Update 5
Feb 15th, 2012 by evergreenplanter
Update 5:
Since the last week of ours has been without any news for our CSL project, we will post more updates for this in our final blog post. In this update, we will discuss similarities and differences with regards to Project Management in CIVL 201/202. We have begun on an extra project for Susan this week, of which one picture is posted in this blog; however, the contents of this will not be discussed here. Here is a tidbit of it…
Water Fountain of “secret” relevance.
Project Management Compare and Contrast:
The question of “Why does the organization want the project?” is clearly answered in CIVL 202. Each team has a community client who has a certain need for a project that students are fulfilling. In our case, we are building planter boxes for Evergreen.
However, in CIVL 201, we had a fictitious project which really served no utilitarian purpose compared to the cost of this project. An overpass would never be built in this situational context, and none of the interaction with the client or any real external force was encountered.
The question of “What are the scope objectives of this project?” or the measurable design criteria are very precise in CIVL 202. Our boxes were required to be certain depths, widths, and materials in order to accommodate for the planting and longevity of trees.
In CIVL 201, these scope objectives were much more “loose”. The bridge had to meet some code specifications and traverse the required intersection. There was a lot more room for “creative thought”.
The question of “What are the project constraints?” in CIVL 202 encompasses some pre-determined dimensions, tree-friendly materials, and costs.
In CIVL 201, there were not too many constraints aside from building code specifications and geographical ones. In the design of an overpass, the major constraints would be cost and rigorous design guidelines. None of the aforementioned were encompassed into our “design” in this course, as it was really just a fictitious structure with no regard to engineering of it. If there was encompassing of actual calculations in the course, the activity would’ve been more successful.
The project timetable can be seen in Update 3. All projects, or at least the successful execution of them, require a planned and cyclic monitoring of process objectives and benchmarks.
You’ve shown insight into project management by comparing the two assignments. Do you think the differences are fundamentally related to the different scales of the two projects? Do you think you’ve gained appreciation for huge civil engineering projects like the Three Gorges Dam and Boston’s “big dig”?
That’s a tantalizing photo of the water fountain!
Regards,
SN