Rafael

Why don’t you download a copy of Micro Planner X-Pert from my UK web site. While it is a sampler it is quite big enough to run a small project and you will have everythinh you want to do at NO cost to you or the boss. And you will enjoy all those lovely things that you obviously remember.
Yes the deasdly embrace I remember it well

Micro Planner Manager runs up to 1350 tasks with all the things you want. E-Mail me at raf@microplanning.com.au and I will give a great price for a copy

Raf

Raphael:

We usually keep is as simple as we can. We generally use only two calendars, one for the standard work week and one in calendar days for a hammock that spans the whole project duration.

That is the secret, manage the problem, not fudge the answer through multiple calendars, I agree. But I still believe in choices, the more you have the better, not everyone has the same scheduling needs, that is why I did not even dared to question Mustafa needs for link calendars.

I miss a lot Microplanner, my MAC version could handle both, Activity on Arrow and Activity on Node, you could not switch for one to the other at a click of the mouse but you had the options. If Microplanner can still handle both using the mathematical computations from the Arrow arithmetic, why not others? I believe they should follow.

I got a copy of the book Faster Construction Projects With CPM Scheduling by Murray w. foreword by Obrien. I am just starting with my reading but at first glance seem like at home we are doing what Murray proposes.

We are small to medium sized Contractors that can handle our Schedules with 300 to 600 activities, of course as long as the owner does not pretend to make the schedule a substitute of a Submittal Log with hundreds of items, just long lead, critical and near critical submittals should do it. We usually do not resource load our schedules but include some logic into the schedule to solve this issue as algorithms at times will go unpredictably the other way. I do resource load the schedule on my own as to verify if we solved all relevant over allocation issues. We do not use WBS we use Activity Codes. We do not Cost Load our Schedules unless forced by the specs to satisfy the Owners desire for an S curve that will never happen. Some contractors do have accounting software that can link Job Costing to Schedules like Timberline, we do not use this feature even when available. In summary if the schedule becomes too complicated it will end at the Porto lets where the job superintendant will make good use of it.

When at those committee meetings remember us, small contractors, what you say and discuss is relevant to everyone.

Cordially,
Rafael

By the way my regards to The Deadly Embrace

Mike

I tried your e-mail address and the following occurred

Your message did not reach some or all of the intended recipients.

Subject: E-Mail Ref MPI2009062201 - Raf Papers
Sent: 22/06/2009 9:30 PM

The following recipient(s) could not be reached:

’planning.services@xlninternet.co.uk.’ on 22/06/2009 9:31 PM
501 : domain missing or malformed


Fancy your ISP doing that to an honorary Aus
Send me an e-mail ro Raf@microplanning.com.au and I will send you a reply.

Is there a limit to your mailbox?

Raf

Mike

Oh, Iam sorry, being an honorary OZ is probably the highest honour that can be bestowed on somebody who is (by his own admission) not a planner. :-)

My objection to SS & FF in Precedence diagrams; is that the folk who sell the software have absolutly no idea about lag drag, which is the problem with this technique.

At least Microsoft has not got the problem because they can’t even do SS and FF on the same task.

When using SS (Lead) and FF(Lag) in an arrow diagram the game is different and the two activities that are connected have to described differently as do the lead and lags. So in ICT we invented Ladders to overcome the math problem that IBM threw up with it’s precedence software on the 7090 PERT system. (Are you old enough to remember the 7090 - it was a big favourite with the old CEGB, until ICT sold them 1900’s to run ICT 1900 PERT)

The reason for Ladders came about when in early 1960’s construction companies like George Wimpey, Marples, Taylor Woodrow, Costain, wanted a method of overlapping activities in order to shorten the amount of time a series of interdependent activities took. It was an early form of programme acceleration.

I have written a simple book on Basic Critical Path - well not recently, would you believe 1965, of which I have given away heaps. It fully explains how Ladders works and shows the math behind the calculations. If as a Construction person you would like to learn how a Pommy company beat the world, let know by givimg me your e-mail address and I will happily give you a copy

Our friends the Americans were .....I believe the word is ....Gobsmacked ... when at the PMICOS in Boston last May I described lag drag problem that had never heard of, and all it’s horrible results in P3, Open Plan, etc.

Especially the folk who do Construction Delay Claims, as now they understood the reasons for some jurisdictions in the US for banning the use of SS and FF links as well as negative FS links in programmes (Mostly P3 I might add)

Already since my earlier posting I have had twenty direct e-mails requesting copies of my PMI paper. So there is some hope yet

We must catch up next time I am in the UK, which is generally on an annual basis.

By the way CIOB have in their recent publications on how to do Critical Path included Ladders!

Raf

Rafael

I forgot to add to my previous post as you miss your beloved MAC, you can still use Micro Planner X-Pert using dare I say it .... Windows .... download it off my UK page
www.microplanner.co.uk

Another thing that amuses me is why people want a lead or lag to have a different calendar. If you say it is because you want a duration between two Tasks, then you really should use a Dummy task, with as Mike says a plain old FS no duration same calendar as all the data.

I am further amused at the absolute precision arithmetically that all the young planners today are able to plan a schedule for whatever 100% correctly, no room for doubt or error. Gee I wish it was that easy as Mike will testify, some of my bigger and better projects have gone 15 years in duration with durations in hours and we thought that being + or - minus 3% (the statistical error of estimating) we were absolutely Gods !. Well we built all 6 submarins to the original forecast milestone dates. Spot on, but then we did use Micro Planner for the MAC, and never created a schedule so big it could not be managed.
That is the secret, manage the problem , not fudge ithe answer through multiple calendars

Raf

Hi Mustafa

I hope you have picked up a bit of information following your original thread.

It happens in PP that threads often go off at wild tangents.

This is good so long as it is controlled.

Rafael and I have a history of "Knock About" debate.

We are both better off for it.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Mustafa,

I am sorry we diverted the discussion but I would like to highlight my previous comment about the issue of multiple links from a single predecessor not being transferred from P6 into MS Project, a warning in good faith just in case. If this happened this might also make your schedule dates to differ.

Best regards,
Rafael

Hi Rafael

What happens when you have a lead lag link 20 days into a 50 day task and you enter 50% progress.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Mustapha

Here we go again.

You cannot have a true critical path when there are lead lag links between tasks.

Here are my basic rules for a proper bottom up plan.

1. One trade only per task
2. One work front only for that trade - no other trades allowed.
3. Finish - Start Links only.
4. Every task must have at least one outgoing link.
5. No task should be longer than 10 days.
6. No restraint flags.

Have a look at the earlier thread - Ban These Planning Abominations - where you will find that I won the debate.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Rafael

Its not rubbish software - its rubbish programmes produced by lazy planners.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Hi Rafael

Thats fine by me - rubbish programmes create work for delay analysts.

Please continue and pay my pension.

Best regards

Mike Testro.

Hi Rafael

You are not succeeding in winding me up.

With a properly constructed Bottom Up programme lead lags are not needed.

Use of lead lags to set up task overlaps is the sign of a lazy planner.

They create a distortions on the critical path and are an abomination.

Stop using them NOW.

Best regards

Mike Testro

I understand you very well, in this regard the functionality of P6 excels, let see if someone else give us the answer.

Now it is two of us who are looking for the answer.

It surprises me you are not having issues with double linking.

Mustafa,

I am new to MS Project, in my way to learn the software I get my nose everywhere. I have the following idea that might do the trick in case you do not find a direct way.

Between the predecessor and successor tasks insert a "dummy" task with 0 duration and then assign the calendar of the predecessor task to this new "dummy" task, now predecessor and successor share the same calendar, or even assign whichever calendar you wish.

In my attempt to do within MS Project what I am used to do with Primavera Suretrack I applied a similar approach to mimic linking a predecessor task twice to the same successor task with a ss and a ff link. Microplanner for the MAC used to call it "ladder activities", you culd do it at a single click of the mouse, good to make jumping those who do not like the idea.

Best regards,
Rafael