The construction industry is currently known for projects often being delayed. Since planning is very important for the whole building project, it is very important that this is done correctly. More time should be put to plan the different projects so that the project should go on as smooth and efficient as possible. By using improved planning methods, you can contribute to a more efficient production on the construction site with less disturbances and corrections of errors. The purpose with this study is to compare the two planning methods, Critical Path and Line of Balance, and compare its strengths and weaknesses with each other. Hopefully, this study also contributes to development opportunities in planning in the construction sector. The result of the study has shown that Critical Path is a well-developed method that is best suited to non- repetitive projects such as construction of villas, schools and other unique projects. Line of Balance is better suited to projects with repetitive activities, for example construction of highways or the production of high-rise buildings.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:hh-35064 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Axelsson, Malin, Svanberg, Nina |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds