Schedule Management in Building Automation System Retrofit Projects

Daniel Lacerda de Souza; Luciano Azevedo de Souza

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602805

Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the E&S Magazine with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute for textual synthesis and organization.

Abstract

The management of schedules in automation retrofit projects for occupied commercial buildings presented specific challenges, due to the need to reconcile the execution of activities with the continuous operation of the environment, including restrictions such as nighttime interventions and dependence on releases for execution. The study analyzed the schedule of a real automation retrofit project for building systems, focusing on Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC), executed over six months in a large commercial building in operation in the city of São Paulo. Through direct project monitoring, five successive schedule revisions were analyzed, considering the level of activity detail, replanning capacity, and impact on deadline control. The results showed that the progressive refinement of the schedule, combined with weekly revisions with the client and structured communication between teams, contributed to recovering delays in the delivery of imported equipment, which presented a 14-day delay, and to meeting project milestones within the established deadline. The experience demonstrated that the schedule, when treated dynamically and adaptatively, acted as an instrument of control, alignment, and predictability in projects with high operational complexity.

Keywords: Occupied environment; Deadline management; PMBOK; Replanning; HVAC retrofit.

1. Introduction

Retrofit projects for building automation, focusing on the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) discipline, have become increasingly frequent in corporate buildings. This trend is driven by the need to modernize automated systems, aiming to improve operational performance, optimize thermal comfort, and reduce maintenance costs (Filho, 2016).

The concept of retrofit, in this context, refers to the modernization of obsolete or discontinued systems and equipment through the technological updating of existing buildings. The objective is to improve the overall performance and extend the useful life of these constructions (Rocha; Qualharini, 2001). Many buildings erected in the 1990s, for example, still operate with outdated technologies, which can result in low-precision temperature sensors, data communication delays, and operational limitations.

The modernization of these systems, however, increases the complexity of projects in terms of planning and execution. Additional care is required to mitigate risks and ensure that the operational comfort of users is not compromised. Technical standards, such as ABNT NBR 16401, establish guidelines for thermal comfort in air-conditioned environments, underscoring the importance of well-designed and managed building automation systems.

Effective building automation can generate a significant increase in energy efficiency, in addition to allowing more precise control of thermal comfort conditions for occupants, which can be associated with productivity gains. Additionally, modern equipment tends to decrease maintenance costs, offering greater precision and faster responses in communication with other installed peripherals (Filho, 2016).

Given the complexity inherent in these modernization projects, the need for a structured planning system becomes evident. The Project Management Institute (2017) highlights, in the sixth edition of the PMBOK, that schedule management is fundamental for deadline control, risk management, and effective communication throughout project execution. Authors like Kerzner (2017) reinforce that detailed planning and continuous control are crucial elements for the success of complex undertakings.

Schedule management in building automation retrofit projects faces specific challenges, such as client operational constraints, material delivery deadlines, and the need for alignment among various stakeholders. In occupied and operational commercial building environments, these particularities, which include interventions during alternative hours and dependence on permits for activities, require a more structured and adaptive planning approach.

In this context, schedules with a low level of detail can hinder the monitoring of activities and adaptation to real project conditions, compromising decision-making. The absence of adequate detailing can prevent the early identification of deviations, reducing the team’s ability to respond to unforeseen events and impairing continuous control over the progress of activities. Understanding how the level of schedule detail influences the control and predictability of deadlines is, therefore, of great practical and theoretical relevance.

This work aims to analyze how the level of detail in the schedule impacts deadline control in a building automation retrofit project, focusing on HVAC, carried out in an operational commercial building over six months.

2. Material and Methods

The research was characterized as a case study of an applied nature, with a qualitative approach and descriptive-analytical character. The applied nature was justified by starting from a real situation experienced by the author, aiming to generate knowledge for the solution of practical problems in project management (GIL, 2002). The qualitative approach was employed to understand phenomena in depth, without statistically quantifying them (CRESWELL, 2010).

The descriptive character was manifested in the description of the schedule’s characteristics and behavior throughout the project execution, relating them to the real environmental conditions and the decisions made by the teams. The analytical character was evidenced in the comparison between the schedule versions and in the evaluation of the replanning strategies adopted.

The research strategy adopted was the case study (YIN, 2015). The central unit of analysis was the schedule of a building automation retrofit project, focusing on Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC), carried out in a large commercial building in operation in the city of São Paulo.

The analyzed retrofit project involved the replacement of approximately 35 Variable Air Volume (VAV) controllers and about 200 temperature sensors, distributed across seven floors. It also included the replacement of seven fan coil controllers and seven chilled water valves in common areas, in addition to hydraulic services and software and license updates for the automation system.

The study was based on the author’s practical experience, as he directly participated in the project, configuring a participant observation approach. This condition enabled continuous monitoring of activities and access to detailed information about the planning, execution, and schedule revisions over six months.

To complement the case study, a systematic literature review was conducted. The objective was to identify the main factors of delay in construction projects and their relationship with schedule management. The search was conducted in the Scopus database, using the search string: (“project delay” OR “schedule delay”) AND construction AND scheduling.

Initially, 243 articles were identified. After filtering by document type, period (2018–2026), areas (engineering, business, and energy), and language (English), 106 articles were selected. Screening by titles and abstracts resulted in 30 studies, of which 13 were selected for detailed analysis.

Data collection for the case study was carried out through direct monitoring of the project. It included the elaborated schedule and its revised versions throughout the execution, as well as records of weekly meetings with the client and operational communications related to the progress of activities.

The initial schedule was developed in Microsoft Excel, covering the main project stages at a simpler level of detail, such as equipment approval, acquisition, and delivery, execution, and completion. Excel was the standard tool adopted by the company for schedule development.

Throughout the six months of project execution, five periodic schedule reviews were carried out. These reviews aimed to increase the level of detail of the activities, adapting to factors such as delays in equipment delivery and operational restrictions imposed by the client.

Client interactions occurred through weekly meetings, held throughout the entire six-month project period. These meetings allowed for continuous alignment between the automation team and the client, as well as monitoring of activities and decision-making.

For the case study analysis, the activity definitions, level of detail, established deadlines, and weekly reviews were considered. The impacts of delays in equipment delivery, especially those of imported origin, and the strategies for reallocating activities were also evaluated.

The data analysis was conducted qualitatively, through comparison between the schedule versions and interpretation of the events observed throughout the project execution. We sought to identify patterns and the impacts of replanning decisions on schedule control.

In this context, schedule revisions and adopted replanning strategies were considered, as well as their impacts on execution, especially regarding deadline compliance. The methodology allowed for the analysis of the schedule’s evolution throughout the project, considering its impacts on activity management, communication, and decision-making.

To preserve confidentiality and institutional anonymity, no data that could identify the company, client, or venture were presented. The data were used exclusively for academic purposes and treated in an aggregated manner, ensuring the necessary ethical considerations.

3. Results and Discussion

The analysis of the research results allowed for an in-depth understanding of schedule management in automation retrofit projects in occupied environments, highlighting the relevance of the level of detail and replanning strategies. Initially, the literature review identified the main delay factors in construction projects, providing a theoretical framework for interpreting the challenges observed in the case study. These factors, categorized into planning, management, labor, supplies, risk management, and external factors, are recurrent in the literature and often interdependent, which amplifies the complexity of deadline control and requires an integrated approach.

The delay factors identified in the literature, such as inadequate planning, lack of detail, and absence of periodic reviews, are frequently cited by authors like Viles et al. (2020) and Türkakın et al. (2020). Communication failures and slow decision-making, in turn, are pointed out by Hosaini and Singla (2019) as critical elements in project management. Delays in material delivery and problems with suppliers, according to Mbala et al. (2019), also represent significant challenges. Insufficient risk analysis and mitigation, as well as the absence of contingency plans, are highlighted by Koulinas et al. (2020), while operational approvals and restrictions are relevant external factors, according to Rachid et al. (2019). This theoretical consolidation aligns directly with the practical challenges faced in the analyzed retrofit project, reinforcing the universality of these problems.

Project Characteristics

The retrofit project analyzed focused on the partial modernization of the building automation system, specifically in the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) discipline. Interventions included the replacement of approximately 35 Variable Air Volume (VAV) controllers and about 200 temperature sensors, distributed across the client’s seven private floors. In the building’s common areas, seven fan coil controllers and seven chilled water valves were replaced, which required complex hydraulic services. Finally, the project involved updating software and licenses, implementing a new automation network architecture for the seven floors, demonstrating the scope’s breadth and technical complexity.

The diversity of stages, which included engineering, equipment supply, installation, programming, and commissioning, and the participation of partner companies in specific activities, such as infrastructure and hydraulics, contributed to the complexity of planning and coordination. This multiplicity of work fronts and the interdependence between activities reinforced the need for a robust and detailed schedule. The management of a project with these characteristics requires not only the organization of tasks but also effective integration among the different agents involved to ensure alignment and adherence to deadlines.

Context and Organizational Structure

The project was executed in a context of high expectation from the client, resulting from scope revisions and reductions in previous years. Although the company responsible for the implementation had not participated in the initial stages, the client’s demands and monitoring were intense throughout the entire execution. In this scenario, the schedule transcended its function as a mere planning tool, becoming a central instrument for communication and alignment among all stakeholders, as advocated by the PMBOK® (PMI, 2017), which emphasizes the importance of stakeholder management.

The project’s organizational structure involved the technical team, third-party companies, and the client, each with different levels of influence and expectations. This dynamic can be understood as part of the company’s environmental factors (CEF), which shape planning and execution (PMI, 2017). Schedules, weekly meeting minutes, and communication logs served as organizational process assets (OPA), fundamental for replanning decisions. The distribution of responsibilities among management, engineering, execution, and commissioning, with the dependency on client and building administration validations, introduced additional variables to the planning, especially regarding activity release and documentation approval.

Initial Planning and Limitations

The initial project planning considered two distinct fronts of action: the client’s internal areas and the building’s common areas, due to different requirements for activity release, documentation, and operational restrictions. Activities in common areas depended on the building administration’s approval, often requiring execution outside business hours. In the client’s internal areas, interventions needed to occur with the system in operation, demanding night and weekend work to minimize operational impact, which added a layer of complexity to the planning.

The initial schedule was developed at a macro level, with 23 activities distributed into four sections: Pre-execution, Private Area Scope, Condominium Area Scope, and Assisted Operation. However, the lack of detail per floor limited the visualization of the actual progress of activities and compromised the schedule’s control capacity. This initial approach, with durations estimated broadly and based on supplier deadlines and general execution estimates, did not contemplate the project’s operational complexity, which aligns with literature pointing to inadequate planning and lack of detail as delay factors (Yin, 2015).

It was found that the initial schedule lacked adequate float for potential delays, a critical factor that manifested with a 14-day delay in the delivery of imported equipment. This delay directly impacted the planning, requiring a new schedule revision and highlighting the need for a more cautious approach in defining deadlines for equipment with external dependencies. The absence of more granular detail, such as segmentation by floor, hindered early identification of deviations and agile decision-making to mitigate impacts, compromising project predictability.

Challenges and Replanning Strategies

During the project execution, significant challenges were identified, such as delays in equipment delivery, the need for activity clearance from building administration, and operational restrictions in the occupied environment. These factors, widely discussed in the literature as common causes of delay related to supply logistics and dependence on external agents, impacted the schedule’s progress and required continuous planning adjustments. Proactive management of these challenges was crucial for the project’s success.

Faced with this scenario, replanning strategies were implemented based on weekly schedule reviews with the client, in addition to anticipating necessary documentation for the release of future activities. The 14-day delay in the delivery of imported equipment was recovered by reorganizing the deadlines for activities by floor. This strategy was made possible by the detailed breakdown of the schedule by floor, which allowed us to identify which floors were available for the teams, enabling the anticipation of tasks and keeping the overall schedule within the planned deadline, demonstrating the value of progressive detailing as a management and control tool.

The weekly reviews with the client were essential to ensure greater transparency in project monitoring and for making quick and appropriate decisions. Structured communication between teams also contributed significantly, centralizing information and reducing rework. This approach is in line with the recommendations of the PMBOK® (PMI, 2017) in the areas of Communications Management and Risk Management, which emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring and effective communication for controlling project execution. The ability to replan, in projects with multiple external agents, proved to be directly proportional to the level of detail in the schedule.

Schedule Evolution and Results

The evolution of the schedule, from initial planning to the final version, was remarkable, with the number of activities increasing from 23 to 73, a 217% rise in the level of detail. Generic activities, such as “Start of replacements,” were broken down by floor, generating individual sub-activities for each level. This segmentation allowed for precise progress tracking on each work front, reflecting a maturation of the planning throughout execution and a transition from a generic model to one more aligned with the project’s operational reality.

In addition to the breakdown by floor, new activities were incorporated into the scope, including server and manager licensing, training for operating the new graphical screens, and offline programming of the fan coil controller. This progressive enhancement of the schedule not only accompanied the execution of activities but also acted as an active tool for control and decision-making support. The segmentation of activities and the detailing of execution times allowed for more precise monitoring, making it possible to re-evaluate and reorganize activities whenever delays occurred, thus maintaining compliance with established deadlines.

The evolution of schedule performance was analyzed based on the progress of activities, changes in dates, identified deviations, and replanning actions. A progressive recovery from the initial delay was observed throughout the schedule reviews, indicating an improvement in deadline management and an increase in schedule performance, as discussed in the project management literature. The comparison between the schedule versions highlighted the change in the tool’s usage, which shifted from static planning to a dynamic instrument, constantly adjusted to real execution conditions.

This transition to a dynamic schedule, aligned with the monitoring and control practices described by the PMBOK® (PMI, 2017), contributed significantly to the improvement of deadline control and predictability. The final result demonstrated that the adopted strategies were effective, as the project was completed within the originally established deadline, with all 73 activities of the final version of the schedule finalized with 100% progress. The formal delivery was made in an in-person meeting the week after the activities concluded, confirming the success of the approach.

In general, the results observed in the study are consistent with the literature findings, which indicate that factors such as inadequate planning, communication failures, third-party dependencies, and operational constraints are associated with schedule deviations in projects. Practical experience has shown that increasing the level of schedule detail, combined with periodic reviews and structured communication, contributed to the predictability and control of deadlines in a building automation retrofit project in an occupied commercial building, responding to the study’s central objective.

4. Conclusion

The study analyzed the impact of the schedule detail level on deadline control in a building automation retrofit project, focusing on HVAC, carried out in an operational commercial building. It was found that the initial planning, with 23 macro-level activities, presented significant limitations for monitoring and control, especially in the face of a 14-day delay in the delivery of imported equipment. However, through weekly reviews with the client and anticipation of documentation, a replanning was implemented that detailed the schedule by floor. This approach allowed for the reorganization of activities and the recovery of the delay, culminating in the project’s completion within the originally established deadline. The evolution of the schedule, which came to include 73 activities, demonstrated that progressive refinement and structured communication between teams were crucial for predictability and deadline control.

The main contribution of this work lies in demonstrating that the schedule, when treated as a dynamic and adaptive instrument, acts as an essential tool for control, alignment, and decision-making support in projects with high operational complexity, such as retrofit projects in occupied environments. It was observed that the increase in the level of planning detail is directly associated with improved control and predictability of deadlines. As a limitation, it should be noted that the study was based on a single case, which restricts the statistical generalization of the results, and did not apply formal quantitative performance analysis methods. For future studies, it is suggested to apply methodologies such as Earned Value Management (EVM) and replicate the research in retrofit projects from other building automation disciplines, as well as in buildings of different sizes and segments, to broaden the evidence base.

Bibliographic References

CRESWELL, John W. Projeto de pesquisa: métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2010.

FILHO, Claudio Veja Dourado. Sistema de automação predial. 2016. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Graduação em Engenharia Elétrica) — Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, 2016.

GIL, Antonio Carlos. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2002.

HOSAINI, Sayed Behbood; SINGLA, Sandeep. Significant factors of delay in construction projects in Afghanistan. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, v. 17, n. 6, p. 1243-1260, 2019.

KERZNER, Harold. Gestão de projetos: as melhores práticas. 4. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2017.

KOULINAS, Georgios K.; XANTHOPOULOS, Alexandros S.; TSILIPIRAS, Thomas T.; KOULOURIOTIS, Dimitrios E. Schedule delay risk analysis in construction projects with a simulation-based expert system. Buildings, v. 10, n. 8, p. 134, 2020.

MBALA, Mbuyamba; AIGBAVBOA, Clinton; ALIU, John. Causes of delay in various construction projects: a literature review. Procedia Engineering, v. 196, p. 818–825, 2019.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE (PMI). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). 6. ed. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute, 2017.

RACHID, Zemra; TOUFIK, Boudouh; MOHAMMED, Baheddi. Causes of schedule delays in construction projects in Algeria. International Journal of Construction Management, v. 19, n. 5, p. 371-381, 2019.

ROCHA, C. G.; QUALHARINI, E. L. Retrofit de edificações: uma alternativa para a modernização de edificações existentes. In: CONGRESSO DA CONSTRUÇÃO, 2001, Lisboa. Anais […]. Lisboa: Congresso da Construção, 2001.

TÜRKAKIN, Osman Hürol; MANİSALI, Ekrem; ARDITI, David. Delay analysis in construction projects with no updated work schedules. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, v. 146, n. 9, 2020.

VILES, Elisabeth; RUDELI, Natalia Carolina; SANTILLI, Adrian. Causes of delay in construction projects: a quantitative analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, v. 27, n. 4, p. 917–935, 2020.

YIN, Robert K. Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. 5. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2015.

Article originating from the Final Course Work of the Specialization in Project Management of the MBA USP/Esalq

To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform