In order to receive proof of CEU credits, you must watch this presentation in its entirety and complete the survey.
Level: Advanced
TCM Section(s):
7.2. Schedule Planning and Development
9.2. Progress and Performance Measurement
Venue: 2020 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Oracle’s Primavera P6 Professional Project Management scheduling software remains the dominant package in construction scheduling in North America, and features introduced by this software often become lingua franca between schedulers and schedule analysts. Such has been the case with the multiple float path calculation that Oracle includes in its P6 software.
Oracle’s documentation states that the multiple float path module of P6 calculates a “most critical path” and “sub-critical” paths, ranked in order of “criticality” by the float path value.An earlier study demonstrated the limitations of such analyses in single-calendar project schedules.
This paper extends the prior study to address float path assignments in project schedules with multiple activity calendars and other complications.It attempts to unravel the detailed consequences of the various calculation parameters, identifying potential use cases and interpretations for each.In particular, it demonstrates conditions that lead to invalid multiple float path results.Finally, the paper illustrates cases where the relevant software documentation fails to support the observed analysis results and may therefore be inaccurate.
TCM Section(s):
7.2. Schedule Planning and Development
9.2. Progress and Performance Measurement
Venue: 2020 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Oracle’s Primavera P6 Professional Project Management scheduling software remains the dominant package in construction scheduling in North America, and features introduced by this software often become lingua franca between schedulers and schedule analysts. Such has been the case with the multiple float path calculation that Oracle includes in its P6 software.
Oracle’s documentation states that the multiple float path module of P6 calculates a “most critical path” and “sub-critical” paths, ranked in order of “criticality” by the float path value.An earlier study demonstrated the limitations of such analyses in single-calendar project schedules.
This paper extends the prior study to address float path assignments in project schedules with multiple activity calendars and other complications.It attempts to unravel the detailed consequences of the various calculation parameters, identifying potential use cases and interpretations for each.In particular, it demonstrates conditions that lead to invalid multiple float path results.Finally, the paper illustrates cases where the relevant software documentation fails to support the observed analysis results and may therefore be inaccurate.