European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No.
5 June 2013
151
A FRAMEWORK FOR APPLICATION OF GENETIC ALGORITHM IN
PRODUCTIVITY OPTIMIZATION OF HIGHWAY EQUIPMENTS USING
EVOLVER SOFTWARE
Dr. Debasis Sarar
Associate Professor,
Dept. of Civil Engineering,
School of Technology,
Pandit Deendayal Petroleum niversity,
!andhinagar, "ndia.
Email# de$[Link]%ar&[Link] 'Corresponding Author(
Dee! S"a"
)ormer *.Tech student,
Dept. of Construction + Pro,ect *anagement,
)aculty of Technology, CEPT niversity,
Ahmeda$ad, "ndia
A#STRACT
Genetic algorith i! a tool to !ol"e !election and optii#ation related pro$le!. It i! a heuri!tic !earch
proce!! %hich help! in optii#ing producti"ity of high%ay e&uipent!. Thi! paper ai! at de"eloping an
approach for optii#ing producti"ity of hydraulic e'ca"ator! and "i$ratory tande !teel dru roller! in
high%ay pro(ect! u!ing genetic algorith. )or analy!i!* EV+,VE- 5../ add/in !oft%are of e'cel ha! $een
u!ed. It ha! $een o$!er"ed that for hydraulic e'ca"ator!* the difference $et%een actual producti"ity on !ite
and the producti"ity a! coputed through producti"ity e&uation i! a$out ..0 1 and the difference $et%een
the coputed producti"ity and the optii#ed producti"ity i! a$out ..2 1. )or "i$ratory !teel dru roller!*
the total optii#ed producti"ity a! gi"en $y EV+,VE- 5.. !oft%are i! a$out i! a$out 15.30 1 higher than
the coputed producti"ity. 4l!o* e'ca"ator Vol"o E5 210 6,5* and roller ,7T 110.8 appear to $e ore
fea!i$le to $e deployed in the pro(ect.
KEYWORDS$ !enetic algorithm- .ptimi/ation- 0ydraulic e1cavators- 2i$ratory rollers- Evolver-
Productivity.
INTRODUCTION
Construction of high3ay pro,ects involves huge investments for deployment of high3ay construction
e4uipments. So optimi/ation of productivity of e4uipment is necessary for on5time availa$ility, cost
reduction and $etter performance. .ne of the very important e4uipment of high3ay construction is hydraulic
e1cavators. "t primarily helps in initial stage of high3ay construction particularly during cleaning and
gru$$ing. This paper aims at optimi/ing the productivity of hydraulic e1cavators using genetic algorithm.
Some of the ma,or factors affecting the productivity of hydraulic e1cavators have $een identified and the
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
156
input data has $een fed in an optimi/ing soft3are E2.72E8, through 3hich an optimal solution has $een
o$tained.
!enetic algorithms are adaptive heuristic search algorithm premised on the Dar3in9s evolutionary ideas of
natural selection and genetic evolution. The $asic concept of genetic algorithms is designed to simulate
processes in natural system necessary for evolution. As such they represent an intelligent e1ploitation of a
random search 3ithin a defined search space to solve a pro$lem. "t generates solutions to optimi/ation
pro$lems using techni4ues inspired $y natural evolution, such as inheritance, mutation, selection, and
crossover ':a,pai and ;umar 6<<=(. Steps for the procedure of genetic algorithms are# '1( Defining a
solution representation- '6( Setting the varia$les, o$,ective functions and constraints- '>( !enerating initial
population of solutions- '?( Evaluating the population- and '5( Evolution cycles '0ega/y and ;assa$, 6<<>(.
