Alexandria Engineering Journal (2018) 57, 4177–4187

H O S T E D BY
Alexandria University

Alexandria Engineering Journal

www.elsevier.com/locate/aej
www.sciencedirect.com

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Linear programming applications in construction

sites
Yasser M.R. Aboelmagd *

Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Business and Technology, UBT, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Math. and Phys. Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Egypt

Received 23 January 2018; revised 28 September 2018; accepted 3 November 2018

Available online 28 November 2018

KEYWORDS Abstract More issues in construction management were found especially for decision making that
Linear programming; related to the Arabian construction management office requirements. Operation research especially
Construction management; linear programming models considered one of the most important tool used in optimization appli-
Cost optimization; cations at many fields of production engineering and mass production, also linear programming
Tendering strategy; applications was developed to construction engineering field. This paper presents a linear program-
Optimization model; ming technique to spotlight decision making application for optimizing competitive bidding strat-
Contractor selection and egy to select best tender as shown in real case study. Therefore, project manager or decision maker
decision making can use this concept for getting the best project cost. This paper give linear programming concepts
that are reviewed to describe recent linear programming component which had large focus on
related time-cost and time problems for studied project. Linear programming models are formu-
lated to solve various cost and time problems by using LINDO software. The developed models
had many limitations and restrictions for studied project. Construction managers can use it to
explore more possible opportunities to predict influence of decision for construction to facilitate
preferred different management objectives. Linear programming implementation shows the practice
of wide variety for construction problems especially cost with time issues and it is more applicable
to generate a shortest computational effort and time with low cost.
Ó 2018 Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction Problem; (2) Portfolio Optimization; (3) Crew Scheduling;

(4) Manufacturing and Transportation; (5) Telecommunica-
Linear programming method is the recent method during Sec- tions; and (6) Traveling Salesman Problem. At linear program-
ond World War. The Applications of Linear Programming ming model which is optimized is called objective function.
models includes for example but not limited to: (1) The Diet The services, products and projects are sharing by limited
resources which are named variables. The resources limitations
are shown as inequalities which they are named constraints.
* Address: Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering,
Linear programming problem formulation as a mathematical
University of Business and Technology, UBT, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
function using following steps: (1) Define decision variables
E-mail address: yasser@ubt.edu.sa.
to be express and determined them as symbols such as xi; (2)
Peer review under responsibility of Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria
University.
Define all constraints as function of defined decision variables;

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2018.11.006
1110-0168 Ó 2018 Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
4178 Y.M.R. Aboelmagd

