(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.
Hi
I have a schedule which is resourced and I wish to do the following:
I want to crash a section of the works, so I want to indicate an increase in resources and inherently the reduction in duration. I am using Primavera P6.
To give you a background of my schedule and my intention, my schedule had programmed two similar sections of pipeline which were scheduled to be executed simultaineously for x period of time and complete at just about the same time. What happened is that the contractor was delayed because of access issues such that he could only start to work on the second section at the time the first section got completed. So now, in justifying an extension of time, the access date for the second section is revised and the sections are programmed successively instead of concurrently. Now I want to prove that if the resources that were employed for the 2nd section were allocated to the 1st section and both teams worked first on the 1st section, they would complete the 1st section earlier than it should have been and both move onto the second section.
Please advice on this matter.
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Fast Tracking VS Crashing the Schedule
Fast Tracking the schedule means to Revise the logic and do thing concurrently or in parallel which means that your manpower peak will be higher but it will be the same number of man-hours except for additional supervision.
A good rule of thumb is that sequential activities can sometimes be fast-tracked by up to 33%. In other words, if you're fast-tracking, you can start the second of two sequential activities when the first activity is 66% complete. So when you are 66% complete with the first conduit activity you can start the wire pulling.
Crashing the schedule means to reduce your durations but you will have to increase your man-hours because you need more men to do it in a shorter amount of time. You would shorten the duration of the activities on the critical path by throwing additional resources to the critical path without necessarily getting the highest level of efficiency. You might have to do several iterations because you crash one critical path then something else becomes critical. You will have increased cost in with this option
Not sure about this post. This was dated 2013, but why this shows on top? Anyhow, it's very interesting.
Given data (Original post), may not be complete (i.e. dependencies of the pipe sections if any in terms of location etc.). Anyway, if it was a constrained situation due to access issue, even if you put more resources to first section and finished earlier than scheduled, you will still get a Lag until you are allowed to start the second section.
So what do you want? Make a claim for the standby time of your resources? Well, if I were the client, I would say that I notified you about the access issue just in time and I did not advise you to put more resources to the first section to finish early and make your resources standby until you'll be able to start the second section.
Well, if you can expound more, then perhaps you can establish a case. However, don't expect that a software can easily make a case for you.
Hi..
Your case of Project Crash can be proved if you have finite resource for that activity or specific skills for that operation. generally, if you have common resource pool, primavera will not show the benefits as you expected. Hope you are convinced now!!
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies