Scheduling

Hi Nitin

I would interperet this as saying that ideally your activities need to have finish-to-start relationships.

Often when start-to-start relationships are utilised, there is also a finish-to-finish relationship between these activities. If this relationship is not also captured delays in your first activity will not correctly indicate the impact on the successor.

Jackie

Hi Jackie,

Thanks for your reply,i was trying to figure out what impact exactly finish to finish relationship has on overall programme,b’coz i believe it is majorly FS relation which drives programme.

Honestly i didn’t understand what you said "when start-to-start relationships are utilised, there is also a finish-to-finish relationship between these activities",i don’t think this is true

Regards

Nitin

Hi Nitin,

I will try to explain differently.

The ideal situation for any project schedule would be to always only use FS relationships. For various reasons this is however not always possible.

Where you are unable to use a FS relationship, you have the option of either using SS or FF relationships which are both recognized relationships.

Provided either your SS or FF relationships are applied correctly, they will correctly drive your schedule.

Should you have a specific problem in this regard, maybe you should provide more detail, someone around is bound to come up with a solution.

Regards

Jackie

Hi Jackie,

Thanks for your prompt response.It was useful.

Regards

Nitin

Scheduling? i believe scheduling means calculating the time element and calculating means math.

Start-to-Start (SS) or Finish-to-Finish (FF) relationships are just assumptions - these are sometimes used (or most of the time) because of i.e. availability of details (data); knowledge of the Planner/Scheduler (to make the work easier..they only wanted to see the bars anyway); or to make the program/presentation faster (for a baseline schedule).

Problems will arise once you do the updates.