(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.
Dear All,
May be it seems stupid to ask this question but still i will prefer to ask.
In construction schedules, most of the activities go parallel. What logic do you people prefer while doing your schedule.
It is very difficult to make whole schedule or major part of schedule with Finish to start logic.
When we apply start to start + lag or finish to finish +lag, then still there will be open ends either at the start or at the end of activities. There is possibility to add some links to close them but those links will not be logical.
I am just wondering what is right relationship between the activities which are to be planned parallel without leaving any open end.
Best Regards
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Emran,
activity dependencies shall refect real life constraints. Lags are used when the succeeding activity may be done in parallel but with the certain distance between the resource crews on both activities. This constraint is real and certainly defendable.
Adding lags for no reason is certainly poor practice.
Adding Lag raise a lot of questions infront of the management and not always the management is technical enough to understand the issues. But from scheduling point of view, adding lags without reason is not a fair practice because you can have a reason to prove it.
Any better or defendable solution please.
Best Regards
Usually activities that can be done in parallel are linked by two dependencies: SS + Lag and FF + Lag.
Usually in such dependencies preceding activities shall start earlier than successor activity and finish earlier too.
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies