Resource Overloads Bar and Resource Dependencies
- Created
- 75
- 9
Resource Overloads Bar and Resource Overloads Reports:
- Resource Overloads Bar always misses to display material resources overloads.
- Resource Overloads Bar always misses to display financial resources overloads.
- Resource Overload Reports always get it right with regard to common renewable resources overloads.
- Overloads Reports always misses to display material/consumable resources overloads.
- Overloads Reports always misses to display financial resources overloads.
- All overloads are relevant, all shall be displayed in a transparent way. The report name "Resource Overloads Report" can misled you to believe all types of resource overloads are covered.
- Diagrams as well as tabular reports can display any type of resource overloads. The way the Resource Overloads Report is organized makes it easier to get into the details of renewable resources. Why not display materials/consumable resources as well as financial resources overloads in the same way? The devil is in the details!
The value of overloads reports shall not be underestimated. These reports are more reliable than overload bars/diagrams. A short duration overload of any resource makes the schedule not feasible, this you will not miss under overload reports but easy to be missed if looking at the overloads bar. When checking unleveled schedules or leveled schedules from external software this functionality can be invaluable.
Resource Dependencies:
- No consumable resources dependencies are displayed. Analogous to renewable resource dependencies they are temporal relationships.
- No financial resources dependencies are displayed. Analogous to renewable resource dependencies they are temporal relationships.
- If activity splitting by the resource leveling is allowed the links among the segments should be shown. Arguably each of the split segments has their own duration and float values and resource dependencies.
- All resource dependencies are relevant, all shall be displayed, otherwise why show some.
In summary: I would like the following:
For Resource Overloads:
- Overloads Bar is eliminated as it can be misleading or error prone while the more functional Overload Reports is enough.
- Overload Reports for Materials/Consumable Resources be made available.
- Overload Reports for Financial Resources be made available.
- This adds two items while eliminates one item from the Reports and Diagrams menu, for a net increase of a single menu item.
For Resource Dependencies:
- The links table should display and identify all resource type dependencies, not only renewable resource type dependencies but also materials/consumable resource dependencies as well as financial resource dependencies.
- In case of activity splitting by resource leveling engine double links should be able to make it clearer.
- No need to add a new field as Resource Dependency field can be used to this purpose, display "no" if a hard link while for resource links “resource", "materials", or "financial” labels can be used. Resource label to mean renewable resources, materials label to mean consumable resources and financial resources to mean cost expenditures.
75 replies
Oldest first- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, I'm not arguing
Vladimir, I'm not arguing about the importance of computers or software. Of course the "right software" is a necessity in todays construction. However, for decision making, I believe that you cannot just simply rely on a software output (regardless how reliable a software is - or simply GIGO). Let me cite real examples as follows: You got a pipeline project where you were required to use three types of pipes as: RC Pipes, Steel Pipes, and FRP or GRP Pipes. And you got one specific crew for each type of pipe. However, you had only one "special crew" in-charge of Pipe Fitting which can be used or common to all pipes as mentioned (just for example). Say you have started the three segments (three types of pipes) at the same time and assigned with each corresponding crew. And the "one special crew" was assigned to all the segments at the same time as well. Considering all the segments (all types of pipes), were equally critical as scheduled, how can the software select which segment would be prioritize (or delayed) with respect to the "special crew" assignment? Considering no "human decision" has been made yet (or you just let the software decide first). - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, I'm not arguing
Vladimir, I'm not arguing about the importance of computers or software. Of course the "right software" is a necessity in todays construction. However, for decision making, I believe that you cannot just simply rely on a software output (regardless how reliable a software is - or simply GIGO). Let me cite real examples as follows: You got a pipeline project where you were required to use three types of pipes as: RC Pipes, Steel Pipes, and FRP or GRP Pipes. And you got one specific crew for each type of pipe. However, you had only one "special crew" in-charge of Pipe Fitting which can be used or common to all pipes as mentioned (just for example). Say you have started the three segments (three types of pipes) at the same time and assigned with each corresponding crew. And the "one special crew" was assigned to all the segments at the same time as well. Considering all the segments (all types of pipes), were equally critical as scheduled, how can the software select which segment would be prioritize (or delayed) with respect to the "special crew" assignment? Considering no "human decision" has been made yet (or you just let the software decide first). - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Sorry for the
Vladimir, Sorry for the multiple posts (I hope Mike T. will delete the duplicates). "Work Order" or sequencing always matter in construction scheduling (even without considering CPM). I guess today's software are all CPM based, and the so called "AI" or perhaps algorithm simply based its so-called decision only in terms of activity "floats" (nothing else). If the schedule is out of sequence in the first place, of course the software can never tell that (only humans). Therefore, the "out-of-sequence issue" alone cannot be resolved by any software, but perhaps shall aggravate it. Thanks for the option "Progress Override" (the issue can always be resolved by smart Humans). For me, there is no such thing as "Resource Overloads", but only wrong assumptions in the first place (or wrong scheduling or sequencing or wrong resource assignments). It is a fact that resources in construction are always limited (or there is no such thing as unlimited resources in construction. Otherwise, contractors can never go bankrupt). Hence, "unlimited resources" or "any order or sequence" should never be an option in "construction scheduling". Then perhaps you can insist on "Retained Logic Only" as for sure there would be no "resource overloads" or resource leveling necessary. - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Sorry for the
Vladimir, Sorry for the multiple posts (I hope Mike T. will delete the duplicates). "Work Order" or sequencing always matter in construction scheduling (even without considering CPM). I guess today's software are all CPM based, and the so called "AI" or perhaps algorithm simply based its so-called decision only in terms of activity "floats" (nothing else). If the schedule is out of sequence in the first place, of course the software can never tell that (only humans). Therefore, the "out-of-sequence issue" alone cannot be resolved by any software, but perhaps shall aggravate it. Thanks for the option "Progress Override" (the issue can always be resolved by smart Humans). For me, there is no such thing as "Resource Overloads", but only wrong assumptions in the first place (or wrong scheduling or sequencing or wrong resource assignments). It is a fact that resources in construction are always limited (or there is no such thing as unlimited resources in construction. Otherwise, contractors can never go bankrupt). Hence, "unlimited resources" or "any order or sequence" should never be an option in "construction scheduling". Then perhaps you can insist on "Retained Logic Only" as for sure there would be no "resource overloads" or resource leveling necessary. - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
Anoon,as I wrote earlier
Anoon,
as I wrote earlier activity floats is only one of many factors that are considered in resource constrained scheduling.
The aim - to create the schedule that has minimum overall duration taking into account all existing constraints. The software will not prefer one schedule to another if these schedules have the same duration.
I never suggested to use retained logic only because people may miss something when schedule model was created or something may change. Out of sequence may happen if the schedule model is not perfect and shall be adjusted.
Resource overloads happen when the schedule was not properly leveled.
- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, I didn't get it
Vladimir, I didn't get it when you said "there are other factors considered other that floats". Aside from scheduling ASAP or ALAP (Early or Late), then what is it? The only thing I can guess is to adjust OD or original duration by shortening or lengthening it. Let me go back to the basics: A project (or schedule) is simply defined as:"Series of related activities with a beginning and an end"(period). Of course it does not mention floats, logics, resources or even duration, but as you know, a schedule is even more than, floats, logics, resources or durations. I would like to define the project or schedule as: Series of related activities with planned resources and durations (period). I missed the proponent of "DRAG". What happened to "DRAG" by the way? (anyway, I still don't understand it). - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, I'm not sure if
Vladimir, I'm not sure if what I'm seeing in my very small screen is what you have really posted. Of course when you run the schedule, considering all FS, then it will just follow logic. Say resource A is overloaded (but I cannot see it in the sample), then you run resource leveling, but if you're using FS, I cannot see a reason why it will be overloaded. Anyway, forget about the sample (honestly, it doesn't make sense to me). Just consider two resources for example: Pipe Fitter and Welder (just consider them separate, but I know most pipe fitters are best welders as well). Of course, these types of resources can only be sequenced in FS (you cannot weld until the pipes were properly fit). If you use FS only, there would be no overloading, unless there are other WBS occurring in parallel and were assigned with exactly the same crew or resources. If this case happens, then the scheduler must decide if which WBS to be prioritized or which one to be delayed. Of course the software can never do it by itself. - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
OK, Anoon,just imagine that
OK, Anoon,
just imagine that resource A in my example is fitter and resource B is welder.
Activities 1 and 3 require fitter and activities 2 and 4 need welder.
In CPM schedule activities 1 and 3 start simultaneously that is not possible since you have only one fitter (or fitting crew) and only one welder (or welding crew). So it is necessary to decide if to start with activity 1 or activity 3.
I asked about your decision and if it is based on activity floats.
You suggest to rely on scheduler intuition and manual leveling. I don't think that the scheduler can manually level large schedule and get the best possible solution and then repeat this process when any information was changed (activity delay, changes in resource availability, changes in productivity estimates, etc.). Manual leveling is hard and time consuming job. Our schedules consist of many thousands activities and manual leveling is not an option.
- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Then the sample is
Vladimir, Then the sample is wrong. If you have used FS only, your schedule would be: 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4. There's no way that 1 & 3; and 2 & 4 can have start to start relationship (even if using ASAP). That's why I said the sample doesn't make sense. - 0Bogdan Leonte ·
Vladimir, Anoon,If I may,
Vladimir, Anoon,
If I may, here is a basic model I made for a more complex project, with the help of Vladimir. The main purpose of the basic model was to find a way to solve the following problems:
1. Project must finish in a maximum of 270 day;
2. Each street must finish within 60 days;
3. No overallocations.All links are FS.
The following capture shows the activities of 1 street:https://i.postimg.cc/MZnnSBnT/Street-Activities.png
The next capture show that for 1 street there are no overallocations:
https://i.postimg.cc/CMRg1HC3/One-Street.png
Next is the project scheduled with CPM and has a lot of overallocations:
https://i.postimg.cc/rmdP8g6g/No-Leveling.png
Next is the solution provided using only the well constructed model and resource leveling:
https://i.postimg.cc/05wBFt0y/Leveled.png
Now Anoon, the sample consists of 9 streets with no overallocations/street, but the real project has 30 streets with overallocations, how many iterations do you believe a scheduler would have to make until a right solution would be found? How many if each street would have overallocations?
Using a good project model and a configurable resource leveling algorithm it would take you minutes instead of hours or days.
Best regards,
Bogdan - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Bogdan, I'm not able to see
Bogdan, I'm not able to see the links, but yes I agree with only one thing: "Using A Good Project Model". I'm not sure about "Resource leveling Algorithms". I can only guess that if you got a "good project model", then all algorithms shall follow, and perhaps you don't even need the so-called resource leveling (as your assumptions are already good in the first place). - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
Anoon,in my example
Anoon,
in my example activities 1, 2 and 3,4 do not depend on each other. FS are linkes between activities 1 and 2, and between 3 and 4.
And creating artificial links lead to poor schedules like the order that you suggested. Doing all activities one after another though they may be done in parallel is poor solution.
I think that my question was clear and that you can suggest the best schedule of this 4 activities project.
My question was if your decision on the order of activity execution in your schedule was based on activity floats.
Good project model includes only those activities, dependencies, resources, etc. that are real. The software is used for finding the best way (best order) of activity execution. If the model is good and includes all constraints that people consider when schedule their projects manually the software provides feasible results.
Adding any artificial constraints and dependencies restrict software options for finding the best solution and lead to worse schedules. But sometimes preferential logic may be added (to build the road from point A to point B or vice cersa?) and in this case different options shall be tried for finding the best solutin.
So the model where the order of work was already selected by people is not a model at all. It is the result of manual leveling that is poor in most cases.
- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Sorry but I don't
Vladimir, Sorry but I don't see any logic in your sample that perhaps made you believe that when using the same resource for similar but another activity, both activities can possibly be done in parallel (or start to start). I guess this is the effect of using "unnamed samples" everytime. Of course you can be blinded by math or theory. Perhaps it is forgotten that activities and resources must "jive". In other words, a dancer can only dance on a beat at a time to maintain the rhythm. If you play two different music at the same time, do you think a dancer can dance? Possibly, but of course there is no rhythm. And that's how I see your sample. - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
OK Anoon, I just see that you
OK Anoon, I just see that you don't want to answer to my question.
It looks like you never met the situation when the work can be done different ways. I've met with this a lot of times. And I agree that when the work can be done in only one straightforward sequence the scheduling and leveling (and any scheduling software) are not needed and out of sequence may never happen.
- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Of course there are
Vladimir, Of course there are many ways to execute a certain job. Like "design" or engineering for example, but as you know, even the best engineered product sometimes fail. For me, "construction scheduling" is always "engineering based", where ideally, you should consider the approved method statement, quality control procedures and quality assurance, and of course available resources in order to derive a good project model. Otherwise, for sure your schedule is wrong. Hence, you cannot simply base construction scheduling in the shortest possible time or duration, as calculated by the software. As software itself simply cannot determine "out of sequence". Plans remain as plans until realized. And there should be no shortcuts when you are working with quality control and assurance. - 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Yes it is a fact
Vladimir, Yes it is a fact that there are no "FS only" schedules, as of course you can always do multi-tasking (again) depending on availability of resources, but if you got only one resource, then the only solution is FS only. Even computers or software will tell you that (as computers never lie). However, computers or software (likewise) cannot tell you the truth, especially in terms of "out of sequence". Perhaps the problem is always "misconception". As I guess, "planning & scheduling" as a job is always underestimated or nobody thought that "planning & scheduling must cover all disciplines (QA/QC and Safety included), and never specific only to "time scheduling". Perhaps I may suggest that "Planning & Scheduling (like Engineering) should be done, or be considered as a process, because you can never do proper scheduling without any basis. For me, Scheduling has no difference in "Design or Engineering" as a job. While Engineering has FEED, Basic, Detailed or whatever. You can only find "Schedulers" always busy browsing the web (or Planning Planet in particular), trying to find a source where to copy a certain schedule. So apologies, but what "Best Practices" are you talking about? - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
Anoon,I did not talk about
Anoon,
I did not talk about best practices.
We have different experience. Your schedules never include parallel activities competing for the same scarce resources, my schedules always meet this. That's all.
As I always wrote good schedule model shall include everything that shall be done (quality assurance activities, commissioning activities, as anything else) and risk events that may happen or not.
- 0Anoon Iimos ·
Vladimir, Your experience or
Vladimir, Your experience or my experience is not the issue. In fact I'm even considering you as a mentor (only here in PP), but I'm sure that you have never seen a schedule that I personally did. To be honest, being just a mere employee as a scheduler (like me) for example, at least from my own experience, you cannot do anything but just to follow the Bosses. That's why I referred to so-called "best practices in scheduling", I mean in general (not you). Which for me, never really happens in real-world. And I suspect, simply because the importance of "Planning and Scheduling", perhaps is not really understood in the industry. So who would care about a certain software's output (leveling or whatever) for example? And most project managers don't even know how to use a "scheduling software". Believe me they're just happy with an Excel spreadsheet. And of course when you go to Engineering and Procurement, they are all busy doing their own things. So what do you think a "poor scheduler" can do? Just look at some of the posts here in PP. Most were asking for a sample schedule. And if you give them the sample, do you think it will help? For sure it can make their schedules even worse. As I've said, while Engineering has a properly defined process or flow of works, Scheduling has nothing, but must cover all disciplines including Procurement etc. That's how difficult "Planning and Scheduling" is! So "Schedulers" raise your Rates, or just let those companies go bankrupt! Where's the "Best Practice" by the way? - 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
Anoon,I make conclusions
Anoon,
I make conclusions about your schedules basing on your posts. And these conclusions are not on the quality of your schedules but on the projects you deal with.
The schedulers do what they are told to do (if they agree with this). So the problem is in the poor understanding of the value of proper scheduling by most top managers. In the companies where top managers understand that proper scheduling can save time and money the scheduling itself is the team work and planner/scheduler participates in decision making becoming very important member of the management team.
- 0Vladimir Liberzon ·
Anoon,I make conclusions
Anoon,
I make conclusions about your schedules basing on your posts. And these conclusions are not on the quality of your schedules but on the projects you deal with.
The schedulers do what they are told to do (if they agree with this). So the problem is in the poor understanding of the value of proper scheduling by most top managers. In the companies where top managers understand that proper scheduling can save time and money the scheduling itself is the team work and planner/scheduler participates in decision making becoming very important member of the management team.
Log in or join to reply
ProjectControls.com is free to join. Members can post questions, reply, vote and follow discussions.
Existing members: your original username and password still work. Forgot password?