Schedule Risk Analysis With Acumen: Different Calendars

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 effects of activity calendars in the SRA outputs are investigated.  Activities are assigned with different calendars while holding all other parameters constant.  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 output shows that the duration as inputs in the risk register represents working days and NOT calendar days.  Furthermore, Acumen takes into account the activity calendars in determining the probabilistic completion dates of the activities.

Variable

  • Activity Calendars (Case 04).

Input

  • Risk assigned to a project with different activity calendars.
  • 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 with Different Activity Calendars.

Table 1.  Risk Input for Different Activity Calendars.

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

Though C04A and C04B have the same parameters in the risk input, the difference in the calendar used affected the worst case scenario (P100) date with the former finishing later (23-Sep-20) than the later (14-Aug-20).  C04A has a 5-day workweek calendar while C04B is working on a 7-day workweek schedule.

Due to a year of non-working period between 01-Jun-20 to 31-May-21, this affected the P100 of C04C to complete on 23-Sep-21. Compared to C04A, this is also a year late with both cases using the 5-day workweek calendar with the difference on the 1-year non-working period for C04C.

C04D and C04E use the same calendars with work period on 1 & 2-Aug-19, 1 & 2-Oct-19, 1 & 2-Dec-19 and from 1-Aug-20. During the non-working days, no hits were accounted in the risk exposure diagram.

Takeaways

  1. The duration in the risk register represents workdays and NOT calendar days.
  2. Acumen takes into account the workdays or the activity calendars when determining the probabilistic completion dates (P-dates) of an activity.
Share
Tweet
Share
MLR Project Management & Consultancy

Rationalizing the Irrationalities in Decision-Making

Traditionally, decision-making was seen as a rational process governed by logic, with emotions viewed as disruptive. Yet, recent studies reveal emotions are essential to organizational decision-making, especially in complex scenarios. Emotions, distinct from moods, shape judgments and persist beyond the moment, influencing future decisions. They act as motivators and guide adaptive choices, with both immediate and anticipated feelings present throughout the process. Neuropsychological research further shows that lacking emotional input can impair decision quality, even if rational skills remain strong. Ultimately, emotions and rationality are intertwined, both crucial for effective decisions.

Read More »
MLR Project Management & Consultancy

Mastering Activity Codes in Primavera P6 Schedules for USACE and NAVFAC Contracts: Requirements, Common Pitfalls, and Best Practices

The article outlines the significance of utilizing specific activity codes in Primavera P6 schedules for US government projects, particularly under USACE and NAVFAC contracts. USACE typically requires eight detailed codes, while NAVFAC may only use a subset. The content stresses the necessity of reviewing contracts for compliance and notes potential exceptions. It highlights common mistakes and offers guidance on applying these codes effectively, ultimately illustrating their role in enhancing schedule management and ensuring successful project execution.

Read More »
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 »

How may we help you?

Where to send the file?