The concept of a genetic algorithm $ased multi5o$,ective approach, 3hich utili/es a genetic search for
simultaneously optimi/ing more than one varia$le i.e. time and cost '@heng, et al. 6<<?(. Aun and El58ayes
'6<11( have developed a novel multio$,ective optimi/ation model to simultaneously optimi/e resource
levelling and allocation for construction pro,ects. The present model is designed to provide construction
planners 3ith ne3 capa$ilities, including '1( ma1imi/ing resource utili/ation efficiency $y directly
measuring and minimi/ing undesira$le resource fluctuation- '6( simultaneously minimi/ing pro,ect duration
3hile complying 3ith all resource availa$ility constraints and '>( generating optimal trade5offs $et3een
minimi/ing pro,ect duration and ma1imi/ing resource utili/ation efficiency.
T3o ne3 metrics for resource levelling and a ro$ust optimi/ation model 3ere developed to ma1imi/e the
efficiency of resource utili/ation in construction pro,ects. The model is designed to search for optimal and
practical schedules that minimi/e undesira$le resource fluctuation 3hile simultaneously minimi/ing the
resource pea% demand 'El58ayes and Aun, 6<<B(. Doula$i, et al. '6<11( have introduced a novel hy$rid
genetic algorithm for resource levelling 3hich ta%es advantage of activity splitting 3henever possi$le. The
proposed genetic algorithm is e4uipped 3ith a novel local search heuristic and a repair mechanism. The
repair mechanism is used to restore the feasi$ility of the solutions $y fi1ing the precedence relations.
!enetic algorithm procedures converge 4uic%ly on optimal solutions after e1amining only a small fraction of
the search space and have $een applied successfully to comple1 optimi/ation pro$lems in engineering-
CS.*E, the computer5$ased program developed to solve the e1cavating and haulage e4uipment selection
pro$lem in opencast mining, has progressed from applying integer linear programming into developing a
hy$rid %no3ledge5$ased system and genetic algorithms '0aidar, et al. 1BBB(. 0ega/y '1BBB( has made three
main developments 3ith respect to improving the resource management of pro,ects# '1( an effective
improvement to resource allocation heuristics using random activity priorities- '6( a practical modification to
resource leveling heuristics using a dou$le5moment approach and '>( a multio$,ective optimi/ation of $oth
resource allocation and leveling using the genetic algorithms techni4ue.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
"nitial stage of high3ay construction is earthmoving operations and the first point to consider is that
earthmoving productivity is governed $y the e1cavator. All movement and functions of a hydraulic
e1cavator are accomplished through the use of hydraulic fluid, 3ith hydraulic cylinders and hydraulic
motors. )or the e1cavator system, the e1cavator is the prime mover and ma1imum prime output 3ill $e
achieved if the e1cavator is 3or%ing at ma1imum utili/ation and supplied 3ith enough truc%s. The
regression model for actual productivity that has $een underta%en and descri$ed in this paper has provided
an e4uation that descri$es over B<D of the variance in a large set of data o$tained from different sources and
that provides a realistic estimate for the actual output for e1cavator earthmoving operations 'Smith 1BBB(.
)ormula to find out the productivity of a hydraulic e1cavator as given $y Peurifoy and Sche1nayder '6<<=(
is e1pressed $y the follo3ing relationship#
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
15>
Productivity of hydraulic e1cavator 'cum. E hr( F
'1(
0eaped capacity is e1pressed in cu$ic yard and time cycle is e1pressed in seconds.
Productivity of vi$ratory steel drum roller as mentioned in Peurifoy and Sche1nayder '6<<=( is e1pressed as#
Productivity of vi$ratory steel drum roller 'cum. E hr.( F
Compacted 3idth per roller pass 1 average roller speed 1 compacted lift thic%ness 1 efficiency
Go. of roller passes re4uired '6(
CASE STUDY
To analy/e the optimum productivity of hydraulic e1cavators, t3o case studies are considered. The first case
study 'Case 1( is 3idening of :hruch5Dahe, high3ay 'S05<H(, !u,arat, "ndia. 0ydraulic e1cavators 3ere
used in initial stage of high3ay construction particularly in earthmoving operations. Collected primary data
includes soil type, details of hydraulic e1cavators li%e heaped $uc%et capacity, ma1imum digging depth,
s3ing angle, average depth of cut, 3or%ing efficiency and cycle time. The models of hydraulic e1cavators
used for e1cavation for Case 1 are 7+T ;omatsu PC ><<5I and AC: >DC.
The details of the hydraulic e1cavators and soil type are ta$ulated in ta$le 1 and the actual productivity of 7
+ T ;omatsu PC ><<5I is presented in Ta$le 6.
Tab%e &$ De'ai%s () "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs a0+ s(i% '*!e 1Case &2
7+T ;omatsu
PC ><<5I
0eaped $uc%et capacity 1.? cum.
*a1. digging depth =.15 m
S3ing angle 2aries from I5 to 1=< degrees
Average depth of cut > m
Jor%ing efficiency ?< min. per hour
Cycle time
6< sec
7oad :uc%et5 H Sec
S3ing 3ith load5 H Sec
Dump load5 ? Sec
8eturn s3ing5 ? Sec
AC: >DC
0eaped $uc%et capacity <.6? cum.
*a1. digging depth ?.II m
S3ing angle 2aries from H< to 16< degrees
Average depth of cut 1.5 m
Jor%ing efficiency ?5 minutes per hour
Cycle time
1B Sec
7oad :uc%et5 I Sec
S3ing 3ith load5 5 Sec
Dump load5 6 Sec
8eturn s3ing5 5 Sec
Soil type Clayey soil )ill factor 1<<511< D
Jet or dry clayey soil S3ell >5D
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
15?
Tab%e 3$ A-',a% !r(+,-'i(0 -"ar' () L4T K(5a's, PC 67789
Sr. Go. Date 0ours per day E1cavation 'cum.(
1 1>.<>.16 = =I>
6 1?.<>.16 = =1B
> 15.<>.16 H I56
? 1I.<>.16 H IB>
5 1=.<>.16 I =61
H 1B.<>.16 5 ?>6
I 6<.<>.16 ? 1H<
= 61.<>.16 ? ><B
B 66.<>.16 ? >H>
1< 6>.<>.16 ? >1=
T.TA7 5H 5H?<
Productivity 'cum. E hr.( 1<<.I1
Similarly for AC: >DC productivity in [Link] hour is I1.=6.
The second case study 'Case 6( for analysis is Ahmeda$ad52iramgam5*aliya 8oad Pro,ect 'A2*8P(,
!u,arat, "ndia. This is also a 3idening pro,ect. T3o different models of e1cavators used for earth moving
operations for this case are TATA 0itachi EC 11< and 2olvo EC 61< :7C. The details of the hydraulic
e1cavators and soil type are ta$ulated in ta$le > and the actual productivity of TATA 0itachi EC 11< is
presented in ta$le ?.
Tab%e 6$ De'ai%s () "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs a0+ s(i% '*!e 1Case 32
TATA 0itachi EC 11<
0eaped $uc%et capacity <.B cum.
*a1. digging depth ?.I6 m
S3ing angle 2aries from H< to 15< degrees
Average depth of cut 1.5 m
Jor%ing efficiency ?6 min. per hour
Cycle time
61 sec
7oad :uc%et5 I Sec
S3ing 3ith load5 H Sec
Dump load5 ? Sec
8eturn s3ing5 ? Sec
2olvo EC 61< :7C
0eaped $uc%et capacity 1.H cum.
*a1. digging depth ?.II m
S3ing angle 2aries from H< to 16< degrees
Average depth of cut H.I m
Jor%ing efficiency >= minutes per hour
Cycle time
61 Sec
7oad :uc%et5 H Sec
S3ing 3ith load5 H Sec
Dump load5 ? Sec
8eturn s3ing5 5 Sec
Soil type Earth roc% mi1ture )ill factor 1<<511< D
Jet or dry earth S3ell >5D
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
155
Tab%e :$ A-',a% !r(+,-'i(0 -"ar' () TATA Hi'a-"i E; &&7
Sr. Go. Date 0ours per day E1cavation 'cum.(
1 <5.<?.16 H ?=B
6 <H.<?.16 5 ?56
> <I.<?.16 H 516
? <B.<?.16 > 6=>
5 1<.<?.16 ?.5 >B6
H 11.<?.16 ? ?<<
I 16.<?.16 ? >I=
= 1>.<?.16 5 ?5B
B 1?.<?.16 >.5 65B
1< 15.<?.16 >.5 6?>
T.TA7 ??.5 >=HI
Productivity 'cum.E hr( =H.B<
Similarly for 2olvo EC 61< :7C productivity in [Link] hour is 1>=.5
The other category of e4uipment considered for this study is steel drum vi$ratory roller deployed in Case 1.
The details of the production for model "8 SD 11< is presented in ta$le 5.
Tab%e <$ A-',a% !r(+,-'i(0 () s'ee% +r,5 /ibra'(r* r(%%er 1IR SD &&72
Sr. Go. Date 0ours per day E1cavation 'cum.(
1 6I.<5.16
6
?H='su$grade(
6 6=.<5.16
6
><H< 'em$an%ment(
> 6B.<5.16
6
? ><.<5.16
1
5 <1.<H.16
>
H <?.<H.16
1.5
>=? 'su$grade(
I <5.<H.16
6
?B< 'em$an%ment E su$grade(
= <H.<H.16 6.5 51< 'em$an%ment(
B <I.<H.16 > ?6< 'em$an%ment(
1< <=.<H.16
1
>15 'em$an%ment(
T.TA7 6< 5H?I
Productivity 'cum.E hr( 6=6
ANALYSIS
The actual productivity of e1cavators are affected $y factors li%e '1( class of material '6( $uc%et capacity '>(
height E depth of cut '?( angle of s3ing '5( cycle time 'H( 3or%ing efficiency and 'I( s%ill of operator.
Primary data pertaining to these parameters are ta$ulated in ta$le H. The productivity for all the four models
of hydraulic e1cavators under consideration is calculated as per e4uation 1.
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
15H
Tab%e =$ Da'a a))e-'i0> !r(+,-'i/i'* a0+ -(5!,'a'i(0 () !r(+,-'i/i'* )(r "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs 1Case &
a0+ 32
Description
7+T ;omatsu
PC ><<5I
AC: >DC
TATA 0itachi
EC 11<
2olvo
EC 61< :7C Total
)ill factor 1.<5 1.<5 1.1 1.1
S3ell 'D( >5 >5 65 65
0eaped :uc%et capacity
'cum.( 1.? <.I5 <.B 1.H
*a1. Digging depth 'm( =.15 ?.II ?.I6 H.I
.ptimum height 'm( >.HI 6.15 1.H5 6.>5
D optimum depth =1.I? [Link] B<.B1 =5.11
0eight5s3ing factor <.=6 <.B5 <.BB <.B=
Efficiency factor <.HI <.I5 <.I <.H>
cycle time 'sec( 6< 1B 61 61
Productivity
'cum.E hr.( 1<I.H= I=.I5 B?.<B 1?B.<6 ?6B.5?
Productivity sho3n in ta$le H is $ased on computation as per e4uation '1(. The other factors listed in the
a$ove ta$le have $een fed as input data to E2.72E8 5.I soft3are and carrying out trial runs the optimi/ed
productivity is o$tained. :rief description of the process is as follo3s. )or the model,
Objective function: .ptimi/e the overall productivity
Adjustable cells:
Tab%e 9$ De'ai%s () a+?,s'ab%e -e%% ra0>es i0 EVOLVER 5(+e%
)ill )actor <.B5 to 1.15
S3ell 'D( 65 to >5
Efficiency factor <.5 to <.B
Cycle time 'sec( 1H to 6?
0eight5s3ing factor
<.=> to 1.15 'for AC:(
<.HB to 1.<? 'for 7+T ;omatsu(
<.I> to 1.1? 'for Tata 0itachi(
<.HB to 1.16 'for 2olvo(
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
15I
Constraint:
Productivity of e4uipments should $e more than the productivity o$tained from formula.
Fi>,re &$ S-ree0 +is!%a* )(r (!'i5i@a'i(0 >(a%A a+?,s'ab%e -e%% ra0>es a0+ -(0s'rai0's ()
EVOLVER M(+e%
Fi>,re 3$ S-ree0 +is!%a* )(r EVOLVER Wa'-"er s"(Bi0> -r(ss(/er a0+ 5,'a'i(0 ra'e
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
15=
Fi>,re 6$ S-ree0 +is!%a* )(r EVOLVER Wa'-"er s"(Bi0> 0,5ber () 'ria%s (r i'era'i(0s eC,a% '( =6
Fi>,re :$ S-ree0 +is!%a* s"(Bi0> '"e !(!,%a'i(0 si@e <7
Fi>,re <$ S-ree0 +is!%a* s"(Bi0> +i/ersi'* !a''er0 a' !re+e)i0e+ -r(ss(/er a0+ 5,'a'i(0 ra'e
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
15B
Fi>,re =$ S-ree0 +is!%a* s"(Bi0> -(0s'rai0' s(%/er a0+ "ar+ -(0s'rai0's
Res,%'s
)inal result after completing the genetic algorithm optimi/ation process is presented in ta$le =
Tab%e D$ O!'i5i@e+ !r(+,-'i/i'* )(r "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs 1Case & a0+ Case 32
Description
7+T ;omatsu
PC ><<5I
AC: >DC
TATA 0itachi
EC 11<
2olvo EC
61< :7C Total
)ill factor 1.<5 1.15 1.1 1.1
S3ell 'D( >5 >5 65 65
0eaped :uc%et capacity
'cum.( 1.? <.I5 <.B 1.H
*a1. Digging depth 'm( =.15 ?.II ?.I6 H.I
.ptimum height 'm( >.HI 6.15 1.H5 6.>5
D optimum depth =1.I? [Link] B<.B1 =5.11
0eight5s3ing factor <.=6 <.B5 <.BB <.B=
Efficiency factor <.HI <.I5 <.=B <.H>
cycle time 'sec( 6< 1B 61 61
Productivity 'cum.E hr.( 1<I.H= =H.65 16<.?B 1?B.<6 ?H>.?5
The comparison of the actual productivity on site, productivity $ased on e4uation '1( and the productivity as
o$tained after optimi/ation using genetic algorithm and E2.72E8 5.I soft3are is presented in ta$le B.
Tab%e E$ Pr(+,-'i/i'* -(5!aris(0 -"ar' )(r "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs 1Case & a0+ 32
Description
Actual productivity
on site 'cum.E hr.(
Productivity $ased on
e4uation '1( 'cum.E hr.(
Productivity after optimi/ation
using genetic algorithm 'cum.E hr.(
7+T ;omatsu
PC ><<5I
1<<.I1 1<I.H= 1<I.H=
AC: >DC I1.=6 I=.I5 =H.65
TATA 0itachi EC 11< =H.B B?.<B 16<.?B
2olvo EC 61< :7C 1>=.5 1?B.<6 1?B.<6
Total >BI.B> ?6B.5? ?H>.?5
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
1H<
To facilitate the e4uipment selection process, the o3ning and operating cost of each of the models of the
hydraulic e1cavators has $een calculated using the soft3are pac%age developed $y us. A sample
computation of the o3ning and operating cost of AC: >DC is presented in figure I.
Fi>,re 9$ S-ree0 s"(' () '"e !a-a>e +e/e%(!e+ )(r -(5!,'i0> eC,i!5e0' (B0i0> 4 (!era'i0> -(s'
1FC# 6D;2
The comparative o3ning and operating cost analysis for the models of hydraulic e1cavators li%e 7+T
;omatsu PC ><<5I, AC: >DC, TATA 0itachi E1 11< and 2olvo EC 61< :7C are presented in ta$le 1<
Tab%e &7$ C(5!ara'i/e a0a%*sis () (B0i0> a0+ (!era'i0> -(s's )(r "*+ra,%i- e.-a/a'(rs 1Case & a0+ 32
*odel
Total cost '[Link].(
7+T ;omatsu PC ><<5I 1<6<
AC: >DC HI?
TATA 0itachi EC 11< I6H
2olvo EC 61< :7C =H5
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
1H1
To analy/e the optimum productivity of vi$ratory steel drum rollers, the hard factors considered for study
that affect the productivity include 'i( compacted 3idth per roller pass 'ii( average roller speed 'iii(
compacted lift thic%ness 'iv( num$er of roller passes re4uired and 'v( efficiency.
Productivity as computed $y incorporating the values of the factors in the productivity formulae '6(, is
presented in ta$le 11.
Tab%e &&$ Da'a a))e-'i0> !r(+,-'i/i'* a0+ -(5!,'a'i(0 () !r(+,-'i/i'* )(r /ibra'(r* s'ee% +r,5 r(%%ers
1Case & a0+ 32
)actor description *odels
7+T 11<ID "8 KSD 11< DLGAPAC
CA 15<D
Total productivity
'cum. E hr.(
*a1imum operating 3eight
'tones(
11.> 1<.= B.>
Compacted 3idth per roller pass
'm(
6.> 6.>H [Link]
Average roller speed 'm Ehr( ><<< >65< ?<66
Compacted lift thic%ness 'm( <.5 <.5 <.5
Go. of roller passes re4uired = = =
Efficiency <.I5 <.I= <.=
Productivity 'cum E hr( >6>.?? >I>.B1 >>I.<? 1<>?.>B
Gum$er of generations or iterations are HI and population si/e is 5<. *utation and crossover rate are <.1 and
<.5 respectively.
)inal result after completing the !A optimi/ation process
Tab%e &3$ Tes' res,%'s () !r(+,-'i/i'* (!'i5i@a'i(0 () s'ee% +r,5 /ibra'(r* r(%%er a)'er a0a%*sis i0
EVOLVER <.9
)actor description *odels
7+T 11<ID "8 KSD 11< DLGAPAC
CA 15<D
Total productivity
'cum. E hr.(
*a1imum operating 3eight
'tones(
11.> 1<.= B.>
Compacted 3idth per roller pass
'm(
6.> 6.>H 1.H=
Average roller speed 'm Ehr( ?=65.66 ?[Link] H<<<
Compacted lift thic%ness 'm( <.5 <.5 <.5
Go. of roller passes re4uired B.H> B.=B 11.=6
Efficiency <.=1 <.IH <.=
Productivity 'cum E hr( ?H=.B> >=I.I> >?<.<? 11BH.I<
European International Journal of Science and Technology ISSN9 230:/0303 %%%.ce;[Link].u;<EIJST
1H6
Tab%e &6$ C(5!ara'i/e a0a%*sis () (B0i0> a0+ (!era'i0> -(s's )(r /ibra'(r* s'ee% +r,5 r(%%ers 1Case &
a0+ 32
*odel Total cost '[Link].(
7+T 11<I D =6=
"85SD 11< B?<
DLGAPAC CA 15<D II<
CONCLUSION
Considering all the four models of hydraulic e1cavators of Case 1 and 6 it is o$served that the difference
$et3een actual productivity on site and the productivity as computed through e4uation '1( is a$out I.B D
and the difference $et3een the computed productivity and the optimi/ed productivity is a$out I.= D 'refer
ta$le =(.
!enetic algorithm5 an optimi/ation tool 3as used to optimi/e productivity having cross over and mutation
rate of <.5 and <.1 respectively. The population si/e is 5< and num$er of iterations are H>. There 3ere four
constraints, 3hich 3ere solved $y the constraint solver. As o$tained through the analysis $y E2.72E8 5.I
soft3are, the productivity value 'as computed through e4uation 1( for 7+T ;omatsu PC ><<5I and 2olvo
EC 61< :7C remain same after optimi/ation using genetic algorithm 'refer ta$le =(. )or $oth models, after
H> iterations the values changed depending on the constraints and ad,usta$le cells $ut at the end of the all
iterations genetic algorithm has given the same values of optimum productivity as that of computed values.
