(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.
Hello Everyone,
A majority of the projects have interim milestones, and clients are now more interested to know the longest path for each interim milestone. P6 does not have readily available options to find the driving path of any activity, and some artificial ways are used as described below.
I use two methods as follows:
1. Adding a dummy activity with a long duration and linking it to the required interim milestone for the longest path. This artificially forces the key completion milestone and all of its driving predecessors onto the Longest Path.
2. Using multiple-float-path analysis with a free float option to identify the driving and near-driving paths to each interim milestone.
However, I have often got different results by using both the above-described methods, and I wondered which one is more accurate and the difference between them.
Your expert opinion is appreciated.
Thanks,
Nilesh
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
it does not matter how many activites you have it matters how many interium milestones that you are tracking
if you want the correct results take the time and do it correctly there is not always a fast fix for everything you only get something out of something based on what you put into it. So what if it take you a few hours to do in the end you know that is it correct.
Get real, Longest Path is outdated!
Thanks Zoltan.
Your solution will indeed give an accurate result.
However, it becomes really tedious for multiple interim miletone with 20000+ activity schedule.
I will raise this issue with Oracle and I hope they will do needful in the coming version of P6.
Thanks and Regards,
Nilesh Jain
Thanks, Tom.
I hope a lot of people looking for the answer to the longest path of the Interim milestone will find your solution helpful.
1. create a code lets call it milestone #1 and give it the code vlaue of MS1 add that column code to the data table area (it is blank now)
2. filter for just the interium milestone #1 what ever activity id that is
3. now look at the predcessor window and in the predcessor window area add columns driving and critical (these are both under the general category).
4. look at the predcessors to the milestone activity and click on the one that have the chec mark driving and also has the check box critical and at the bottom select GOTO.
5. keep doing this procedure clicking in the driving and critical and then GOTO this until you get back to the data date or the start date.
6. now in the data area look of the milestone #1 column that you added and assign the code vlaue of MS1 to the first activity in that column.
7. Now do a fill down to the rest of the activities with the MS1 code value
8. Now you can filter where milestone #1 equals MS1
this is your ONLY your critical and driving path activities to this interium milestone. It may take a little work but you now have it.
after the next update clear out all of the milestone #1 code values and do this again.
Nilesh,
The key differences in the results of the two methods depend on the following:
1. If you have intermediate LOE activities that are constructed using traditional SS/FF links, then P6 may incorrectly include some non-LP activities (namely the LOE's SS predecessors and their own driving paths) on the "Longest Path." MFP analysis will quite properly exclude them.
2. In complex project schedules, the driving path to project completion (or to some intermediate milestone) will often have some concurrency, i.e. typically several parallel driving branches for short periods of time, which will be included on the Longest Path. MFP analysis will include only one branch on "Float Path 1" and will segregate any others into higher-numbered float paths, even though they are equally as "critical" as Path 1. You'll need to take care not to exclude them. If your schedule includes calendars that are not well aligned, then these parallel (and still critical) activities can be relegated to float paths much higher than you would expect. This is why it's generally not a good idea to limit the number of paths in MFP analysis.
Good luck, tom
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies