COMPARISON OF FUZZY-PERT, CLASSICAL-PERT AND REAL-DISTRIBUTION METHODS BY USING THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS IN FINDING THE COMPLETING TIME OF PROJECT

Volume: 3 Number: 2 May 1, 2001
  • Cevriye Gencer
  • Orhan Türkbey
EN TR

COMPARISON OF FUZZY-PERT, CLASSICAL-PERT AND REAL-DISTRIBUTION METHODS BY USING THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS IN FINDING THE COMPLETING TIME OF PROJECT

Abstract

In the literature, Classical-PERT (CPert), Fuzzy-PERT (FPert) and Real-PERT (RPert) techniques take place in the probabilistic determination of starting and finishing times, which are towards to the future of operational activities that are found in a project planning and control technique. But in each of these three techniques a statistical analysis is not done in terms of operation number, operation confusion, solution time and quality. In this study, by constructing a network, a comparable statistical analysis is made according to the mentioned performance criteria of each of the three techniques. Between the mentioned techniques, the paired-t test is applied in order to investigate whether there is a statistically significant difference or not. It is seen that CPert technique is more dominant when the results are considered in terms of solution difficulties and quality, operation confusion.

Keywords

References

  1. Dubois D.; Prade H. (1979): “Decision-making under fuzzness, In Advances in Fuzzy Set and Applications”, p. 279-302, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
  2. Prade H. (1981): “Operations research with fuzzy data, In Fuzzy Sets-Theory and Applica- tions to Policy Analysis and Information Systems”, p. 155-169, Plenum Press, New york.
  3. Chanas S., Kamburowski J. (1981): “The use of fuzzy variables in PERT”, Fuzzy Sets Systems, V.5, pp.11-19.
  4. Li R.J., Lee E.S. (1987): “Ranking fuzzy numbers-a comparison”, Proceedings of NAFIPS, May. 5-7, West Lafayette, Indiana.
  5. McCahon C.S., Lee E.S. (1988): “Project network analysis with fuzzy activity times”, Computers and Mathematics Applications, V.15 (10), pp.829-838.
  6. Lootsma F.A. (1989): “Stochastic and fuzzy Pert”, European Journal of Operations Research, V.43, pp.174-183.
  7. Shipley M.F., Korvin A., Ömer K. (1997): “BIFPET methodology versus PERT in project management: fuzzy probability instead of the beta distribution”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, V.14, pp.49-65.
  8. Mon D.L., Cheng C.H., Lu H.C. (1995): “Aplication of fuzzy distributions on project management”, Fuzzy Stes and Systems, V.73, pp.227-234.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Cevriye Gencer This is me

Orhan Türkbey This is me

Publication Date

May 1, 2001

Submission Date

May 1, 2001

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2001 Volume: 3 Number: 2

APA
Gencer, C., & Türkbey, O. (2001). PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen Ve Mühendislik Dergisi, 3(2), 29-39. https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC
AMA
1.Gencer C, Türkbey O. PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. DEUFMD. 2001;3(2):29-39. https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC
Chicago
Gencer, Cevriye, and Orhan Türkbey. 2001. “PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen Ve Mühendislik Dergisi 3 (2): 29-39. https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC.
EndNote
Gencer C, Türkbey O (May 1, 2001) PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi 3 2 29–39.
IEEE
[1]C. Gencer and O. Türkbey, “PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI”, DEUFMD, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 29–39, May 2001, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC
ISNAD
Gencer, Cevriye - Türkbey, Orhan. “PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi 3/2 (May 1, 2001): 29-39. https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC.
JAMA
1.Gencer C, Türkbey O. PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. DEUFMD. 2001;3:29–39.
MLA
Gencer, Cevriye, and Orhan Türkbey. “PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen Ve Mühendislik Dergisi, vol. 3, no. 2, May 2001, pp. 29-39, https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC.
Vancouver
1.Cevriye Gencer, Orhan Türkbey. PROJE TAMAMLANMA ZAMANININ BULUNMASINDA İSTATİSTİKSEL ANALİZ YARDIMIYLA BULANIK-PERT, KLASİK-PERT VE GERÇEK-DAĞILIM YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. DEUFMD [Internet]. 2001 May 1;3(2):29-3. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA34FF49PC

This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).

download?token=eyJhdXRoX3JvbGVzIjpbXSwiZW5kcG9pbnQiOiJmaWxlIiwicGF0aCI6IjliNTAvMDBjMi8xZmIxLzY5MjZmZDIyOGE1NzgyLjA3MzU5MTk2LnBuZyIsImV4cCI6MTc2NDE2OTMzMSwibm9uY2UiOiI2MTU1ODg1NGZlYzhkZTA1OThkNTU2NGFmYTQzYTc0YiJ9.O5b4Ex8bMlFv5797LL8VnE9YWS_X5880dfbmOp2-kc8