"n other t3o models li%e AC: >DC and TATA 0itachi EC 11<, the value of productivity has changed due to
change in fill factor and efficiency factor respectively. "t appears that in TATA 0itachi EC 11< model, the
efficiency can $e increased up to <.=B 'refer ta$le I( from <.I 'refer ta$le 5( and in AC: >DC the optimum
productivity is o$tained at an increased fill factor of 1.15 'refer ta$le I( against the pre optimi/ation fill
factor value of 1.<5 'refer ta$le 5(. Productivity of the vi$ratory steel drum rollers as computed $y
incorporating the values of the factors in the productivity e4uation '6(, for 7+T 11<ID, "85SD 11< and
DLGAPAC CA 15<D are >6>.??, >I>.B1 and >>I.<? cum E hr respectively. After carrying out HI iterations
for population si/e of 5< and for mutation and crossover rate are <.1 and <.5 respectively the optimi/ed
productivity as given $y E2.72E8 5.I soft3are are ?H=.B>, >=I.I> and >?<.<? cum. E hr respectively.
Thus the total optimi/ed productivity as given $y E2.72E8 5.I soft3are for three different vi$ratory steel
drum rollers is a$out 11BH.I< cum. E hr, 3hich is a$out [Link] D higher than the computed productivity
'1<>?.>B cum. E hr(. Also, since the increase in optimi/ed productivity is ma1imum for 7+T 11<ID, 3hich
is a$out ??.B= D and the o3ning and operation cost is also 4uite reasona$le and is 8s.=6= E hr 'refer ta$le
1>(, thus this 7+T 11<I D appears to $e more feasi$le and should $e selected for carrying out more 3or% $y
the pro,ect authorities. )urther as the concept is generic, this tool can $e applied for selection and
optimi/ation of other e4uipments used in high3ays and other infrastructure sector.
European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No. 5 June 2013
1H>
REFERENCES
:a,pai, P. and ;umar, *. '6<<=( M!enetic algorithm K an approach to solve glo$al optimi/ation pro$lemsN,
"ndian Aournal of Computer Science and Engineering* 1'>(, 1BB56<H.
Doula$i, S., Seifi, A. and Sharirat, S. '6<11( M Efficient hy$rid genetic algorithm for resource leveling via
resource splittingN, Aournal of Construction Engineering and *anagement, ASCE, 1>I'6(, 1>65161.
El58ayes, ;. and Aun, D. '6<<B( [Link]/ing resource levelling in construction pro,ectsN, Aournal of
Construction Engineering and *anagement, ASCE, 1>5'11(, 11I6511=<.
0aidar, A., Gaoum, S., 0o3es, 8. and Tah, A. '1BBB( M!enetic algorithms application and testing for
e4uipment selectionN, Aournal of Construction Engineering and *anagement* ASCE , 165'1(, >65>=.
0ega/y, T. and ;assa$, *. '6<<>( M8esource optimi/ation using com$ined simulation and genetic
algorithmsN, Aournal of Construction Engineering and *anagement, ASCE, 16B'H(, HB=5I<5.
0ega/y, T. '1BBB( [Link]/ation of resource allocation and levelling using genetic algorithmsN, Aournal of
Construction Engineering and *anagement, ASCE, 165'>(, 1HI51I5.
Aun, D. and El58ayes, ;. '6<11( M*ultio$,ective optimi/ation of resource levelling and allocation during
construction schedulingN, Aournal of Construction Engineering and *anagement, ASCE, 1>I'16(, 1<=<5
1<==.
Peurifoy, 8. and Sche1nayder, C. '6<<=( 5on!truction =lanning* E&uipent* and >ethod!* Si1th Edition,
Tata *c!ra350ill Pu$lishing Company 7td., Ge3 Delhi
DISCLAIMER
This is a pure academic research 3ith no intention to promote or discourage any $rand of construction
e4uipments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are very grateful to the pro,ect authorities for providing the necessary data and co5operation to
carry out this research 3or%.