Analysis of Tracking of Project by Earned Value Management Method in High Rise Building

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Analysis of Tracking of Project by Earned Value Management Method in High Rise Building

1PG Scholar, Miss. Monali Mahadev Bhagwat

Department of Civil Engineering,

Tatyasaheb Kore Institute of Engineering and Technology, Warananagar, India

2Asst. Prof. Sandeep Chavan

Department of Civil Engineering,

Tatyasaheb Kore Institute of Engineering and Technology, Warananagar, India

Abstract Earn value management is a project accomplishment approach that has been suitable for utilization in project management. Baseline plan can be calculated using EVM to check the progress of the project. EVM operation help in giving achievement standard to the assessment of evolution report of project and it likewise go about as a command gadget to deal with budget and time. The present study deals with planning, scheduling and performance of project process along with it also discusses main parameters involving in the calculation of earned value analysis in cost and time management of civil construction project. the main objectives of manuscript is compare the project tracked by MSP and EVM with conventional tracking method using real time case study of G+15 story building by MSP software.

KeywordsEVM, Tracking, MSP Software, Planning, Schedulling.

  1. INTRODUCTION

    Construction industry is an important industry at both the global level and national level. It is second largest sector in India. It provides huge employment to the people and plays very significant role in country economy. Project delay is most common problems in the construction industry. In growing countries challenge overruns is a serious in which implementation of challenge faces many doubts. It outcomes in wastage of scare resource of finance, delay in providing facilities, development and too make costlier in construction. With globalization and technology determined economic growth all over the world, a scientific and systematic approach to project organization becomes imperative to make certain that project objectives are attain within the constraints of time and resources EVM is the procedure of measuring presentation of project employment against a baseline plan. EVM application allows in offering overall performance preferred for the assessment of advancement report of project & it also act as a manipulate tool to take care of time & cost schedule through responsibility described in OBS. It provide better performance picture of project and gives better forecast of the final completion cost

  2. LITERATURE REVIEW

    1. Three-Variance Approach for Updating Earned Value Management

      The project management triad has scale, time, and cost. In this study, schedule variations and schedule performance indicators, in traditional dual-variance management (EVM), were shown not for real-time performance indicators, and it is

      suggested that the physical body definitions as work variables (WV) and performance indicators be restored. It is found that the performance of the work may be equal to the performance of the same period before the scheduled project time in certain circumstances. However, the same is not always true, especially if the project is over. A performance measurement earned time (ETM) method is presented in this study, which can serve as an alternative to measuring project time upon completion. Finally, it is suggested that the independent performance measurement, WV, be added to EVM, and that a three-pronged approach be used to analyze work conditions, time, and costs in relation to a given project.

    2. Estimated Cost at Completion: Integrating Risk into Earned Value Management

      Earned Value Management (EVM) is the industry's standard for monitoring the performance of ongoing projects. The operating basis is set in the planning phase to measure any time and cost errors during the project. Based on current progress, it is estimated when completed (EAC). Traditionally, EVM focuses exclusively on project planning (SPI) and cost (CPI), and does not address other important aspects of health and safety, stakeholder satisfaction, and quality. Despite its high volatility, EVM forecasts are still influenced by project risk and uncertainty, leading to a conflict between the results of the EAC obtained by standard formulas. In order to measure a better EAC, a framework is developed that incorporates various key performance indicators in the risk performance indicator (RPI). Using SPI, CPI, and RPI, an integrated model is developed and several case studies are conducted to validate it. The findings show a better EAC compared to traditional methods. Introducing performance indicators to measure key project aspects will provide participants with a better monitoring and decision-making tool.

    3. Study of the Stability of Earned Value Management Forecasting

    In this paper, the authors focus on establishing mechanisms for predicting the value of earned value management (EVM). The contribution was tripled. First, a new condition for measuring stability that does not suffer as a result of a psychological malfunction that is historically used is proposed. Second, the stability of time and cost forecasting methods are compared and compared using computerized tests on a variety of data sets. In all of these tests, predictive accuracy is also reported, which helps to trade between accuracy and stability. Finally, the demonstration shows that the mathematical strength of the novel can be applied to real

    worlds using two real projects. The results of these legal guarantees are found to be highly correlated with computer results.

  3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

    Fig. 1. Flowchart of Methodology

  4. PREPARE YOUR PAPER BEFORE STYLING

    1. Earned Value Analysis-Process

      Value Earn is a system management system that uses continuous activity to show what will happen in the future. EVA uses costs as a standard measure of project costs & schedule performance. Allows cost estimates by currency, hours, working days, or other similar item that can be used as the same amount of project-related amounts. EVA uses the following project parameters to evaluate project performance:

      • Planned Value

      • Earned Value

      • Actual Value

        As mentioned, there are several ways to calculate the EV, PV and AC of a work package in work. A comparison of those statistics can be used to identify performance and progress inadequate or sophisticated specific work packages, project manager and team can expect supportive actions. Cost and schedule performance should be measured and evaluated with consistency and severity with the magnitude of the performance risk as required by project management. The analysis should be progressive and follow the principle of management by exception. The variance limit should be set at the planning stage and used to guide the examination of performance.

    2. Concepts & Terminologies Related to Earned Value Management

      Value management systems gives different variations that can be analyzed to provide the current status of the project, initiate corrective action also predict future trends measure: Planned Value (PV), Actual Price (AC) and Acquired Value (EV). From the three measures, project performance indicators are formed.

      • BCWS (PV) Budgeted Cost of Works Scheduled It is the baseline for the analysis, cumulated planned

        costs related to time of their incurrence; Figure 1 shows the graph of BCWS vs. Time

      • BCWP(EV) Budgeted Cost of Work Performed It is a measure of physical progress of works expresed by cumulated planned cost of works actually done related to time, it is also called Earned Value (like the method it is used by);

      • ACWP (AC) Actual Cost of Work Performed A cumulated amount payable for work done related to time;

      • BAC Budget at Completion The total planned cost of the whole project, it equals BCWS at the planned finish;

      • T Planned duration of the project.

      • SV: Schedule Variance (EV-PV)

        • A comparison of amount of work performed during a given period of time to what was scheduled to be performed.

        • A negative variance means the project is behind schedule

      • CV: Cost Variance (EV-AC)

        • A comparison of the budgeted cost of work performed with actual cost.

        • A negative variance means the project is over budget

        • SPI: Schedule Performance Index

        • If means project is behind schedule

        • CPI: Cost Performance Index

        • If means project is over budget

        • CSI: Cost Schedule Index

        • The further CSI is from 1.0, the less likely project recovery becomes. Estimate at completion

    3. Case Study

      TABLE I. CASE STUDY INFORMATION

      Name of the Project

      Elixa Park

      Client

      Sachin Shinde, Kolhapur

      Builder

      Ajay Singh V. Desai, Builders and Developers, Kolhapur 416004

      Total duration

      1400 Day

      Built up Area per Floor

      643.82 sq.m = 6927.50 sq.ft

      Rate per sq. ft

      2850 per sq.ft

      Start date

      01 Jan 2018

      End date

      29 Oct 2021

      Fig. 2. Plan of Project

  5. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

    1. Conventional Model Results

      1. Earned Value Overtime Report

        TABLE II. EARNED VALUE OVERTIME REPORT

        Year

        Quarter

        Earned Value

        Planned Value

        AC

        2018

        Q1

        61493405.1

        61540959.66

        61493405.1

        Q2

        103701832.6

        103749387.1

        103701832.6

        Q3

        116020816.9

        116068371.5

        116020816.9

        Q4

        133471552

        133519106.5

        133471552

        2018 Total

        133471552

        133519106.5

        133471552

        2019

        Q1

        145859361.1

        147058926.4

        145859361.1

        Q2

        156234168

        157433733.3

        156234168

        Q3

        164347322.7

        165546888.1

        164347322.7

        Q4

        173785638.3

        174985203.6

        173785638.3

        2019 Total

        173785638.3

        174985203.6

        173785638.3

        2020

        Q1

        181675846.7

        182875412.1

        181675846.7

        Q2

        189596239

        190958371

        189596239

        Q3

        252731059.7

        254093191.7

        252731059.7

        Q4

        264611082

        265973213.9

        264611082

        2020 Total

        264611082

        265973213.9

        264611082

        2021

        Q1

        276564556.4

        277926688.4

        276564556.4

        Q2

        287506496.1

        288868628.1

        287506496.1

        Q3

        293348797.5

        294710929.5

        293348797.5

        2021 Total

        293348797.5

        294710929.5

        293348797.5

        Grand Total

        29,33,48,797.5

        29,47,10,929.5

        29,33,48,797.5

      2. Cash Flow

        Fig. 3. Earned Value Overtime Report

        TABLE III. CASH FLOW REPORT FOR PROJECT

        Year

        Quarter

        Cost

        Cumulative Cost

        2018

        Q1

        61540959.7

        61540959.66

        Q2

        42208427.5

        103749387.1

        Q3

        12318984.3

        116068371.5

        Q4

        17450735.1

        133519106.5

        2018 Total

        133519107

        133519106.5

        2019

        Q1

        13392495

        146911601.5

        Q2

        10522131.8

        157433733.3

        Q3

        8113154.75

        165546888.1

        Q4

        9438315.55

        174985203.6

        2019 Total

        41466097.1

        174985203.6

        2020

        Q1

        7890208.45

        182875412.1

        Q2

        8082958.9

        190958371

        Q3

        63134820.7

        254093191.7

        Q4

        11880022.3

        265973213.9

        2020 Total

        90988010.3

        265973213.9

        2021

        Q1

        11953474.5

        277926688.4

        Q2

        10941939.7

        288868628.1

        Q3

        8397213.77

        297265841.9

        Q4

        933122.694

        298198964.6

        2021 Total

        32225750.6

        298198964.6

        Grand Total

        29,81,98,965

        29,81,98,964.6

      3. Budget Cost

        Fig. 4. Cash Flow of Project

        TABLE IV. BUDGET COST FOR PROJECT

        Year

        Quarter

        Baseline Cost

        Cost

        Actual Cost

        2018

        Q1

        61540959.66

        61540959.66

        61493405.1

        Q2

        42208427.46

        42208427.46

        42208427.46

        Q3

        12318984.35

        12318984.35

        12318984.35

        Q4

        17450735.07

        17450735.07

        17450735.07

        2018 Total

        133519106.5

        133519106.5

        133471552

        2019

        Q1

        13539819.91

        13392494.95

        12387809.12

        Q2

        10374806.88

        10522131.84

        10374806.88

        Q3

        8113154.751

        8113154.751

        8113154.751

        Q4

        9438315.549

        9438315.549

        9438315.549

        p>2019 Total

        41466097.09

        41466097.09

        40314086.3

        2020

        Q1

        7890208.449

        7890208.449

        7890208.449

        Q2

        8082958.904

        8082958.904

        7920392.274

        Q3

        63134820.68

        63134820.68

        63134820.68

        Q4

        11880022.27

        11880022.27

        11880022.27

        2020 Total

        90988010.31

        90988010.31

        90825443.68

        2021

        Q1

        11953474.48

        11953474.48

        11953474.48

        Q2

        10941939.7

        10941939.7

        10941939.7

        Q3

        8397213.767

        8397213.767

        7691873.144

        Q4

        933122.6935

        933122.6935

        762655.7395

        2021 Total

        32225750.64

        32225750.64

        31349943.06

        Grand Total

        29,81,98,964.6

        29,81,98,964.6

        29,59,61,025

        Fig. 5. Budget Cost For Project

      4. Budget Work

        TABLE V. BUDGET WORK FOR PROJECT

        Year

        Quarter

        Baseline Work

        Work

        Actual Work

        2018

        Q1

        328

        328

        311.5

        Q2

        712

        712

        712

        Q3

        1253.15

        1253.15

        1253.15

        Q4

        1540.856

        1540.856

        1540.856

        2018 Total

        3834.006

        3834.006

        3817.506

        2019

        Q1

        1462.911

        1438.761

        1140.911

        Q2

        1066.433

        1090.583

        1066.433

        Q3

        1041.75

        1041.75

        1041.75

        Q4

        743.3

        743.3

        743.3

        2019 Total

        4314.394

        4314.394

        3992.394

        2020

        Q1

        903.6

        903.6

        903.6

        Q2

        807.85

        807.85

        742.85

        Q3

        833.65

        833.65

        833.65

        Q4

        1111

        1111

        1111

        2020 Total

        3656.1

        3656.1

        3591.1

        2021

        Q1

        1083.872

        1083.872

        1083.872

        Q2

        1420.828

        1420.828

        1420.828

        Q3

        773.75

        773.75

        661.05

        Q4

        185.55

        185.55

        88.91667

        2021 Total

        3464

        3464

        3254.667

        Grand Total

        15,268.5

        15,268.5

        14,655.67

      5. Resource Work Availability Report

        Fig. 6. Budget Work For Project

        TABLE VI. RESOURCE WORK AVAILABILITY REPORT

        Year

        Quarter

        Work Availability

        Work

        Remaining Availability

        2018

        Q1

        190944

        312

        190632

        Q2

        190944

        688

        190256

        Q3

        190944

        1232

        189712

        Q4

        193392

        1512

        191880

        2018 Total

        766224

        3744

        762480

        2019

        Q1

        188496

        1440.167

        187055.8333

        Q2

        190944

        1048.317

        189895.6833

        Q3

        190928

        944

        189984

        Q4

        193392

        808

        192584

        2019 Total

        763760

        4240.483

        759519.5167

        2020

        Q1

        190944

        856

        190088

        Q2

        190944

        792

        190152

        Q3

        193392

        856

        192536

        Q4

        193392

        1088

        192304

        2020 Total

        768672

        3592

        765080

        2021

        Q1

        188496

        1008

        187488

        Q2

        190944

        1416

        189528

        Q3

        193392

        784

        192608

        Q4

        61200

        200

        61000

        2021 Total

        634032

        3408

        630624

        Grand Total

        29,32,688

        14,984.48

        29,17,703.517

        Fig. 7. Resource Work Availability Report

    2. Tracking 1 Project Result (Date 12-November 2018)

      TABLE VII. EARNED VALUE ANALYSIS IN TRACKING 1 PROJECT

      Year

      Quarter

      Earned Value

      Planned Value

      AC

      2018

      Q1

      61493405.1

      61540959.66

      61493405.1

      Q2

      103701832.6

      103749387.1

      103701832.6

      Q3

      116020816.9

      116068371.5

      116020816.9

      Q4

      118861184

      118908738.5

      118861184

      2018 Total

      118861184

      118908738.5

      118861184

      Grand Total

      11,88,61,184

      11,89,08,738.5

      11,88,61,184

      Fig. 8. Earned Value Analysis in Tracking 1 Project

    3. Tracking 2 Project Result (Date 11-September 2020)

    TABLE VIII. EARNED VALUE ANALYSIS IN TRACKING 2 PROJECT

    Year

    Earned Value

    Planned Value

    AC

    2018

    133471552

    133519106.5

    133471552

    2019

    173785638.3

    174985203.6

    173785638.3

    2020

    251549735.4

    252911867.4

    251549735.4

    Grand Total

    25,15,49,735.4

    25,29,11,867.4

    25,15,49,735.4

    Fig. 9. Earned Value Analysis in Tracking 2 Project

    6. Final Values for EVM Element

    TABLE IX. VALUES FOR EVM PERFORMANCE INDICATOR

    EVM Performance Indicator

    1st Tracking

    2nd Tracking

    Conventional Method

    SV

    -47554.5

    -1362132

    -1362132

    CV

    0

    0

    0

    SV%

    -0.040

    -0.539

    -0.462

    CV%

    0

    0

    0

    SPI

    0.9996

    0.9946

    0.9954

    CPI

    1.0

    1.0

    1.0

    TABLE X. VALUES FOR EVM FORECASTING PARAMETER

    EVM Performance Indicator

    1st Tracking

    2nd Tracking

    Conventional Method

    EAC

    29,81,98,964.6

    29,81,98,964.6

    29,81,98,964.6

    VAC

    0

    0

    0

    TSPI

    1.00

    1.030

    1.391

    TCPI

    1.00

    1.00

    1.00

      • Value of schedule performance indicators i.e. SV < 0 and SPI < 1

      • It indicates that, Project is running behind the schedule.

      • Value of cost performance indicators CV = 0 and CPI = 1

      • It indicates that Project is running according to budget.

      • Value of cost forecasting parameters i.e. TCPI =1 and VAC = 0 , it interprets that the remaining work and money left from budget are in good coordination; And if it continues properly, then chances of budgeted timely completion are almost 100%.

      • Value of schedule forecasting parameters i.e. TSPI = 1.391 , it interprets that the coordination between remaining work and the time left from scheduled time is highly lacking; And in order to bring it back on track, crew members have to work 139% more than normal 100%

  6. CONCLUSION

      • Earned value management provides information for the project work package in decision making.

      • Tracking of construction project using earned value

        management is useful recognizing the risk factors of the project and to forecast the potential problem in order to face the remaining project work. It also helps the project team in decision making & to be proactive in managing their projects as well as find out progress of performance in construction projects.

      • Tracking is provides practical level knowledge to the contractors about project and proves most helpful to any

        project manager who has made a firm commitment to complete the entire feature within a definite schedule and for a restricted amount of funds.

      • The efficiency of project is demonstrated by SPI is 0.995

        which is less than 1 hence the project is performed less efficiently and running at about 99% of the planned schedule.

      • Schedule variance of the project is -1362132 Rs. The negative sign determine the project is lagging behind the original schedule.

      • CPI indicates the project efficiency of project utilization.

        In our case study CPI is 1 means project is running according to the budget.

      • Cost Variance of the project is Rs 0 because of actual cost and earned value of our project is same.

      • The study shows important, implementation and unique features of EVM that benefits project managers and

        ultimately results in project success.

      • In this study 1.41% of cost is reduced or saving with respect calculated planned estimated cost using EVM method.

  • Final Results

TABLE XI. VALUES FOR EVM BASIC ELEMENT

EVM

Basic Eleme nt

1st Trackin g

(Rs.)

2nd Tracking (Rs.)

Conventio nal Method (Rs.)

Saving Cost by EVM (Rs.)

%

Savi ng Cost EV M

Estimat ed Cost (before start the project

)

29,75,3

3,647.7

29,75,33,64

7.7

29,75,33,6

47.7

Total Duratio n of Project

1400

1400

1400

Remai ning Duratio n

1054

Day

384 Day

EV

11,88,6

1,184

25,15,49,73

5.4

293348797

.5

4184850.

18

1.41

PV

11,89,0

8,738.5

252911867.

4

294710929

.5

2822718.

18

0.95

AC

11,88,6

1,184

25,15,49,73

5.4

293348797

.5

4184850.

18

1.41

Cash Flow Cumul ated Cost

29,81,9

8,964.6

29,81,98,96

4.6

298198964

.6

REFERENCES

  1. A. Naderpour, M. Mofid, Improving Construction Management Of An Educational Center By Applying Earned Value Technique, Science Direct, Vol – 14, Pp No- 1945-1952, 2011.

  2. Agata Czarnigowska, Earned Value Method as a Tool for Project Control, Vol. 3, Pp. 15-32, 2008.

  3. Byung-Cheol Kim, M.ASCE, Probabilistic Evaluation of Cost Performance Stability in Earned Value Management, J. Manage. Eng., Vol. 32, No.1, 2016.

  4. Byung-Cheol Kim, M.ASCE and Hyung-Jin Kim, Sensitivity of Earned Value Schedule Forecasting to S-Curve Patterns, Journal Construction of Engineering Management, Vol. 140, Issue 7, 2014.

  5. Chia-Jui Chang1 and Szu-Wei Yu, Three-Variance Approach for Updating Earned Value Management, © ASCE, J. Constr. Eng. Manage., Vol. 144, No. 6, 2018.

  6. Daniel R. McConnell, M. ASCE, Earned Value Technique for Performance Measurement, J. Manage. Eng., Vol. 1, Issue 2, Pp. 79- 94, 1985.

  7. Fernando Acebes, Javier Pajares, et. al., Beyond Earned Value Management: A Graphical Frameworkfor Integrated Cost, Schedule and Risk Monitoring, Procedia Social and Behaviour Sciences, Vol. 74, Pp.181-189, March 2013.

  8. Jordy Batselier1 and Mario Vanhoucke, Empirical Evaluation of Earned Value Management Forecasting Accuracy for Time and Cost,

    © ASCE, J. Constr. Eng. Manage., Vol. 141, No.11, 2015.

  9. Mathieu Wauters and Mario Vanhoucke, Study of the Stability of Earned Value Management Forecasting, © ASCE, J. Constr. Eng. Manage., Vol. 141, No. 4, 2015.

  10. Roger D.H. Warburton, Denis F. Cioffi, Estimating A Project's Earned and Final Duration, International Journal Of Project Management, Vol. 34, Pp. 1493-1504, Nov. 2016.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *