Heathrow Airport Project Evaluation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Heathrow Airport Project Evaluation - Essay Example This meant some of the Star Alliance airlines having their operations at terminal 2 and 3 would have to move to terminal 1. Completion of this project on time would enable Heathrow Airport, which currently caters for 90 airlines, to rise up to more than 180 airlines worldwide. Though completing the project on the laid timeline was one of the most important things, there were other factors that had to be considered, including the safety and health issues (BAA, 2012). This was important because the terminal was to be used by passengers, and their needs came first. All factors had to be considered so as to maintain the reputation of BAA to the stakeholders , the public, and the media. The passage of terminal 1 may lead to delays which could cause not only significant penalties but also loss of other clients. A project manager, David Buisson, was chosen to manage the project as he was a certified project manager who also had more than 13 years of working experience as a manger in various challenging and complex projects (BAA, 2012). Mr. Buisson had worked with teams of professionals from various places around the world, including professionals from industries who were skilled enough to tackle major transport and communication projects. Using the experience developed from many years of experience and meeting different people around the world, Mr. Buisson had the required sufficient knowledge to choose a team that would be able to complete the project in the required timeline. The teams chosen would be required to collaborate and make the success of the project the most important thing they do. They should also remember the safety of the project as it is supposed to serve millions of people and for decades of years to come. Planning Approaches Planning and survey are a continuous process wh ich may take time before being implemented. There are three proven planning approaches for projects which include top-down execution and responsibility; top-down policy and bottom-up planning and execution; and bottom-up execution and responsibility (Kerzner, 2000). The top down execution and responsibility is the department responsible for coordinating and planning of procedures and policies. The management in this approach is centralized as it involves a few people making decisions for the rest of the team (Cooke-Davies, 2000). In this case, the stakeholders are informed of the proceedings of the project and they make the decisions of whether the project would still be done or not. They decide whether the request for time extensions would be necessary, whether additional resources would make any changes to the project and they make conclusions without consulting the teams doing the project. This approach has its disadvantages as various departments may not get the special attentio n required to complete the project on time. Different teams may also not understand how they should relate to each other while trying to complete the project. The other approach is the bottom-up execution and responsibility which encourages each department to develop or come up with their ideas and implement plans without much supervision (Morris, 2004). In this approach, there is a manager in charge of them, but they only report to them in critical circumstances. In our case, the project manager encourages the team members to use the collaborative approach while solving various problems. This approach involves training various people as well as having different parties which can be expensive especially to big projects such as refurbishing Heathrow Airport Terminals. The last planning approach is the top down policy and bottom up planning and execution which have overall planning rules or guidelines which are

Soil Mechanics Lap Report Lab Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Soil Mechanics Lap - Lab Report Example rent laboratory tests, which were performed to determine various important mechanical properties and index of soils: Atterberg Limits, Visual classification, compaction (Moisture-Density relationship), Constant Head Method (Hydraulic Conductivity), Consolidation, and Unconfined Compression Test. This lab was performed with a view to determine the liquid and plastic limits of fine-grained soil. The LL (Liquid limit) is defined arbitrary as the water content expressed in percent, at which part of soil in a cut and standard cup by the groove of dimensions can flow together at a groove for 13 mm, when it is subjected to 25 shocks from a cup, which is being dropped from a distance of 10 mm in a standard LL apparatus operated at two shocks per second. The PL (Plastic Limit) refers to water content, expressed as a percentage, at which soil can be deformed any longer by rolling it into 3.2 mm diameter threads without crumbling. Porcelain dish, Liquid limit device, Flat grooving tool with gage, Balance, Spatula, Drying oven set at 150 degrees Celsius, Eight moisture cans, Wash bottle filled with distilled water, and Glass plate 1. About three quarters of the soil was taken and placed into the porcelain dish. The soil was thoroughly mixed with some small amounts of distilled water until a smooth uniform paste appeared. The cellophane was used to cover the dish in order to prevent moisture from getting out. 3. The liquid limit apparatus was adjusted by checking height of the drop of cup. The block which was the end of grooving tool was 10 mm high and was used as a gauge. Using the cup, the correct rate was determined by rotating the crank to drop the cup approximately 2 times per second. 4. A portion of previously mixed soil was placed into the cup containing the liquid limit apparatus at a point where the cup could rest on the base. The soil was squeezed down in order to eliminate air pockets and ensure it is spread into a cup to a 10 mm depth at its deepest point. 6.