09-10-2017

Assignment 5:
Project Planning

CT3101 BASISAPSECTEN PROJECTMANAGEMENT

GROUP 9B
MIKE MORITZ - 4287932
LISE ANDRINGA - 4454952

TU DELFT Minor Project Management: from Nano to Mega

1. Create the network diagram based on the provided information without using any
specialized software for project management planning!

Figure 1: Network diagram

*: ‘Connecting the cables to towers’ is a critical task, despite having a float of 1 month due to having
a start to start relationship with ‘Connecting the deck to the cables’.

2. Calculate the length of the critical path.

The length of the critical path is shown by the red path in figure 1. The critical path in the
network diagram shows a time in months.
𝐶𝑃 = 0 + 12 + 7 + 10 + 12 + 14 + 2 + 31 + 4 + 6 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 2.5 + 0 = 105.5 𝑚𝑜𝑛𝑡ℎ𝑠
3. Which are the near-critical activities? How would you treat them as a project
manager?
Near-critical activities are activities that have the potential to delay the entire project despite not
laying on the critical path, essentially having a very low float while connecting to the critical
components. As can be seen in figure one the activities that conform to this are:

 Towers reaching 160 meters, This activity has a direct connection with ‘Towers reaching
207 meter’, which is a critical activity which would delay the entire project. Apart from
that the activity is preceded by another activity with a very low float, this can cause
stacking delays.
 The connecting of the cables to the towers. This activity is directly linked to the
‘pavement of the bridge’ while having a very low float time, which can cause delays.

Since near-critical activities have a direct impact on the critical path they are to be the direct
priority after the critical path. When there is multiple subtasks it where there is one which is
near-critical it is best to first focus on the critical and near-critical path, while starting the other
subtask at a later date allowed by its greater float time.

4. Plot the Gantt chart for the project specifying all the tasks, their duration and
relations (Table 1). Compare it with the chart you made manually: what did you
learn from the network diagram, the Gantt chart and the comparison of both?
There are a great number of differences between the network diagram and the Gantt chart, each
with different learning opportunities.

The networking diagram shows a clear differentiation between the different project phases, it
can clearly be seen that generally each project phase needs to be finished before a new one can
be started. The other apparent thing we learned is that delays in a large number of activities do
actually not influence the general timetable of the project that much, only critical and possibly
near-critical activities do.

The Gantt chart is a lot clearer in regard to the time duration. It can be clearly seen that certain
activities can be done parallel to others and how time delays influence the project as a whole
due to the graphic visualization with an axis of time.

After comparing the two planning tools we saw that the Gantt chart has a much higher amount
of detail involving time. For the task visualization and seeing the follow ups we found the
networking diagram more clear. However, the Gantt chart its higher amount of information on
time gives a better estimate of a timetable. A very nice function of the Gantt chart is that it only
counts working days depending on the settings used. This allows for a strict planning and the
predicting of dates. We find both tools a good way to set up a planning, a networking diagram for
the overall overview and subdivision of the project and a Gantt chart for the detailed timetable
and visualization of effects delays may have on the project.
5. Please provide 2 separate Gantt charts, one for first estimates and the other one including the abovementioned delays (actual
planning).

Figure 2: Gantt chart without delays

Figure 3: Gantt chart with delays
6. We now want you to take a critical look at the schedule. How can the current
schedule be “crashed”, i.e. how much time can you reduce from the total critical
path?

For these schedule changes it is assumed that by hiring extra personnel there won’t be any time
gained, there are only so many people that can work at a certain place at a certain time, hence
the assumption that the project runs at maximum personnel efficiency, for if it were not a few
months would have been easily gained by hiring more people. The schedule can be crashed in a
number of ways, such as starting the tendering procedure parallel to negotiations with investors,
starting the construction of towers above 207 meter at the same time as the towers above 160
meter, preliminarily installation part of the electronics and sensors or starting clean-up during
the finishing phase.

Start the tendering competition while at the same time search for/finalizing negotiations with
investors (at least -3 months): Finding funders/investors has a whole ten months of time
reserved, however negotiations are fluid. At the end of those ten months there either should
already have been a number of investors on board when going for co-funding, or the
negotiations with the primary investments should be in the third phase of negotiating a contract,
implying that the investors can no longer pull out of the negotiations without paying substantial
damages (Contract law). With the details already obtained during the negotiations, which after
seven months together with the technical studies should be a good indicator of the final budget,
preliminary tenders can be put up which would allow for shortening the tendering time by an
estimated three months.

Start the construction of towers above 207 meter at the same time as towers reaching 160
meter (at maximum -4 months): We see no reason the towers cannot be constructed parallel to
each other. The towers are of the same general design, independent constructions and requiring
largely the same resources. While the deck may require the towers to already be in place this is
not the case for the towers which can stand on their own perfectly fine. It will only be more time-
efficient to build the towers parallel to each other, after which the deck can be placed upon it.

Preliminarily install electronics and sensors during off-site preparation (at maximum -1 month):
Normally workshops allow for a higher working efficiency than working on site. By installing the
electronics and sensors present on the deck itself during off-site preparation would allow on
saving installation time. Naturally this will not be possible for the towers and the testing will have
to be done one site, hence there will still have to be time reserved on site. Apart from this there
may be complications during the delivery of the deck that can cause delays, hence we think that
one month of shortening the schedule is the maximum that can be achieved.

Start clean-up early (at maximum -1.5 months): The finishing phase consist of testing and
detailed electronic works which on their own do not require a low of clean-up operations.
Therefore it is advisable to start the clean-up after finishing all clear construction works, those
being the ‘Assembly of bridge deck to towers’ and ‘Access to highways’. There will always be a
clean-up needed after the finishing phase, but the majority can be cleaned earlier. Which would
allow of shaving off approximately one month of time.