Global change of the Relationship type

Deleted by Rafael Davila as to avoid annoying requests to revive this old discussion.

Deleted by Rafael Davila as to avoid annoying requests to revive this old discussion.

Deleted by Rafael Davila as to avoid annoying requests to revive this old discussion.

For some inexplicable reason people insist on reviving old discussions, it seems like Ron Beachy the originator of this discussion is no longer active at Planning Planet.<a href="http://www.planningplanet.com/users/1718-ron-beechey/view/associates">h… href="http://www.planningplanet.com/users/1718-ron-beechey">http://www.planni… Since: Nov-1973Current year&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2018To date years of practice&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 45Assume started practice at age&nbsp; 25Estimated Current Age&nbsp; 70Maybe retired living in paradise.As I said before some/many of us consider disrespectul opening such old discussions.&nbsp; A complaint I have seen many times before.&nbsp;

yes display detail successor relationship but you can not do it as a global change&nbsp;

Anderson,Are you referring to my posting of&nbsp;Wed, 2011-08-31 09:05, that is over 6 years ago.&nbsp; So old I cannot follow the posted images that were deleted long ago when the file hosting service changed their rules.&nbsp; If this is so then you are over 6 years late to get into the discussion about my postings.&nbsp;&nbsp;The discussion:Started on Mon, 2011-08-29 14:25Was active until Thu, 2011-09-01 23:03then&nbsp;INACTIVE FOR OVER FIVE YEARS !&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;Was resuscitated on Wed, 2016-10-26 08:07 – over 5 years after active discussion ended.Was re-resuscitated on Thu, 2016-10-27 12:31Was re-re-resuscitated by you on Thu, 2018-03-29 16:02 – over 6 years after active discussion ended.&nbsp;For obvious reasons many of us do not believe it is a good idea to re-open discussions so old.&nbsp;&nbsp;I wonder why Planning Planet does not lock discussions after some inactivity, say 6 months or at maximum 1 year.Best Regards,Rafael

<a href="http://www.planningplanet.com/users/5730-rafael-davila">Rafael Davila</a>, what does your reply have to do with the question?!

RonWhat version of P6 do you have ? I believe that starting with version 15 that the relationship type is now available as a column.&nbsp;

I think I have the solution that could help you.&nbsp;1. First, select all activities that you wanna change relationship type;2. Right click and choose Asign -&gt; Predecessor;Now, what happens here, if you enter the ID of the predecessor activity and hit the + (asign) button, you'll get this activity as a predecessor with FS relationship type. Now try to add again the same activity as predecessor. This time it will add this activity as a predecessor as FF relationship type. And if you do it again, it will add it as SS predecessor.Same happens with removing. If you type activity ID and hit the x (remove) button, it removes the FS predecessor activity. Hit the remove button again and it will remove FF predecessor activity.So, the next steps would be:3. Tipe the ID of the activity in search bar, that you want it to be your SS predecesor;4. Hit the + (asign) button 3 times (or 2 times if you have already this activity as FS predecessor);5. Hit the x (remove) button twice.6. VOILA!Enjoy! Loves from Serbia!

Dear Ron,
I do not think there is a method with just a few buttons then you could achieve the change of relationship type globally. But by and large P6 can facilitate a easier change of data entries in spreadsheet environment (MS Excel) using Export ---&gt; Change ----&gt; Import. You may try to export the project data by choosing what information you need to change (herein Activitiy Relationships), and in Activivity Relationships you include relationship type in the export. Edit whatever you like in the exported spreadsheet and then import back to P6. That's it.
Nevertheless, this serves to be a convenient way to change the relationships easily. I do also think&nbsp;you should be very careful by changing FS to just SS in your plan.&nbsp;Why? because by doing so, you would sometimes get anomalies like predecessors finish later than successors. A more proper way is to consider also a FF relationship between activities.
Regards and happy exporting / importing,Raymond Au-Yeung

Hi Ron
Just for the record PowerProject has a function for selecting all links and making global changes.
Best regards
Mike Testro

Hi Ron
I cannot think of any circumstance in a construction sequence where two tasks have to start simultaneously - that is why a SS link is intrinsically invalid.
If you are going to add lead lags on the SS link then you are creating a quasi FS link - but using guesswork as to the lag and losing criticality.
I say again there is no justification for using SS Links - please have a look at my earlier thread "Ban these planning abominations" to see the full debate.
Best regards
Mike Testro

Hi Ron
Why do want to change a valid FS link to an invalid SS link.
You will destroy all criticality on your programme.
Please reconsider this unwarranted action.
Best regards
Mike Testro