What would be a good methodology to apply regarding Constrains on a Schedule?
I was giving the following schedule to correct:
Total Task in the Project: 1660
Normal Tasks: 1018
Milestone Tasks: 462
Summary Tasks: 180
Constraints: 329
Open Ended Tasks: 959
Out of Sequence Logic: 7
Lags Longer Than 0 Units: 75
Negative Lags (“Lead”): 145 (see example below to see how the issue was corrected)
Positive Lags on Finish to Start Links: 19 (see example below to see how the issue was corrected)
Start To Finish Links: 120
Lags between tasks with different calendars: 6
What I have done so far for the LAG Problems:
Example:
Task_ID 545: “TRA Sep/09: Steel 1 (structure PH I, EA, PP, FF, CL)”
Link Type: FS [ 545 --> 785 ]
Task_ID 785: CIV CV Structural Steel
Lag Link Type: [FS] Lag Link Duration [70]
So these is how I corrected these issues:
Example:
Task_ID 545 [FS]--> Task_ID 785
Task_ID 545 [FS] --> Task_ID FS_545:785 (Duration 70D) (*lag to task conversion) --> Task_ID 785
Or:
Example if the task had a SS Lag with Duration of [70]:
Task_ID 545 [SS]--> Task_ID 785
Task_ID 545 [SS] --> Task_ID SS_545:785 (Duration 70D) (*lag to task conversion) --> Task_ID 785
Now to my Question:
How should I deal with the issue of the 329 Constrains (I have read many of the previous post on the creation of a Sub-Project by Mike T and others “For the Dates of Deliveries of Construction Equip/Supplies/Systems/etc”. I also have been made quite aware of how the constrains can distort the critical path and how it’s so difficult to do any critical path analysis or any sort of risk management on a project with so many constraints.):
I have included the list of Activities with the Constraint Type: (P.S. I Did Not Create This Schedule)
[ID] [Task_Type] [Activity Name] [Constraints]
[101] [SM] [ENG MEC Water treatment system; order documents avaiCLle] [(Type)As late as possible]
[119] [SM] [ENG MEC Surveillance system; order documents available] [(Type)Must start on]
[479] [Task] [FAT Alternators 1-2] [(Type)Finish on or after]
[572] [Task] [TRA Nov/09 Engine lube servicel modules 6-1] [(Type)Start on or after]
[576] [Task] [TRA Dec/09 Power house ventilation system] [(Type)Start on or after]
Well Once Again, Thank Yyou to anyone who is willing to help a fellow planner....
P.s. Mike, Dieter, Rafael If any of guys can share your inputs and your valuable experience on this topic. I know you have dealt with these issues many time over your careers and I would be grateful if you guys could open my mind to a new solution and a new way of looking at schedule constraints. Instead of my currect view and method to just removed them and let the schedule be free to slip [lol].
:P
JoseR
I was giving the following schedule to correct:
Total Task in the Project: 1660
Normal Tasks: 1018
Milestone Tasks: 462
Summary Tasks: 180
Constraints: 329
Open Ended Tasks: 959
Out of Sequence Logic: 7
Lags Longer Than 0 Units: 75
Negative Lags (“Lead”): 145 (see example below to see how the issue was corrected)
Positive Lags on Finish to Start Links: 19 (see example below to see how the issue was corrected)
Start To Finish Links: 120
Lags between tasks with different calendars: 6
What I have done so far for the LAG Problems:
Example:
Task_ID 545: “TRA Sep/09: Steel 1 (structure PH I, EA, PP, FF, CL)”
Link Type: FS [ 545 --> 785 ]
Task_ID 785: CIV CV Structural Steel
Lag Link Type: [FS] Lag Link Duration [70]
So these is how I corrected these issues:
Example:
Task_ID 545 [FS]--> Task_ID 785
Task_ID 545 [FS] --> Task_ID FS_545:785 (Duration 70D) (*lag to task conversion) --> Task_ID 785
Or:
Example if the task had a SS Lag with Duration of [70]:
Task_ID 545 [SS]--> Task_ID 785
Task_ID 545 [SS] --> Task_ID SS_545:785 (Duration 70D) (*lag to task conversion) --> Task_ID 785
Now to my Question:
How should I deal with the issue of the 329 Constrains (I have read many of the previous post on the creation of a Sub-Project by Mike T and others “For the Dates of Deliveries of Construction Equip/Supplies/Systems/etc”. I also have been made quite aware of how the constrains can distort the critical path and how it’s so difficult to do any critical path analysis or any sort of risk management on a project with so many constraints.):
I have included the list of Activities with the Constraint Type: (P.S. I Did Not Create This Schedule)
[ID] [Task_Type] [Activity Name] [Constraints]
[101] [SM] [ENG MEC Water treatment system; order documents avaiCLle] [(Type)As late as possible]
[119] [SM] [ENG MEC Surveillance system; order documents available] [(Type)Must start on]
[479] [Task] [FAT Alternators 1-2] [(Type)Finish on or after]
[572] [Task] [TRA Nov/09 Engine lube servicel modules 6-1] [(Type)Start on or after]
[576] [Task] [TRA Dec/09 Power house ventilation system] [(Type)Start on or after]
Well Once Again, Thank Yyou to anyone who is willing to help a fellow planner....
P.s. Mike, Dieter, Rafael If any of guys can share your inputs and your valuable experience on this topic. I know you have dealt with these issues many time over your careers and I would be grateful if you guys could open my mind to a new solution and a new way of looking at schedule constraints. Instead of my currect view and method to just removed them and let the schedule be free to slip [lol].
:P
JoseR