and (3) Define objective function that is optimized as a func- potential modeling. Operations research was applied four
tion of decision variables (maximized or minimized). (See- major techniques: (1) Simulation models, (2) Supply chain
Fig. 1., Fig. 2.) models (3) Optimization models and (4) Markov models,. It
concerned with important theory that provides integer pro-
2. Literature review gramming with optimizing decisions mechanism for complex
systems [6]. was concerned with cost or/and time which are
Many Scholars has researched and dealt with the Linear Pro- major criteria that must considered carefully for construction
gramming and they have studied many applications of Linear scheduling with pricing. Construction managers should trying
Programming and Operation Research in several field [1]. pre- to find optimal project duration corresponding with minimum
sented a simplified linear programming model having many project cost that is solved by LINGO 12.0 [7]. Proposed a new
management restrictions and it was formulated to solve con- optimum technique especially in fuzzy environment cost and
struction problems using LINDO software. The model devel- time trade-off problems. For goal programming problems, it
oped represents of this project [2]. considered rectilinear was developed new solution technique [8]. got and analyzed
distance location problem, which yields to capacitated facilities linear programming problems that were solved by original sim-
location, to decrease total project cost. The problem is refor- plex algorithm [9]. presented a simplex algorithm that gives
mulated as linear mixed integer problem related to linear pro- more solutions and taking advantage of minimizing construc-
gramming relaxation [3]. applied mathematical programming tion operations based upon rational arithmetic [10]. mentioned
methods by recognized widely limitations. This researcher pro- project important factors to provide skilled labor related to its
posed multi-mode technique depends on linear and/or integer requirements. Linear programming was done to achieve opti-
programming for improving project cost and time. More mod- mized solution [11]. Linear algorithms in linear programming
ules were used for this study: (1) Duration, (2) Reduction, and are presented and they are applicable for other problems as
(3) adjustment models [4]. reviewed linear programming as quadratic programming [12]. applied fuzzy theory for more
mathematical procedures that needed to obtain variables, con- construction fields, and presented more new solving fuzzy
straints and feasible solutions [5]. presented workforce plan- methods for construction by linear ranking function [13]. solv-
ning and operations research applications to explore general ing nonlinear problems complexity were reduced by transfor-
mations actions from nonlinear to integer linear
programming [14]. investigated a new teaching process which
it will be considered by two different methods: (1) quadratic
programming problems by linear models are solved and for-
Real World mulated by statistical methods; and (2) linear regression model
solution with constraints can be use quadratic and linear pro-
Assumed THE MODLE gramming by simplex techniques [15]. Concentrated on sim-
plistic approach for real construction problems within
multiple objectives and is high practice of operation research
[16]. Focused on human resource planning and their needs that
Fig. 1 Levels of abstraction in model development [17]. facing leaders and managers.

Fig. 2 Flow Chart illustrates Construction of Operation Research Model.

Linear programming applicationsPlease check the insertion of running head, and correct if necessary 4179

3. Research scope 5.1. Graphical method

The primary research scope is to review solving method of The & Feasible area can be founded in Fig. 3. First, account the
Linear Programming Models (Graphical Solution, Simplex non-negativity constraints X1
0 and X2
0. Two axis x1
Method, and Binary Variable) and discuss The Applications and x2 represent two variables. To plot all constraints,
of The Linear Programming in The Project Management replace inequality to equation and plot it into graph. Any
Office (PMO) to provide useful information for establishing point inside or border of ABCDEF area is feasible solution.
data. Therefore, this study constitutes a wide review of litera- & Determination of Optimum Solution as shown in Fig. 3.
ture including more cases of studies. Any point on area boundary of ABCDEF may one of them
to can find optimum solution by solve profit function z = 5
4. Methodology X1 + 4 for maximizing objective function.
& Optimum solution can be found at point C, X1 and X2 val-
ues corresponding to point C were calculating equations:
This Research presents realistic Linear Programming models
5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2 = 24.0 and 1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2 = 6.0.
that define the variables and problem constraints also objective
& The solution of point C (3, 1.5) give daily profit is equal to
function for construction which are not straightforward.
$21,000.
Firstly, it should understand what is Operation Research and
& The benefit of optimum solution that is located at corner
Linear Programming where that it’s Mathematical modeling
point only. (See Fig. 4).
is a cornerstone to solve more Problems and making a decision
before a final decision can be reached. All techniques include
Properties of the linear programming model: (1) Propor-
the following: (1) Non-Linear Programming (2) Dynamic Pro-
tionality: it requires every decision variable contribution in
gramming, (3) Network Programming, finally (4) Integer Pro-
constraints and objective function which directly proportional
gramming. They are trying to find functional relationships
to variable value. (2) Additivity: it requires all variables contri-
between all variables and defining real World boundaries
bution constraints and objective function which directly each
[17], The principal phases for the implementation of operation
variable individual contributions summation. (3) Certainty:
research model in practice include the following: (1) Definition,
Linear Programming model constraint coefficients and objec-
(2) Construction, (3) Solution, (4) Validation and (5) Solution
tive were deterministic.
Implementation.
5.2. Software solution (TORA)
5. Linear programming applications
(See-Fig. 5., Fig. 6.).
Ready mix produces two types of paints, first one is interior
paint and second one is exterior paint. They are produced from 5.3. Simplex method and sensitivity analysis
two raw materials. Following table give all limitations of
problem:
Interior paint maximum demand per day is equal to 2 tons. Simplex technique was invented to solve problems that related
Also, interior paint daily demand cannot exceed by 1 ton than to linear programming [18]. This technique had developed to
exterior paint. Ready mix wants to get optimal product mix solve complex problems using more variables with limitations
from exterior and interior products that increase daily profit. and constraints. Simplex method begin from origin then moves
The studied model had three items: (1) Decision variables, from next corner point and so on for increasing objective func-
(2) Constraints and (3) Objective (maximize or minimize). tion value, simplex method is used to optimize linear program-
It must be to get optimal feasible solution that maximizes ming associated with complex problems using more decision
the total profit and must be locate the optimum solution. variables number, it will be restricted the use of problems with

Fig. 3 Feasible Space of The Ready mix Model.

4180 Y.M.R. Aboelmagd

Fig. 4 Optimum Solution of the Ready mix Model.

Fig. 5 Detailed Solution by TORA software.

four variables or less based on sensitivity analysis to optimize Three equations with five unknowns (X1, X2, S1, S2 and S3).
project cost. If unknowns number more than equations number, there will
be many solutions available at this model. It can be repre-
5.3.1. Simplex method Form sented the initial Simplex Table as shown in Table 5.
Two requirements must be done as: (1) Variables are non- Table 6 was designed to specify Basic and Non-basic Vari-
negative. (2) Constraints are presented as equations. ables and to provide at the origin (X1, X2) = (0, 0) starting
iteration solution as (1) Non-basic variables: (X1, X2), 2) and
5.3.2. Converting inequalities to equations Basic vars. are S1 & S2 & S3 and S4. In case of non-basic vars.
are X1 = 0.0 and X2 = 0.0 then Z = 0.0 & S1 = 24.0 &
In less than or equal constraints, right-hand side present
S2 = 6.0 & S3 = 1.0 and S4 = 2.0. Objective function
resource availability by using of model. To convert less than
Z = 5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2 presents that any result can increase in
or equal inequality constrain into simplified equation, it must
case of increasing X1 or/and X2. While X1 is better than X2
be add non-negative slack variable at constraint left-hand side.
because of its high positive coefficient inside objective function
As shown in Table 1, it will be solved the illustrative example
and it is selected as entering variable, then it will assigned to
by using simplex method, then Table 4 shows the simplex
high negative coefficient at new objective function optimality
equation forms. (See-Table 2., Table 3.)
Linear programming applicationsPlease check the insertion of running head, and correct if necessary 4181

Fig. 6 Graphical Solution by TORA software.

Table 1 Basic data for ready mix application. Table 4 LP Model Equation Form.
Raw matl. Tons per Maximum 1- Decision variables:
ton of Availability
X1 = daily exterior paint production per tons
(tons per day)
Ext. paint Int. paint X2 = daily interior paint production per tons
First raw matl. M1 6.0 4.0 24.0 2- Objective function:
Maximize Z = 5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2
Second raw matl. M2 1.0 2.0 6.0
3- Convert objective function.:
Profit per ton ($1000.0) 5.0 4.0
Maximize Z – 5.0 X1 – 4.0 X2 = 0
4- Constraints:
6.0 X1 + 4.0 X2  24.0
1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2  6.0
1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2  1.0
1.0 X2  2.0
Table 2 LP model for ready mix application. X1, X2
0 (The non-negativity Constraints)
1- Decision variables: 5- Convert each constrain inequality into equation:
6.0 X1 + 4.0 X2 + 1.0 S1 = 24.0 where Slack Variable S1
0
X1 = daily exterior paint production per tons 1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2 + 1.0 S2 = 6.0 where Slack Variable S2
0
X2 = daily interior paint production per tons 1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2 + 1.0 S3 = 1.0 where Slack Variable S3
0
2- Objective function: 1.0 X2 + 1.0 S4 = 2.0 where Slack Variable S4
0
Maximize Z = 5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2 X1, X2, S1, S2, S3, S4
0
3- Constraint:
6.0 X1 + 4.0 X2  24.0
1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2  6.0
1.0 X1 + 2.0 X2  1.0
1.0 X2  2.0 condition rule 1.0 Z – 5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2 = 0, (all vars. are
X1, X2 = <0 (The non-negativity Constraints) switched to L.H.S). Leaving variable determining mechanics
from simplex table calls computing equations right-hand side

Table 3 LP Model Algebraic Method.

The Objective
The Corner Point
Function (in dollar)
Code X1 X2 Z = 5.0 X1 + 4.0 X2
A 0.0 0.0 00.0
B 4.0 0.0 20.0
C 3.0 1.5 21.0
D 2.0 2.0 18.0
E 1.0 2.0 13.0
F 0.0 1.0 04.0
4182 Y.M.R. Aboelmagd

Table 5 LP Model Initial Simplex Coefficients.

Basic Z X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 Solution
Z 1.0 -5.0 -4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Objective Function
S1 0.0 6.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 Constraint - 01
S2 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 Constraint - 02
S3 0.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 Constraint - 03
S4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 Constraint - 04

pivot column with pivot row is named aspivot element. Table 7

Table 6 Simplex Optimality Condition. shows starting table with its pivot row and column highlighted.
It is important to generate new basic solution which it
Entering Ratio
Solution include: (1) Pivot row: switch leaving var. at basic column with
Basic X1 (or intercept)
S1 6.0 24.0 X1 = 24/6 = 4.0 Min. entering var. by new pivot row isequal to current pivot row
S2 1.0 6.0 X1 = 6/1 = 6.0 Not Ok divided by pivot element as shown in next calculations. (2)
S3 -1.0 1.0 X1 = 1/-1 = -1.0 Ignore. All next new rows and Z row as New Row is equal to current
S4 0.0 2.0 X1 = 2/0 = ∞ Ignore. row minus its pivot column coefficient multiply to new pivot
row [19,20]. (See-Fig. 8.)
These calculations are used to as following steps:
1- Replace S1 in the Basic column with X1. New
nonnegative ratios (Solution column) to corresponding coeffi- X1-row = Current S1-row  6
cients of constraint under use of entering variable, X1, as the = 1/6 (0 6 4 1 0 0 0 24) = (0 1 2/3 3/6 0 0 0 4)
following Table 6. 2- New Z-row = Current Z-row - (-5)  New X1-row
The minimum non-negative ratio automatically will convert = (1–5 -4 0 0 0 0 0) - (-5)  (0 1 2/3 1/6 0 0 0 4) = (1 0–2/3
leaving var. S1 with entering var. X1 with corresponding new 5/6 0 0 0 20)
value. Fig. 7. shows computed ratios using intercepts of con- 3- New S2-row = Current S2-row - (1)  New X1-row
straints and entering variable (X1) axis. It can be produce fol- = (0 1 2 0 1 0 0 6) - (1)  (0 1 2/3 1/6 0 0 0 4) = (0 0 4/3–1/6
lowing sets for Non-basic and basic variables: (1) Non-basic 1 0 0 2)
variables: (S1, X2), 2) Basic variables: (X1, S2, S3, S4). Basically 4- New S3-row = Current S3-row - (-1)  New X1-row
it must be to determine column of entering var. as pivot col- = (0–1 1 0 0 1 0 1) - (1)  (0 1 2/3 1/6 0 0 0 4) = (0 0 5/3 1/6
umn and row of leaving var. as pivot row. Intersection between 0 1 0 5)

Fig. 7 Graphical interpretation of the ratios.

Table 7 Highlighted Simplex Pivot Row and Column.

Enter
Basic Z X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 Solution
Z 1.0 -5.0 -4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
S1 0.0 6.0 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 Pivot row
S2 0.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 6.0
S3 0.0 -1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0
S4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0
Pivot
Column
Linear programming applicationsPlease check the insertion of running head, and correct if necessary 4183

Fig. 8 TORA Simplex Input Wizard.

5- New S4-row = Current S4-row - (0)  New X1-row

= (0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2) - (0)  (0 1 2/3 1/6 0 0 0 4) = (0 0 1 0 0 0 Table 9 Simplex Optimality Condition and Feasibility
1 2) Condition.
The new basic solution is (X1, S2, S3, S4), and the new
tableau as shown in Table 8. Basic Entering X2 Solution Ratio (or intercept)
Table 8 shows same properties as Table 5 and then it was X1 2/3 4.0 X2 = 4/(2/3) = 6.0 Min.
set as new non-basic vars. X2 and S1 are equal to zero, also S2 4/3 2.0 X2 = 2 /(4/3) = 1.5
new basic solution of X1 = 4.0 & S2 = 2.0 & S3 = 5.0 & S3 5/3 5.0 X2 = 5/(5/3) = 3.0 Ignore.
S4 = 2.0 and Z = 20, which is consistent with New Z = 0 S4 1.0 2.0 X2 = 2/1 = 2.0 Ignore.
+ 4  5 = 20. Table 9 give X2 is entering var. as optimality
with feasibility condition.
Thus, S2 will leave basic solution after that X2new value is
equal to 1.5. Then corresponding increase of Z is 2/3 and
X2 = 2/3  1.5 = 1.0, that give new Z = 20.0 + 1.0 = 21.0.
Table 10 Simplex Final Result.
Replacing leaving var. S2 with entering var. X2, the following
Gauss-Jordan row operations are done as: 1) New pivot Basic Z X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 Solution
Z 1.0 0.0 0.0 3/4 1/2 0.0 0.0 21.0
X2-row = Current S2-row/(4/3). 2) New Z-row = Current Z- X1 0.0 1.0 0.0 1/4 -1/2 0.0 0.0 3.0
row – (-2/3)  New X2-row. 3) New X1-row = Current X2 0.0 0.0 1.0 -1/8 3/4 0.0 0.0 3/2
X2-row – (2/3)  New X2-row. 4) New S3-row = Current S3- S3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3/8 -5/4 1.0 0.0 5/2
row – (5/3)  New X2-row. 5) New S4-row = Current S4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1/8 3/4 0.0 1.0 1/2
S4-row– (1)  New X2-row. These computations produce the
following Table 10:

Table 8 Highlighted Simplex New Basic Solution.

Enter
Basic Z X1 X2 S1 S2 S3 S4 Solution
Z 1 0 -2/3 5/6 0 0 0 20
X1 0 2/3 2/3 1/6 0 0 0 4
S2 0 0 4/3 -1/6 1 0 0 2 Pivot row
S3 0 0 5/3 1/6 0 1 0 5
S4 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2
Pivot
Column
4184 Y.M.R. Aboelmagd

New pivot row is equal to old pivot row divided by pivot ele-
Table 11 Simplex Final Decision.
ment. Then the remaining rows, including z: New row is equal
Decision Optimum to old row minus (pivot column coefficient) multiply (New
Recommendation
Variable Value pivot row). Finally simplex steps are: (1) Determine starting
X1 3.0 Daily exterior paint production per tons. solution of basic feasible. (2) Select entering var. using opti-
mality condition. Stop in case of no entering var. and last solu-
X2 1.0 Daily interior paint production per tons.
tion is optimal. (3) Feasibility condition will select leaving var.
Z 21.0 $21,000 is equivelant to daily profit. (4) Determine new basic solution and repeat by go to step 2
[21,22].

According to optimality condition no negative coefficients 6. Case study

for Z-row. Finally Table 10 is converted to optimal solution
table, then optimal values for studied problem are shown in Project Selection with Competition at Limit Resource Using
Table 11. Linear Programming as Contractor View. Project Manage-
ment Office has five bids and must make a decision to enter
5.4. (TORA) solution all of them or some of them or none of them with the note:
(1) There is competition between the bidders. (2) Is the amount
(See-Fig. 9., Fig. 10.) of existing resources enough or not enough. Table 12 gives
problem basic data. The Bid Bonding is 0.2% of the amount
5.5. Minimization of linear simplex technique of the tender and the Exposure Limit is 18 million. The follow-
ing table provides the available resource which that Project
Management Office Company has owned: 4 cranes, 3 air-
For minimization problems optimality select entering var. as
compressors and 2 tractors.
non-basic variable with objective function in most positive
It is required to determine which projects the company can
coefficient and opposite rule for maximization problems such
entering it to give maximum profit through their resource.
as maximize of Z is equivalent to minimize of (-Z). In
feasibility condition maximization or minimization problem
6.1. Case study solution
is non-basic var. that had max negative or positive coefficient
at z-row. Optimum at z-row coefficients iteration are nonneg-
ative or non-positive. For maximization or minimization It will be identified potential opportunities to win the likely
problems, basic variable (leaving) assigned with smallest price of each project can enter the bid as shown Table 13:
non-negative ratio or positive ratio. Pivot row: Replace the Where: Chance of Weighted Profit ‘‘CWP” = Profit 
leaving variable in the Basic column with the entering variable. Probability of Winning.

Fig. 9 TORA Simplex Matrix.

Linear programming applicationsPlease check the insertion of running head, and correct if necessary 4185

Fig. 10 TORA Simplex Results.

Table 12 Case Study Data.

Promising Bid Pre-cost Cranes Air-Compressor Tractors
1- Office 10.50 2 1 1
2- House 8.00 2 1 1
3- School 5.50 2 1 1
4- Shopping Mall 8.00 2 1

Table 13 Case Study Potential Opportunities.

Probability
Estimation Bid Chance of
Project (Chance of
Cost Amount Winning Profit
Winning)
11.00 60% 0.3
11.50 40% 0.4
1- Office 10.50
12.00 20% 0.3
12.50 10% 0.2
8.50 50% 0.25
9.00 30% 0.30
2- House 8.00
9.50 20% 0.30
10.00 10% 0.20
5.70 80% 0.16
5.90 40% 0.16
3- School 5.5
6.10 30% 0.18
6.30 10% 0.08
3.20 60% 0.12
4- Shopping Mall 5.5 3.40 40% 0.16
3.60 10% 0.06
4186 Y.M.R. Aboelmagd

Table 14 Case Study Optimum Solution.

Office House School Shopping Mall
X11 = 0.0 X21 = 1.00 X31 = 0.0 X41 = 0.0
X12 = 0.0 X22 = 0.0 X32 = 1.00 X42 = 1.00
No Entering House = 8.50 School = 5.90 Shopping Mall = 3.40
Z = 564.00

For Example: Chance of Weighted Profit ‘‘CWP” = (11– 6.5.2. Air-compressor Constraint
10.50) x 0.60 = 0.30. X11 + X12 + X21 + X22 + X31 + X32 + X41 + X42
3

6.2. Decision variables 6.5.3. Tractors Constraint

X11 + X12 + X21 + X22 + X31 + X32
2 & X11 + X12 +
o Binary Variable, where that: X21 + X22 + X41 + X42
2
(1) : Express, this value mustn’t entering the Bid with Value Two Constraints Must be Verified at same time.
Equivalent.
(2) : Express, this value must entering the Bid with Value 6.6. Bonding Constraint
Equivalent.
X11 + 11.5 X12 + 8.5 X21 + 9 X22 + 5.7 X31 + 5.9 X32 + 3.2
X41 + 3.4 X42
18
Then, Optimum solution is shown in Table 14:

Then, Let Xji (i = 1,4) be Binary Variable

7. Conclusion and recommendations

This research imply explain the linear programming models

o where that: and its applications in the field of Project Management, where
in the first part talked about introduction and a quick review
(j): Express, Number of Project, (i): Express, Number of of the general applications of linear Programming in the real
Option (Project Cost). world, In the second part it was dealt talk about some research
which addressed The Application of Linear Programming that
o It means that: nearby field, and it was discussed in part three it was explain
Introduction to Operations Research as access to a Linear Pro-
j (1, 2, 3)?i (1, 2, 3, 4) gramming models and it was dealt explain the Graphical Solu-
j (4) ? i (1, 2, 3) tion Method, The Simplex Method and The Binary Variables
Method, and in the fourth Part it was dealt with one of Linear
6.3. Objective function Programming Applications in tasks of Project Management
Offices of Engineering projects which studies evaluation and
X
J¼j selection of Bids that should entering and participate in it
Zmax ¼ ðCWP - ðBid Amount  BondÞÞi xJi and how to determine the right price to enter this Bid and
J¼1 probability of gaining it, In part five has been mentioned the
=(0.3 – (11  0.002)) X 11 + (0.4 – (11.5  0.002)) X 12 + conclusions of this study, as well as some of the topics that
(0.25 – (8.5  0.002)) X 21 + (0.3 – (9.00  0.002)) X 22 + scholars can complete their studies until it wasachieve the high-
(0.16 – (5.70  0.002)) X 31 + (0.16 – (5.90  0.002)) X 32 + est benefit and focus our effort and our thought.
(0.12 – (3.20  0.002)) X 41 + (0.16 – (3.40  0.002)) X The main conclusions drawn from this study are taking
x42 = 0.278 X11 + 0.377 X12 + 0.233 X21 + 0.282 advantage of the potential possibilities of a linear program-
X22 + 0.149 X31 + 0.148 X32 + 0.1136 X41 + 0.1532 X42 ming model to support decision-making processes and evalu-
Multiply by 1000 ate some tasks The Project Management Offices (PMO) of
Zmax = 278 X11 + 377 X12 + 233 X21 + 282 X22 + 149 Construction Companies and also Offices of Projects Manage-
X31 + 148.20 X32 + 113.6 X41 + 153.20 X42 ment and these tasks, for example, but not limited to: Determi-
nation and Evaluation The Bids which appropriated The
6.4. Logic constraints Companies Resources, Determination and Evaluation The
Optimal Resource for Projects and also, Determination and
Evaluation The Optimal Time and The Optimal Cost for
X11 + X12 < = 1 & X21 + X22 < = 1 & X31 + X32 < = 1 implementation Construction projects.
& X41 + X42 < = 1
8. Future study
6.5. Resource constraints

6.5.1. Cranes Constraint Further studies are needed in the following subjects: (1) Per-
forming similar studies to Applications the Linear Program-
2X11 + 2 X12 + 2 X21 + 2 X22 + X31 + X32
4
Linear programming applicationsPlease check the insertion of running head, and correct if necessary 4187

