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.

S-S Relationship with different dates

26 replies [Last post]
Sat, 2007-07-28 09:40
ulysses garcia
User offline. Last seen 14 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 259
Groups: GPC Qatar
Hi,
Is it theoritically correct to have start to start (SS) relationship with different early start dates in each activities.

Suppose activity A will start today, then activity B will start after one week with SS relationship.
How can it be? Did you experience submittal like this? needs help..
Top

Replies

Wed, 2007-09-12 20:54
#1
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
Line of balance and critical path.
Two different means to an end???
Top
Wed, 2007-09-12 20:53
#2
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
Vladamir

I did not say SS was a problem if you did this

"In an SS relationship unless you % constrain the start of the second activity you get a logic problem. You could for example have completed 80% of the pipework but not installed the lengths that require to be cut to install the valves."

Its when there is no relationship to progress that I have a problem with.
Top
Wed, 2007-09-12 09:13
#3
vikas agrawal
User offline. Last seen 6 years 3 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Aug 2007
Posts: 18
Groups: Building Information Modelling
nigel,

perhaps your contractor used the Line of Balance approach. This kind of approach is good for repetitive jobs (which have little element of uncertainty) eg different typical floors of a building.

In such a case the critical path would probably be passing through the SS lags. However when the project finish date is affected this critical path may go through some SS lags and through the body of the network it may pass through the FF lags.

This is the reason free float must be monitored at each update
Top
Wed, 2007-09-12 07:46
#4
Vladimir Liberzon
User offline. Last seen 17 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 5 Feb 2001
Posts: 2753
Groups: Accreditation Editors, Board of Advisors, Civil Engineering, GPCCAR Editors, Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, Regional Representatives, Spider Project Team, TURNAROUND & SHUTDOWN (T/A & S/D)
Clive,
in pipeleine construction project Ditching, Welding, Coating, Lowering to Ditch and Backfilling have both SS AND FF dependencies with Lags. We prefer to use volume (or quantity) lags (like after 500 meters have been done).
This is how people work keeping the distance between different work types and performing activities in parallel.
Why reflecting the real situation is called Lazyness?
Top
Wed, 2007-09-12 05:25
#5
Nigel Burn
User offline. Last seen 5 years 20 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 13 Aug 2007
Posts: 7
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, TURNAROUND & SHUTDOWN (T/A & S/D)
Clive,
I totally agree with you when you say SS & FF relationships are for lazy planners.
We have had an experience whereby our contractor has submitted his schedule with their "Ladder Logic", and they have used SS and FF links throughout their whole schedule.
All this has done is constrained the "front" end and the "back" end of the schedule and shows a pretty picture and not true logic. That can be clearly shown when the monthly updates are calculated, and the schedule is depicting "on schedule", but in reality, progress on site is down by 9%, and all they are doing is manuipulating the schedule and eating up whatever float that had in their logics.
That’s my 10 cents worth.
Top
Thu, 2007-09-06 20:44
#6
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
Nicolas

There you have it,the reason why I call SS relationships for lazy planners.

You erect the pipes and on another path is the procurement of the valves. The pipe can be erected without the valves but not the other way around. There is a link at the end which is maybe test pipework aftyer the valves are installed.

So what I would do is say erect pipe between a valve and b valve. Install valves, test. That way you get a FS relationship.

In an SS relationship unless you % constrain the start of the second activity you get a logic problem. You could for example have completed 80% of the pipework but not installed the lengths that require to be cut to install the valves.

Take the scenario that pipes arrive and are layed out, neither fixed or welded. The activity is progressed as started. On this basis the valves can be installed after the lag duration on the SS activity. However unless the pipework is welded/fixed the valves cannot be installed so a false logic has occured.

In my mind a SS and FF relationship are tools to create a programme that looks right, they should be used very sparingly if you want a programme you can interogate and progress against.
Top
Thu, 2007-09-06 09:48
#7
Nicolas Igersheim
User offline. Last seen 8 years 33 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 62
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas
"Suppose activity A will start today, then activity B will start after one week with SS relationship.
How can it be? Did you experience submittal like this? needs help.."


Suppose A is erection of piping
B is installation of valves on these pipes
B can start only once A started hence SS relationship

However, valves need to be delivered in order to be installed, and they are due next week

subsequently a SS link and starting a week later!

hth
Top
Thu, 2007-09-06 08:48
#8
ulysses garcia
User offline. Last seen 14 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 259
Groups: GPC Qatar
SS relationship in real life is True either you are using buffalo or carabao equipment, but FF is not guaranteed..
Top
Thu, 2007-09-06 08:02
#9
ashraf alawady
User offline. Last seen 10 years 46 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 320
Groups: None
even if we used SS and FF relationship.

still i can not understand the bad effect to use SS and FF relationship .
Top
Wed, 2007-09-05 13:26
#10
vikas agrawal
User offline. Last seen 6 years 3 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Aug 2007
Posts: 18
Groups: Building Information Modelling
hi all,

I would reiterate that for initial planning purpose the SS relationship may seem useful (cosmetically shows the correct logic of the schedule).

But the moment such activities are in progress ONE MUST THINK WHETHER SS RELATIONSHIP HOLDS GOOD FOR THE REMAINING DURATIONS ALSO ON EACH UPDATE.

Most of the time SS relationship will not mimic the actual situation at site once the updates of the schedule are in progress.
Top
Tue, 2007-09-04 23:38
#11
Benito Nepomuceno
User offline. Last seen 9 years 41 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Posts: 28
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, Pinoy Planning Planet Community
To all,

The basic approach of all scheduling techniques is to create or form a network of activity & event relationships that graphically portrays the sequential relations between the tasks in the project. Tasks that must PRECEDE or FOLLOW other tasks are CLEARLY identified.
I believe SS relationship with time lag can only be use in graphical representation of Schedule in Level 1~3 and not in detailed schedule.

benito
Top
Tue, 2007-09-04 09:25
#12
ashraf alawady
User offline. Last seen 10 years 46 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 320
Groups: None
Thanks,Clive

however i would like to clarify that most of the activites in roads and infrastructure projects have to be overlaped we can not use only FS relation otherwise the project duration will enlagred unnecessary.
To make these overlap between the activities we have to use SS and FF relationships.

can you explaine to me what do you mean by (generally SS and FF are lazy realtionships ).
Top
Sat, 2007-08-25 22:20
#13
ashraf alawady
User offline. Last seen 10 years 46 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 320
Groups: None
Hi,
Perviously i gave a practicl example in which we have to use relation Start to Start but in the same time we have to use Finish to Finish relation in order to avoid open ends.

I will repeat that practical example for your infomation and benefit discussion.

In roads works , we can not start spray betuminous prim coat until we start laying of aggregate road base layer and we ca not finish spray betuminous prim coat until we finish laying of aggregate road base layer in the same time we can not wait until finishing of all woks for aggregate road base layer in order to start spray betuminous prim coat.

another example, We can start laying of asphalt base course only after two days from start spraying of spray betuminous prim coat and we can finish laying of asphalt base course only after two days from finishspraying of spray betuminous prim coat .
Top
Sun, 2007-08-26 20:51
#14
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
Ashraf
I stand by what I said generally SS and FF are lazy realtionships.

In your case of the blacktop, there is likely to be a factor to be considered, for example you have plant that enables you to spray 1000m2 per day. If you programme for that and then look at the paving you will also find that has characteristrics such as economical paving length per day or asphalt delivery per day. By adding these constraints even down to a daily basis ther is no reason to have SS and FF relationships.

Well thats my thoughts.
Top
Fri, 2007-08-24 18:02
#15
Bernard Ertl
User offline. Last seen 10 years 36 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 20 Nov 2002
Posts: 757
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, TURNAROUND & SHUTDOWN (T/A & S/D)
Is it theoritically correct to have start to start (SS) relationship with different early start dates in each activities.

Suppose activity A will start today, then activity B will start after one week with SS relationship.
How can it be? Did you experience submittal like this?
If multiple calendars are used, then yes, it is both theoretically and practically possible if A & B have different working calendars.

Resource leveling systems could also affect the "pure" CPM logic.

Bernard
InterPlan Systems
Top
Fri, 2007-08-24 12:50
#16
vikas agrawal
User offline. Last seen 6 years 3 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Aug 2007
Posts: 18
Groups: Building Information Modelling
Hi,

Be very cautious while giving relationships. Most of the planners do not think how these relationships will behave when the activities are in progress.

Top
Sun, 2007-08-19 21:41
#17
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
Nieman, Ashraf

I see where you are coming from but I still see SS links whether lagged or not as an excuse for lazziness. For example you both quote curing as an example so why not add it as an activity?

If B cannot start until A has been partially completed, identify what that partial completion is, that way your programme becomes more realistic.

Well thats how I see it, however I do realise we are all personally constrained by time.
Top
Sat, 2007-08-18 07:01
#18
Richard Spedding
User offline. Last seen 6 years 42 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2007
Posts: 127
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas, The GrapeVine
Surely what we are trying to do as planners is to decide the optimum method of construction given the particular constraints of the project.

If activity B cannot start until after activity A has started, then a S-S link is the correct one.

If there is a logical delay between the two starts - concrete curing or attaining strength, paint films drying or similar, then there will be a S-S link with a lag.

If activity B cannot finish before activity A as well, then a F-F link should be used too. If there is no logical link then don’t use one!

There is more danger in putting illogical links into programmes than there is in having loose ends and associated float in a programme. This can be edited out on the final pass through the programme before issuing.
Top
Sat, 2007-08-18 01:45
#19
ashraf alawady
User offline. Last seen 10 years 46 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 320
Groups: None
selection of the proper relatio between the activities and proper links is on of the most important task during the preparation of the work program.

some times we have the chance to selest between alternative links if the logic and sequance of the works are allowing for this and many times we have to use a certain relation in order to reflect the proer logic and sequances of the activities.

for example, in the road works, we have to spray betuminous prim coat above the aggregate road base layer and it has to get 48 hours as curring time befor staring the aspalt works. in this particular case we have to link the activity "spraying of betuminous prim coat " with it’s predessor "laying,mixing, watering, copaction and testing of aggregate road base layer " with relation SS with lag +2days and FF with lag +2 days so we can not avoid using cetain relation and we have to reflect the actual logic and sequances of the activities.
Top
Wed, 2007-08-15 04:30
#20
Clive Randall
User offline. Last seen 17 years 35 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 744
Groups: None
If you can avoid Start to start relationshipd you should as was pointed out here, you get a delay and you got a problem.
Some software MSP for example and power project overcome this by introducing a link on % complete, this is a more accurate representation of reality i feel.
Top
Wed, 2007-08-15 04:26
#21
Andrew Dick
User offline. Last seen 9 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 295
Groups: Regional Representatives, The GrapeVine
I would think that there would only be a difference if either activity or the logic were using different calendars.

Not to forget that if the scheduled start for an activity is close to shift end on one day there may not be sufficient time for the engine to place a portion, (= to the minimum scheduling time period), of the activity on that day, this will cause the Successor to spill into the next time period which may in fact be the next day.

So I would say it is entirely theoretically possible, dependant on the software being used and the way it has been set up to schedule, and also the underlying activity settings.

So that’s my 2 bobs worth.

Andy
Top
Wed, 2007-08-15 02:34
#22
Govindaswamy Gaje...
User offline. Last seen 14 years 14 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 5
Groups: None
Hi,

If we are using only the SS relation in the links, as per my knowledge the link is not closed. Then, it may be required to introduce FF relation in the same link, with certain lag, to close the relation. Hope I am not wrong.

GG
Top
Thu, 2007-08-02 21:52
#23
Zhang Haixiang
User offline. Last seen 4 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 250
Groups: None
Hi，

Maybe we can use FF+ (-lag),but some people don’t like -lag.

if the software can use %lag as MSP or pertmaster,it will be better
Top
Thu, 2007-08-02 11:39
#24
Steve McCubbin
User offline. Last seen 18 years 1 week ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Dec 2006
Posts: 5
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas
I don’t think we have enough information to really advise to use a FF relationship. What if Task A has a long duration (ex: 35 days) and Task B has a short duration (ex: 3 days).

I’d use a SS with +7 days lag to cover this.
Top
Sat, 2007-07-28 10:49
#25
Rahmat Hidayat
User offline. Last seen 41 weeks 3 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 30 Jul 2002
Posts: 82
Groups: Petro-Chem / Oil & Gas
Hello Ulysses,

Your point is about the logic not about the technic of making SS link right ?

In my opinion the SS relationhsip is problem when the predecessor activities was being delay, then u will get a mistake in forecasting the start of the SS successors. To overcome this problem pls cover it with FF relationship.

Other way u can use as single FS with negative lag but..some person doesn’t like this trick.

it answers u ?
Top
Sat, 2007-07-28 10:12
#26
Ramesh Kavassery
User offline. Last seen 7 years 21 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Oct 2004
Posts: 17
Groups: None
Hi Ulysses,

This is possible if the relationship is Start to Start (SS)
with a lag. So, if Activity A has Activity B as a successor
with SS + 7 days lag, then you will have a case as you
mentioned.

Regards,
Ramesh
Top