Guild of Project Controls: Compendium | Roles | Assessment | Certifications | Membership

Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

Negative Lag

6 replies [Last post]
raed hussein
User offline. Last seen 11 years 8 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 29 May 2007
Posts: 17
Groups: None

is there any restriction to use relationship FS with negative lag (exp FS Lag = - 3days) 

Replies

Feng Benjamin
User offline. Last seen 2 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Feb 2011
Posts: 12
Groups: None

If the concern is regarding a requirement to have an activity occuring X days before the completion of another, try applying the primary constraint "as late as possible" to the activity with FS(X) lag to the successor activity

If your completion date moves, (earlier or later) the Meeting Notification activity will move correspondingly.

This would be preferable to a FS negative lag.

Raymund de Laza
User offline. Last seen 8 weeks 1 day ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 762

Hi,

Do not ever use negative lag. Experiences will prove the disadvantage.

Gary Whitehead
User offline. Last seen 5 years 10 weeks ago. Offline

It is rare that FS (or indeed any relationship type) with neagtive lag is a good idea.

Please desribe the activities involved and the reason you want to use negative lag, and we can advise the correct relationships.

 

Cheers,

 

G

raed hussein
User offline. Last seen 11 years 8 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 29 May 2007
Posts: 17
Groups: None

but if i use FS Zero lag also affect the critical activities and consultant accept to use FS zero lag and not accept to use FS with negative lag is it correct ?

Feng Benjamin
User offline. Last seen 2 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Feb 2011
Posts: 12
Groups: None

Each relationship in a plan has a meaning.

FS refers to a Finish to Start relationship which states that a process needs to be completed before another can begin. By putting in a negative lag. what this means is that a process can only begin 3 days before the previous will complete.

If that is what you wish to express, then yes it is possible to use such a relationship. However this is generally not agreeable to most planners as the negative lag will have an impact on your critical path.

If however the relationship you want to express is a parallel one, which means that both actives can be run concurrently, then it would be more preferable to use a Start to Start (SS) or a Finish to Finish (FF) relationship with positive lag.

Alain De leon
User offline. Last seen 8 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 18
Groups: None

You must use  SS and (+) Log, (-) Lag can affect your critical activity