Website Upgrade Incoming - we're working on a new look (and speed!) standby while we deliver the project

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.

SS FF relationships...& progress updation

1 reply [Last post]
Thu, 2010-05-06 11:11
Shareef Abdul Azeez
User offline. Last seen 3 years 22 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 19 Sep 2005
Posts: 183
Groups: Civil Engineering, GPC Qatar
Hello....

Consider the Situation.

Activity 1 - Unclassified Excavation - 150days
Activity 2 - Excavate to lay storm water pipe - 45 days
Activity 3 - Lay Pipes - 30 days

Now the execution would be like Unclassifed excavation starts on and after a lag of say 7 days Excavation for pipeline starts and once again after a lag of 7 days from Excavation for pipeline Laying Pipes start; all activities running parallel.
ie the relation ships are:

Activity 1 (SS Lag 7) Activity 2
Activity 1 (FF Lag 2) Activity 2

Activity 2 (SS Lag 7) Activity 3
Activity 2 (FF Lag 2) Activity 3

Now once scheduled the dates are held by the Finish Links
(driving) as such the start dates of Activity 2 & Activity 3 would be later than what was actually intended with the SS Lag.

One solution now is to break up the activities into two or three parts.

Now suppose I dont break it up and go ahead and try to update the schedule....

Suppose Activity 1 starts as planned now after a week (7days) Activity 2 starts as such I give an actual start date to the activity and now I use remaining duration to update the progress. But now you see the FF driving relation still exists and as such my acivity duration increases from 30 days to some where around 145 days
(150-7+2). I thought I would use suspend and resume function of P3 but once again the programme permits suspend and resume on an activity only once.



Any comments on this situation??


Top

Replies

Thu, 2010-05-06 15:39
#1
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 2 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 5241
Groups: Spider Project Team
Split updating r1

Under discontinuous updating you should get the above, the software should respect driving logic relationships as well as resource dependancies, should respect multiple splits each with different start and finish dates, different costs, quantities, volume of work …etc, and it should display true remaining duration where it belongs as per CPM computations.

The following is a sample of an even more discountinuous update, if this is how it happened this is what you should report.

UCE

I believed only SureTrak would allow for a single split while P3 would allow for multiple splits.

P3 have an option to automate activity splitting but is kind of rudimentary, details are lost, and must be applied to all or none. The correct way is for you to decide when and how to split. Whenever you have a FF relationship you should investigate the possibility of the need for splitting, then you decide on a per activity basis if splitting or not, in how many segments and how long each segment.

In the event you decide to split the activity, the updating of your activities should allow you to display discontinuous actuals on each segment.
Top