(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,
As we all know out of sequence activities create heaps of problems. For instance, remaining duration for out of sequence activities showing wrong because reaming early start is wrong (Due to activity being out of sequence).
I am looking for an UDf to call up a column for CURRENT DATE & later on use that as a global change representing correct remaining duration but I haven’t seen current date option anywhere in p6.
I appreciate hints in advance
Cheers,
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
If the software found an optimal sequence of resource assignments doing different task may create problems in future and delay project completion. So it is still necessary to reschedule the project if doing planned work is impossible for some reason.
In any case rescheduling is necessary if resources are limited.
Stephen,
I think we've had this discussion before, but I have a somewhat more lenient approach to OOS working than yourself. To my mind how big an issue it is depends on the "hardness" of the relationship that was broken. From hardest to softest, I can think of the following 4 categories:
1) Physical necessity: This is a link which is impossible to break because doing so would require time travel. e.g. you cannot start welding a pipeline before you have strung out (some of) the pipe lengths.
2) Mandatory link: This is a link which, while it is possible to break, doing so will always be a bad idea. Typically breaking this link will have adverse affects on quality, H&S, or breach of contract. Anyone breaking such a link should indeed be shot. e.g. pouring concrete before formwork.
3) Preferential link: This is a link which represents the (planner's opinion of the) optimum solution to the sequence of work, in terms of efficient working, risk (financial, time, quality, H&S), and project completion. Breaking such a link may be appropriate due to changes in the situation, mitigating delay, info the planner wasn't aware of when developing the schedule, or simply the wrong solution arrived at by the planner. e.g. erecting tank farm before the underground pipework is complete.
In an ideal world, the planner would have talked through whoever is responsible for doing the work in advance, and agreed any changes to the links then, after assesing the impact on the schedule & risk register. If this wasn't possible, then the next most ideal thing would be to agree changes with the planner immediately before changing the work sequence. Often neither of these things are possible, and quite often this is due to availability of the planner.
In such situations, I feel some senior people on site should have the authority to authorise changes to the sequence without first agreeing with the planner.
4) Resource smoothing: This is a link which is just there to balance resource requirements across the duration of the project, whilst maximising float. e.g. design data sheets for procurement. If something stops you from doing the first thing on your list, you should automatically move onto the second thing. Still keep the planner informed, but no need to seek approval.
Cheers,
G
Stephen,
Thanks for the comment. I think although a well established logical schedule should prevent out of sequencing but we all have encountered considerable number of projects with this situation.
Now the solution is better than digging the hole & chucking them in. in such cases, I personally suggest:
1- Try to work with remaining duration instead of expected finish while updating (out of sequencing creates dodgy RD if you work with expected finish dates)
2- Ignore negative total float as the result of out of sequencing.
3- In further programme extensions, try to justify project engineers to avoid unhealthy logic.
There is a step-by-step way to address team members who do activities out of sequence:
If someone has a bright idea of how to improve the schedule through a different sequence:
Fraternally in project management,
Steve the Bajan
Ed,
This seems to have nothing to do with out of sequence activities, then?
You are correct to say that remaining duration equals early finish - DD and not current date. This is how it should work. This is the point of having a data date. -So that you can update your schedule with progress up to the latest date for which you have progress information, which very often will not be the same as the curret date.
If you want remaining duration to show early finish - current date, and you have updated all progress to the current date, why not set your data date to the current date?
I am not very good with UDFs, so cannot help you there.
I’m new to this forum & apparently messed up with triple copying a discussion.
Does anyone know how to delete redundant ones?
I am using a cost loaded schedule in which percent complete is based on physical & I use expected finish for updating. The problem is that the remaining duration doesn’t show right for in progressed activities which started before DD.
Now RD = finish date- DD while I want it to show RD= finish date- Current date.
Any reason & at least a UDF or Global change to fix that is much appreciated.
(FYI, I have ticked the setting in calculation tab but it doesn’t change anything)
Cheers,
Ed,
Why not just correct your logic, so you don't have any OOS activities?
Hi Ed
Welcome to Planning Planet.
In future please do not duplicate your topics in more than one forum and you only need to hit the save button once.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies