greater than the proportion ofdays where ground conditions arepoor, and is greater than or equalto the proportion of days whereground conditions are good.site(ground_conditions,good)proportion of days in time windowwhere ground conditions are goodis greater than the proportion ofdays where ground conditions arepoor or fair.probsource(frequency, @W) Based on the frequency (f) of theproblem source, the weightingfactor is W (as calculated by thefrequency function).probsource(frequency, @W),<=(@W,0.35)1Based on the frequency (f) of theproblem source, the weightingfactor (W) 	 (as calculated by thefrequency function) is less thanor equal to 0.35.Table 4.1 Predicates and Conditions that Return a Value TRUE78	5. 	 A routine to perform a max-min operation for each schema ontwo matrices which are the strengths of the linkages between:(a) problem sources and user-assigned activity attributes(matrix S(X,V)) and user-assigned activity attributes andcorrective actions (matrix T(V,Z)) (Schema A);(b) problem sources and the types of problems (matrix P(X,Y))and the types of problems and corrective actions (matrixQ(Y,Z)) (Schema B).Each max-min operation yields one set of weightings [matrixR1(X,Z) from Schema A and matrix R2(X,Z) from Schema B ofcorrective actions (Z) for a problem source (Xj) recordedagainst an activity (i). The max-min algorithm was explainedin Chapter 3 and is demonstrated in the examples found inAppendix C. Alternatively, a cumulative-minimum operation canbe performed to determine the X-Z weights. The details ofthis operation were explained in Chapter 3 and aredemonstrated in the examples in Appendix C. The applicationprogram allows the user to choose between the max-min and thecum-min method of computation when 'Data Interpretation' isinitiated.6. A routine to take the minimum value for each pair ofweightings (e.g. the intersection of R1(X,Z) and R2(X,Z)), toyield a single matrix of X-Z weightings, R(X,Z). This matrixgives a ranking of corrective actions for a problem sourcerecorded against an activity. The intersection routine wasexplained in Chapter 3 and can be found in the examples of79Appendix C.7. A report generator to report the selected corrective actionsfor each problem source occurring against an activity in thetime window under analysis and rank them based on the valuesfound in the R(X,Z) matrix. The format of the reportgenerator is shown in Chapter 5.A possible message that is printed instead of suggestingcorrective actions for an activity is 'No corrective action -lack of supporting evidence.' This message results from anR(X,Z) matrix with zero membership for all elements. This canoccur if matrix R1(X,Z) from Schema A and/or matrix R2(X,Z)from Schema B have zero membership for all elements. Thus,there is lack of evidence to suggest any corrective actionfrom either one or both analysis schema.An option in the report generator is to includeactivities that are completed within the time window underanalysis. If the user elects to do so, then these activitieswill be listed along with all their attributes and problemsource data and calculations. The analysis to selectcorrective actions will not be performed for completedactivities; the message 'No corrective action -activitycompleted' is printed in the place of corrective actions.Once an activity is completed, corrective actions can not beimplemented; however, the problems occurring against acompleted activity may be symptomatic of problems encounteredin other activities and are therefore worth reporting.80A future extension of the report generator is one thatcalculates and reports the strengths with which correctiveactions are suggested based on all problem sources occurringagainst an activity. This routine would weight the strengthof corrective actions suggested for a problem source based on:(i) the percentage of total days lost due to this problemsource out of all days lost due to all problem sourcesoccurring in the time window under analysis;(ii) the percentage of total manhours lost due to this problemsource out of all manhours lost due to all problemsources occurring in the time window under analysis; and(iii)the percentage of occurrence of that problem source outof all problem sources occurring in the time windowunder analysis.For example, if a corrective action is suggested with astrength of 100% for a problem source that accounts for 20%of the total days lost, then that corrective action would besuggested with a strength of 0.2*100% = 20%, based on thepercentage of days lost due to problem sources. Once allcorrective action strengths have been weighted, for a givencorrective action, the sum of the weighted strengths from allproblem sources is the strength with which it is suggested forthat activity, again based on each of the three categoriesdescribed above. For example, if a corrective action issuggested with a weighted strength of 20% for one problemsource and 50% for another problem source, then that81corrective action would be suggested for that activity witha strength of 20%+50% = 70%. A possible format for theoutput, which would be displayed for each activity, is shownin Figure 4.14. Another extension to the report generatorwould be an indication of the path(s) that led to therecommendation of the corrective action(s).Based on all problem sources:Recommended corrective actions(s): (list and strengths)(i) based on % of total days lost:(ii)based on % of total manhours lost:(iii) based on % occurrence out of all problem sources:Figure 4.14 Future Addition to the Daily Site Analysis ReportThe application program accesses the information contained inthe REPCON data files in order to evaluate the predicates. Itstores the values (TRUE or FALSE) returned by the predicates in atemporary memory which forms the predicate data base. Theapplication program also draws upon the information suppliedthrough the user interface to perform some of its calculations.It further interacts with the inference engine; this process isdescribed in Section 4.3.82The overall structure of the application program, in the formof pseudocode is presented here to provide insights into how itworks. The actual C code for this program was written by WilliamWong, a University of British Columbia Construction ManagementLaboratory programmer.APPLICATION PROGRAM IN PSEUDOCODE1. Specify the time window.2. Identify the list of activities (i=1,...,m) active in timewindow.3. 	 Do for all activities i=1,...,mIf remaining duration of activity = 0.0 then go to nextactivity i+1.If remaining duration of activity > 0.0 thenDo for all problem sources Xj, j=1,...,tDo for all days in time window k=1,...,uCalculate:sum of days lostsum of manhours lost83f = frequency = # of days of occurrence of problem source/# of days in time window when activitystatus is recorded for that activityIf f <= 0.0 then go to the next problem source X(j+l).If f > 0.0 thenSCHEMA A(i) Do for all attributes Va, a=1,...,20If Dai = 0.0 for all a=1,...,20 then go to Schema B, andR(X,Z) = R2(X,Z).Sja = Dai (degree of applicability of attribute Va toactivity i) * Bja (standard strength betweenproblem source Xj and attribute Va)gives	V1 V2 V3 	 V20	Xj[Sj1 Sj2 Sj3 	 Sj20](ii) Do for all attributes Va, a=1,...,20Do for all corrective actions Zc, c=1,...,rTja,c = strength determined by expert rules linkingactivity attributes to corrective actions(found in Appendix D)84givesZ1 	 Z2 	 ZrV1[Tj1,1 Tj1,2 	 Tjl,r]V2[Tj2,1 Tj2,2 	 Tj2,r].[ 	 . . 	 ].[ 	 . . 	 ].[ 	 . 	 . . 	 ]V20[Tj20,1 Tj20,2....Tj20,r)(iii)Apply max-min rule to S(X,V) and T(V,Z) matricesRljc= max[min(Sj1,Tjl,c), min(Sj2,Tj2,c),min(Sj3,Tj3,c),...,min(Sj20,Tj20,c)]c = 1,...,rgivesZ1 	 Z2 	 ZrXj[R1j1 R1j2 	 Rljr]Apply cum-min rule to S(X,V) and T(V,Z) matricesRljc= sum[min(Sj1,Tjl,c), min(Sj2,Tj2,c),min(Sj3,Tj3,c),...,min(Sj20,Tj20,c)]c = 1,...,rgivesZ1 	 Z2 	 ZrXj[Rljl R1j2 	 Rljr]85SCHEMA B(i) Do for all problem types Yd, d=1,2,3,4Yl=time; Y2=cost; Y3=quality; Y4=no problemPjd = strength determined by rules in following tabled = 1,2,3,4givesY1 Y2 Y3 Y4Xj[Pjl Pj2 Pj3 Pj4]86Let the four types of problems be:(1) time(2) cost(3) quality(4) no problem,and let them be represented by the set Y.Problem source Xj points to problem Yd with a strength Pjdranging from 0.0 to 1.0, where j represents the problem sourceand d the problem type. Pjd is determined from the system-derived variables as follows:(1) DO THIS FIRST = DEFAULTIf the total number of days lost from all problem sourcesis >= total float (as of current progress date), then:Pjl = 1.0Pj2 = 0.0Pj4 = 0.0.(2) IN ALL CASESIf the problem source (Xj) is rework (workmanship), then:Pj3 = 1.0.Otherwise,Pj3 = 0.0.87(3) Let the 'degree of non-criticality' = # of days of totalfloat/remaining duration.Let the 'criticality index' = 1.0 - 4(degree of non-criticality), where 0.0 <= criticality index <= 1.0.If the total float is negative, then 'criticality index'> 1.0; therefore, set the 'criticality index' to 1.0.(4) For a given activity i and a given problem source Xj:(a) If there are days lost only (no manhours lost), thenPjl = max[default, criticality index]Pj2 = 0.0Pj4 = 0.0.(b) If there are manhours lost only (no days lost), thenPjl = 0.0Pj2 = 1.0Pj4 = 0.0.(c) If there are both days lost and manhours lost, thenPjl = max[default, criticality index)Pj2 = 1.0 - criticality indexPj4 = 0.0.(d) If there are no manhours lost, no days lost, and theproblem source is not rework (workmanship), thenPjl = Pj2 = Pj3 = 0.0Pj4 = 1.0.88(ii) Do for all problem types Yd, d=1,2,3,4Do for all corrective actions Zc, c=1,...,rQjd,c = strength determined by expert rules linkingproblem types to corrective actions (found inAppendix D)givesZ1 	 Z2 	 ZrYl[Qjl,l Qj1,2	 Qjl,r]Y 2 [Qj 2 ,l Qj2,2 	 Qj2,r]Y3[Qj3,1 Qj3,2	 Qj3.rJY4[Qj4,1 Qj4,2	 Qj4,r](iii)Apply max-min rule to P(X,Y) and Q(Y,Z) matricesR2jc= max[min(Pjl,Qjl,c), min(Pj2,Qj2,c),min(Pj3,Qj3,c),min(Pj4,Qj4,c)]c = 1,...,rgivesZl 	 Z2 	 ZrXj[R2j1 R2j2 	 R2jr]Apply cum-min rule to P(X,Y) and Q(Y,Z) matricesR2jc= sum[min(Pjl,Qjl,c), min(Pj2,Qj2,c),min(Pj3,Qj3,c),min(Pj4,Qj4,c)]c = 1,...,rgivesZl 	 Z2 	 ZrXj[R2j1 R2j2	 R2jr]89COMBINE SCHEMA A AND SCHEMA BTake intersection of two (X,Z) matrices from Schema A andSchema B(i) Do for matrices calculated by max-min ruleRjc = min(R1jc,R2jc)c = 1,..,rgives	Z1 Z2	Zr	Xj[Rj1 Rj2 	 Rjr]For activity i and problem source Xj, corrective actionZc is suggested with a strength of Rjc (0.0<=Rjc<=1.0).(ii) Do for matrices determined by cum-min ruleRjc = min(R1jc,R2jc)= 1,...,rgives	Z1 Z2 	 Zr	Xj[Rjl Rj2 	 Rjr]For activity i and problem source Xj, corrective actionZc is suggested with a strength of Rjc (0.0<=Rjc<=1.0).90CALCULATIONS FOR REPORT GENERATORIf frequency (f) > 0.0 then(i) Do for all activities i=1,...,mtotal floatremaining duration (x days, y%)where y = (remaining duration/total duration)*100%total float/remaining duration(ii) Do for all activities (i=1,...,m)Do for all problem sources Xj, j=1,...,tDo for all days in time window k=1,...,usum of total number of days lost due to all problem sourcesin time windowsum of total number of manhours lost due to all problemsources in time windowtotal number of occurrences of all problem sources in timewindow% of total days lost =(total days lost due to this problem source/total dayslost due to all problem sources) X 1009 1% of total manhours lost =(total manhours lost due to this problem source/totalmanhours lost due to all problem sources) X 100% occurrence out of all problem sources =(total # of occurrences of this problem source/total #of occurrences of all problem sources) X 100frequency of occurrence in time window =(# of days of occurrence of this problem source in timewindow/# of days in time window when activity status isrecorded for that activity) X 1004.2.4 Inference EngineThe inference engine is a set of rules that provide the systemwith the ability to reason about the knowledge base. The role ofthe inference engine is to interact with the application programand the rule base to prove whether or not the conditions in therule base are triggered and to return a value to the applicationprogram in the case that they are true. A number of predicates arepredefined and associated with the inference engine. The rest arecreated by the application program, as described previously. Asingle inference engine can be used with a number of knowledgebases, each with its own application program. The interaction92between the application program, the inference engine, and the rulebase is explained in Section 4.3.The existing inference engine is a basic one that evaluatesthe rules in the rule base in sequential order and is premised inthe fact that the rules are independent. This is the limitationon the inference engine: for this application, it can only managerules that are independent. This inference engine operates in arudimentary forward-chaining mode; it traces only once through therules without having to backtrack, since the rules are independent.4.2.5 Rule BaseA set of expert rules has been developed to determine thestrengths of the linkages between user-assigned activity attributesand corrective actions (Tja,c elements of the T(V,Z) matrix) andbetween problem types and corrective actions (Qjd,c elements of theQ(Y,Z) matrix). These rules form a database that can be edited inthe form of an ASCII file; the inference engine accesses theserules. Figure 4.15 shows part of the ASCII file and the form ofthe rules.#if current(problem, 11)#then#if and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, @A), >=(@A, 12),activity(percent remaining_ duration, @B), >=(@B, 50),activity(remainiiig_duration, Ic), >=(@c, 3))#then$ag_strength 1 1001 1.0fendFigure 4.15 ASCII File of Rule Base93These rules are if-then rules: if (conditions are satisfied)then (strength ranging from 0.0 to 1.0 applies). For example, therule shown in Figure 4.15 translates in English as:If the activity status is critical, andif the precipitation on site is greater than or equal to 12mm on any single day in the time window under analysis whenactivity status is recorded against the activity, andif the remaining duration of the activity is greater than orequal to 50% and 3 days,then the strength of the linkage between attribute 1(sensitive to high precipitation) and corrective action 1.1(provide a protected environment or shelter) for problemsource 11 (too much precipitation) is 1.0 (Tja,c).The predicates represent arguments in the rules and correspondto those previously defined by the application program. Thepredicates used in the rules that determine T(V,Z) check thefollowing system-derived activity attributes and project variables:(a) criticality;(b) remaining duration;(c) trade responsible;(d) work force data;(e) weather conditions; and(f) site conditions.The predicate used in the rules that determine Q(Y,Z) checks thefrequency of the problem source to determine the weighting 'W' that94is multiplied by a factor contained in the rule. The completeASCII file of rules is found in Appendix D, and the rules aredemonstrated in several examples found in Appendix C.Although an attempt has been made to formulate meaningfulrules by drawing on knowledge gained through experience and fromthe literature, this is an area in which much refinement isrequired. This effort will require very extensive interaction withseasoned construction personnel to refine both the rules and theassociated weightings and to expand the rule base.4.3 Interaction Between Application Program, Inference Engine, andRule BaseThe application program sets up the environment in which theinference engine can be used. It goes through the REPCON activitydata files and Daily Site files and extracts all activities, withina specified date range, that have problem codes assigned to them,along with other information associated with an activity or day(e.g. work environment data). It organizes this data in a formatthat is usable by the inference engine and sets up files that willreceive information from it.The application program then proceeds to use this dataretrieved from the REPCON files to evaluate all of the predicateslisted in Table 4.1, using the conditions stated below eachpredicate. The TRUE or FALSE value returned by each predicate is95stored in temporary memory which will be accessed by the inferenceengine (see Figure 4.1). The evaluation of the predicates is doneon an activity-by-activity basis, as each activity is processed.With each new activity, the temporary memory is cleared to prepareit to store predicate values for the current activity.Next, the application program determines the membershipelements of S(X,V) and P(X,Y). S(X,V) is simply a matrixmultiplication of the 'degree of applicability' (Dai) by the'standard strength' (Bja). P(X,Y) involves the evaluation of a setof rules to determine the type of problem(s) arising out of aproblem source. This rule base can not be modified by the user inthe form of an ASCII file and has been incorporated as part of theapplication program since it is a small, finite set of rules thatwill not require augmentation (although refinement is possible).Conversely, the rule base contains rules that need to be augmentedin order to encompass more problem sources and corrective actions,since these rules define the linkages between attributes andcorrective actions (T(V,Z)) and between problem types andcorrective actions (Q(Y,Z)) for only seven problem sources.The application program then makes a call to the inferenceengine. The inference engine goes through the rule base toestablish which ones are true for this set of data. The inferenceengine checks the temporary memory for the values returned by thepredicates which form the arguments of the rules. When a rule isestablished as true, the inference engine assigns the weightassociated with the rule to the linkage between the two data items96also associated with the rule (e.g. Va and Zc, or Yd and Zc). Theweight is passed back to the application program and the evaluationproceeds. The inference engine goes through the entire rule basefor each item, in this case each problem source for a givenactivity.The application program sets up the T(V,Z) and the Q(Y,Z)matrices based on the weights passed to it by the inference engine.It performs the max-min and cum-min operations to calculate R1(X,Z)and R2(X,Z) and takes the intersection of these two matrices todetermine R(X,Z) for each problem source. Once all problem sourcesfor a given activity have been processed, the next activity foranalysis is selected by the application program. The entireprocedure is repeated for each activity until all activities activeand not yet complete in the selected time window have beenanalyzed, after which the application program goes on to completeits task of generating a report on problem sources and suggestedcorrective actions.4.4 Processing ConsiderationsThe database of expert rules developed for this thesis islimited: it covers only seven problem sources (out of a potentialeighty-one problem sources in REPCON) and their correspondingcorrective actions; at present, there are 465 rules (365 fromSchema A and 100 from Schema B) for seven problem sources. As the97number of problem sources treated expands, so too will the numberof potential corrective actions. Each additional problem sourcetreated leads to the addition of a substantial number of rules,which the system's inference engine must process. As the databaseis expanded and the number of activities being processed increases,the processing can become very time-consuming; efficiency inprocessing is therefore an issue worth considering, particularlyfor future development of the system.As the rule base stands now, the inference engine tests forthe problem source with the "#if current(problem, x)" statement.If this problem source occurs in the time window under analysis,the inference engine processes all of the rules following thisstatement until the "#end" statement for that problem source. Ifthis problem source does not exist in the time window, its blockof accompanying rules is skipped. This procedure is done on anactivity-by-activity basis.A potential refinement is to add a second test statement,after testing for the problem source, to test for:(i) the user-assigned activity attribute, and process theaccompanying rules only if the attribute in question hasa non-zero linkage to the problem source; and(ii) the problem type, and process the rules only if theproblem type exists (has a non-zero linkage to theproblem source).The disadvantage of implementing this extra check is that theinference engine would require more reasoning ability with thispmcip.<12mmprecip.> gol2mmprecip.> AN12mm 	 precip.<12mm% rem. dur.	% rem. dur.' 	 rem. dur. 	 I 	 rem. dur.PROBLEM SOURCE: Too much precipitation% rem. dur.rem. dur.1 % rem. dur.rem. dur.non-critical acthdtycritical activity98refinement, would take longer to process the rules in the database, and may not save any processing time despite the fact thatfewer rules are processed.A worthwhile refinement to the rule base that would speed upthe processing is to nest some of the rules so that similarconditions are tested for only once for each problem source. Forexample, for the problem source 'too much precipitation', one couldgroup together all linkages that depend on the activity beingcritical, and group those that depend on the activity being non-critical separately. Under each of these groupings, one couldseparate the linkages that require the precipitation on site to begreater than or equal to 12 mm from those that require theprecipitation to be less than 12 mm. In each of these categories,one could then test for the percent remaining duration and thenumber of days of remaining duration requirements. The flow chartshown in Figure 4.16 shows this structure.Figure 4.16 Rule Nesting Structure99The existing application program processes the entire set ofpredicates listed in Table 4.1, before any of the expert rules thatuse these predicates are executed by the inference engine. As aresult, some of the predicates that are evaluated by theapplication program may not be required if the rule in which theyare used is skipped. A rule may be skipped by the inference engineif the problem source to which it applies is not encountered.Thus, there may be some unnecessary evaluation of predicates by theapplication program. A more efficient approach is to have theapplication program evaluate 	 only 	 those 	 predicates 	 that areencountered in rules that are processed by the inference engine.This is difficult to do in a forward-chaining process like theexisting simplified forward-chaining method; it would be bettersuited to a backward-chaining method that traces backwards throughthe data to determine the most likely problem source for a givencorrective action.1005.0 APPLICATION IN PRACTICE5.1 Sequence of Steps for the Automated InterpretationThis section outlines the sequence of steps that the userwould follow in using the REPCON system, from the initializationof the project to the automated interpretation. The steps thatlead up to automated interpretation are only listed; the automatedinterpretation process is described in greater detail. Thefollowing are the sequence of steps followed by the user:(1) Define the project in terms of activities, logic, etc..(2) Record Daily Site information.(3) Review time lost and/or manhours lost information andmake adjustments.(4) Incorporate performance to date in the schedule. Batchenter actual dates up to the desired progress date andre-execute the schedule to assess the implications ofperformance to date, without incorporating correctiveactions. This is the updating procedure. The defaultprogress date is the end of the current daily siterecords; the user may specify an earlier progress date,in which case only daily site information up to that datewill be used as actual in the updating procedure.(5) Initiate 'Data Interpretation' to apply the rules todetermine the corrective action(s) to be explored.(a) Select 	 the 	 time 	 window 	 for 	 automated101interpretation. The user can specify any startdate and finish date; however, the finish date usedby the system is the lesser of:(1) the end of the current daily site records,taken as the default progress date;(2) the progress date specified for the lastupdate; and(3) the finish date input by the user.The total float, remaining duration, and totalduration for all activities are calculated by thesystem based on the projected start and finishdates for activities based on progress to date;this means that all calculations are made startingfrom the progress date used for the last update.(b) Select the method of analysis: max-min or cum-min.5.2 Procedure for Validating the PrototypeIn order to test and validate that the prototype performs asit should, several examples were calculated by hand and some wereimplemented in REPCON on a project consisting of three independentactivities, each of which is repeated in two locations. Theseexamples are found in Appendix C; those that have been used to testthe prototype are labelled with the REPCON activity code to whichthey correspond. The examples contained in Appendix C were set up102to contain extreme conditions that are used in the expert rules(e.g. critical activity; high precipitation on site and highprecipitation sensitive activity; poor ground conditions and groundcondition sensitive activity; exclusively a time problem;exclusively a cost problem). In this way, the desired results wereknown, and the model could be finetuned or calibrated to give theseresults. In order to test the system against these examples, theconditions listed in Table 5.1 were adopted for the threeactivities in the test project.103SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORKFORCE DATA: (for all activities)critical activity; remaining duration = 90% = 27 days;precipitation >= 12 mm on at least one day in time window;poor access to site; poor ground conditions; insufficientmanpower and low skill level of subtrade responsible.ACTIVITY 1 G00100User-assigned activity attributes with Sja = 1.0:1. high precipitation sensitive7. ground conditions sensitive11. external access sensitive12. labour intensive16. subject to design changes17. subject to high inspection19. requires controlled environment20. requires low toleranceTable 5.1 Characteristics of Activities in Test Project104ACTIVITY 1 G00100Problem sources with frequency of occurrence (f) = 1.0:11. Too much precipitation31. Drawings insufficient/incomplete41. Undermanning52. Rework (workmanship)71. Inadequate external accessCase 1: (Location 1) G00101Days lost only: time problem Pjl = 1.0.Pj2 = Pj4 = 0.0.Pj3 = 1.0 for problem source 52. Pj3 = 0.0 for all others.Case 2: (Location 2) G00102No manhours lost and no days lost: no problem Pj4 = 0.0.Pjl = Pj2 = 0.0.Pj3 = 1.0 for problem source 52. Pj3 = 0.0 for all others.Table 5.1 Characteristics of Activities in Test Project105ACTIVITY 2 G00200User-assigned activity attributes with Sja = 1.0:1. high precipitation sensitive7 . ground conditions sensitive11. external access sensitive16. subject to design changes17. subject to high inspection18. subject to contract provision19. requires controlled environment20. requires low toleranceProblem sources with frequency of occurrence (f) = 1.0:31. Drawings insufficient/incomplete41. Undermanning52. Rework (workmanship)71. Inadequate external access72. Poor ground conditionsCase 1: (Location 1) G00201For all problem sources except problem source 72:Manhours lost only: cost problem Pj2 = 1.0.Pjl = Pj4 = 0.0.For problem source 72:Days lost only: time problem Pjl = 1.0.Pj2 = Pj4 = 0.0.Pj3 = 1.0 for problem source 52. Pj3 = 0.0 for all others.Table 5.1 Characteristics of Activities in Test Project106ACTIVITY 3 G00300User-assigned activity attributes with Sja = 1.0:1. high precipitation sensitive7. ground conditions sensitive11. external access sensitive12. labour intensive16. subject to design changes17. subject to high inspection18. subject to contract provision19. requires controlled environment20. requires low toleranceProblem source with frequency of occurrence (f) = 1.0:81. Unanticipated utilitiesCase 1: (Location 1) G00301Days lost only: time problem Pjl = 1.0.Pj2 = Pj4 = 0.0.Pj3 = 1.0 for problem source 52. Pj3 = 0.0 for all others.Case 2: (Location 2) G00302Manhours lost only: cost problem Pj2 = 1.0.Pjl = Pj4 = 0.0.Pj3 = 1.0 for problem source 52. Pj3 = 0.0 for all others.Table 5.1 Characteristics of Activities in Test Project107An Activity Report generated by the REPCON system is shown inFigure 5.1; a Work Environment Data Report, a Work Force DataReport, and a Problem Listing are shown in Figures 5.2, 5.3, and5.4 respectively. The Daily Site Analysis Reports using the max-min and cum-min analysis schema are shown in Figure 5.5 and Figure5.6 respectively. These Reports display for each problem sourcethe percentage of total days lost, the percentage of total manhourslost, the percentage occurrence, and the frequency of occurrence.The percentage of total days lost and the percentage of totalmanhours lost are based on the proportion of days or manhours lost,respectively, due to the problem source in question out of all daysor manhours lost, respectively, due to all problem sourcesoccurring against the activity, in the time window under analysis.The percentage occurrence of a problem source is based on theproportion of occurrences of a problem source out of the totalnumber of occurrences of all problem sources for the activity. Thefrequency of occurrence is based on the proportion of days that theproblem source occurs out of the number of days in the time windowwhen activity status is recorded for the activity. The formulasused to calculate each of these values are contained in thepseudocode for the application program, found in Chapter 4.As demonstrated in Figures 5.5 and 5.6, the automatedinterpretation gave the same results as those determined in theexamples through manual calculations found in Appendix C. The cum-min analysis gave slightly higher weightings than the max-minanalysis to some of the suggested corrective actions; other than108that, both methods of analysis yielded the same results.UBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGENIMNT LAB	ItEPCONmExernpleis to Test PrototypePage I Of IEx•mp lenK	GovN Critical Activityerning predecessor of an activity IV 	 or successor governed by activityReport Date: 	 02381192Report Tine: 	 1S:48:39File Used: 	 C:\REP288\PROJIII\TESTRevision Number: 	 8Progress Date: 0330042ACTIVITY 	 (TYPECODE 	 DESCRIPTION0111118 	 Activity 11	 I SPIEDACT. CNC DESCRIPTION, G08188 	 Activity IITYPE LOC HELVE OFF/LOCT 	 SS 	 8 -1 SSUCCESSORSACT. CODE DESCRIPTION, G88188 	 Activity 11TYPE LOC 61 LAG OIT/LOCT 	 SS 	 0 -1 SPRODUCTION DATAIOC 	 11008 SKIP MIR1 - 2 	 1 	 0 	 JO111C EARLY DATE SOLD 	 LATE DATE 	 ACTUAL DATE	ACTUAL 	 FLOAT	/S ZISTART FINISH OUR STANT FINISH START FINISH 	 DIKE NORMAL EXTRA1 8111192 18J01.92 38 0111192 1811.92 E11311192 1111111321 I 3B1 8 	 N/A N/A 182 81111192 10E92 38 0130162 1831102 81111192 11811E921 I 381 8 	 N/A N/A 18PROGRESSIn ProgressHigh prec-ipitation1.86Lou preci-pitationHigh temp-erature11.88Lou tempe-rature8.88Humid ty8. 80Wind0.88Ground co-nditions1.00ALIMOTOMOE 	 DESCRIPTIONCW88 	 Activity 12TYPE	11110111SS016ACT. CODE INIERIPTIONNCMOS 	 Activity 12TYPE LOC RU. IAG OIT/LOCT 	 SS 	 0 -1 SDesign ch- H gh inspanges 	 ection1.88 	 1.88SIKX.T.SSORSACT. CODE DESCRIPTIONQOM 	 Activity 12Contract - Controlled Lou toler-provision environmen ance8.88	1.88	1.00UPC LOC 1111 LAC 011VLOCT 	 SS 	 8 	 -1 Sr3PROMICTION OATH 	 (CILOC 	 WORK SKIP MR1 - Z 	 I 	 8 38(Storage 04site8.88Site cogestion8.88Internal -access0.80Externalaccess1.88Labour in-tensive1.00Equipmentintensive0.00Buffer ac-tivity8.88Innovativemethods0118LOC 	 EARLY DATE 	 SHAD 	 LATE DATE 	 AC113AL DATE	 ACTUAL 	 MOAT 	 YS ZI PROGRESS High prec- Lon preci- High temp- Lou tempe- timidity Wind	Ground co-START FINISH DOR START FINISH START FINISH 	 OUR NORMAL EXTRA	ipitation pitation erature 	 rature 	 nditions1 	 8111692 1801192 38 8130092 1811092 813111192 118.1111321 I 381 B 	 N/A N/A 10 In Progress	IAN	8.88	8.88	8.88 	 . 00	1.002 84311192 15JUL92 38 81311092 11U111.92 0101092 11831E921 I 381 8 	 N/A N/A 18(Storage ansite0.08Site tongestion1.1111Internal -access8.88Externalaccess1.00Labour in-tensive0.00Equipmentintensive8.88Duffer ac-tivity8.118Innovativemethods8.88Design changes1.811H gh inspection1.00Contract -provision1.88Controlledenvironmen1.88Lou toler-ance1.88ACTIVITY	TYPE	PREDECESSORS	SUCCESSORS	PRODUCTION DATACODE 	 DESCRIPTION	ACT. CODE DESCRIPTION	TYPE LOC REL LAG OFF/IOC ACT. CODE DESCRIPTION	TYPE LOC REL LAG OFT/LOC LOC 	 UORK SKIP OURilGO8388	 Activity 13	S 3 GI0388 	 Activity 13	T 	 SS 	 8 -1 S	G88308 	 Activity 13	I 	 SS 	 0 -IS 	 1 -2 	 1 	 0 38LOC EARLY DATE. SOO LATE DATE 	 num. DATE 	 ACTUAL (IAA 	 /S ZISTART FINISH DUN START FINISH START FINISH 	 DUR 1104111AL EXTRA1 111JUI192 18JUL92 38 01.10092 1811.92 8130092 118111921 I 381 8 	 N/A N/A 182 81111192 MUM 30 8111092 10.111132 8111092 11831.921 I 381 8 	 N/A N/A 10MOOSIn Progresshigh prec-ipitation1.08Lou preci -pitation8.08High temp-erature8.88I.1161 tempe-rature0.118Humidity0.00Wind0.00Ground co-nditions1.88'Storage onsite8,88Site tongestion8.88Internalaccess11.811Externalaccess1.80labour in- Equipment	tensive 	 intensive	1.118 	 0.08Buffer ac-tivity8.88Innovativemethods8.88Design changesLOBH gh inspection1.00 'Contract -provisionIANControlledelivimmen1.101Lou toler-anceI .B0FOR A TOTAL OF 3 aminesUBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB 	 REPCONmExamples to Te•t PrototypeDAILY SITE REPORTING - WORK ENVIRONMENT DATAx Non-worked Day	I XXI 	 I 	15X 125 	 B 	 I• 	 • 	DATE011119202.1111S203J111192Report Period: 0111192 - 03111192leport Type: Weather and Site Conditions	•  	 • 	 U CONTITIONSIII(11)Clear Cloud Rail SnowAM(a)ClearICIoudl Lin 1 Snom Report Rate: 	 DZJOINZReport Time: 	 15:19:42File Used:	 C:\111221111\PROJOI\TESTProgress Date: 	 0311H92Revision Homier: B• • • 	 • 	SITE COMITIONSTEMP (e) GROUND CONDITIONS STORAGE ON SITE ions TO SITE(c) Id) Wind (f) (g) (111 OWENSHigh! LomC 	 I 	 C Precipmm Speedkph Loon 	 Fail Good Poorl Fairl Good Pool fair' Good• 	•UBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LABReport Period: 81J1102 - 83.11182Report Type All Responsibility CodesREPCONmExempl en t o Tent PrototypeDAILY SITE REPORTING - WORK FORCE DATAReport Date : 8211192Report Time : 	 15:49:25Pile Used : C:\REP288\PROJ81\TESTProgress Date :83.111892Revision Maher : 8•( i i TIMMSDATERESPCODE	 TOPICSUPER-INDOOR(R)S1F1/8(1)GRILLHIHIL(n)TUMULIHIM1L(n)OverTimehourscortufrs• •8111152 I	G General Contractor 	 S	M 	 I 	 IX 	 I 	 Ix8111192 	 G General Contractor 	 Ile 	 Ifx81111132 	 G General Contractor 	 1 	 5 	 TT 	 I 	 III 	 I 	 IxtoUBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB	REPCONmEx amp l e e t o Tent PrototypeDAILY SITE REPORTING - PROBLEM LISTINGCritical E Extra York Order Report Date: 82110492x Non-worked Day L Letter Report Tine: 15:17:10! Unscheduled NNem File Used C:\REP218\PIOJ8I\TESTB Backcharye T Telephone Progress Date: 8311192Revision Number: 0Report Period: 0IJ11192 - 1011192Report Type: All Problem Codes For All Project Activities.DATE01111920211192131162PROBLEM:ACTIUITIMATIA UDE 01112/11A01 CHAIGECODE 	 C-00181102 	 DESCRIPTION(11) 	 Too 	 much 	 precipitationG80181 	 G Activity IIG811112 	 C Activity 11G08101 	 C Activity 110111112 	 G Activity II00101 	 C Activity IIG88102 	 G Activity 11IPAOLO, DESCRIPTION 	 I P11011.111 RESPONS1OLITV ICODE 	 NI1E ACTION CODES Ism HAIRS LOSTFIST 	 ADJ 	 TOTAL	•		 •DAIS LOSTFISTAOJ 	 TOTAL •0.25 	 8.258.25 	 8.25	•   1 SUBTOTALS 8.50 8511PROBLEM: (31) Drawing. 	 insufficient81111192 G80111 G Activity II 8.58 0.586881112 C Activity 1101211 G Activity 12 8.58 8.588/J111192 1111101 G Activity II 6.58 8.58610112 C Activity II088281 G Activity 128311492 608111 G Activity 11G811102 G Activity 111802111 G Activity 12 8.58 8.581 SUBTOTALS 	 1.00 1.80 	 LIM 1.08PROBLEM: (at) Undermanning111.611192 G88101 G Activity 11 G General Contractor 8.25 0.25G88211 G Activity 12 G General Contractor 8.25 8.258211192 010181 G Activity 11 C General Contractor 8.25 8.250811101 G Activity 12 G General Contractor8310192 618181 C Activity 11 G General ContractorG10211 C Activity 12 G General Contractor 8.25 8.251 SUBTOTALS 	 8.58 11.58 	 8.58 8.581PROBLEM: (63) Rework 	 (workmanship)01.101192 1380101 G Activity 11 G Genera Contractor 8.58 8.58680281 C Activity 12 C Genera Contractor 8.58 8.58821162 008101 G Activity 11 G Genera Contractor 6.56 0.50G88281 G Activity 12 G Genera ContractorHARP 081101 G Activity 11 C Genera Contractor610281 G Activity 12 G Genera Contractor 0.58 8.58N.3•DATEPROBLEM:ACTIVITY/DMACODE 	 C -COIE(71)110111 	 ONIZIfJ2 	 wounKm I PROBIDI RESPONSIBLITY I 	 I 	 MI Hwas LOST 	 mys LOSTPROREN DESCRIPTION 	 ( CODE 	 NA111: 	 I 	 ACTION CODES 	 F _LW 	 ADJ	 TOTAL I F_EST 	 ADJ 	 TOTALI SUBTOTALS I 	 HE 	 Leal	 Lm	 Lealawls.Inadequate 	 ext.81J11192 G111181 6 Activity 11 G General Contractor 0.25 0.250382111 6 Activity 12 G General Contractor 8.25 0.5BLRIN92 038101 6 Activity 11 C General Contractor 8.25 0.25G10211 6 Activity 12 G General Contractor031692 110111 6 Activity 11 G General Contractor110281 6 activity 12 G General Contractor 0.25 8.25I SUBTOTALS 	 0.511 8.58 	 0.58 0.58PROBLEM: 	 (72) Poor 	 ground 	 conditions1111192 GB8201 G Activity 12 8.58 0.50112.111B2 G112111 G Activity 128311192 G111201 G Activity 12 8.58 0.58I SUBTOTALS 1 BO 1.00PROBLEM.. 	 (111) Unanticipated 	 Utilities01.111192 010301 G Activity 13 0.25 8.25MDR G Activity 13 8.58 0.58811162 010301 6 Activity 13 C General Contractor 0.58 8.50128312 C Activity 13 0.25 8.25831162 011301 G Activity 13 G General Contractor 8.25 8.251e0382 C Activity 13 8.58 0.58I SUBTOTALS I 	 1.25 1.25 	 1.88 1.80TOTALS 	 4.5 1.25 	 5.58 5.50UBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LABExamp I eu t o Teat PrototypeREPCONmPage 1 OF 4DAILY SITE ANALYSIS REPORTReport Date: 	 82JUh92Report Tine: 	 15:30:20File Used: 	 C:\REPINAPRONI\TESTRevision Hadar: 	 8Progress Date: 01AM92late Window: From 0111192 to 81101132method used:Activity: G18118 Activity 11 	 lac: 1Trade responsible: General ContractorStart date: 	 81.111192Projected(Actual) finish date: 11110.92Remaining duration! 27 days, 987Total float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 8.118Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 High precipitation : 	 1.887 Ground conditions : 1.8811 External access : 1.0812 Labour intensive : 1.0816 Design changes : 1.1017 High inspection : 1.8819 Controlled environment : 1.0028 Lai tolerance : 1.88Total rapier of days lost: 3.50Total anther of wallows lost: 0.88Problem Source 	 7. total 	 7 total 	 lfrequ of Corrective Action 	 StrengthNo. 	 Description	 (days lost ides lost occur l occur 	 Us. 	 Description11 Too much precipitation 14 28 1.80 1.1 	 Provide a protected environment or shelter. LM3.2 	 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poorground conditions.1.80S.1 	 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonabledelay due to weather (too much precipitation). 1.8031 Drawings insufficient 29 28 1.88 1.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity. 8.481.21 	 !wow architect/engineer coordination. 1.886.2 	 Issue a woo to the party concerned to requestdrawing completion. 1.806.3 	 Open a delay claim. LN41 Underlanning 14 28 1.110 2.1 	 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them toactivity MM. 1.88Rework (workmanship) el 78 1.1111 2.1 	 Used out Or work font to upgrade the skill 10113.3 	 Use prefabricated elements.4.9 	 Increase or improve supervision. 1804.11 	 Employ a quality control program. LM6.6 	 Open a liackcharge to a subtrade or supplier fordelay. LMIRE115k.-11811111188113111Page 3 Of 46.2 	 lame a mmo to the party concerned to requestdrawing completion.1 .8841 Undermanning 0 17 a 1.88 lb corrective action - lack of supporting evidence52 . Rework (workmanship) 33 118 2.3 	 Deed out the work force to upgrade the skilllevel.1 .803.3 	 Use prefabricated elements. 0.584.9 	 Increase or improve supervision. 1.104.11 	 Employ a quality control program. 1.086.6 	 Open a kackcharge to a subtrade or supplier fordelay.1.0071 Inadequate ext. access 1 17 a 1.88 4.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity. 0.684.17 	 Ilse alternate routes of access. 1.804.10 	 Obtain a street closure permit. 1.004.19 	 Reschedule the murk to hours with less traffic. 1.0872 Poor ground conditions 108 20 1.88 1.1 	 Provide a protected environment or shelter. 1.803.1 	 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. 1.803.2 	 Use extra support or sharing to alleviate poorground conditions.1.003.4 	 Use an alternate construction method. 0 .004.2 	 In secondary work on the activity. 0.805.2 	 Notify the Owner under a contract clause forunexpected conditions (ground conditions,utilities).1.8116.3 	 Open a delay claim. 1.886.11 	 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract.1.00Activity: C110308 Activity 	 loc	 1Trade responsible: Genera	 ContractorStart date: 	 81JUN92Projected(Ottual) finish date: 18311L92Remaining duration: 27 days, 98ZTotal float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 8.88Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 Nigh precipitation : 	 1.887 Ground conditions : 1.1011 External access : 1.8112 Labour intensive :1.8116 Design changes : 1.8817 Nigh inspection : 1.0818 Contract provision : 1.8819 Controlled environment : 1.18?A Lou tolerance : 1.88Total number of days lost: 1.88Total number of manhours lost: 8.88Problem Source 	 Z total 	 X total 	 X 	 frequ of Corrective Action 	 StrengthNu. 	 Description 	 days lost sirs lost occur 	 occur No. 	 Description81 Unanticipated Utilities 100 188 1.00 4.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity. 0.684.20 	 Obtain from the City a location map of allutilities on the site.1.905.2 	 Notify the Outer under a contract clause forunexpected conditions (ground conditions,utilities).1.085.3 	 Request a tine extens.nn from the Owner forunanticipated utilities.1.001171iant 	 IsMi4!OgliOA • 1------- M 4.i.-;3 .. A74 	 4 	 1. 	 -'.,7.4 1 	4i' 1Mll -C gP-- 	 . I l iThS -° 1= "2. 	—i 1-12—! 	 i— 3.-1 	 sfit'; .63E —A-1:-. Zila—.241-31g bb7F-1-1 1'24- ' Ll ?) 11-24 11.__ =5. - 	 1,73_ 	 --▪ilAi .. .1ELJAG31 ...,„ 	 4-,--....,m 33JiE           22 2 MS                                                    eta&A  a            44 4 w.44 44 4 3444q■IN e■o NMN 	 ,10,=,..12w■rna 	 1a 	 r 4Sz 	 i=118-ce041:83ESSEMp▪ 301172 ;4 i.7,4w	 "r §N!! si 	 4/- 41' iz ! 21= viz.;gl 110 	 A1 — ir3Ao01■Figure 5.6	 Daily Site Analysis Report for Examples Using Cum-Min RulePage 2 Of 471 Inadequate ext. access 14 Ze 4.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity. 1.884.17 	 Use alternate routes of access. 1.804.18 	 Obtain a street closure permit. 1.884.19 	 Ileschedule the murk to hours with less traffic. 1.88Activity: G80188 Activity 11 	 LOC 	 2Trade responsible: Genera 	 ContractorStart date:	 11JM2Projected(ktuall finish date: 111.111.92Remaining duration: 27 Bags, 9117.Total float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 1.81Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 High precipitation : 	 1.117 Ground conditions : 1.1111 External access : 1.1812 Labour intensive : 1.1816 Design changes : 1.1817 High inspection : 1.1119 Controlled environment : 1.8120 Lou tolerance : 1.88Total number of days lost: 0.B8Total number of manhours lost: 8.00Problem Source 	 I X total I Z total 	 Z 	 Ifrequ of Corrective ActionHo. 	 Description 	 days lost mfrs lost occur 	 occur'Strength'M. 	 Description11 Too much precipitation 50 1.88 Ho corrective action - lack of supporting evidence31 Drawings insufficient 1.88 6.2 	 Issue a memo to the party concerned to requestdrawing completion.1.80 	 Iktivity: C118281 Activity 112 	 Lac 	 1Trade responsible: General ContractorStart date: 	 1111111192ProjectedlActual/ finish date: 1111.92Remaining duration: 27 days, 902Total float: 8 daysTotal float/renaining duration: BIMActivity Attributes1 High precipitation7 Ground conditionsDegree of Applicability: 	 1.88: 	 1.1811 External access :1.1816 Design changes :1.8117 High inspection : 	 1.11118 Contract provision : 	 1.8819 Controlled environment : 	 1.8828 Lou tolerance :1.88Total number of days lost: 1.88Total number of manhours lost: 3.88Problem Source 	 X total 1 Z total 	 Z frequ of Corrective ActionMo. 	 Description 	 (days lostInhrs lost occurl occur llo. 	 Description31 Drawings insufficient 	 I 	 8 I 	 33 I 213 I 1.88 14.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity.4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination.I Strengthl8.481 	 I■ ■ mM MM mMMMMM■ ■■■ ■ M" 	 dOsi -V1 Zia2 it — 	 3044E 	 4!	h	 8g 	 1—'3 t 	 .2E42—	-Q1Eills:	 i3., 	 k_.	 ti 	 i 2 ._20 g Im3. ■'1! 1 2b I■il 1	1: 	 117;017-1 	 . 10'1 4 1 	 t--i1.4. " 11 10!!Eilmili4" 	 —1-1." "▪ ..... WNN... . 	 .0 .1MSMRr.r.R■ ■  T.. 	 1i Irl 	 7i i 	 I1-eJJ 	42— §3.5 268181821112281AO ■. .■.■.■. . . 2mR, 	 E--------- amMNIP9x120   Page 4 Of 46.3 Open a delay claim.6.18 Notify the City for unanticipated utilities.6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract.    Activity: 1388388 Activity 13 	 Lac' 2Trade responsible: General ContractorStart date:Projected(Actual) finish date: 11J192Remaining duration: 27 days, W.Total float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 1.811Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 High precipitation 1.187 Ground conditions : 1.1111 External access : 1.8812 Labour intensive 1.1816 Design changes : 1.1117 High inspection : 1.8818 Contract provision : 1.8819 Controlled environment : 1.8820 Lou tolerance : 1.00Total number of days lost: 8.88Total number of manhours lost: 1.25Problem Source 	 I 	 total 	 total 	 7. 	 fregu of Corrective Action 	 StrengthNu.	 Description	days lostlmhrs lost occur 	 occur 	 Ihn. 	 DescriptionHI Unanticipated Utilities 11111 1 .81 4.2 	 Do secondarg work on the activity. 0.1104.20 	 Obtain from the City a location nap of allutilities on the site.1.88S.2 	 Notify the Owner under a contract clause forunexpected cunditiuns (ground conditions,utilities).I.886.18 	 Notify the City for unanticipated utilities. 1.886.11 	 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract.Lea1225.3 Case StudyOnce the prototype was found to give reliable results, it wasapplied to a full-scale, hypothetical project. The bar chart forthis project is shown in Figure 5.7, and an Activity Report isshown in Figure 5.8; for the sake of saving space, the ActivityReport contains only those activities that were active in the timewindow treated by automated interpretation. Daily site informationwas recorded for a period of two weeks, including problem sourcesoccurring against activities and the corresponding time and/ormanhours lost. A Work Environment Data Report, a Work Force DataReport, and a Problem Listing for the two weekFigures 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11 respectively.The actual dates from the daily site input were batch enteredperiod are shown inand the schedule recomputed to assess the implications ofperformance to date, before any corrective actions are implemented.Data interpretation was performed for the two week time window,once using the max-min rule and once using the cum-min rule. Thedata interpretation, using either method of analysis, took four anda half minutes on an IBM 286 computer. The results of the analysisare shown in the Daily Site Analysis Reports in Figure 5.12 andFigure 5.13.. 1 Hataa,,,1,41ii.10 1x.......,-. 1s 	 g,.-206 Q. 1 lo.W-,(1 1iii0 ....2IWI^ 	 AI I- ..1 ^ 1Z0liIg4Ra7= .-It_%1 13 1 i 	 3?11 	 2 2 	 2 	 222242 - 2 2 	 2112v 2s4s92. IIIq 	 1 	 11 11 glitill2 	 .2211: 1111111 1 1 	1 1 	 	 1 1 1 ! ! I- 1 i !II I 111 1112t2°i g i 	 , 	 V	 Y 	 Y 	 ti l l 	 i 5 	 i 	 . y. - - -20. - 	i ;	 $257121 	 illv/ vil.11-1 	 Id 	 ! 	 : ! i : 1 5 :1- / - 40 ; °" 1"12 z 	 2-4 	 I 	 f il 	 iii 	 ii 	 i 	 :tit!! !ii ; all;iii 	 ii 	 iiii iiiii 	 i 3311" 2 .:44egigliWilliai1 	 ;3 	 ill 	 1 3 	 	 filliiiIiiiii4 301111 IUlt .!ala::attU111]rt.:a•4a 	 asw4►>t1aI..a'	 acisaz0Uaaa123Figure 5.7 Bar Chart for Case StudyACTIVITYCODE 	 DESCRIPTIONG00200 	 INSTALL TIMBER LAGGING TO ZIFTTYPE0P1EDECCSSOPSACT. CODE DESCRIPTIONG80101 	 EXCAVATE TO 21 CELT•:00100 	 MUTE TO 21 VET   TYPE LOC RE LAG OFF/LOCT 	 SS 	 I 	 0 NT 	 fF 	 1 	 ONPRODUCTION DATALOC 	 YORK SKIP DUII -10 	 1 	 8 	 3LOC VALIDATE SCHER LATE DATE 	 ACTUAL DATE 	 ACTUAL MATSTINT FINISH DUR START FINISH START FINISH 	 OUR NORNAL EXTRA1 8411192 001102 	 3 1511192 1711192 114.1192 8911492 	 4 6 	 N/A2 0511192 891192 	 3 2431.1162 2611492 0511192 1911192 	 3 13 	 N/A3 09JIR92 1111192 	 3 8330192 0711192 09111192 12.111192 	 4 17 	 N/A4 11318192 15311102 	 3 131192 17JUL92 1131192 11731111921 1 	 SI 22 	 N/A5 1211192 16J1192	3 22JUL92 2830192 12301192 118111921 1 51 28	 N/A6 1011192 22301192 	 3 84111IG92 116111192 	 33 	 N/A7 2211192 24301192 	 3 1311102 17111732 	 30 	 N/A0 233119225111192 	 3 24111692 264E92 	 44 	 N/A25111197 29.111192 	 11/51392 0451792 	 49 	 N/A10 2911192 0111192 	 7 11SCP92 ISSEP92 	 54 	 N/A            LOC 7S /1 PDOUILIS Iligh prec-lou preci High temp- law tempe Illumidi y	ipitation pitation 	 erature 	 rature1 	 N/A 1001n Progress 	 8.00	8.88 	 8.08 	 0.80 	 8.00Wind 	 Ground co- Storage on Site tong Internal	 External - labour in Equipment Buffer ac	nditions 	 site 	 estion 	 access	 access 	 tensive 	 intensive tinily0.00 	 0.68 	 1.80 	 1.80 	 1.88 	 1.80	 1.80 	 8.58 	 0.00Innovative Design ch	methods 	 angel	BB 	 0.08High insp-ection0.00Controlledenvironmen0.811Lou toler-a4Ce0.80Contractprovision1.00UBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB 	 REPCONTMCase Study f or Theo l oCane Study	 Page 1 Of 4ACTIVITYCODE 	 DESCRIPTIONG110108 	 INMATE TO 21 1T17. 	 Report Date: 	 82301192K 	 g Critical Activity1	Report Time: 	 15:57185E . Governing predecessor of an activity 1 	 File Used: 	 C:\REP200\PROJ04\THESISI 	 or successor governed by activity 	 Revision Number:	 8• Progress Date: 1211192TYPE0PIEWESSORSACT. CODE DESCRIPTIONMIN 	 PROJECT STARTTYPE LOC RU. I. 	 OfT/LOCNI GL SS 	 8	 I11000CTION DATALOC 	 WORK SKIP PM1 -18 	 I 	 0 	 5LOC DALT DATE SOLO LATE DATE	 ACTUAL DATE 	 ACTUAL FLOATSTART FINISH otui START FINISH STAIR FINISH 	 DOR 001111. EXTRAI 1113UM92115301152 	 5 0311192 0911192 013U1491 0911192	 7 0 	 N/A2 82.0192011.1192 	 5 1211119218.011E11211192 89111192 	 6 7 	 N/A3 033111492 0911102	 5 2311192 2911192 0111192 09.01492 	 5 14 	 N/A4 083111192 128192	 5 831192 0930192 111J192 116111921 1 51 17	 N/A5 89311132 1511192	 5 141192 20311.92 11381192 117300921 I 51 23	 N/A6 101892 16111192	 5 2330192 2911192 18111192 116110921 1 51 31	 N/A7 171192 23311192	 5 011E92 07108792 	 33 	 N/A10J1192 2411192	 5 12111732 18A11G92 	 39 	 N/A9 191102 2511492	 5 21111I11732 27111I8732 	 45 	 N/A1 0 24301192 30311192	 5 01SEP92117SEP92 	 49 	 N/A                         LOC %S %II N/A 1002 N/A 11103 WA 1184 N/A 68S N/A 486 N/A IA7 N/A 88 N/A 09 N/A 818 N/A 8 PROGRESSn ProgressHigh prec-ipitation1.00Lou preci-pitation8.80High temp-erature0.00Lon tempe-rature8.00Humidi y8.80Wind0.00Ground co-nditions1.80Storage onsite0.88Site cong-estion1.08Internal -access1.08External -access1.00Labour in-tensive8.28Equipmentintensive1.88Buffer ac-tivity8.80                                  125NNNN111WA 010V2M^ E— 	 g41 	 NNNNNNNN1 2W NNNNNNNNNN'Tg$%;M ilEE1 2-,-,------giIIIIIIiiii11411 1111iN ------,- ,.N..._vamm.2giq rmEb k:BEM 	MMM1§11112,-...1]-Page 3 Of 42 WA 213 N/A NI4 WAS WA6 WA7 WA8 WA9 N/A18 N/AInnovativemethods1.10Design ch-anges1.08High insp-ection8.00Contractprovision1.111ControlledlLow tolerenvironmen ante0.80 	 8.88ACTIUITY TYPE PIEDECESSOIS PRODUCTION DATA IDE 	 EARLY DATE 	 SCHE0 	 LATE DATE 	 fellIAL DATE 	 ACTUAL 	 FLOATCODE INSCRIPTION ACT. CASE 	 DESCRIPTION 	 TYPE LOC	 NC. LAG OFF/LOC LOC 	 WORK SKIP DOR START 	 FINISH 	 DUR 	 START 	 FINISH	 START 	 FINISH 	 DUR 	 NORMAL EXTRAG80500 If6TAIL TINDER LAGGING 0 688400 	 DEMOTE TO 58 FEET 	 T 	 SS 	 1 	 8 N 1	 -10 	 1 	 0 	 6 1	 1511092 2230092 	 6 	 21OCT92 3113a91 11301192 110310821 1	 61 	 % 	 N/A•G110480	 EXCAUATE TO SO ITU 	 I 	 Fr 	 2 	 8 N 2 	 1630192 2311192 	 6 	 230E192 820002 1230192 122300921 I 	 71 	 95 	 N/A682680 	 ORING 1110101 LAGGING ON SITE	 NI 	 GL 	 SS 	 10 	 I 3 	 1930092 260192	 6 	 821O11)2 0900092 	 % 	 N/A4 	 231.148192 38301192 	 6 	 0300092 18911111)92 	 95 	 N/A5 	 2930092 8630E92 	 6 	 111101392 1710192 	 % 	 N/A6 	 01.88.92 80.9N8.92 	 6 	 1114302 18092 	 95 	 N/A7 	 07JUL92 1110E92 	 6 	 11110092 2511011)2	 % 	 N/A0 	 09JUL92 1630192 	 6 	 19110092 261111192 	 95 	 N/A9 	 1530192 2230192 	 6 	 2111101/92 0311EC92 	 % 	 N/A10 	 173%92 2419.92 	 6 	 2711319204DEC92 	 95 	 N/ALOC 	 'a 	 21 MOSS h igh prec- Low preci High temp- lAw tempe - Humidi Wind Ground co- Storage on Site cong - Internal 	 - External - Labour in Equipment Buffer ac-ipitation pitation erature rature nditions site estion access access tensive intensive tivity1 	 N/A 	 33 In Progress 0.80 8.08 8.08 8.00 8.88 11.88 8.611 1.88 1.00 1.00 LBO 1.00 8.50 8.002 	 N/A 	 163 	 N/A4 	 N/A5 	 N/A6 	 N/A7 	 N/A8 	 N/A9 	 N/A18	 N/AInnovative Design ch- High imp Contractmethods anges action provision Controlledltom toler -environmen ante0.80 0.00 0.88 0.08 8.00 	 11.80ACTIVITY TYPE PREDECESSORS PRODUCTION DATA LOC 	 EARLY DATE 	 SOO 	 !ATE DATE 	 ACITIAL DATE 	 ACTUAL 	 T1OATCODE INSCRIPTION ACT. CODE 	 DESCRIPTION 	 TYPE LOC 	 BEL LAG	 OFF/LOC LOC 	 YORK SKIP 100 START 	 FINISH 	 DM 	 START 	 FINISH 	 START 	 FINISH 	 DIM 	 foam EXTRA882S00 PREPARE IMACING INIAVINGS 0 GL 	 -U. 	 1	 0 	 15 GL 	 0111192 1911192 	 15 	 81311832 2231182 01311132 122.1114121 I 	 161 	 0 	 N/ALOC 	 2S	 21 PROGRESS High prec- Low preci High temp Lou tempe Humidi y Wind Ground co- Storage on Site cong- Internal 	 - External - Labour in- Equipnentipitation pitation erature rature nditions site estion access access tensive intensive Buffer ac-1tivit9GL 	 N/A 68 In Progress 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.00  0.80 0.00 0.011 0.00 8. 00 0.80 0.00 8.08Innovative Design ch- Controlled Lou toler-methods anges High inspiContract - 1ection 	 provision environmen ance0 OR 1.80 8.00 	 8.18$ NAM 8 MIACTIVITY TYPE PREDECESSORS PRODUCTION DATA LOC 	 EARLY DATE 	 SOB 	 LATE DATE 	 ACTUAL DATE 	 ACTUAL 	 RoarCODE DESCRIPTION ACT. CODE 	 DESCRIPTI(11 	 TYPE LOC 	 BC. DIG 	 Off/LOC LOC 	 WOK SNIP DUR START 	 FINISH 	 DWI 	 START 	 FINISH 	 START 	 FINISH 	 8(10 	 nowt. EXTRA1(112608 BRING TINED LAGGING ON SITE 0 GL 	 -GL 	 1 	 8 	 15 GL 	 0130092 19.111192 	 15 	 1610092 0414E92 8234192 122110921 I 	 151 	 119 	 N/AI lmovativellesign ch- High insp.MOWS angel 	 eCt 1011e.ee	 0.011 	 0.10 Contract -provision0.00 Controlled low toter-environnen are0.60 	 8.00INC 	 iS 	 ZI PIVXMISS High prec- Low preci- High temp-ipitation pitation eratureGE 	 N/A 68 In Progress I. 0.80 HAMlow tempe- HOmidity Hind 	 Ground co- Storage on Site cong- Internal -rature 	 nditions site 	 estion 	 accessO. 	 O.BB 	 8.88 	 8 . NI 	 1.00 	 1.811 	 1.00Page 4 Of 4	Exte nal	 Latour in- Equipment Buffer ac-1	access 	 tensive 	 intensive hallo	1.00 	 0.00 	 8.08 	 8.80FOR A TOTAL. OF 7 ACTIUITICS  128    U 2 egEss,T-7  t w_NC at ft 747C at====== 77 CO CI7kt3-at .at. at at atzXz0e-z0000E.I Zz— 21 0zI.• 0• W• >E-1ai2+ C3• E.7 00• Wcd• W2 r0▪ rn3W=21:Figure 5.9 Work Environment Data Report for Case StudyUBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB	REPCONmCase Study for Theei aDAILY SITE REPORTING - WORK FORCE DATAReport Date 	 : 02JUNT2Report Time 	 : IS:SI:S7file Used 	 : C:\10288\P1KJ0I\T1ESIgProgress Date : 1211192Revision Number : 0Report Period: 81JUNT2 - 1211102Report Type: All Orsponsibility Codes                DATEKESPCNC 	 TIME(i)INTERIM1(j)1(K)SOFV/NTRADESMEN(I) 	 (m)SKILL 	 MOOHInIL• •(n)OverTimehoursCAMEOSBIJUNT2 G GENE. MACH I 	 125 	 V 	 Ix' Ili(82J11f92 G GDIERAL CONTRACTOR I 	 125 	 V 	 Ix' I 	 lx03JUN92 G GDOIAL COMPACTOR I 	 28 	 N 	 I 	 I 	 lx I 	 lx01A1192 G GDCPAL COMNACT011 I 	20	 I 	 Ix. 	 .• •I 	 Ix• • - 	55J1492 G GDR. CONTRACTOR I 	 I 	 I 	 20 	 If 	 Ix' Ilx•80.1l1f32 I 	G COWL CONTRACTOR I 	 25 	 Y 	 I 	 lx 1 I 	 I 	 lx09JUI191 G GENERAL CONTRACTOR I 	 25 I 	 I 	 Ix' I 	 ixI 	 1011192 G GDUAL CAIRN/CIAO I 	  	125 	V 	I	 lx I 	 lxI 	 IIJUN92 G GDCRAL comma 1 	 2511 1 	 IxI• •I 	 ixILAINAL G 131101/C• • 	 • 	 -I 	 I 	 20 	 HI 	 Ix'I. 	 II 	 I 	 Ixi3i*334MWa4,4a3•0ftX00a.a•toa•az•w Xm•0 	 fr.144a °o	 11z :Heo •_7211H JAJAaa IIzXzC.100S4:4••a•••mmPgggee,mz/441?saaa•E•ENSSIIIIIII4li33331111$$ gl$samZuS	aNNNSXOa==••••a.-a•a•aaCdOs@s■NWNM	 *; 	 WMARM	 M AM*_-3 *NM W	 *ER,. M.... 	 <6 WMA 3N 	 N *YEWNE130Figure 5.11 Problem Listing for Case Study•ACTIVITY/WM 110111 01181/1800OATC 	 0300 	 C-COIC IESI	 IGICIIITION £800131 OLICAIFI IONI PROOLIN	 S 	 LOSTACSPONSIOLITY 	 MAN HOUR 	 DAYS 	 TCOLIC 	 NAM 	 ACTION CORES 	 I FAST 	 ADJ 	 TOTAL I I CST	 ADJLOS 	 ITOTAL 8111192 	 680182 	 C MENSITE TO II MEI 8.25 	 8.25111260. 	 C MK TIMM IAMBIC ON SITE 8.10 	 1.10808192	 cam 	 C MENNE fl ZI MET 8.28 	 0.2805381192 	 am 	 C MAX TO 21 FEET00.111192	 Q11182 	 C MO 	 TO 21 FEET 1.88 	 1.88GRIM	 G MIIG 711111 IACCIIC ON SITE 0.58 	 0.50 0.10 	 0.1089118HZ 	 612661. 	 C MING TIMM AGING ON SITE18111192 	 GM& 	 C MIND TIMM MING ON SITE 0.58 	 0.5811311192 	 G8260. 	 C MING Ma LAGGING ON SITE 0 	 8.38I SUIITOTAIS I	 1.85 	 LOS	 3.58 3.58PROBLEM:	 ( 7 3 ) Poor 	 ground 	 conditions013111192	 G80101 	 G EXCAUATE TO 21 FEETBL UM 	 018181 	 G EICNJATE TO 21 FEET163111192 	 M0101 	 G ERTIAITE TO 21 FEET 0.48 	 0.4011311192 	 MOM 	 G IIGTALL TINIER [AXING TO 21 0.25 	 0.25121401 	 G MIME TO 58 FEET 8.18 	 0.111(118402 	 G DCAUATE TO 58 fin 1.08 	 1.001211192 	 C88284 	 G INSTALL IMO MK TO 21 11.38	 0.38U10401 	 G DICAUKTE TO 58 FEET 8.20 	 8.28G138482 	 G EXCAVATE TO 58 ITVI SUBTOTALS	 8.65 	 0.65 I 	 1.68 1.611PROBLEM:	 (83) 	 Unanticipated 	 utilities811111192 	 080103 GOICAUATE TO 21 FEET 8.25 	 0.25 0.58 	 8.5884.1162 	 00103 G EACAOATE TO 21 FELT 0.10 	 8.1009.111192 	 1118105 G DICAUATE TO 21 FEET 1.80 	 1.0011130192 	 G10185 G MUM TO 21 MET 0.50 	 0.58 0.50 	 0.58SUITOTAIS 8.85 I 	 2.00 2.811I TOMS 	 5.15 5.15 	 13115 13.85AIN IA■1 •30000132A0Qa=5:7.. 	 a•i- ts!■■■MPI■I!1 gill )	 e22-14 A	 "ie	Is 	 s. 	 .1■ .1m.f. 	 :141 eilsiriA Si. z 	 Tiv4z it;E i	t	 S-11 v e 	 1141 f111.03 z!/.1igl.4 --a.E.241,S.• 	12Figure 5.12	 Daily Site Analysis Report for Case Study UsingMax-Min RuleOD CO aJi133CO	110 	 4.1a1- 	 I II11 — A : i•_ •_. 3i 7, g ' 	 Ii 	 1 - 1 I i .-maimmonsim7 ow i711— iall .m 	. .;a . a— MI 4 i -i..754..., gEes _. = 1...E. g -' = got; lig . i.. :_tg lij i 	 ..ts;;ml 3%z! z -z- - C 8 g" "--Ct ..4, g r6 ,14:;:-. :-... 1 : *A/ t 7 i3f2_2 1, ' 1V,0 li.s,..."_t 	=-5,g2 2.04. 	 ....., ..t.-.5.,2Jacg- A X: 	 .-.-am•   Page 3 Of 6    Problem SourceNo. 	 Description I 	 total I total I 	 !Irvin ofICOrrective ActionWays lost mhrs hastlaccurl occur 1No. 	 Description 'Strength'31 Drawings insufficient 	 I 	 118 I 	 I IN I 0.33 	 No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence'Activity: DAM DETAIL TOW WOCING TO 2111 lac: 1Trade responsible: Mak C011111fC101Start date: 1111111192Projected(Actual) finish date: WW2Remaining duration: 8 days,Total float: 6 daysTotal float/remaining duration: Dadefined(Divide 1y 1)Activity Attributes Segree of Applicability7 Ground conditions : 8.688 Storage on site : 	 1.1189 Site congestion : 1.1118 Internal access : 	 1.8111 External access : 1.8112 Labour intensive : 	 1.8013 Equipment intensive : 8.5816 Design changes : 	 1.88Total number of days lost: 	 8.28Total number of manhours lost: 8.88%Problem SourceNo. 	 Description total. total I 7.Ifrequ ofrorrective Actiondays lostinhrs lostloccur1 occur No. 	 Description 'Strength'41 Undermanning 	 leo 1 	 l 180 I 8.51 	 MU corrective action - activity completedActivity: G80318 INSTALL TIMBER AGING TO 2111 Loc: 3Trade responsible: =NAL 1111111ACI0NStart date: 19J11102Projected(Actual) finish date: 121162Remaining duration: 0 days. 82Total float: 17 daysTotal float/remaining duration: OndefinedlDivide Dy 81Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability7 Ground conditions : 8.688 Storage on site : 	 1.889 Site congestion : 	 1.8818 Internal access : 	 1.0811 External access 1.0112 Labour intensive : 	 1.8013 Equipment intensive : 1.5816 Design changes : 	 1.08Total number of days lost: 	 8.58Total number of manhours lost: 8.58Problem Source 	 IIfrequ ofrorrective Action 	 'Strength'No. 	 Description 	 days lost ohs lost occur occur Nu. 	 Description52 Rework (workmanship)	 I 	 180 I 	 108 1 188 1 8.58 I 	 No corrective action - activity completed 	 1 	 1Activity: 608280 INSTI81. TIMER MMHG TO 2117 Inc: 4Trade responsible: (MAL CONTIVCT011Start date: 	 11J11112Projected(Actual) finish date: 17,111N112Remaining duration: 1 imp, StTotal float: 22 daysTotal float/remaining duration: rzlePage 4 Of 6Activity Attributes levee of Applicability7 Ground conditions : 8.618 Storage oa site : 1.189 Site congestion : 1.8818 Internal access : 1.8811 External access : 1.8812 labour intensive : 1.1813 Equipment intensive 8.5816 Design changes : 1.80Total number of days lost: 	 8.80Total number of minhours lost: 8.55Problen Source 	 Z total I 	 total 	 2	 frequ of Corrective Action 'Strength'No. 	 Description 	 (days lostlmhrs last occur' occur 	 No. 	 DescriptionI12 Pour ground conditions 100 lee 1.00 3.1 Conduct ware on site soil investigations. 0.605.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause forunexpected conditions (ground conditions,utilities).0.686.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract. 8.60Activity: 13111418 MANIC TO 58 1111	Lac: 	 1Trade responsible: GDIERAL 011111ALIORStart date: 11181192Projected(Actual) finish date: 16.111192Remaining duration: 2 days, 4114Total float: 3 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 1.58Activity Attributes levee of Applicability1 High precipitation 1.007 Ground conditions : 1.809 Site congestion 1.81118 Internal access : 1.8811 External access : 1.8812 Labour intensive : 8.2013 Equipment intensive : 1.0018 Contract provision : 1.88Total number of days lost: 8.20Total number of manhours lost: 8.18Problem Source 	 Z total 	 2 total 2 	 frequ of Corrective ActionHo. 	 Description 	 days lost mhrs lost'Strength'cur 	 occur 	 No. 	 Description72 Poor ground conditions lee 180 100 8.67 1.2 	 Postpone the activity to a time window with betteranticipated weather conditions. 8.583.1 	 Conduct more on site soil 	 investigations. 8.754.1 	 Postpone tic activity. 0.585.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause forunexpected conditions (ground conditions,utilities).6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by the	1.88contract.Page S Of 6Activity: 018488 DEMOTE TO SO nv 	 Inc: 2Trade responsible: GENERAL CONDIA11111Start date: 110192Projected(Actual) finish date: IHUIRRemaining duration: 4 days, MI4Total float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 2.18Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 High precipitation : 1.017 Ground conditions : 1.889 Site congestion : 1.1818 Internal access : 1.8811 External access : 1.8812 Labour intensive : 8.2813 Equipment intensive18 Contract provision: 	 1.88: 'AmTotal number of days lost: LBOTotal number of manhours lost: 8.88Problem Source	7 total I 7 total I 	 l	 Iin* of Corrective fiction 	 'Strength'No. 	 Description 	 (days lostlirrs lostloccurl occur ti). 	 Description72 Poor ground conditions 	 I 	 1188 I Lee I 	 No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence'	Activity: G82588 PIIPARE BRACING DRAIIINGS	lac: GI.Trade responsible: GDUAL CONTIACTORStart date: 8131192Projected(Actual) finish date: &UMRemaining duration: 6 days, 387.Total float: 8 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 8.88Activity Attributes	 Degree of 	 Applicability16 Design changes 	 : 1.88Total number of days lost: 	 1.78Total number of mirrors lost: 1.38Problem Source	total total I frequ of Corrective ActionNo. 	 Description 	 (days lost Airs lost occur' occur'Strength'No. 	 Description31 Drawings insufficient 108 108 180 8.78 4.2 	 On secondary work on the activity. 8.486.2 	 Issue a POW to the party concerned to requestdrawing completion.1.886.3 	 Open a delay claim. 1.88Activity: G82618 BRING TIMBER LAGGING ON SITE Inc aTrade responsible: GUM DINTRACTORStart date: 12)0192Projected(Actual) finish date: 22J11192Remaining duration: 6 days, qyzPage 6 Of 6Total float: 119 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 19.13Activity Attributes8 Storage on site9 Site congestionNI lateral access11 External accesslora of Applicability: 1.11: 1.11: 1.11: 1.80Total number of days lost: 	 1.51Total number of manhours lost: 8.68Problem SourceHo. 	 Descriptiontotal %. total 	 2 frequ ofICorrective Actiosdays lost airs lost occur occur IND. 	 Description Strength0.758.450.758.400.7571 Inadequate ext. access 188 188 0.67 1.1 	 Postpone the activity.1.2 to secondary work on the activity.4.17 Use alternate routes of access.4.18 06tain a street closure permit.4.19 leschedule the work to hours with less traffic.      UBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB RE PC 0 NmCase Study for TheaiePage I Of 6DAILY SITE ANALYSIS REPORTn 013)O 1—'-1 late Windom: From 81301192 to 1111192Method used: 1:1111-1011Activity: C88188 INCALIITE TO 21 FEET 	 Lac: 11"4" 	 Trade responsible: MEWL COMPACTOR• ft 	 Start date: 	 8111192Projected(Actual) finish date: 89111921-4 	 Remaining duration: 8 days, OZCD'21 	 Total float: 8 days.J-	 float/remaining duration: UndefinedUlivide lyReport Date: 	 02J0692Report fine: 	 15:24:27file Used: 	 C:\REP200\PROJ84\THESISRevision timber: 	 IIProgress Date: 	 11111192'0Total number of manhours lost: 8.88ftcn7:1CDActivity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 Nigh precipitation : 	 1.807 Ground conditions : 1.189 Site congestion : 1.8118 Internal access : 1.8111 External access : 1.8812 Labour intensive : 8.2813 Equipment intensive : 1.8818 Contract provision : 1.1111Total rusher of days lost: 1.650titProblem Source 	 total I totalNo. 	 Description 	 days lost oars lost2 frequ of Corrective Actionoccur occur IND. 	 Description IStrengthlPI 	 11 Too much precipitation	76	57	8.57	No corrective action - activity completed'2 Poor ground condition	24	13	0.43	No corrective action - activity completednEU 	 Activity: MMINI DICAUATE TO 21 FM09 	 Trade responsible: COCA CONTRACTORCD Start date: 8211192ProjectedUctuaD finish date: 0911192lemaining duration: 8 days, 82Cl) 	 Total float: 7 daysLac:C	 Total float/remaining duration: UndefinedfDivide ly IDa'<M1—...:3tlaActivity Attributes Degree of Applicability1 Nigh precipitation :	 1.807 Ground conditions : 1.889 Site congestion : 1.0810 Internal access : 1.88: 1.11111 External access12 Labour intensive : 8.2813 Equipment intensive : 1.0033NN 	 alfgaMEMEMSEEgigg °,g4'Ni.... ORJia1393OVdii A 	 .a• =1 2 i: 	 IMW 1—il	1--I—	 11 1 177777777,1	-4a .1	0	14 i s	 gc—I —9,4 	 Is g4.4 4 2 	 E 	 170' 4 1s8 12Al 'Y'41. 42lizi --It Ai:1 itli__i;4211 11•3	avs.11 	 2glAg5 -; 	 114MJE-5a   Page 3 Of 6    Problem SourceN. 	 Description1 total Idoys lost m 7.total	7.Ifregoi of Corrective ActionIhr  lost occur! occur INo. 	 Description'Strength '31 Drawings insufficient 	 I 	 118 1	 1 118 1 1.33 1 	 No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence'Activity: 038288 INSTAU. TIM LAGGING TO 2117 Loc: 1Trade responsible: GENDIALOWIACROIStart date: KUMProjected(Actuall finish late: MUMRemaining duration: 8 days, I%Total float: 6 daysTotal float/remaining duration: OndefinedIDivide ly 0)Activity Attributes legree of Applicability7 Ground conditions :8.688 Storage on site : 1.889 Site congestion 1.01118 Internal access 1.1811 External access : 1.1812 Labour intensive : 1.01113 Equipment intensive : 8.5816 Design changes : 1.88Total number of days lost:	 8.28Total number of soanhairs lost: 0.88Problem Source 	 X. total I X total 1 7,frequ of Corrective ActionNo. 	 Description 	 (days lostIahrs lostloccur occur lb. 	 Description 'Strength'41 Iluderlonn ng 	 I 	 ISS me 1 8.58 1 	 lb corrective action - activity completed I 	 IActivity: 1118208.11611111. TIMI1130 LAGGING TO 2117 Inc: 3Trade responsible: Walt CONTIOCTOIStart date: 119JU1192Projected(Actual) finish date: 123111f92Remaining duration: 8 days, 07.Total float: 17 daysTotal float/remaining duration: Undefined(llivide Ily 8)Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability7 Ground conditions : 8.608 Storage on site : 1.009 Site congestion : 1.0018 Internal access : 1.08: 1.0811 External access12 Labour intensive : 1.0013 Equipment intensive : 8.5816 Design changes :Total number of days lost: 	 8.58Total number of manhours lost: 0.58Problem Source 	 I 	 total 	 '7, Itotal 	 % frequ ofICorrective Action 	 'Strength'No. 	 Description 	 Idays lost mhrs lost occur occur INo. 	 Description52 Rework (workmanship) 	 I 	 100 I 	 108 1188 I 8.58 I 	 lb corrective action - activity completed 	 iPage 4 Of 6Activity: 6110208 INSTALL T11111131 !AXING TO 2111 Loc: 4Trade responsible: GEICIAL C0NT180011Start date: 11AD812Projected(Actual) finish date: 17JON92Remaining duration: 1 days, 717.Total float: 22 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 22.88Activity Attributes Degree of Applicability7 Ground conditions : 8.680 Storage on site : 1.119 Site congestion : 1.1810 Internal access : 1.1811 External access : 1.1812 Labour intensive : 1.8013 Equipment intensive ; 8.5816 Design changes : 1.1111Total wider or days lost: 	 BANTotal wider of 'rainbows lost: 8.55Problem Source 	 I 7 total 	 total frequ of Corrective Actionho. 	 Description 	 days lost Ars lost occur occur 	 No.'Strength'Description72 Poor ground conditions 180 188 1.88 3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. 0.605.2 Notify the Omer under a contract clause forunexpected conditions (grouna conditions,utilities).ILEA6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract.0.68Activity: 61104118 D(CitaTE TO 511 III!	tactTrade responsible: GIXRAL CONNACTORStart date: 	 18118192Proiected(Actualt finish date: 16J01192Remaining duration: 2 days, 10%Total float: 3 daysTotal float/remaining duration: 1.58Activity Attributes 	 Degree of Applicability1 High precipitation 	 : 1.807 Ground conditions 	 :1.089 Site congestion 	 :1.8810 Internal access 	 : 1.08II External access 	 :1.0812 Labour intensive 	 : 8.2013 Equipment intensive 	 :18 Contract provision 	 : 1.00Total mother of days lost: 	 8.20Total number of manhours lost: 8.18Problem Source 	 'Strength'(daystotal I total frequ of Corrective ActionNo. Description Idays lostkhrs lost occur occur INC. Description72 Poor ground conditions 188 180 100 1.2 Postpone the activity to a time window with betteranticipated weather conditions. 0.583.1 Conduct more on-site soil 	 investigations. 8.754.1 Postpone the activity. 8.58A aIa§■ UAa142Page 6 Of 6Total float: 119 daysTotal float/romining duration: 19.13Activity Attributes ICONS of ApplicabilityB Storage on site : 1.119 Site congestion 1.1118 Internal access : 1.1111 External access 1.11Total rapier of days lost: 1.58Total number of nanhours lost: 1.68Problem Source 	 7 total 	 7 total I 	 Z 	 free ofiCarrective Action 	 StrengthNo. 	 Description 	 days lost 'Ns lostloccur 	 occur 	 Itio. 	 Description71 Inadequate ext. access 11111 11111 IN 8.62	4.1 	 Postpone the activity.	4.2 	 Po secondary work on the activity.0.75e 454.17 	 Use alternate routes or access. 0.754.18 	 Obtain a street closure permit. 0.484.19 	 Arnie:dole the mock to tours with less traffic. 0.75144The results of the data interpretation, as shown in Figures5.12 and 5.13, demonstrate that the analysis yields plausiblecorrective actions for problem sources. It is inconclusive,however, as to whether the max-min or the cum-min rule is a bettermethod of analysis, as there is no difference for the case studyin the results based on each approach. The data interpretationoutput is useful in pointing out:(i) activities that have been experiencing difficulty;(ii) activities that have had problems but that are completed andwould therefore not benefit from corrective actions;(iii)activities that do not have enough supporting evidence torecommend corrective actions; and(iv) activities that would benefit from various corrective actions,and what these corrective actions are.The case study was useful in demonstrating the workability ofthe prototype on a realistic-sized project. As can be seen fromthe data in Figures 5.9 to 5.11, the project manager is confrontedby a great volume of data. What the prototype system has createdis the ability to search through the data, extract relevantinformation, and suggest likely corrective actions for problems.As the volume of data increases with the increasing size andduration of a project, automated interpretation becomes more andmore essential for the project manager to be able to digest thedata and make use of it for project control.1456.0 CONCLUSION6.1 Thesis ReviewThe objective of this work was to develop a schema to performthe automated interpretation of daily site records used inconstruction. The desired result was to identify activities thatare experiencing difficulties; to identify the source(s) of theseproblems; to identify the types of problems resulting; to findcollaborating information from the daily site records to validatethe causes of these problems; and to suggest likely correctiveactions.A framework was developed wherein each component of theanalysis schema was defined. These components consist of system-derived and user-assigned activity attributes; problem sources;problems; and corrective actions, all of which are discussed inChapter 2. The relationship between these elements was alsodefined, and was used as the basis of the expert rules linking themtogether.Fuzzy logic was used to define the imprecise relationshipsthat exist between these components. Each of the expert ruleslinking two elements was assigned a fuzzy weighting. Fuzzycomposition was used as a method of determining the strength withwhich a corrective action is suggested for a problem sourceoccurring against an activity. Chapter 3 describes the use offuzzy logic and its applicability to the analysis schema used.146A prototype system was developed to implement and test thiswork. Chapter 4 outlines the components of this system and theirinteraction, the application procedure, and processingconsiderations.Chapter 5 attempts to validate the prototype. The procedurefollowed by the user in using automated interpretation is outlined.The computer model is tested on a simple three activity projectthat matches the conditions in several examples computed manuallyand found in Appendix C. A hypothetical case study is also treatedby automated interpretation, thus demonstrating the workability ofthe prototype on a multi-activity project.The framework created in this thesis was shown to work; validcorrective actions are suggested for activities experiencingdifficulty. Various components of the prototype would benefit fromrefinement and expansion; nevertheless, the existing prototype isa complete working model that is a useful tool for project control.6.2 Recommendations for Future WorkThe prototype model described in this thesis would benefitfrom further developments. The list of corrective actions needsto be augmented and could be refined to address project-specificproblems. The set of expert rules used to link the variouscomponents of the system can be refined to encompass a larger setof variables and can be augmented to account for a greater number147of cases. As more rules are developed, the expert rule knowledgebase can be expanded. It would also be desirable to allow the userto have access to these rules and their weightings so that they canbe modified to meet the specifics of each project. The set ofproblem sources that can be analyzed by automated interpretationshould be expanded. This involves developing expert rules andcorrective actions for other problem sources contained in theuniversal set. The system would also benefit from theidentification and inclusion of other problems that can arise outof problem sources, particularly those of safety and scope, whichwere not addressed in this work. The report generator would be ofgreater use if it could identify the path(s) and rule(s) used tosuggest the corrective action(s), as well as reporting on theactivity attribute(s) and project and site conditions that dominatein the rule(s) that led to the suggested corrective action(s).The analysis schema proposed in this thesis does not accountfor daily activity status (e.g. postponed, started, ongoing, idle,finished, etc). A future refinement would be to account for anidle status of an activity and to determine whether this is due tothe fact that an activity is a buffer activity or whether the idlestatus accounts for problems leading to a delay. If an activityis a buffer activity, the idle status may be quite natural; thisfact should be taken into account when choosing the time windowover which the problem source frequency and predicate calculationsare performed for an activity.The existing application program analyzes activities based on148data entered within the time window chosen for automatedinterpretation. It neglects any problem data and projectconditions that have occurred prior to the window; taking thisinformation into account may reveal recurring problems that are notevident in the time window specified by the user. A futureimprovement is to establish a temporary time window for eachactivity under analysis, that is, a time window that begins on thefirst day of recorded activity status and extends to the last dayin the selected time window, according to the restrictionsmentioned previously (e.g. lesser of last day of daily siterecords, progress date, or last day as specified by user). Theuser would have the option to include data that occurs prior to thefirst day of the time window under analysis, in which case theanalysis for that activity would be performed based on thistemporary time window. The report generator would report the timewindow chosen for the automated interpretation of data as well asthe temporary time window used in the analysis of each activity.The existing model assumes that if no days lost or no manhourslost are reported against a problem source, then this problemsource points to 'no problem'. This may not be true, since therealities of construction are that it is often not possible toprovide an estimate of time or manhours lost at the time theproblem source is recorded. There may in fact be time and costimpacts, and these may later be input as office adjustments;however, if data interpretation is performed prior to this, thenthe system concludes that there is no problem. The system could149be improved if it could account for such problem sources and usecorroborating data in the form of activity attributes, workenvironment data, and work force data to suggest correctiveactions.The application program would benefit from the inclusion ofa threshold rule that performs data interpretation for activitiesonly if they suffer from a minimum number of days and/or manhourslost due to problem sources. This threshold value could be anabsolute value (number of days and/or manhours lost) or a relativevalue (proportion of days lost to total activity duration;proportion of manhours lost to total manhours required to completethe activity).Another feature of the data interpretation program that needsto be addressed is one that detects potential problem trends forrepetitive activities. For example, an activity that is repeatedin several locations may be experiencing a pattern of problems onone of its first few locations; the analysis should be able todetect a problem trend and suggest that the duration of theactivity in all successive locations be increased, based on thelikelihood of encountering similar problems in the other locations.The potential benefits derived from automated interpretationof daily site records points to the need for future development ofthe analysis schema presented in this thesis. The model developedin this work performs the automated interpretation at the activitylevel; this analysis could be performed for a group of activities;for a responsibility or trade; or for the entire project. In order150to fully assess the impacts of problems occurring on a particularproject, the analysis must be performed at each of these levels andcorrective actions suggested at each tier. Further work isrequired in refining the expert rules and in expanding the rulebase. This will require extensive interaction with site personneland subsequent documentation of their knowledge.Another area of development is the use of fuzzy logic todefine the relationships between the components of the system.Other fuzzy methods of defining the links between components andcombining these links should be explored. The strengths of theselinks also need refinements, as they are often based on experienceand may need fine-tuning to suit the project at hand. Fuzzy logicmay also be of use in combining suggested corrective actions fromindividual problem sources for an activity to yield a single setof corrective actions for the activity. Further use of fuzzy logicmay be in the integration of corrective actions over a group ofactivities, a subtrade, or the entire project.Another use of this system could be to provide for aconsistency check amongst data items recorded. It could be usedto report that project and site conditions recorded in combinationwith activity attributes point to potential problem sources,although none have been recorded. Further work is required to makethe system operate in this way.Future research and development should focus on developingstandards for the reporting and classification of information.More work needs to be done in the area of defining how productivity151and performance in construction are measured. The issue of whichsensors are appropriate for monitoring progress needs to beaddressed, as does the use of fuzzy logic in handling theimprecision of the data collected from these sensors.The next stage of development for the prototype model is toprovide a feedback loop to the system whereby the user indicateswhich corrective actions have been implemented and their impactson performance. The system could use this information to modifyits expert rule base and to infer new weightings of linkagesbetween data items, thus making it more knowledge-intensive.152BIBLIOGRAPHY[1] Al-Tabtabai, H.M. 1989. PROCON: a knowledge-based approach toconstruction project control. Colorado: University ofColorado, Doctoral Thesis.[2] Ayyub, Bilal M., and Achintya Haldar. 1984. Project schedulingusing fuzzy set concepts. Journal of Construction Engineeringand Management 110 (June): 189-204.[3] Burati Jr., James L., Jodi J. Farrington, and William B.Ledbetter. 1992. Causes of quality deviations in design andconstruction. Journal of Construction Engineering andManagement 118 (March): 34-49.[4] Chang, T.C., C. William Ibbs, and Keith C. Crandall. 1990.Network resource allocation with support of a fuzzy expertsystem. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 116(June): 239-260.Chang, Luh-Maan. 1991. Measuring construction productivity.Cost Engineering 33 (October): 19-25.Diekmann, J.E., and H. Al-Tabtabai. 1992. Knowledge-basedapproach to construction project control. International Journal of Project Management 10 (February): 23-30.Grivas, Dimitri A., and Yung-Ching Shen. 1991. A fuzzy setapproach for pavement damage assessments. Civil EngineeringSystems 8 (March): 37-47.Jansma, Glen L. 1988. The relationship between project manninglevels and craft productivity for nuclear power construction.Project Management Journal XIX (February): 48-54.Klir, George J., and Tina A. Folger. 1988. Fuzzy sets, uncertainty, and information. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.[10] Kouatli, I., and B. Jones. 1991. Improved design proceduresfor fuzzy control systems. International Journal of MachineTools and Manufacture 31 (March): 107-122.[11] Neil, James M., and Lee E. Knack. 1984. Predictingproductivity. 1984 Transactions of the American Associationof Cost Engineers: H.3.1-H.3.8.[12] Rahbar, F. Fred, J.K. Yates, and G.R. Spencer. 1991. Projectmanagement knowledge engineering system. Cost Engineering 33(July): 15-24.153[13] Rahbar, F. Fred, and J.K. Yates. 1991. A knowledge engineeringsystem for inquiry feedback project management.  Preparing forConstruction in the 21st Century, Proceedings of ConstructionCongress '91 (AACE) (April): 704-709.[14] Russell, Jeffrey S., and Luh-Maan Chang. 1987. Methods forconstruction productivity measurement. 1987 Transactions ofthe American Association of Cost Engineers: K.1.1 - K.1.10.[15] Russell, Alan D. 1990. Framework for productivity analysis.The Canadian Society for Civil Engineering ConstructionDivision Seminar (September): 1-42.[16] Russell, Alan D. 1991. Automated daily site reporting.Proceedings of the 1991 Canadian Society for Civil EngineeringAnnual Conference III (May): 405-414.[17] Schmucker, Kurt J. 1984. Fuzzy sets, natural languagecomputations, and risk analysis. Rockville, Md.: ComputerScience Press.[18] Smith, Gary. R., and Donn E. Hancher. 1989. Estimatingprecipitation impacts for scheduling. Journal of ConstructionEngineering and Management 115 (December): 552-566.[19] Tee, A.B., and M.D. Bowman. 1991. Bridge condition assessmentusing fuzzy weighted averages. Civil Engineering Systems 8(March): 49-57.[20] Thomas, H. Randolph, and Iacovos Yiakoumis. 1987. Factor modelfor construction productivity. Journal of ConstructionEngineering and Management 113 (December): 623-639.[21] Thomas, H. Randolph, Steve R. Sanders, and R. Malcolm W.Horner. 1988. Procedures manual for collecting productivityand related data of labor-intensive activities on commercial construction projects. Pennsylvania State University, U.S.,and University of Dundee, Scotland.[22] Tong, Richard M., and Piero P. Bonissone. 1984. Linguisticsolutions to fuzzy decision problems. Fuzzy Sets and DecisionAnalysis 20: 323-334..APPENDIX A:DAILY SITE FORM153AConcreteWORK FORCE DATA 	 DELIVERIESG MAL CONTRACTORCaveats:Item 	 I Qty I Units I 	 CommentEQUIPMENT/RENTALSResl 	 Item 	 1 Qty 	 Consent 	 I StatusSuperlilTradeTradesmenI 	 Sot  Skill  T/0  OwlVIM HiM/L H/M/L INS(j) 	 (10 	 (I) 	 Im) 	 (n)UDC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LABCane Study f or The•I alREPCONmACTIVITY DIARY - MONDAY, OR JUN 92Superintendent: 	 Report Date: 	 2SJUIPT2Report Time: 	 15:16:34Please sign: 	 File Used: 	 CAREPZOO\PROJM\THESISProgress Date: 	 IZJON92Revision Maker: 0 Page 1 of Z.WORK ENVIRONMENT DATAWeherCoMitions:(a) 0111! Clear I I Cloudy 1 I Rain 1 1 Snou I I(1) (111)! Clear 1 I Cloudy 11 Rain 1 I Saar I I(c)Temperature! High 	 C Lou C(d)Precipitation: 	 an(e) Yid: 	 kphSite Conditions:(T) Ground conditions: foorltrair I I Good 1 I(g)Storage on site: 	 PoorlIFairlIGood 1 1(h)Access to site: 	 PoorIlFairlIGoodllComments!INSPECTIONS AND TESTSVISITORSACCIDENTSSITE INSTRUCTIONSMISCELLANEOUS NOTESStatus: 0:Delivered A'-Active I=Idle R-ReturnedUBC CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT LAB Came Study f or Theist aACTIVITY DIARY — MONDAY, OR JUN 92REPCONmReport Date: 	 ZSJUN92Report Time: 	 15:16:58File Used: 	 C.\RLP288\PROJ84\INCSISProgress Date: 	 IZJOH92One Day Window. All Project Activities by loop Code (excluding completed activities). Locations GL to 18. 	 Revision Humber: 	 8 Page 2 of 2..  	 . 	 . 	 . 	 • 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 .I 	 TRADE 	 COST IACTIUITY/11110 OfIRGEENTIA WOK ORIERIDATES (A = ACTUAL)15DAY SCHEDULE' STATUS' PROBLEM 1 	 WORN PROGRESS MARKS/ 	 1 FE TIME LOST 	 ACTION 	 11 	 WEE 	 CODE 'CODE 111C 	 ICIERIPTION 	 I START FINSI1 OUR' 	 TODAY 	 1 TODAY IPLIPICODE 1 	 PROBLENDISCRIPTIONS 	 1 NES T  DAYS TI CODE I 10E0 1. 	 . 	 • 	 • 	 . 	 . 	 • 	  •  	 •I GIMBAL CO I 	 1 an 	 coma aet 	 To fur 	 IA 81JUN 89,11/1 7Ixx xx la xx lesolel• • 	 • 	 •	 • 	 • 	 . 	 .I 	 I	 1 011 82 DEMME TO 21 FEET 	 IA 82.1111 ODJUN 61xx xx XX xx IrsoirlI. 	 • 	 . 	 .  	 .  	 .I 	 I	 108183 EXCAVATE TO 21 FUT 	 IA 83JUN 89JUNSIo xx XX xx lesoirl. 	 • 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 • 	 .I 	 I	 I ceez 81 INSTALL TINEI LAGGING TO 2117 IA 04111 19J111 41xx xx XX xx Ipsolel	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 .I 	 I	 1 082 82 INSTALL TINRER LAGGING TO 21FT IA 115.11111 89.11111 31 	 x* XX xx 	 Irsoirl 	 I	 , 	 . 	 .  	 . 	 . 	 .I 	 1I'( GL PREPARE BRACING DININGS 	 IA 81JUN 122.11111 16 1xx xx XX xx ,,,,Ipso IF'. 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 .  	 .I 	 I 	  ma GL 0011€ TRIER [AGEING ON SITE IA 112111 (221111 151xx xx XX xx xx1PSOIFI. 	 	 . . 	 . 	 . 	 .xx 011101 ALTIUITIES1 	 1 	 I 	 I 	 IPSOIF 1 	 1. 	 . 	 • 	 • 	 • 	 • 	 . 	 .IPSOIF 1 	 II 	  I 	  I 	 I 	 I. 	 . 	 ' 	 • 	 • 	 ' 	 . 	 .I 	  I 	  I 	  I 	  I 	 Irsoirl. 	 .	•	 • 	 •	 . 	 . 	 .no DINA WEI ORDERSI 	 I   	 1 	 I 	 lesoirl__	1• • 	 . 	 , 	 • 	 .IPsoir1 	 II  	 	  	I 	  I.  	 	 	 . 	 . 	 • 	.	 .I.! mac URGESI 	 I 	 I 	  I 	 lesoirl• • 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 . 	 .I 	 I 	  	 I 	  I 	lesoiel	 I• • 	. 	 . 	 	.	 . 	 . 	  I.- 	  lie DIJIRONIOR 1 130 110101/DRA141110 	 148 YORK FORCE 	 5°114E158 UORKMES	. 	  . 	 • 	 I 170 SITE CONDITIONS 	 188 UTILITIES/CITY 	 I	 . 	 .   	 . 	11 Too much precipitat 	 31 Drawings insufficie 41 Undermanning 	 52 Rework (workmanship 	 71 Inadequate ext. ace 81 Unanticipated utili72 Poor ground conditi1. 	 . 	 . 	ACTIVITY STATUS CODES 	. 	 . 		F = Finished I = Idle 0 = On going P = Postponed S = Started x = Critical 	 i	 .   	 • 	 .    •	I 	ACTION COES .T = Telephone L = Letter 11 = Memo R = Backcharge C = Extra Work Order U = Uerhal InstructionsII 	 I  	 I  	 I 	 I. 	 . 	 . 	I 	 I  	 I 	 I 	 I. 	 . 	 . 	 . 	  .	I 	 I 	 I  	 I 	 I	. 	 . 	 . 	II 	 I  	 I  	 I 	  i. 	 . . 	 .  	 . 	 .I	 I 	 I 	 I	 	 I	 I  	 I 	 I	. 	 . 	 . 	 .11	 I 	 I 	 I 	 I. 	 . 	 . 	 .1 	 I  	 I 	 1 I•	1 	. 	 . 	1 	 1 	 1 	 1.  	 I 	 I  	 •	1	I  	 I  	 I 	  I	. 	.	 . 	 . 	 .	• 	I 	 I  	 I  	 I. 	 . 	. 	.	 .  	 . 	 .I  	 I 	 I 	 I	11 	 I  	 I 	 I	.  	 . 	 • 	 1 	I 	 I  	 I 	  	IAPPENDIX B:STANDARD STRENGTH BETWEEN PROBLEM SOURCESAND USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES156PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): TOO MUCH PRECIPITATIONUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation 1.0 Do actions thatminimize/eliminateprecipitation.2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions 0.5 Do actions thatprovide shelter.8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive 0.8 Do actions thatprovide shelter.13. equipment intensive 0.8 Do actions thatminimize/eliminateprecipitation.14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions thatminimize/eliminateprecipitation.15. innovative methods157PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): TOO MUCH PRECIPITATIONUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes17. high inspection18. contract provision 1.0 Do actions thatinvolve the contractrequirements.19. controlled environment 0.8 Do actions thatprovide shelter.20. low tolerance 1.0 Do actions thatprovide shelter.158PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): DRAWINGS INSUFFICIENT/INCOMPLETEUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access. 