Schedule Risk Analysis With Acumen: Different Activity Types

Share
Tweet
Share
Schedule Risk Analysis by MLR

This article provides an overview on how varying inputs and parameters affect the date outputs, in particular, the P0, P50, and P100 dates, in the Schedule Risk Analysis (SRA) with software Deltek Acumen Fuse.  By understanding how Acumen behaves with respect to varying conditions, schedulers, risk managers, and key stakeholders alike will be guided on providing only realistic input values for the SRA.

In this analysis, the activity types are varied while holding all other parameters constant.  These activity types include Task Dependent, Level of Effort, WBS Summary, and Milestones.  A simple schedule was developed using Primavera P6 for a straightforward understanding of the relationship between the inputs and the SRA results generated from Acumen.

The investigation provides results that risks (threats) can only be mapped to Task Dependent and Milestone type activities.  Assigning risk to Level of Effort or WBS Summary activities will not return risk exposure dates.

See also:

Variable

  • Activity Types (Case 03).

Input

  • Risk assigned to a project with different types of activity constraint.
  • 1 risk mapped to a single activity.
  • 1,000 iterations set in Deltek Acumen Fuse.
  • All other parameters are set to be the same in each case/project shown in Figure 1 below.
Primavera Schedule for Risk Analysis
Figure 1. Primavera Schedule for Different Activity Types.

Table 1.  Risk Input for Different Activity Types.

Schedule Risk Analysis Risk Register

Output

Risk Exposure Histogram by Deltek Acumen Fuse
Figure 2. Risk Exposure Histogram Generated from Acumen (see tabulated values in Table 2).
Risk Drivers by Deltek Acumen Fuse
Figure 3. Risk Drivers Generated from Acumen (see tabulated values in Table 2).

Analysis

Tabulation of the results of Figures 2 and 3 are shown in Table 2 along with calculations for analysis.

Table 2.  Results and Calculations.

Schedule Risk Analysis

Activities in case C03A have the same deterministic dates (DT).  With the risk mapped to a Task Dependent activity  (C03A-020), both the monitored activities C03A-020 and C03A-030 do have the same risk exposure outputs.

When the risk is assigned to a Level of Effort type of an activities as in C03B, the DT of the schedule is not affected.

Similar to C03B but this time assigning the risk to a WBS Summary kind of an activity in C03C, the DT does not change as well. Accordingly, no risk exposure nor risk driver diagrams were generated by Acumen.

In C03D, the risk is mapped to a Milestone activity type and the result of the schedule analysis yielded dates similar to that in C03A.

Takeaways

  1. Risks (Threats) can be mapped to Milestone type and Task Dependent activities.
  2. Risks should not be assigned to Level of Effort and WBS Summary activities.
  3. Acumen will not generate results (no risk exposure and risk driver diagrams) if risks are mapped to a Level of Effort or a WBS Summary type activity.
Share
Tweet
Share

OTHER RECENT BLOGS

MLR Project Management & Consultancy

USACE & NAVFAC Activity Codes in Primavera P6: A Practical Guide

USACE Activity Codes are a critical requirement for Primavera P6 schedules on USACE and NAVFAC projects, yet they are often misunderstood or incorrectly applied. These codes are not just administrative—they directly impact schedule organization, reporting, and compliance with contract specifications. This guide explains the purpose of USACE Activity Codes, how they differ from standard coding practices, and how to implement them effectively in your schedule. Whether you’re a scheduler, project manager, or contractor, understanding these requirements will help you avoid common pitfalls, improve schedule clarity, and ensure your submissions meet USACE expectations.

Read More »
Marty Fuentes January 13, 2026
Power Bi Dashboard by MLR

Dashboard: Solar PV Installations In Australia

The dashboard provides a rich collection of data carefully put up together to provide an interactive source of information pertaining to the solar PV state of the country including a predictor tool to forecast the installation quantity based on several relevant parameters as determined by regression analysis.

Read More »
Marty Fuentes June 6, 2023
Delay Analysis by MLR

Different Delay Analysis Techniques

A number of claims analysis techniques have been introduced with varying degree of results accuracy and some often offer favorable outcome to the claims proponent, consequently, arising the difficulty for both sides to reach an agreement. The Time Impact Analysis (TIA) has been recognized by practitioners and researchers to produce the most reliable and unbiased results. The drawbacks of this method, however, are its complexity to perform and the stringent requisite of having well-maintained and relevant project documentations.

Read More »
Marty Fuentes December 14, 2022

Build Better Projects With Expert Guidance

MLR Subscription - Browsing

Where to send the file?