Month: November 2019

When the “Expense Profile With Actuals” Curve is selected for previewing or printing, in addition to the printed/previewable report, Zümmer generates an Excel spreadsheet supplemental file for the curve produced in the report.

The spreadsheet output file is stored in the Zummer/Output folder. In the illustration below, the Project MH-BL1-UP33 was selected for printing with the file listed. Note the file structure prefix consists of “EXP” then the next filename segment consists of the Project ID, “MH-BL1-UP33”. The final filename segment is a 5-digit computer system generate suffix.

The “EXP” file in the “Chart1” Tab contains the “Expense Profile With Actuals” Curves shown as below:

Since the file above is generated by a spreadsheet, the visual content can be customized by the user and/or Cut/Copy & Pasted into another document.

In the “EXP” file above, shown below is a partial section of the ChartData tab and the raw data used to plot the curve shown above: (Rows 6 thru 241 and 247 thru 1076 are hidden for instructional purposes).

Column A contains the series of dates from the earliest date in the selected Project listing daily down to the latest date in the selected Project.

Columns B, C and D contain the cumulative Early, Late and Average Expense Series respectively for the Expense Profile curve on the graph displayed in the Chart1 tab.

Column E contains the cumulative Actual Expense Series for the Expense Profile curve on the graph displayed in the Chart1 tab.

Column F contains the Total Budgeted Expense amount used to generate the vertical Data Date line in the graph.

Columns G, H, I and J contain the daily total Early, Late, Average and Actual Expense Series respectively used to calculate the cumulative values shown in Columns B, C, D and E respectively.

Copyright ©2019 FoxQuest Systems, Inc. – All Rights Reserved

The PDM (Precedence Diagram Method) method of defining relationships between activities is a powerful tool. Often, however, Schedulers, sometimes unknowingly, misuse the options available when defining relationships between activities. In the illustration below, under Method 1, Activity “A” is related to “B” using Finish-To-Start (FS) and “B” is related to “C” using Start-To-Start (SS) with Lag = 0.

This may appear as a reasonable approach as often, the Activity Name description(s) may provide a false justification for this relationship. Unfortunately, the Forward and Backward pass doesn’t care about your Activity Name description. Therefore, trying to justify the use of Method 1 by using a “real world” situation fails as an argument to promote its use.

By observation, since “B” has a shorter duration than “C”, “B” should have a higher Total Float (TF) value than “C”. However, when calculated, the TF for “B” = 0. Under Method 1, the SS/Lag = 0 relationship between “B” and “C” is causing the critical path to flow through the only the Start of “B” resulting in an incorrect TF value for “B”.

By representing “B” as a critical activity, the result could lead to a possible misallocation of resources. Furthermore, if the correct TF value “B” is later discovered, then this could cause a loss in trust in the schedule.

The solution is to follow Method 2, i.e. “A” is related to “B” using FS and “A” is related to “C” using FS. Not only is this trap avoided but relationships between activities are more clearly defined.

Zümmer checks this anomaly with Report #37 – “Tasks With Start-To-Start Relationships And No Lag” reports all instances. In the illustration below, each Start-To-Start relationship with no lag is clearly and individually paired. In addition, the Activity Status of the predecessor and successor is listed along with each Original Duration, Total Float, type of Relationship and lag value between the two activities.

Copyright ©2019 FoxQuest Systems, Inc. – All Rights Reserved