11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive 0.8 Do actions that speedup issuing ofdrawings.13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delaythe activity.15. innovative methods 1.0 Do actions thatimprove procedures fordrawings.SUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes 1.0 Do actions thatimprove procedures fordrawings.17. high inspection18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low tolerance159PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): UNDERMANNINGUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive 1.0 Do actions thatreplenish work forceon that activity.13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delaythe activity.15. innovative methodsSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes17. high inspection18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low tolerance160PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): REWORK (WORKMANSHIP)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive 1.0 Do actions thatimprove how work forcefunctions, and thatimprove quality ofwork force.13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions thatimprove quality ofwork force, and thatimprove quality ofwork.15. innovative methods 1.0 Do actions thatimprove procedures fordrawings, thatdocument problems,that improve qualityof work force, andthat improve qualityof work.161PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): REWORK (WORKMANSHIP)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes 0.5 Do actions that reducenumber of designchanges, and thatdocument problems.17. high inspection 1.0 Do actions thatmonitor quality ofwork.18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low tolerance 1.0 Do actions thatmonitor quality ofwork.162PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): INADEQUATE EXTERNAL ACCESSUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (VA)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external access 1.0 Do actions thatalleviate externalcongestion.CHARACTERISTICS:I 12. labour intensive13. equipment intensive 0.5 Do actions that reduceamount of equipment ina given location.14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delayactivity.15. innovative methodsSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes17. high inspection18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low tolerance163PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): POOR GROUND CONDITIONSUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation 0.5 Do actions that reduceexposure toprecipitation.2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions 1.0 Do actions thatimprove groundconditions.8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delayactivity.15. innovative methodsSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes17. high inspection18. contract provision19. controlled environment20. low tolerance164PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj): UNANTICIPATED UTILITIESUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITYATTRIBUTES (Va)Bja REASONINGSENSITIVE TO:1. high precipitation2. low precipitation3. high temperature4. low temperature5. humidity6. wind7. ground conditions8. storage on site9. site congestion10. internal access11. external accessCHARACTERISTICS:12. labour intensive13. equipment intensive14. buffer activity 1.0 Do actions that delayactivity.15. innovative methodsSUBJECT TO/REQUIRES:16. design changes17. high inspection18. contract provision 1.0 Do actions thatinvolve the contractrequirements.19. controlled environment20. low toleranceAPPENDIX C:DIAGNOSING CORRECTIVE ACTIONSFOR PROBLEM SOURCES: EXAMPLES164A165PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) MAX-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive	 1.0labour intensive	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3V1 	 [1.0 0.0	 0.0 	 0.0V7 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0	V12[1.0 0.0 0.0	 0.0	V19[1.0	 0.0 0.0 	 0.04.220.20.20.00.04.230.00.00.00.05.11.0]1.0]0.0]0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:YlX1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Yl 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]166CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) CUM-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [4.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 	 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]167R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0)R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) MAX-MIN (Activity G00102)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):no problem 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]168P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y4X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y4 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0	 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence.PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) CUM-MIN (Activity G00102)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive	 1.0ground condition sensitive	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):no problem 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V1 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1691.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [4.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y4X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y4 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence.PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V1 V7 V12 V19X1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1701.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X1 	 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 	 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]Y2 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (50%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (50%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 days171FREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3V1 	 [1.0 	 0.0 0.0 0.0V7 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0	V12[1.0 0.0 	 0.0 0.0V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.04.220.20.20.00.04.230.00.00.00.05.11.0]1.0]0.0]0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [4.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X1 	 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 	 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]Y2 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (50%)172PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive	1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.2, W=0.095TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2Y1 	 [0.095 0.057 0.0954.30.0954.221.04.230.65.10.095]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.057 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.095]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.0 0.095 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.095]173CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.22 Monitor the activity but do nothing in the meantime.(20%)1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (10%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (10%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (10%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1)	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive	 1.0ground condition sensitive	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.2, W=0.095TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [4.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 [1.0]174Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2Y1 	 [0.095 	 0.057 	 0.0954.30.0954.221.04.230.65.10.095]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.057 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.095]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.0 0.095 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.095]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.22 Monitor the activity but do nothing in the meantime.(40%)1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (10%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (10%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (10%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.2, W=0.095TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Vi V7 V12 V19X1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1751.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	Y1 	 Y2X1 	 [0.5 	 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 [0.095 0.057 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.095]Y2 [0.095 0.095 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.0R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.095 0.095 0.095 0.5 0.5 0.095]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.095 0.0 0.095 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.095]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.22 Monitor the activity but do nothing in the meantime.(20%)1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (10%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (10%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (10%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0176SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.2, W=0.095TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [4.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	Y1 	 Y2X1 	 [0.5 	 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 [0.095 0.057 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.095]Y2 [0.095 0.095 0.095 0.095 1.0 0.6 0.0R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.190 0.152 0.190 0.190 1.0 1.0 0.095]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.190 0.0 0.190 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.095]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.22 Monitor the activity but do nothing in the meantime.(40%)1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (19%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (19%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delay177due to weather (too much precipitation). (10%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V1 V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0V19[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.04.220.20.00.04.230.00.00.05.11.0]0.0]0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 	 0.0 0.0 	 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1	[1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]178R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1)	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0requires controlled environment 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Vi V12 V19X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3V1 	 [1.0 	 0.0 0.0 	 0.0	V12[1.0 	 0.0 0.0 	 0.0	V19[1.0 	 0.0 0.0	 0.04.220.20.00.04.230.00.00.05.11.0]0.0]0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [3.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Y1 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]179R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)5.1 Pursue a project time extension for unreasonable delaydue to weather (too much precipitation). (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0Buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityprecipitation < 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V14X1 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V12[0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V14[0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1801.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1Yl [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.2 Postpone the activity to a time window with betteranticipated weather conditions. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Too much precipitation (X1) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive	 1.0Buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityprecipitation < 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V14X1	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1V12[0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]V14[0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 	 [0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]181P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X1 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	1.1 	 1.2 	 3.2 	 4.3Y1 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 1.0 	 1.04.220.04.230.05.11.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [1.0 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.2 4.3 4.22 4.23 5.1X1 [0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.2 Postpone the activity to a time window with betteranticipated weather conditions. (60%)182PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/ incomplete (X2) MAX-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.06.21.06.21.06.31.0]6.31.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y1 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (100%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)183PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2) CUM-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.06.21.06.21.06.31.0]6.31.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y1 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (100%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)184PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2) MAX-MIN (Activity 000102)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):no problem 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y4X2 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3Y4 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)185PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete(X2) CUM-MIN (Activity G00102)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):no problem 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3	 4.21	V16[0.0 0.4	 0.0 	 1.06.21.06.21.06.31.0]6.31.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y4X2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y4 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 0.0 0.0 	 0.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)186PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insuff icient/ incomplete ( X2) MAX-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.06.21.06.21.06.31.0]6.31.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y2 	 (1.0 	 0.5 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (100%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)187PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2) CUM-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4	 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[0.0 	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.06.21.06.21.06.31.0]6.31.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y2 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [1.0 	 0.5 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0	 0.4 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (100%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)188PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2)	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X2 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3Yl [0.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (50%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (50%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (50%)1894.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2)	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):subject to design changes	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X2 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X2 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3Yl [0.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.5]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.4 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.5]190CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (100%)6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (50%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (40%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V14[1.0 	 0.2 	 1.0 	 0.2R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21	V16[1.0 	 0.2 	 1.0 	 0.26.21.06.21.06.30.0]6.30.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:YlX2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y1 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]191R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.2 0.8 0.2 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (80%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (20%)4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (20%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Drawings insufficient/incomplete (X2) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X2 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3V14[1.0 	 0.2 	 1.0 	 0.2 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3V16[1.0 0.2 	 1.0 	 0.2 1.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:YlX2 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.21 6.2 6.3Y1 	 [0.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]192R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.21 6.2 6.3X2 [0.0 0.2 0.8 0.2 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):6.2 Issue a memo to the party concerned to request drawingcompletion. (100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (80%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (20%)4.21 Improve architect/engineer coordination. (20%)193PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3)	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X3 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.1	 2.2 	 4.3 	 4.23Y1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.1 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them to activityXXYYZZ. (100%)194PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3)	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X3 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.1 	 2.2 	 4.3 	 4.23Y1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.1 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them to activityXXYYZZ. (100%)195PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 0.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 [0.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X3 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y2 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence.196PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 0.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 [0.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0)R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X3 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y2 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):No corrective action - lack of supporting evidence.197PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive	1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X3 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y1 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0]Y2 [0.3 0.5 0.3 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0)R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.1 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them to activityXXYYZZ. (50%)198PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X3 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Yl [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0]Y2 [0.3 0.5 0.3 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.1 Seek additional tradesmen and allocate them to activityXXYYZZ. (80%)199PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V14[0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X3 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.1 	 2.2 	 4.3 	 4.23Y1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 	 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (100%)200PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V14[0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X3 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (100%)201PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V14[0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X3 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y2 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0]R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0)R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (60%)202PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Undermanning (X3) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityinsufficient manpower of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X3 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23V14[0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0)R1(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0)P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X3 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23Y2 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0)R2(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.6 1.0 0.6 0.0)R(X,Z):2.1 2.2 4.3 4.23X3 [0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0)CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (60%)203PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 1.0quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 1.0V17[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0	V20[1.0 	 0.6 	 0.0 	 1.04.110.81.01.06.61.0]1.0]1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y3X4 	 [1.0 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.0]204CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level. (100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 1.0quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.0]V17[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V20[1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [3.0 0.6 0.0 3.0 2.8 3.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y3X4 [1.0 1.0]205Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [2.0 1.0 1.6 2.0 1.8 2.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level. (100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 	 1.0quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 [1.0 1.0 1.0)206T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.0]V17[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V20[1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2 Y3X4 [1.0 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 days207FREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 	 1.0quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 1.0	V17[1.0 	 0.0 	 0.0 	 1.0	V20[1.0 	 0.6 	 0.0 	 1.04.110.81.01.06.61.0]1.0]1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [3.0 0.6 0.0 3.0 2.8 3.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2 Y3X4 	 [1.0 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y2 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [2.0 1.0 1.6 2.0 1.8 2.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (60%)208PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 [1.0 1.0 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.0]V17[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V20[1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2 Y3X4 [0.5 0.5 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]209R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance	1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 60% and RD = 6 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6V12[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.0]V17[1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V20[1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [3.0 0.6 0.0 3.0 2.8 3.0]210P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	Y1 	 Y2 	 Y3X4 	 [0.5 	 0.5 	 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0)Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [2.0 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)4.11 Employ a quality control program. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)3.3 Use prefabricated elements. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4)	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0211S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9	V12[1.0 0.0 	 0.5 	 1.0	V17[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0	V20[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.04.110.00.00.06.61.0]1.0]1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 	 Y2 	 Y3X4 	 [0.5 0.5 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y2 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.0 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level. (100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (80%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4)	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject to high inspection 	 1.0subject to low tolerance 	 1.0212SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V17 V20X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 0.5 	 1.0	V17[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0	V20[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.04.110.00.00.06.61.0]1.0]1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [3.0 0.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 3.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 	 Y2 	 Y3X4 	 [0.5 0.5 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y2 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 	 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [2.0 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)213PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V14X4 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9	V12[1.0 	 0.0 0.5 	 1.0	V14[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9X4 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.04.110.00.04.110.06.61.0]1.0]6.61.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 	 Y2 	 Y3X4 	 [0.5 	 0.5 	 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y2 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 	 0.5 	 0.8 	 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):2.3 	 3.3 	 4.3 	 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 0.8 	 1.0 0.0 1.0]214CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level.(100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (80%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Rework (workmanship) (X4) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activitylow skill level of subtrade XXRD = 20% and RD = 2 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 	 0.5cost 	 0.5quality 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V14X4 [1.0 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6V12[1.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0 1.0]V14[1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [2.0 0.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2 Y3X4 [0.5 0.5 1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6Y1 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y2 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.0]Y3 [1.0 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0]215R2(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [2.0 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0]R(X,Z):2.3 3.3 4.3 4.9 4.11 6.6X4 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):2.3 Weed out the work force to upgrade the skill level. (100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (100%)4.9 Increase or improve supervision. (100%)6.6 Open a backcharge to a subtrade or supplier for delay.(100%)216PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) MAX-MIN (Activity 000101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):external access sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V11 V12X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17	V11[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0	V12[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17X5 	 [0.0	 1.0 0.0 	 1.04.181.01.04.181.04.191.01.04.191.04.230.0]0.0]4.230.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X5 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y1 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (100%)4.17 Use alternate routes of access. (100%)4.18 Obtain a street closure permit. (100%)2174.19 Reschedule the work to hours with less traffic. (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) CUM-MIN (Activity G00101)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):external access sensitive 	 1. 0labour intensive 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V11 V12X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17	V11[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0	V12[0.0 1.0 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17X5 	 [0.0 2.0 0.0 	 2.04.181.01.04.182.04.191.01.04.192.04.230.0]0.0]4.230.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X5 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y1 	 [1.0	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]218CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (100%)4.17 Use alternate routes of access. (100%)4.18 Obtain a street closure permit. (100%)4.19 Reschedule the work to hours with less traffic. (100%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) MAX-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):external access sensitive 	 1.0labour intensive 	 1. 0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V11 V12X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17	V11[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0	V12[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17X5 	 [0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.04.181.01.04.181.04.191.01.04.191.04.230.0]0.0]4.230.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X5 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y2 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]219R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [0.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.17 Use alternate routes of access. (100%)4.18 Obtain a street closure permit. (100%)4.19 Reschedule the work to hours with less traffic. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) CUM-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):external access sensitive 	 1. 0labour intensive 	 1. 0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V11 V12X5 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23V11[0.0 	 1.0 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]V12[0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [0.0 	 2.0 	 0.0 	 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X5 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 	 4.2 	 4.3 	 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y2 	 [1.0 	 0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]220R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [1.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [0.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.17 Use alternate routes of access. (100%)4.18 Obtain a street closure permit. (100%)4.19 Reschedule the work to hours with less traffic. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.75, W=0.85TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X5 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23V16[1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R1(X,Z) :4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Yl Y2X5 [0.5 0.5]221Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y1 [0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.0]Y2 [0.85 0.51 0.0 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.1 Postpone the activity. (50%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (50%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Inadequate external access (X5) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:non-critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor accessFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=0.75, W=0.85TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V16X5 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23V16[1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0]222P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X5 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23Y1 [0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.0]Y2 [0.85 0.51 0.0 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.0]R2(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0]R(X,Z):4.1 4.2 4.3 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.23X5 [1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.1 Postpone the activity. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (100%)4.3 Increase the remaining duration on the activity. (50%)223PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Poor ground conditions (X6)	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive	 1.0ground condition sensitive	1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor ground conditionsFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V18X6 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11V1 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V7 	 [0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:YlX6 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11Yl 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]224CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract. (100%)3.4 Use an alternate construction method. (80%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (80%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Poor ground conditions (X6) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00201)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor ground conditionsFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V18X6 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V7 [0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [1.0 0.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0]225P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X6 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11Y1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1'1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract. (100%)3.4 Use an alternate construction method. (80%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (80%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Poor ground conditions (X6) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor ground conditionsFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5226S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V1 V7 V18X6 [1.0 1.0 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11V1 [1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V7 [0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Yl Y2X6 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11Y1 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 [0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 [0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (50%)3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. (50%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (50%)3.4 Use an alternate construction method. (50%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (50%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (50%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (50%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract. (50%)227PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Poor ground conditions (X6) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):high precipitation sensitive 	 1.0ground condition sensitive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityprecipitation >= 12 mmRD = 90% and RD = 9 dayspoor ground conditionsFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	V1 	 V7 V18X6 	 [1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11V1 	 [1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V7 	 [0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Yl Y2X6 	 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11Y1 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 	 [0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 1.0 0.5 1.0]R(X,Z):1.1 1.2 3.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.23 5.2 6.3 6.11X6 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.5 1.0]228CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):1.1 Provide a protected environment or shelter. (100%)3.1 Conduct more on-site soil investigations. (100%)3.2 Use extra support or shoring to alleviate poor groundconditions. (100%)3.4 Use an alternate construction method. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not covered by thecontract. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (50%)229PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7)	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00301)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0	V18[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.2 	 4.3	 4.20 	 5.2X7 	 [1.0 0.0 	 1.0	 1.05.31.01.05.31.06.31.01.06.31.06.101.01.06.101.06.111.0]1.0]6.111.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X7 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 	 [0.6 	 1.0	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]230CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)5.3 Request a time extension from the Owner forunanticipated utilities. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00301)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11V12[1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X7 [1.0]231Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2Y1 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.05.31.06.31.06.101.06.111.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [0.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [0.6 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)5.3 Request a time extension from the Owner forunanticipated utilities. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 MAX-MIN (Activity G00302)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 [1.0 1.0]232T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0	 0.0	V18[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.2 	 4.3	 4.20 	 5.2X7 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0	 1.05.31.01.05.31.06.31.01.06.31.06.101.01.06.101.06.111.0]1.0]6.111.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X7 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (80%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 CUM-MIN (Activity G00302)USER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0233TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):cost 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2	V12[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0	V18[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0R1(X,Z):	4.2.4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2X7 	 [2.0 	 0.0 	 2.0 	 1.05.31.01.05.32.06.31.01.06.32.06.101.01.06.102.06.111.0]1.0]6.112.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y2X7 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.8 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (80%)234PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7)	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X7 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2	V14[1.0	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0R1(X,Z):	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20	 5.2X7 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.05.31.05.31.06.31.06.31.06.101.06.101.06.111.0]6.111.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X7 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.3 Request a time extension from the Owner forunanticipated utilities. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)2356.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):buffer activity 	 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 1.0S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V14X7 	 [1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2	V14[1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0R1(X,Z):	4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2X7 	 [1.0 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.05.31.05.31.06.31.06.31.06.101.06.101.06.111.0]6.111.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1X7 	 [1.0]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 1.0 	 1.0 	 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 	 4.3 	 4.20 	 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [0.6 	 0.0 	 1.0 	 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]236CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.3 Request a time extension from the Owner forunanticipated utilities. (100%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (60%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 MAX-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 	 [1.0 	 1.0]T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11V12[1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 	 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X7 [0.5 0.5]237Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 [0.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 [0.8 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5]R(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) 	 (Zc):4.2 	 Do secondary work on the activity. 	 (50%)4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. 	 (50%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpected5.3conditions (ground conditions, utilities).Request 	 a 	 time 	 extension 	 from 	 theunanticipated utilities.	 (50%)(50%)Owner 	 for6.3 Open a delay claim. 	 (50%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (50%)6.11 Open 	 a 	 claim 	 for 	 conditions not 	 convered 	 by 	 thecontract. (50%)PROBLEM SOURCE (Xj):Unanticipated utilities (X7) 	 CUM-MINUSER-ASSIGNED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES (Va):labour intensive 	 1.0subject of a notice/contract provision 1.0SYSTEM-DERIVED ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTES; SITE CONDITIONS; WORK FORCEDATA:critical activityRD = 90% and RD = 9 daysFREQUENCY OF PROBLEM SOURCE:f=1.0, W=1.0TYPE OF PROBLEM(S) (Yd):time 0.5cost 0.5S(X,V) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:V12 V18X7 [1.0 1.0]238T(V,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11V12[1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]V18[1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]R1(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [2.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0]P(X,Y) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:Y1 Y2X7 [0.5 0.5]Q(Y,Z) MEMBERSHIP MATRIX:4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11Y1 [0.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0]Y2 [0.8 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0]R2(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0]R(X,Z):4.2 4.3 4.20 5.2 5.3 6.3 6.10 6.11X7 [1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0]CORRECTIVE ACTION(S) (Zc):4.2 Do secondary work on the activity. (100%)4.20 Obtain from the City a location map of all utilities onthe site. (100%)5.2 Notify the Owner under a contract clause for unexpectedconditions (ground conditions, utilities). (100%)6.10 Notify the City of unanticipated utilities. (100%)6.11 Open a claim for conditions not convered by thecontract. (100%)5.3 Request a time extension from the Owner forunanticipated utilities. (50%)6.3 Open a delay claim. (50%)APPENDIX D:EXPERT RULE BASE238A239DEFINITION OF RULES FOR RULE BASEactivity(status, critical)if the activity status is criticalactivity(status, critical)if the activity status is non-criticalactivity(percentremaining_duration, @B), >=(@B, 50)if the remaining duration of the activity is greater than orequal to 50%activity(remaining duration, @C), >=(@C, 3)if the remaining duration of the activity is greater than orequal to 3 dayssite(precipitation, @A), >=(@A, 12)if the precipitation on site is greater than or equal to 12mm on any day in the time window under analysissite(precipitation, @A), <(@A, 12)if the precipitation on site is less than 12 mm for each andevery day in the time window under analysissite(access, poor)if the access on site is poorsite(access, fair)if the access on site is fairsite(access, good)if the access on site is goodsite(ground_conditions, poor)if the ground conditions on site are poorsite(ground_conditions, fair)if the ground conditions on site are fairsite(ground_conditions, good)if the ground conditions on site are goodmanpower(number, sufficient)if the subtrade responsible for the activity has sufficientnumbers on sitemanpower(number, sufficient)if the subtrade responsible for the activity has insufficientmanpower on site240manpower(skill, poor)if 	 the 	 skill 	 level of the subtrade responsible for theactivity is lowmanpower(skill, 	 fair)if 	 the 	 skill 	 level of the subtrade responsible for theactivity is mediummanpower(skill, good)if 	 the 	 skill 	 level of the subtrade responsible for theactivity is highprobsource(frequency, @W)if the weighting based on the frequency of the problem sourceis Wprobsource(frequency, @W), <=(@W, 0.35)if the weighting based on the frequency of the problem sourceis less than or equal to 0.35$ag_strength 1 1001 1.0the strength of the linkage between attribute or problem type1 and corrective action 1.1 is 1.0$ag_strength 2 4002 0.6*Wthe strength of the linkage between problem type 2 andcorrective action 4.2 is 0.6*Wtram define current(problem, a)tree define activity(status, critical)trem define activity(percent_remaining_duration, a)tram define activity(remaining_duration, 2)tram define site(precipitation, a)trim define menpower(nueber, sufficient)Orem define menpower(skill, poor)//ram define menpower(skill, fair)Orem define menpower(skill, good)Orem define site(access, poor)tram define site(access, fair)tram define site(access, good)Orem define site(ground_conditions, poor)tram define site(ground_conditions, fair)gram define stte(grou►d conditions, good)tram ag_strength v z w (user-assigned activity attribute, corrective action,tram 	 weighting of linkage)tram define probsource(frequency, a)Orem ag_strangth y z w (problem type, corrective action, weighting of linkage)Oif scheme(1)//then//if current(problem, 11)//thenof and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, &A), >=(aA, 12),activity(percent_remeining duration, ae), >m(28, 50),activity(remmining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))*thenSag_strength 1 1001 1.0tend//if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ).(ae, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), ).(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 1 1001 0.8lendof and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(eA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ).(28, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), ).(ac, 3))//thenSag_strength 1 1001 0.4SendNif and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), 3—(iA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, is), <(ae, 75))//thenSag_strength 1 1002 1.0tendtit and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration,	 >=(ae, 75))//thenSag_strength 1 1002 0.6Mend//if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >m(lilA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <.(ae, 25))//thenSag_strength 1 4003 1.0tendFite: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 1/if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ›.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >(28, 25), <(all, 50))/thenSag_strength 1 4003 0.6lend/if end( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, iA), >=(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >=(28, 50))*thenSag_strength 1 4003 0.2lendlit and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), >.(aA, 12),activity(parcent_remaining duration, aB), >m(28, 80),activity(rommining duration, SC), ,.(ac, 5))OthenSag_strength 1 4022 1.0lardOff and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(8A, 12),activity(percent_reamining_duration, 28), >z(8o, 90),activity(ramaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 5))OthenSag_strength 1 4022 0.6Wendlit and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >4(aA, 1 2),activity(percent_remaining_duration, aB), >=(28, 90),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), >.(ac, 5))/thenSag_strength 1 4022 0.2lend/if and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), <=(ae, 25),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), <=(2C, 1)) 	 NJ/thenSag_strength 1 4023 1.0lend//if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), 4(8A, 12),activity(percent_reamining_duration, 2B), <(m, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), <(2C, 3))/thenSag_strength 1 4023 0.8SendOff and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), ..(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, aS), <oil, 50),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), <(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 1 4023 0.5lend/if and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, iA), >.(aA, 12))/thenSag_strength 1 5001 1.0lend/if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(2A, 12),activity(percent_remaining duration, aS), >.(as, 50),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), >.(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 1 5001 0.8lend/if and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), >x(aA, 12),File: repcon.r02. 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 2activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ›•(ae, 50),activity(ramaining_duration, ac), ).(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 7 1001 1.0Wand*if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12),aetivity(percent_ramsining_duration, as), ›.(ae, 50 ).activity(remaining_duration, ac), >■(ac, 3))OthenSag_strangth 7 1001 0.8Wend*if and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ((aA, 12),activity(porcent_ressining_duration, as), ).(ae, 50),activity(remsining_duration, 2C), >=(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 7 1001 0.4lendOif and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12),activity(percent_ramaining_duration, as), <(a11, 75 ))/thenSag_strength 7 1002 1.0lendNif and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, aa), >.(as, 75))#thenSag_strength 7 1002 0.6WendOif and(site(precipitation, aA), ›.(aA, 12))OthenSag_strength 7 3002 1.0 	 rolend -#if and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12), 	 Loactivity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <z(ao, 25))OthenSag_strength 7 4003 1.0WendOif and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12),activity(percent_reemining_duration, 2B), >(as, 25), gas, 50))OthenSag_strength 7 4003 0.6lendOff and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12),activity(percant_remaining_duration, ae), >=(11, 50))hthenSag_strength 7 4003 0.2WendOff and( -activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12),activity(percent_ramaining_duration, as), >=(as, 80),activity(ressining_duration, IC), >.(2C, 5))*thenSag_strength 7 4022 1.0*endNif and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), c(aA, 12),activity(percent_resmining_duration, aB), 3—(ae, 90),activity(remaining duration, ac), >=(ac, 5))OthenFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 3Sag_strength 7 4022 0.6lend//if and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), >=(3A, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >=(a0, 90),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), ).(2C, 5))Othenfag strength 7 4022 0.2lendOff and(octivity(percent remaining_duration, 28), <=(28, 25),activity(reemining_duration, aC), <.(2C, 1))OthenSag_strength 7 4023 1.0fendSit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(2A, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, ae), <(28, 50),activity(ramaining_duration, aC), <(2C, 3))Othenfag strength 7 4023 0.8SendOff and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), ›■(aA, 12),activity(percent_reneining_duration, 211), <(28, 50),activity(rameining_duration, 2C), ((aC, 3))//thenSag strength 7 4023 0.5SendOff ond(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 2A), ›.(aA, 12))/thenSag_strength 7 5001 1.0lendlit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(201, 12),activity(percent_remeining_duration, aa), >-(a11, 50 ),activity(remaining_duration, aC), ›.(0C, 3)) -lthenSag_strength 7 5001 0.8*endOff and(site(precipitation, 2A), >.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, ae), ›.(as, 80),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), >=(ac, 5))OthenSag_strength 12 1001 1.0Mendlit and(site(precipitation, 2A), ›.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, ae), >(ae, 50), (caa, 80),activity(remaining_dUration, aC), >.(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 12 1001 0.6lendlit and(site(precipitation, 2A), >.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining duration, ae), <=(m, 50),activity(reamining_duration, aC), <cac, 3»/thenSag_strength 12 1001 0.4lendOff and("activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(2A, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, ao), <(ae, 75))OthenFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 4Sag_strength 12 1002 1.0/tend/if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ›.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remeining_duration, 28), >.(28, 75))'thenfog_strength 12 1002 0.6lendOff and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(2A, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <=(28, 25))'thenfag strength 12 4003 1.0Send'if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), '(m, 25), ((28, 50))/thenSag_strength 12 4003 0.6lend/if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(2A, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >m(28, 50))/khanSag_strength 12 4003 0.2lend/if and(activity(percent remaining_duration, as), <=(28, 25),activity(remainIng_duration, ac), <=(BC, 1))OthenSag_strength 12 4023 1.0Sendlit and(activity(percent remaining _duration, an, ...(as. 75),activity(remainingduration, ac), >=(ac, 5))OthenSag_strength 19 1001 1.0 	 IN)/end 	 Lrilit and(activity(percent remaining_duration, 28), >(28, 25), ‹(as, 50),activity(remaining duration, ac), >-(ac, 3))*thenfag_strength 19 1001 0.8Send*if and(activity(percent remaining_duration, ae), ‹.08, 25),activity(reamiang_duration, ac), <=(ac, 1))//thenSag_strength 19 1001 0.5fendlit and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ..(aA, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >.(28, 50),activity(reamining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))*thenfag strength 14 1001 1.0lendlit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, 22), >■(22, 12),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >m(28, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >-(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 14 10010.6lendlit and( -activity(status, critical))/thenFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 5Sag_strength 14 1002 1.0lend/if andractivity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 14 4023 1.0Mendlit and(activity(status, critical))',thenSag_strength 14 5001 1.0lendOff end( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, GA), <(aA, 12))/khanSag_strength 18 4023 1.0lendOff and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(aA, 12))*thenSag_strength 18 4023 0.6lendlit and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12))OthenSag_strength 18 5001 1.0lend/if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12))OthenSag_strength 18 5001 0.8Oendlend/if current(probless, 31)*thenOff and( "activity(status, critical))	 f\a/thenSag_strength 14 4001 1.0 	 cnlendlit and(activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 14 4002 0.5fiendNit and( -activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 14 4002 0.2lend/if and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_reueining duration, 28), <(all, 50))OthenSag_strength 14 4003 1.0lend/if and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_resmining_duration, 28), >.(211, 50))//thenSag_strength 14 4003 0.5lendlit and(activity(percent_refsaining_duration, as), >=(28, 75),activity(resmining_duration, ac), >m(ac, 5))/thenSag_strength 14 4021 0.8lendFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 6Off and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >(as, 50), <(all, 75),activity(reasining_duration, ac), >qac, 3))lthenSag_strangth 14 4021 0.5lend*if and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <=(211, 50).activity(reesining duration, 2C), (cac, 3))*thenSag_strength 14 4021 0.2fiendSag_strength 14 6002 1.0lit and(activity(litatua, critical))*thenfay strength 14 6003 1.0lendOff and( -activity(status, critical))lthenSag_strength 14 4001 1.0landOif and(activity(status, critical))lthenSag_strength 14 4002 0.4lend*if and( -activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 14 4003 1.0landOif and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >=(22, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >=cac, 3))*thenSag_strength 14 4021 1.0lend//if and(activity(percent_remmining_duration, as), gas, 50),activity(remaining duration, ac), <(iC, 3))lthenSag_strength 14 4021 0.5lendSag_strength 14 6002 1.0Off and(activity(status, critical))lthenSag_strength 14 6003 1.0*end*if and ("iactivity(statua, critical))*thenSag_strength 16 4001 1.0lendOff and (iactivity(status, critical))lthenSag_strength 16 4002 0.4lendlit and ("iactivity(status, critical))*thenfag strength 16 4003 1.0lendOif and (iactivity(percent_remining_duration, 22), >.(28, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >-(ac, 3))File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 7OlhenSag_strength 16 4021 1.0HandHit and (tactivity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <(86, 50),activity(remaining duration, 2C), <(2C, 3))OthenSag_strength 16 4021 0.5NandSag_strength 16 6002 1.0Off and (iactIvity(status, critical))/khanSag_strength 16 6003 1.0fiendMendHit current(problem, 41)'then8if and(activity(status, critical), "menpower(number, sufficient),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ).(28, 25),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 2))//thenSag_strength 12 2001 1.0*end//if and(activity(status, critical), -manpower(number, sufficient),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), <(58, 25),activity(remeining duration, 2C), ).(ac, 2))/thenSag_strength 12 2001 0.8lendOif and(activity(status, critical), manpower(number, sufficient))/thenSag_strength 12 2002 1.0/And 	 COHit end( "activity(status, critical), manpower(number, sufficient))*thenSag_strength 12 2002 0.6lend*if and( -activity(status, critical), "menpower(number, sufficient))*thenSag_strength 12 4003 1.0landlit and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), <.(28, 25),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), <.(2C, 1))*thenSag_strength 12 4023 1.0lendHit end( "activity(status, critical), manpower(number, sufficient))*thenSag_strength 12 4023 0.8lendNit and(activity(status, critical), -menpower(number, sufficient),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >x(28, 50),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), >=(2C, 3))*thenSag_strength 14 2001 1.0fiend*if and(activity(status, critical), -menpower(number, sufficient),File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 8activity(percent_remmining_duration, 28), <(28, 50),activity(remaining_duration, BC), >.(ac, 3))lthenSag_strength 14 2001 0.8WendOff and(activity(status, critical), manpower(number, sufficient))OthenSap strength 14 2002 1.0WendOff and( "activity(status, critical), "manpower(number, sufficient))khanSag_strength 14 4003 1.0SendWit and(activity(percentrsmaining_duration, remaining_duration, aa), ‹.(a), 25),activity(remaining_duration, ac), (s(2C, 1))WthenSap strength 14 4023 1.0NandOff and( "activity(status, critical), menpower(number, sufficient))/thenSag_strength 14 4023 1.0WendWendNit current(problem, 52)WthenWit and(manpower(skill, poor))OthenSag_strength 12 2003 1.0lendlif and(eawsmwer(skill, fair))OthenSag_strength 12 2003 0.5WendOff and(manpower(skill, good))WthenSag_strength 12 2003 0.0WendWif and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remeining duration, as), <=(as, 25))WthenSag_strength 12 4003 0.5Wendlif and(manpower(skill, poor))*thenSag_strength 12 4009 1.0Wendlif and(manpower(skill, fair))//thenSag_strength 12 4009 0.8lendWit and(amnpower(skill, good))WthenSag_strength 12 4009 0.4WendWit and(manpower(skill, poor),activity(percent_remaining duration,•8), ,..(ae, 50),File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:00 	 Page: 9activity(ressaining_duration, ac), >=(2C, 5))//thenSag_strength 12 4011 0.8lendOff and(menpower(skill, fair),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >=(28, 50),ectfv1ty(remaining_duration, 2C), >.(ac, 5))'thenSag_strength 12 4011 0.5lendOff and(menfmwer(skill, good),activity(percent_reseining_duration, 28), >=(28, 50),activity(romaining_duration, ac), >=(2C, 5))'thenfag strength 12 4011 0.2SendSag_strength 12 6006 1.0Off and(menpower(skill, poor))'thanSag strength 20 2003 1.0SendMif and(menpower(skill, fair))OthenSag_strength 20 2003 0.5Mendbit and(menpower(skill, good))OthenSag strength 20 2003 0.0Send8if and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ).(as, 50),activity(remainingduration, ac), >.(ac, 5))OthenSag strength 20 3003 0.6SendSit andCactivity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), qae, 25))//thenSag_strength 20 4003 1.0bendOff and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 22), >=(as, 25), (=(m, 50))OthenSag_strength 20 4003 0.6SendSif and(manpower(skill, poor))//thenSag_strength 20 4009 1.0Send*if and(menpower(skill, fair))//thenSag_strength 20 4009 0.9lendOff and(menpower(skill, good))*thenSag_strength 20 4009 0.8Wend01CDFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 10Sif and(activity(percent_renaining_duration, 26), >-(as, 50),activity(remeining_duration, SC), >=(aC, 5))SthenSag_strength 20 4011 1.0SendSif and(activity(percent_resaining_duration, as), >(all, 25), gas, 50),activity(remaining duration, ac), >=(2C, 3))•thenSag_strength 20 4011 0.6SendSag_strength 20 6006 1.0Sif and(aanpower(skill, poor))•SthenSag_strength 17 2003 1.0SendSit and(manpousr(skill, fair))SthenSag_strength 17 2003 0.5SendSif and(nanpower(akill, good))•thenSag_strength 17 2003 0.0SendSif and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_rewaining_duration, 26), qae, 25))SthenSag_strength 17 4003 1.0SendNit and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_reneining_duration, as), 3—(ae, 25), Ixcaa, 50))•SthenSag_strength 17 4003 0.6SendSif and(nampower(skill, poor))•SthenSag_strength 17 4009 1.0SendSit and(nenpower(skill, fair))•thenSag_strength 17 4009 0.9SendSit and(manpower(skill, good))•SthenSag_strength 17 4009 0.8SendSit anckactivity(percent_rearining_duration, 	 >=(a11, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 5))•thenSag_strength 17 4011 1.0SendSif and(activity(percent_rmoaining_duration, as), >02, 25 ), <011, 50 ),activity(reasining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))SthenSag_strength 17 4011 0.6SendSag_strength 17 6006 1.0File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 11/if and(manposer(skill, poor))*thenSagstrength 14 2003 1.0Mendlit and(menpower(skill, fair))OthenSag_strength 14 2003 0.5Send/if and(esmouer(skill, good))OthenSag_strength 14 2003 0.0Mendlit and("activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 14 4003 1.0MendOff and(menpower(skill, poor))OthenSag_strength 14 4009 1.0SendOff and(empower(skill, fair))*thenSag_strength 14 4009 0.8Mend/if and(menpower(skill, good))/thenSag_strength 14 4009 0.4SendSag_strength 14 6006 1.0Mend/if current(problem, 71)1\.)/then*if and("activity(status, critical), site(access, poor))//thenSag_strength 11 4001 1.0MendOif and("activity(status, critical), site(access, fair))*thenfag_strength 11 4001 0.8lend*if and("activity(status, critical), site(access, good))*thenSag_strength 11 4001 0.6lendOff and(activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 11 4002 1.0lendand("activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 11 4002 0.6MendOff and("activity(status, critical).activity(percent_remaining_duration, 20), <=(26, 25))OthenSag_strength 11 4003 1.0File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 12lendOff and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining duration, aa), >(28, 25), <(211, 50))/thenSag_strength 11 4003 0.6landlit and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >.(as, 50))*thenSag strength 11 4003 0.2tendOff and(site(access, poor))*thenSag_strength 11 4017 1.0lendOff and(site(access, fair))//thenSag_strength 11 4017 0.8tendOff and(site(access, good))*thenSap strength 11 4017 0.6landlif and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remeining_duration, 28), >•(28, 50),activity(renaining_duration, ac), >■(2C, 3))//thenSag_strength 11 4018 1.0lendOff andractivity(statua, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), >.(ae, 50),activity(remaining_durstion, ac), >■(ac, 3))*thenSag_strength 11 4018 0.8fiendOff and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, ae), <(28, 50))OthenSag_strength 11 4018 0.6MendOff and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), 4(1i11, 50))OthenSag_strength 11 4018 0.4lendOff and(site(access, poor))//thenSag_strength 11 4019 1.0tendOff and(site(access, fair))'khanSag_strength 11 4019 0.8fiendhif snd(site(access, good))//thenSag_strength 11 4019 0.6File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 13tendlit and(activity(percent_reamining_duration, as), ‹.(38, 25),activity(remaining duration, SC), 1.(ac, 1))/thenSag_strength 11 4023 1.0tendSag_strength 12 4002 1.0of and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), 0.(as, 25))/thenSag_strength 12 4003 1.0lendtit end( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ›(as, 25), .(as, 50))/thenSag strength 12 4003 0.6tendof and( "ectivity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining duration, as), ›.(28, 50))/thenSag_strength 12 4003 0.2lend/if and(site(access, poor))/thenSag_strength 12 4017 1.0lendOff and(site(access, fair))/thenSag_strength 12 4017 0.8tendOil and(site(access, good))/thenSag_strength 12 4017 0.6lend/if and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ).(as, 50),activity(remining_duration, 8C), >■(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 12 4018 1.0lendlit and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_ressining_duration, 88), >.(a8, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), ).(2C, 3))*thenSag_strength 12 4018 0.8/endlit and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), gas, 50))'thenSag_strength 12 4018 0.6tend/if and( "activity(status, critical),octivity(percent_resaining_duration, as), <(38, 50))OthenSag_strength 12 4018 0.4lendcnFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 14Oif and(site(access, poor))#thenSagstrength 12 4019 1.0SendSit and(site(access, fair))SthenSag strength 12 4019 0.8handOff and(site(access, good))'thanSag_strangth 12 4019 0.6Sendlit and(activity(pircent_remaining_duration, as), .c.(as, 25),activity(reseining_duration, ac), <=(ac, 1))khanSag_strength 12 4023 1.0lendtap strength 13 4002 1.0lit and("activity(status, critical),activity(percent_renaining_duration, as), ‹.(as, 25))OthenSag_strength 13 4003 1.0OendOff and("activity(status, critical),activity(percentremainingduration, as), >(m, 25), <(M, 50))thenSag_strangth 13 4003 0.6lendlit and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >0(88, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 4003 0.2SendSit and(site(access, poor))/thenSag_strength 13 4017 1.0SendSif and(site(access, fair))OthenSag_strangth 13 4017 0.8lendSit and(site(access, good))SthenSag_strength 13 4017 0.6lendSit and(activity(status, critical),activity(parcent_remaining_duration, as), >-(as. SD),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 13 4018 1.0Oendlit and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, is), ,.(as, 50),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >=(8C, 3))OthenSag_strength 13 4018 0.8File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 15SendSit and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 2B), (as, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 4018 0.6SendSit and( "ectivity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 	 qas, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 4018 0.4*endSit ancitsitCaccess, poor))lichenSacatrength 13 4019 1.0lend*if and(site(access, fair))/thenSag_atrength 13 4019 0.8Sendlit and(site(access, good))'thenSag_strength 13 4019 0.6fend*if and(activity(percent_rdsmining_duration, as), <=(28, 25),activity(remaining_duration, ac), c.(ac, 1))/thenSag_strength 13 4023 1.0Send/if andractivity(status, critical), site(access, poor))/thenSag_strength 14 4001 1.0SendSit and("activity(status, critical), site(access, fair))'thenSag_strength 14 4001 0.8Sendlit andractivity(status, critical), site(access, good))/thenSag_strength 14 4001 0.6SendSit and(activity(status, critical))'thenSag_strength 14 4002 1.0SendSit and("activity(status, critical), site(access, poor))/thenSag_strength 14 4003 1.0SendOff and("activity(status, critical), site(access, fair))'thenSag strength 14 4003 0.8SendSit and("activity(status, critical), site(access, good))'thenSag_strength 14 4003 0.6Send ,File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 16Nit and(activity(status, critical), site(access, poor))/thenSag strength 14 4017 1.0lendOff and(activity(status, critical), site(access, fair))OthenSag_strength 14 4017 0.8lend*if and(activity(status, critical), site(access, good))/thanSag_strength 14 4017 0.6lendOif and(activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, al), <.(28, 50),activity(remeining duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))*thenSag_strength 14 4018 1.0lendlit and(activity(statua, critical),activity(percent_remeining_duration, as), <(g8, 50))/thenSag_strength 14 4018 0.6lend/if and(activity(status, critical), site(access, poor))OthenSag_strength 14 4019 1.0lend/if and(activity(status, critical), site(access, fair))/thenSag_strength 14 4019 0.8lend 	 (3-1Oif and(activity(status, critical), site(access, good))/thenSag_strength 14 4019 0.6lend*if and("activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 14 4023 1.0lendlendlit current(problem, 81)*thenNif and(activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 12 4002 1.0lend#if and("activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 12 4002 0.8lendOif and("activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 12 4003 1.0lendfag strength 12 4020 1.0%if and(activity(status, critical))File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 17*thenSag_strength 12 5003 1.0Wend*if and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <.(as, 50))lthenSag_strength 12 5003 0.8/fend*if end( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_resaining_duration, as), >(as, 50))//thenSag_strength 12 5003 0.6*andOff and(activity(statua, critical))*thenSag_strength 12 6003 1.0SendOff and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <=(as, 50))/thenSagstrength 12 6003 0.8*end//if andractivity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >(as, 50))*thenSag_strength 12 6003 0.6*endSag_stransth 12 6010 1.0Sag_strength 12 6011 1.0Off and(activity(status, critical))	 1\3*then 	 triSag_strength 13 4002 1.0	CO*end*if and( "activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 13 4002 0.8lendOff and( "activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 13 4003 1.0*endSag_strength 13 4020 1.0*if and(activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 13 5003 1.0SendOff and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), ‘.(ae, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 5003 0.8lend*if andCactivity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >(88, SO))/thentag strength 13 5003 0.6SendFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08	 Page: 18*if and(activity(status, critical))*thenSao_streneth 13 6003 1.0Send*if and( "activity(status, critical).activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), <=(28, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 6003 0.8Sendffif and( "activity(statua, critical).activity(percent_remaining_duration, 28), ,(28, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 6003 0.6SendSag_strength 13 6010 1.0Sag strength 13 6011 1.0*if and(activity(status, critical))*thanSag_strength 14 4002 1.0SendSit and( "activity(status, critics())*thenSag strength 14 4003 1.0SendSag_strength 14 4020 1.0lit and(activity(status, critical))*thenSacatrenoth 14 5003 1.0SendSit and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remainino_duration, as), <=(28, 50)) 	 (31*thenSag_strength 14 5003 0.6Send*it and(activity(status, critical))Schentap strength 14 6003 1.0SendSag_strength 14 6011 1.0*if and(activity(status, critical))'thenSao_strength 18 4002 1.0Send*if and( -activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 18 4003 1.0SendSag strength 18 4020 1.0Sag strength 18 5002 1.0*if and(activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 18 5003 1.0SendSit and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remainino_duration, as). <=013 ..50 1)*thenFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 19Sag_strength 18 5003 0.8lendlit end( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >(88, 50))OthenSag strength 18 5003 0.6Mendlif and(octivity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 18 6003 1.0MendOff and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), <=(as, 50))*thenSagstrength 18 6003 0.8lend*if and( -activity(status, critical),ectivity(percent_remaining_daration, as), )(as, SO))OthenSag_strength 18 6003 0.6lendSag_strength 18 6010 1.0Sag strength 18 6011 1.0*end/if current(problem, 72)/thenOff and(site(precipitation, aA), 	 12),site(ground_conditions, poor).ectivity(remmining_duration, QC), ,z(8C, 3))OthenSag_strength 1 1001 1.0 	 ChMendOif and(site(precipitation, aA), qaA, 12),site(groud conditions, poor),activity(reiMning duration, ac), )=(8C, 3))%thenSag_strength 1 1001 0.8lendOff and(site(precipitation, OA), ,=(aA, 12),site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(remeining_duratico, QC), >.(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 1 1001 0.8lendOif and(site(precipitation, aA). >=(aA, 12),site(ground conditions, good),activity(reisining_duration, QC), >.(2C, 3))*thenSag_strength 1 1001 0.6lendlit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, OA), >.(QA, 12),site(ground conditions, poor))OthenSag_strength 1 1002 1.0lendlit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, OA), c(ook, 12),File: repcon.r02, 05126/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 20site(ground_conditions, poor))/thenSag_strength 1 1002 0.6lendlif and(site(precipitation, aA), >x(aA, 12),site(ground_conditions, poor),ectivity(ressining_duration, 2C), ).(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 1 3002 1.0lendlit and(site(precipitation, aA), qaA, 12),site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(remeining_duration, SC), >*(8C, 3))*thenSag_strength 1 3002 0.8lendlif and(site(precipitation, IA), , .(aA, 12),sita(ground conditions, fair),activity(remaining duration, SC), ,.(SC, 3))//thenSag_strength 1 3002 0.8lend*if and(site(precipitation, aA), >.(aA, 12),site(ground_conditions, good),ectivity(remaining_duration, ac), >.(SC, 3))OthenSag_strength 1 3002 0.6lendSif and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ›.(aA, 12),site(ground_conditions, poor))*then 	 chSag_strength 1 4001 1.0*endWit and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(aA, 12),site(ground conditions, poor))*thenSag_strength 1 4001 0.6lendOif and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), ).(aA, 12 ),site(ground conditions, poor))khanSag_strength 1 4002 1.0lendhit and(activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), <(m, 12),site(ground_conditions, poor))*thenSag_strength 1 4002 0.6fiend*if and( "activity(status, critical), site(precipitation, aA), >=(/A, 12),site(ground conditions, poor))/thenSag_strength 1 4003 1.0lendSif and( "activity(status critical), site(precipitation, aA), qaa, 12),site(ground conditions, poor))OthenFile: repcan.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 21Sag strength 1 4003 0.6lendOif and(activity(percent_reasining_duration, 28), <=(28, 50),activity(ramaining_duration, aC), <.(aC, 1))*thenSap strength 1 4023 1.0*end*if and(sito(ground conditions, poor))*thenSag_strength 1 5002 1.0landOff and(site(ground conditions, fair))/thenSag_strangth 1 5002 0.8SendOff and(sita(ground_conditions, good))*thanSag_strength 1 5002 0.6/endSit and(activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 1 6003 1.0lendlit and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), (=(all, 50))*thenSag_strength 1 6003 0.8lendlit and("activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >Rs, 50))*then 	 ChSag_strength 1 6003 0.6*end/if and(site(ground_conditions, poor))/khanSag_strength 1 6011 1.0lend/if and(site(ground_conditions, fair))*thenSag_strength 1 6011 0.8lend/if and(site(ground_conditions, good))/thanSag_strength 1 6011 0.6lendSit and(site(ground_conditions, poor))/thenSag_strength 7 3001 1.0*endlit and(site(ground_conditions, fair))*thenSag_strength 7 3001 0.9lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, good))*thenSag_strength 7 3001 0.8File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 22lendlit and(sito(ground_conditions, poor),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 7 3002 1.0Sendlit and(site(ground conditions, fair),activity(rmaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 7 3002 0.8handOff and(site(ground conditions, good),activity(rameining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))SthenSag_strength 7 3002 0.6lendOff and(site(ground conditions, poor),activity(remeining duration, ac), ›.(0C, 3))*thenSag_strength 7 3004 1.0land/if and(site(ground conditions, fair).activity(remainingduration, 2C), >=(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 7 3004 0.8lendOif and(sita(ground_conditions, good),activity(regaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 7 3004 0.6 	 N.)lend 	 C71Off and(activity(status, critical)) 	 La/thenSag_strength 7 4002 1.0lendOff and( -activity(status, critical), site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(percent_remeining_duration, as), c.(ae, 50))//thenSag_strength 7 4003 1.0lend/if and( -activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor),activity(percent_reamining_duration, aa), )(all. 50 ))/thenSag_strength 7 4003 0.8lendOif and( -activity(status, critical), site(ground_conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 7 4003 0.6fiendNit and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, aa), <z(oo, 25),activity(remeining_duration, ac), <=(2C, 1))OthenSag_strength 7 4023 1.0SendSag_strength 7 5002 1.0Off and(activity(status, critical))File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 23//thenSag_strength 7 6003 1.0Sendlit and( -activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remaining_duration, 22), <=(O0. 50 ))//tenSag_strength 7 6003 0.8SendSit and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_reseining_duration, as), 1,(28, 50))'thanSag strength 7 6003 0.6MadSag_strength 7 6011 1.0and(site(ground_conditions, poor))khanSag_strength 12 3001 1.0lend//if and(site(ground_conditions, fair))*thenSag_strength 12 3001 0.8lend//if and(site(ground_conditions, good))/thenSag_strength 12 3001 0.6lendSit and(site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(rammining_duration, SC), ,.(ac. 3))lichenSag_strength 12 3002 1.0Send*if and(site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(ressining_duration, 2C), ,.(ac, 3))'thenSag_strength 12 3002 0.8Send'if and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(ressining_duration, ac), >x(ac, 3))/thenSag_strength 12 3002 0.6SendOff and(site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >x(2C, 3))%thenSag_strength 12 3004 1.0/end//if and(site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(remaining_duracion, ac), =(2C, 3))/thenSag_strength 12 3004 0.8lend//if and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(ressining_duration, 2C), >.(ac, 3))//thenSag_strength 12 3004 0.6lendIN)OlFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 24Off and(activity(status, critical))OthenSag_strength 12 4002 1.0Nerdlif and( "activity(status, critical))',thanfag strength 12 4002 0.6MendOff and( -activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor).ectivitY(Percent_resaining_duration, ae). <=cas. 50))OthenSag_stroingth 12 4003 0.8SendOff and("activity(status, critical), site(ground_conditions, poor).activity(percent_remaining_duration, au, >(a11, 50 ))OthenSag_strength 12 4003 0.6lend*if and("activity(status, critical), aite(ground conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 12 4003 0.4fendNif and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, aN), (g(ae. 25).activity(remaining_duration, SC), <=(0C, 1))OthenSag_strength 12 4023 1.0Nandlit and(site(ground_conditions, poor))OthenSag_strength 12 5002 1.0lend 	 Chlif and(site(ground_conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 12 5002 0.8lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, good))//thenSag_strength 12 5002 0.6Sendlit and(activity(status, critical))OthenSagstrength 12 6003 1.0lendlif and("activity(status, critical),activity(percent_remmining_duration, p6), (=call, 50))*thenSag_strength 12 6003 0.8Sendlif and("activity(status, critical),activity(percentreosining_duration, as), >(ae, 50))OthenSag_strength 12 6003 0.6/endNif and(site(ground conditions, poor))*thenSag_strength 12 6011 1.0File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 25lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, fair))%thenSag_strength 12 6011 0.8Sendgif and(site(ground_conditions, good))FithianSag_strength 12 6011 0.6lendbit and(sits(ground conditions, poor))OthenSag_strength 13 3001 1.0lendbit and(site(ground conditions, fair))gthenSag_strangth 13 3001 0.8lendlit and(site(ground conditions, good))gthenSag_strength 13 3001 0.6lendbit and(site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(remaining duration, 2C), )..(2C, 3))gthenSag_strength 13 3002 1.0lendWit and(site(ground conditions, fair),activity(remaining_duration, 2C), >m(2C, 3))gthenSag_strength 13 3002 0.8'endbit and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(remining_duration, ac), >.(2C, 3))gthenSag_strength 13 3002 0.6bendgif and(site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(reamining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))gthenSag_strength 13 3004 1.0lendbit and(site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(remmining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))gthenSag_strength 13 3004 0.8lendbit and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(remaining_duration, SC), >.(2C, 3))/thenSag_strength 13 3004 0.6bendgif and(activity(status, critical))gthenSag_strength 13 4002 1.0bendbit and( -activity(status, critical))File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 26/thenSag_strength 13 4002 0.6lendOff and( "activity(status, critical), site(ground_conditions, poor).activity(percent_remaining_duration, OB), ‹.(as, 50))*thenSag_strangth 13 4003 0.8lendOff and( "ectivity(stmtus, critical), site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(percent_remaining_duration, as), >(as, SO))alienSag_strength 13 4003 0.6lend*if and( "activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 13 4003 0.4lendOlt and(activity(percent_remaining_duration, 211), <=(2B, 25),activity(remeining_duration, aC), c-(ac, 1))/thenSag_strength 13 4023 1.0lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, poor))OthenSag_strength 13 5002 1.0lend*if and(site(ground conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 13 5002 0.8Wendlif and(site(ground_conditions, good))/thenSag_strength 13 5002 0.6lendlit and(activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 13 6003 1.0lendOif and( "activity(status, critical),activity(percent_romining_duration, as), <.(88, 50))*thenSag_strength 13 6003 0.8lendlit and("activity(status, critical),activity(percent_reemining_duration, as), >(28, 50))/thenSag_strength 13 6003 0.6lendOif and(site(ground_conditions, poor))/thenSag_strength 13 6011 1.0lendlit and(site(ground_conditions, fair))//thenSag_strength 13 6011 0.8lendFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 27Mif and(site(ground_conditions, good))'thenSag_strength 13 6011 0.6MindOff and(site(ground conditions, poor))#thenSag_strength 14 3001 1.0MendOff and(efte(ground conditions, fair))/khanSag_strength 14 3001 0.8fendOif and(site(ground conditions, good))/thanSag_strength 14 3001 0.6/endOff and(site(ground conditions, poor),activity(reseining_duration, ac), >-(ac, 3))*thenSag_strength 14 3002 1.0MendOif and(site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(remeining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))//thenSag_strength 14 3002 0.8/andOff and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))//thenSag_strength 14 3002 0.6/tendWif and(site(ground conditions, poor),activity(rissining_duretion, ac), >.(ac, 3))#thenSag_strength 14 3004 1.0Wend*if and(site(ground_conditions, fair),activity(ressining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 14 3004 0.8Mend*if and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(reasining_duration, ac), >=(ac, 3))OthenSag_strength 14 3004 0.6WendWit and(activity(status, critical))*thenSag_strength 14 4002 1.0*endOif and( -activity(status, critical))//thenSag_strength 14 4003 1.0lendWit indcactivitr(xrcent_reamining_duration, as), 4=(211, 25),activity(remaining_duration, ac), .c.cac, 1))File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 28*thenSag_strength 14 4023 1.0landOif and(site(ground conditions, poor))%thenfag strength 14 5002 1.0Sendlit and(site(ground conditions, fair))OthanSag_strangth 14 5002 0.8landOff and(site(ground_conditions, good))OthenSag_strength 14 5002 0.6SendSif and(activity(status, critical))/thanSag_strength 14 6003 1.0SandOff and(site(ground_conditions, poor))OthtnSag_strength 14 6011 1.0lendOif and(site(ground_canditions. fair))OthenSag_strength 14 6011 0.8lend'if and(site(ground_conditions, good))/thenSag_strength 14 6011 0.6lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, poor))OthenSag_strength 18 3001 1.0lendOif and(site(ground_conditions, fair))OthenSag_strength 18 3001 0.8SendNif and(site(ground conditions, good))'thenSag_strength 18 3001 0.6lendOff and(site(ground_conditions, poor),activity(remaining_duration, ac), >e(aC, 3))OthenSag_strength 18 3002 1.0lendSit and(site(ground_conditions, fair).activity(remaining_duration, ac), >.(ac, 3))khanSag_strength 18 3002 0.8lendOif and(siti(ground_conditions, good),activity(remeining_duration, 2C), >■(2C, 3))%then 	 •01t.0File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 29Sag_strength 18 3002 0.6lendSif and(site(ground_conditions, poor),- 	 activity(remeining_duration, ac), >=(NC, 3))//thenSag_strength 18 3004 1.0Send/if and(site(ground conditions, fair),activity(remeining_duration, ac), >.(0C, 3))/thenSag_strength 18 3004 0.8lard/if and(site(ground_conditions, good),activity(ressining_duration, ac), >=(2C, 3))/thanSag_strength 18 3004 0.6lend/if and(activity(statua, critical))/thenSag_strength 18 4002 1.0lendOff and("activity(status, critical))/thenSag_strength 18 4002 0.6SandSif and("activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor),activity(percent_ressining_duration, as), c=(as, 50))/thanSag_strength 18 4003 0.8SendSit and( -activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor),activity(percent_rossining_duration, aa), ,(ae, 50)) 	 CD/thenSag_strength 18 4003 0.6lendSif and("activity(status, critical), aite(ground_conditions, fair))/thenSag_strength 18 4003 0.4/endSit and(site(ground_conditions, poor))((thenSag_strength 18 5002 1.0Send/if and(site(ground_conditions, fair))/thenSag_strength 18 5002 0.9SendSif and(site(ground_conditions, good))'thanSag_strength 18 5002 0.8SendSif andlactivity(status, critical), site(ground_conditions, poor))thenSag_strength 18 6003 1.0lendSif and("activity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor),File: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 30actiyity(percent_remeining_duration, 28), <=(os, 50))*thenSag_strength 18 6003 0.8lendOff and( -actiyity(status, critical), site(ground conditions, poor),sctivity(percent_resmining_duration, 28), ,(a8, 50))*thenSag_strength 18 6003 0.6lendlit and(site(ground conditions, poor))!thenSap strength 18 6011 1.0MondOff and(site(ground conditions, fair))*thenSag_strength 18 6011 0.9lendlit and(site(ground conditions, good))*thenSag_strength 18 6011 0.8Sendlend(elselit and(current(problem, 11), probsource(frequency, ow))*thenSag_strength 1 1001 owSag_strength 1 1002 0.6 0,22Sag_strength 1 3002 owSag_strength 1 4003 owOff (.(ow, 0.35)*thenSag_strength 1 4022 1.0Sag_strength 1 4023 0.6lendSag_strength 1 5001 owSag_strength 2 1001 owSag_strength 2 1002 allSag_strength 2 3002 owSag_strength 2 4003 owOff <=cow, 0.35)*thenSag_strength 2 4022 1.0Sag_strength 2 4023 0.6*endSag_strength 4 4023 1.0lendlit end(current(problem, 31), probsource(frequency, 210)//thenSag_strength 1 4002 0.5Sag_strength 1 4003 o.a*owSag_strength 1 4021 84Sag_strangth 1 6002 1.0Sag_strength 1 6003 1.0Sag_strangth 2 4001 1.0Sag_strength 2 4002 0.5Sag_strength 2 4021 owFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:00	 Page: 31Sag_strength 2 6002 1.0Sag strength 4 6002 1.0WendOif and(current(problem, 41), probsource(frequency, SW))OthenSag_strength 1 2001 OWSag_strength 1 2002 awSag_strength 1 4003 awOff ‘■(OW, 0.35)OthenSag_strength 1 4023 0.6NandSag_strength 2 2001 0.6'8WSag_strength 2 2002 awSag_strength 2 4003 0.6*OWOff 4■(2W, 0.35)OthenSag_strength 2 4023 0.6NerdSag_strength 4 4023 1.0WendOif andfcurrent(problem, 52), probsource(frequency, OW))*thenSag_strength 1 2003 awSag_strength 1 3003 0.5.awSag_strength 1 4003 o.a.awSag_strength 1 4009 OwSag_strength 1 4011 odramSag_strength 1 6006 1.0Sag_strength 2 2003 awSag_strength 2 3003 0.5"2WSag_strength 2 4003 o.a*awSag_strength 2 4009 awSag_strength 2 4011 o.a*awSag_strength 2 6006 1.0Sag_strength 3 2003 amSag_strength 3 3003 0.5Sag_strength 3 4003 0.8"2WSag_strength 3 4009 OWSag_strength 3 4011 1.0Sag_strength 3 6006 1.0Wendand(current(preblem, 71), probsource(frequency, au))//thenSag_strength 1 4001 OwSag_strength 1 4002 awSag_strength 1 4003 OWSag_strength 1 4017 OWSag_strength 1 4018 OWSag_strength 1 4019 adSag_strength 2 4001 awSag_strength 2 4002 0.6*awSag_strength 2 4017 OWSag_strength 2 4018 OWSag_strength 2 4019 awSag_strength 4 4023 1.0repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08 	 Page: 32(fend//if and(current(problem, 81), probeource(frequency, 211))//thenSag_strength 1 4002 0.6*WISag_strength 1 4003 AlSag_strength 1 4020 1.0Sag_strength 1 5002 1.0Sag_strength 1 5003 awSag_strength 1 6003Sag_strength 1 6010 1.0Sag_strength 1 6011 1.0Sag_strength 2 4002 o.rawSag_strength 2 4020 1.0Sag_strength 2 5002 1.0Sag_strength 2 6010 1.0Sag_strength 2 6011 1.0Sag_strength 4 4020 1.0Sag_strength 4 5002 1.0Sag_strength 4rend6010 1.0//if and(current(prohlem, 72), probscurce(frequency, SW))//thenSag_strength 1 1001 awSag_strength 1 1002 OUSag_strength 1 3001 84Sag strength 1 3002 awSag_strength 1 3004 0.8•21iSag_strength 1 4001 0.8*OWSag_strength 1 4002 0.8*ildSag_strength 1 4003 aw (soSagstrength 1 5002 1.0Sag_strength 1 6003 aw 	 coSag_strength 1 6011 1.0Sag_strength 2 1001 o.rawSag_strength 2 1002 awSag_strength 2 3001 awSag_strength 2 3002 adSag_strength 2 3004 0.8*alSag_strength 2 4001 awSag_strength 2 4002 0.5*awSag_strength 2 5002 1.0Sag_strength 2 6011 1.0Sag_strength 4 4023 1.0(fendlendFile: repcon.r02, 05/26/92 15:03:08	 Page: 33

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0050507/manifest

Comment

Related Items