when using more than 1 calendar the foalt valuse wil be different.
Some things such a as contractual milestones areare usually stated as having to be completed in X number of calendar days after NTP.
Planning you work duration in calendars days when you actually only working working days will not show the planned manpower requirement correct nor will it show the proper cash flow projections.
Best bet is to plan the work durations in working days. This way the manpower forecast and cash flow forecast will be accurate.
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Tue, 2006-07-04 15:33
The point is that the calendar is eternal, but the durations should remain the same, unless you decide to take measures to correct this, such as increasing working hours or resources, etc
Regards
Member for
21 years 2 months
Member for21 years2 months
Submitted by Henk van der Heide on Tue, 2006-07-04 15:10
I think building contingencies into the duration is as good (or as bad) as contingencies in the calender. However if the planner knows what hes doing it shouldnt be a problem.
The advantage of the calander thing is: When you should make a recovery plan you only have to change the calender for instant change 8 hrs working to 12 hours working. Then you have your basis for your acceleration plan.
When you use the duration way you need to adjust al the critical durations.
Kind Regards
Henk
Member for
21 years 2 months
Member for21 years2 months
Submitted by Henk van der Heide on Tue, 2006-07-04 15:05
It is important to put the right amount of float into a programme, but, the calendars is not the place to do it, contingencies should be built into the durations, this includes things, like learning curves, raindays, etc. If you allow everybody to build contingicies into calendars, you would end up with zero working days, or a million calendars.
Regards
Philip
Member for
21 years 2 months
Member for21 years2 months
Submitted by Henk van der Heide on Mon, 2006-07-03 17:42
I usualy have a 8 hours work calander. Yes this means that for the "normal"work you have 16 Hours of non work time.
for construction this time is often used for speeding up programms en activities that should take place when now one else is at side. However i think its important to be clear to the project team about the calanders that have been used because it gives the project manager a feeling about the "float"in the schedule.
Kind Regards
Henk
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Fri, 2006-06-30 18:02
Been through this argument on multiple occasssions, about 5 times today. Everybody wants to build as much float into their project as possible. The question is where to stop.... And this is where I will start another argument, do you allow for the the contingincies in your calendars or duratiohs????? This is an interesting question, as you may have to achieve 10 000lm/day and you have 200 000 so you you have 20 days, do you only allow 14 days a month or 21 days? If it is earthworks or tunnelling?
Member for
19 years 5 months
Member for19 years5 months
Submitted by Nigel Winkley on Fri, 2006-06-30 04:28
The main, useful, difference I find is for tendering type programmes where, say, you are not sure of the actual start date but do know the durations and logic.
If you use a normal calendar date then people can assume that you are definitely going to start on, say, 3rd July 2007.
If you use the week numbers, then it shows a pure schedule that, whilst having durations and times, does not show the definitive start dates. It does give people the overall length of the project, when things are going to happen, relatively, so they can see that 10 weeks after you start you are going to assemble the steelwork - or whatever. Exactly when that 10 weeks is, depends upon all sorts of things but they get the overall idea.
Member for
16 years 3 monthswhen using more than 1
when using more than 1 calendar the foalt valuse wil be different.
Some things such a as contractual milestones areare usually stated as having to be completed in X number of calendar days after NTP.
Planning you work duration in calendars days when you actually only working working days will not show the planned manpower requirement correct nor will it show the proper cash flow projections.
Best bet is to plan the work durations in working days. This way the manpower forecast and cash flow forecast will be accurate.
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Henk,
The point is that the calendar is eternal, but the durations should remain the same, unless you decide to take measures to correct this, such as increasing working hours or resources, etc
Regards
Member for
21 years 2 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Philip,
I think building contingencies into the duration is as good (or as bad) as contingencies in the calender. However if the planner knows what hes doing it shouldnt be a problem.
The advantage of the calander thing is: When you should make a recovery plan you only have to change the calender for instant change 8 hrs working to 12 hours working. Then you have your basis for your acceleration plan.
When you use the duration way you need to adjust al the critical durations.
Kind Regards
Henk
Member for
21 years 2 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Philip,
Betekend dit dat we verder kunnen gaan in het Nederlands
Groeten,
Henk
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Henk
PS, Donner en Bliksem hebt julle nou al te luijbuisen, from the Scheepsjongens de Bontekoe
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Hi Henk,
It is important to put the right amount of float into a programme, but, the calendars is not the place to do it, contingencies should be built into the durations, this includes things, like learning curves, raindays, etc. If you allow everybody to build contingicies into calendars, you would end up with zero working days, or a million calendars.
Regards
Philip
Member for
21 years 2 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
I usualy have a 8 hours work calander. Yes this means that for the "normal"work you have 16 Hours of non work time.
for construction this time is often used for speeding up programms en activities that should take place when now one else is at side. However i think its important to be clear to the project team about the calanders that have been used because it gives the project manager a feeling about the "float"in the schedule.
Kind Regards
Henk
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Hi Julia,
Been through this argument on multiple occasssions, about 5 times today. Everybody wants to build as much float into their project as possible. The question is where to stop.... And this is where I will start another argument, do you allow for the the contingincies in your calendars or duratiohs????? This is an interesting question, as you may have to achieve 10 000lm/day and you have 200 000 so you you have 20 days, do you only allow 14 days a month or 21 days? If it is earthworks or tunnelling?
Member for
19 years 5 monthsRE: Calendar days vs Work days
Julia
The main, useful, difference I find is for tendering type programmes where, say, you are not sure of the actual start date but do know the durations and logic.
If you use a normal calendar date then people can assume that you are definitely going to start on, say, 3rd July 2007.
If you use the week numbers, then it shows a pure schedule that, whilst having durations and times, does not show the definitive start dates. It does give people the overall length of the project, when things are going to happen, relatively, so they can see that 10 weeks after you start you are going to assemble the steelwork - or whatever. Exactly when that 10 weeks is, depends upon all sorts of things but they get the overall idea.
Hope this helps
Cheers
Nige