Print Resource Availability

Hi Vladimir,
Yes you are correct. I change the model to suit on the topic.
Resource availability is different from resource productivity.
Wikipedia: “Availability is the proportion of time a system is in a functioning condition” while "Productivity is a measure of output from a production process, per unit of input".

Availability generally pertaining to time while Productivity is more on measurable output result.

As I mention that scenario is very common here in Australia where resources used is based on their available time (partial working period and not partial workload)

Problem 2:
I opposed the idea because planning is the same as estimating. Like estimating, planning is also using different type of approach and always based on given criteria or available information and done by simple mathematical formula to have result.
For example:
Available data: Automatic welding machine = 2 units with 600” diameter production per 10 days.
1)     How many automatic welding machine I need to complete 600” diameter in 5 days? [Scenario is looking for number of resource to meet duration (unknown is resource?)] – input duration (Task driving)
2)     How many days I can complete 600” diameter if I double the number of welding machine? [Scenario is looking for duration based on number of resource (unknown is duration?)] – input resource (Resource driving)

Another example:
A wall surface with the 1600sqm to plaster composed of 2x800sqm wall on different locations (East wing and West wing). If used one crew can finished both wall surfaces (1600sqm) in10 days:
1)     How many crew I need to finish 1600sqm in 5 days? (task driven)
2)     How many days I need to finish 1600sqm using 2 crews? (resource driven)

On these examples it clearly defines different rules process based on the given criteria. So why I have to live on one rule if 2 rules are both valid?

Best Regards,
Rodel

Hi Rodel,
partial workload is common everywhere.
This is the way people use cranes that participate in many activities done in parallel.

Planning is not the same as estimating, planning is modelling project execution.

If we have only one welding machine the information that we need 1.2 welding machines is nice to have but cannot be accepted. In one of my previous posts I described the crew that does automatic welding. You will not need 2.4 buses, 7.2 welders and 3.6 pipelayers together with 1.2 welding machines. You can use 3 pipelayers or 6 pipelayers, not 4 and not 5.
If productivity of assigned crew is not sufficient people shall decide what can be done to accelerate the work. Two CRC machines on the same activity is nonsense. Maybe it makes sense to create new spread?

Resource assignment decisions are much more complicated than just multiplying existing assignments and make 10 welding machines do the work in one day.

It is easy to calculate necessary amount of crews for plaster work in your second example. To finish the work in 8 days you will need 1.25 crews. You want this result?
Or you will look at the whole project and will think what additional resources to use for accelerating project performance crashing critical activities most effective way? Maybe accelerating some other work will be more cost effective?

Playing with resources or technologies is natural, playing with durations is unprofessional.

You did not answer what is wrong with my examples.

I did not understand the purpose of your explanations about resource availability. We discussed the case when resources are available but are required on certain activities only part time and thus may be used on other activities in parallel (also part time).

Best Regards,
Vladimir

Hi Vladimir,
I agreed that partial workload is available anywhere and even in real life. I explain availability because Rafael is questioning about Act with resource working for certain hours which I clearly stated that it is common here in Australia as an example. We have students, trainee, and part time worker as a good example. You mentioned deployment of crane which is also a good example. Managing resource is equivalent for resource deployment or pooling and when you deploy a resource you scheduling them on a right timing to avoid conflict. I agree on partial deployment using you methods which make the things easier but in real life is not that easy. You have to make sure on the timing to avoid conflict. “Correct me if my statement and understanding are wrong”

As a good example is booking a meeting room to a specified time to make sure that if someone want to use it they will know it is not available on the it was book by others. Or using a crane on different locations (partial workload on every task) where specific time and duration should be specified to allow others when there turn are available to use crane.

I mentioned Planning is the same as estimating but not literally. If a planner is calculating durations or resources what do kind of process are they using? Is that called estimating? An estimating has different approach like planning. Estimating also use plan to quantify quantity, time, cost, resources….and many others same as planning. Estimator also use their imagination on how it going to build to assume what type of resources required, how long it will take…etc although it is not as detail as planning.

Using Duration driving resource approach is also only another method which I keep explaining but it is the duty of planner if the output is correct or not. If the output is not feasible then the planner need to decide on what is the best for the output like on your example for welding machine of 1.25 output. Of course it is not acceptable and the planner needs to decide to make it feasible or acceptable output. It is the same as resource driving, where if output is not acceptable then have to work out by using different approach or different methods to make it acceptable.

Most of the planner use durations first to plan working backwards to meet the deadline then work on the resources if feasible/realistic or not until final schedule is agreed.

In Planning Durations is commonly used with or without resources so what is wrong with that approach? As long as the planners understand the methodology and process I don’t see the difference.

Best Regards,
Rodel

Hi Rodel,
if we both agree that automatic adjustment of resource crews to activity duration just produce something to think about and not to accept then there is nothing to discuss. Accepting new resource requirements means recalculation of the whole schedule and not just one activity.

Specific tasks with specific timing shall be planned as specific activities, I never suggested to use partial workload for this case.
With crane you will not schedule each lift as specific activity. It may be done but the size of the schedule will become too large for easy work.

I am used to apply the term estimating to estimating of costs and durations basing on some norms and usually without considering resource limitations.

Do you agree that simulating total workload instead of both workload and quantities of assigned resources is wrong?

Best Regards,
Vladimir

Hi Vladimir,
Thank you...and I understand what you mean.

Best Regards,
Rodel