1. ENCE 667 Project Performance Measurement Patuxent Water Treatment Plant Upgrade schedule analysis Presented by: Luis Rubio Isobo Tariah

2. Project Overview Location: Laurel, Maryland Total Cost: $45 million Capacity: 56 MGD Owner: Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission Contractor: Danis Environmental Industries Phases: Stage I & Stage II

3. Stage I Demolition of Filter Unit 1 Construction of 3 treatment trains –Flocculation Basin –Sedimentation Basin –Chlorine contact chamber –Deep bed filters –Backwash tank –Chemical feed system Duration: 385 working days

4. Stage I Existing Filter Unit

5. Stage I Demolition of Filter Unit

6. Stage I Construction of new process structure

7. Stage II Demolition of Filter Unit 2, 3 & 4 Construction of 2 treatment trains –Flocculation Basin –Sedimentation Basin –Chlorine contact chamber –Deep bed filters –Backwash tank –Chemical feed system Duration: 650 working days

8. Purpose of the Upgrade Save $24 Million using High-rate processes –Static Mixers for rapid mixing –Four-stage tapered-energy flocculation shaft –Sedimentation plate settlers –Granular activated carbon –Sand filters with air backwash Capable to run at 72-80 MGD in emergency situation

9. Project Objectives To complete Stage I at the minimum time/cost tradeoff. –Develop a CPM schedule –Determine Critical Path –Crash activities in the critical path –Estimate cost associated with crashing

10. Project Performance Measurement Concepts Used CPM Schedule Gantt Chart Linear Programming –Minimize project cost –Obtain optimal crashing time Time/Cost trade-off curve

11. Project Activities

12. Project Schedule

13. AOA Diagram Original

14. Project Crashing Estimated duration: 438 days Contractual required date: 385 days Difference: 53 days Penalty: $12,775 per day Bonus: $4,000 per day

15. Project Crashing

16. Penalty/Bonus

17. Crashing Cost

18. Project Crashing For optimal duration (406 days)

19. Sensitivity Analysis

20. AOA Diagram Original – Crashed

21. Schedule Alternative Some activities relations were changed in order to have parallel activities. Possible changes in the critical path. Estimated duration should decrease. Crashing: 53 days less than the estimated duration.

22. Project Schedule

23. AOA Diagram Alternative

24. Project Crashing For contractual date (287 days) Contractual date = Estimated duration - 53 days = 287 days

25. Penalty/Bonus

26. Crashing Cost

27. Sensitivity Analysis

28. Project Crashing For optimal duration (315 days)

29. AOA Diagram Alternative – Crashed

30. Conclusions Optimal duration should be 406 days –Cost: $526,775 When estimating the project bid, scheduling analysis should be perform to evaluate the necessity of crashing the project. If that is the case, the cost should be included in the bid.

31. Future Extensions PERT Analysis Limited resources allocation

32. Questions