AACE International PSP - Planning & Scheduling Professional (PSP) Exam

Hammock Cost for Activities 2001–2004:

Activity 2001: Cost = $150,000.

Activity 2002: Cost = $25,000.

Activity 2003: Cost = $20,000.

Activity 2004: Cost = $96,000.

Calculate Total Cost:

Total cost = $150,000 + $25,000 + $20,000 + $96,000 = $271,000.

Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option B: Incorrect. Overstates cost.

Option C: Incorrect. Understates cost.

Option D: Incorrect. Overstates cost.

Option A: Correct. Matches the calculated cost.

References:

PSP Study Guide (2019), Section on Summary and Hammock Activities.

AACE Recommended Practices, RP 10S-90.

ï‚· Preventing Structural Steel Delays:

Incorporating realistic timeframes for shop drawing review and resubmittals in the baseline schedule prevents design-related delays.

ï‚· Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Adding time buffers does not address the root cause.

C: Concurrent review may create confusion and errors.

D: Switching to post-tensioned concrete is a significant design change, not a practical solution for a scheduling issue.

ï‚· Verification with PSP Guidelines:Adequate review time aligns with PSP scheduling best practices (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Schedule Development and Baseline Creation).

ï‚· Requirement to Expedite:

To release the product 20 days earlier, critical path activities must be expedited.

Critical path activities: A (Testing), D (Manufacturing), G (Packaging).

ï‚· Excluded Activities:

Activities like drafting (Activity C) or proofing (Activity F) are not critical and do not impact the total project duration.

ï‚· Verification with PSP Guidelines:PSP guidelines emphasize expediting critical path tasks for schedule acceleration (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Schedule Compression Techniques).

Understand Activity B's Status:

Activity B has an original duration of 5 days.

As of the data date/status date, the diagram shows progress beyond 5 days.

Review Actual Duration:

The progress bar indicates that 7 days have already been worked on Activity B.

Actual duration as of the status date = 7 days.

Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Progress exceeds 3 days.

Option C: Incorrect. Progress is not 0 days.

Option D: Incorrect. Progress is more than 4 days.

Option A: Correct. Matches the observed progress on the diagram.

References:

PSP Study Guide (2019), Section on Network Diagrams and Status Updates.

AACE Recommended Practices, RP 10S-90.

Total float is influenced by factors like multiple calendars, start/finish constraints, and preferential logic because these directly affect the calculation of early and late dates.

Option D (front end loading), which involves distributing work to earlier project phases, does not inherently affect float calculations as it primarily pertains to resource or phase management strategies​​.

ï‚· Mitigating Late Completion:

A procurement agent could monitor and expedite long-lead equipment, reducing delivery delays that often affect project timelines.

ï‚· Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Hiring a senior project manager may not address the specific issue.

B: Self-performing may not resolve procurement delays.

D: Better structural steel drawings relate to design, not equipment delays.

ï‚· Verification with PSP Guidelines:PSP emphasizes early identification and mitigation of procurement risks (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Procurement and Supply Chain Management).

ï‚· Determining the Late Finish (LF) of Activity 6002 involves analyzing its successor activity, 6003, and considering the lag (if any).

ï‚· By subtracting 1 day from the Late Start (LS) of 6003, the Late Finish (LF) of 6002 is derived. The date calculation aligns with this logic, making 09 Mar 2023 the correct date.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.5 – Constraints and Calendars, and Appendix A – Example CPM Problems, which detail LF and LS calculations.

ï‚· Shape of Cumulative BCWS:

The Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) reflects a cumulative expenditure curve over time, typically shaped like an "S".

ï‚· Explanation of the S-Curve:

Initially slow expenditure, acceleration during peak work, and tapering off near completion.

ï‚· Verification with PSP Guidelines:The PSP Study Guide discusses BCWS as part of earned value management (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1D: Earned Value Analysis).

To reconstruct a CPM schedule electronically and determine the critical path, the following are essential:

Detailed listing of working days for each calendar (Option A): Ensures accurate scheduling across varying work periods.

Predecessor and successor relationships (Option B): Establishes logic and dependencies.

Tabular data including early/late dates (Option D): Necessary for computing float and identifying the critical path.

Assigned party responsibility (Option C) is important for resource management but not required to calculate the critical path​​.

ï‚· Critical Path and Delays:

A delay must impact the critical path to qualify for a time extension or compensable delay, as the critical path determines the project's overall completion time.

If the critical path is not affected, the delay is considered to have "float," which means it does not affect the project's completion date and, therefore, may not be compensable.

ï‚· PSP Study Guide References:

Delays impacting the critical path are emphasized in the PSP Study Guide under schedule analysis and delay management sections. The claimant must demonstrate that the delay impacts key project milestones and overall project completion​.

ï‚· Analysis for Selection:

Option A: Correct. A delay that does not affect the critical path does not result in additional time or compensation.

Option B: Concurrent delays involve shared responsibility and may complicate claims for compensation but are not a strict requirement for delay consideration.

Option C: Monetary harm is not directly relevant to time extension entitlement.

Option D: While planned schedules are significant, the focus is on the project's critical path, not just the contractor's planned sequence.

ï‚· Conclusion: The correct answer is A because affecting the critical path is the key determinant for entitlement to a time extension or compensable delay.