ming in The relation between The Time, The Cost and The International Conference on Construction In Developing
Quality. (2) Performing similar studies to Applications the Lin- Countries (ICCIDC–I), Advancing and Integrating
ear Programming in The Cost Analysis of the Different Items. Construction Education, Research & Practice, Karachi,
(3) Performing similar studies to Applications the Linear Pro- Pakistan, 2008, pp. 161–167.
[11] N. Megiddo, Linear-time algorithms for linear programming in
gramming in Allocated Resource in Construction Projects.
rand related problems, SIAM J. Comput. 12 (4) (1983) 759–776.
[12] S. Nasseri, E. Ardil, A. Yazdani, R. Zaefarian, Simplex method
References for solving linear programming problems with fuzzy numbers,
World Academy Sci., Eng. Technol. Int. J. Math. Comput. Sci. 1
[1] S. Amirkhanian, N. Baker, Expert system for equipment (10) (2005) 513–517.
selection for earthmoving operations, J. Constr. Eng. Manage. [13] N. Boland, ‘‘Solving environmental problems with integer
118 (2) (1992) 318–331. programming: recent experience and challenges”, 2009.
[2] D. Hanif, R. Sridhar, K. Seong, A localization and [14] C. Feifei, W. Yaowu, L. Xianzhang, Multi-objective dynamic
reformulation discrete programming approach for the simulation-optimization for equipment allocation of
rectilinear distance location-allocation problem, Discrete Appl. earthmoving operations, Constr. Res. Congr. (2010) 328–338.
Math. 49 (1–3) (1994) 357–378. [15] T. Stewart, ‘‘The essential multi-objectivity of linear
[3] J. Aiyin, Z. Yimin, A multi-stage approach to time-cost trade- Programming”, TheOperationsResearchSocietyofSouthAfrica
off analysis using mathematical programming, Int. J. Constr. ORiON 23 (1) (2007) 1–15.
Manage. 10 (3) (2010) 13–27. [16] S. El-Quliti, I. Al-Darrab, ‘‘Workforce capacity planning using
[4] B. Fletcher, ‘‘A review of linear programming and its zero-one-integer programming”, World’s largest Science,
application to the assessment tools for teaching and learning Technology & Medicine Open Access book publisher, 2006.
(asTTle) Projects”, Technical Report 5, Project (asTTle), [17] L. Peurifoy, J. Schexnayder, A. Shapira, Construction planning,
University of Auckland, 2000. equipment, and methods, seventh Ed., McGraw-Hill, Boston,
[5] J. Wang, ‘‘A review of operations research applications in 2006.
workforce planning and potential modeling of military [18] J. Ling, Linear Programming Application in Construction
training”, Australian Government, Department of Defence, Enterprises ISSN: 1662–7482 Online: 2013-06-27, Appl. Mech.
Defence Science and Technology Organaization, DSTO Mater. 328 (2013) 244–247.
Publications, Technical report, DSTO-TR-1688, 2005, AR- [19] A. Belegundu, T. Chandrupatla, Optimization concepts and
013-337 applications in engineering, Pearson Education, Delhi, 2002.
[6] A. Zeinalzadeh, An application of mathematical model to time- [20] D. Anderson, D. Sweeney, T. Williams, K. Martin, An
cost trade off problem- case study, Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 5 (7) introduction to management science quantitative approaches
(2011) 208–214. to decision making, Thomson Higher Education, Mason, OH,
[7] M. Ghazanfari K. Shahanaghi, ‘‘An application of possibility 2008.
goal programming to the time-cost trade off problem”, First [21] O. Moselhi, M. Marzouk, Automated system for cost estimating
Joint Congress on Fuzzy and Intelligent Systems Ferdowsi of earthmoving operations, in: Proceedings of the 17th
University of Mashhad, Iran, 2007, 29-31 International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in
[8] S. Gassa, S. Vinjamurib, Cycling in linear programming Construction (ISARC), 2000, pp. 1053–1058.
problems, Comput. Oper. Res. 31 (2) (2004) 303–311. [22] A. Jrade, N. Markiz, N. Albelwi, An economical operation
[9] D. Applegate, W. Cook, S. Dash, D. Espinoza, Exact solutions analysis optimization model for heavy equipment selection,
to linear programming problems, Oper. Res. Lett. 35 (6) (1991) World Acad. Sci., Eng. Technol. 6 (1) (2012) 146–151.
693–699.
[10] A. Mohammadpour, M. Khanzad, ‘‘Linear programming for
optimizing strategic construction workforce management”, First