Free AACE International PSP Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

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

 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.

Understand the Relationship Between G and H:

The time-scaled diagram shows that Activity H starts immediately after the finish of Activity G.

This is indicative of a Finish-to-Start (FS) relationship.

Cross-Verification:

Option A: Incorrect. The relationship is visible in the diagram.

Option B: Incorrect. There is no evidence of a Start-to-Start (SS) relationship.

Option D: Incorrect. Finish-to-Finish (FF) is not applicable here.

Option C: Correct. FS relationship matches the network logic.

 Hammock Activities (2001–2004):

Activity 2001 ("River Diversion Stage 1"): Duration = 92 days.

Activity 2002: Starts immediately after 2001, duration = 38 days.

Activity 2003: Starts immediately after 2002, duration = 15 days.

Activity 2004: Starts immediately after 2003, duration = 38 days.

 Calculate the Duration:

Total duration = 92 + 38 + 15 + 38 = 183 days.

 Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Underestimates.

Option C: Incorrect. Overestimates.

Option D: Incorrect. Overestimates.

Option B: Correct. Matches the calculated duration.

 Understanding the Timeline:

The total time from testing (Activity A) to the release of the product (Activity H) involves sequential tasks.

Calculate the durations of the critical path:

Activity A: 30 days

Activity B: 0 days

Activity D: 60 days

Activity F: 20 days

Activity G: 10 days

 Summing Durations:

Total duration = 30 + 0 + 60 + 20 + 10 = 100 days.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes critical path analysis for determining the project timeline (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path Method).

 Activity Relationships:

Activity 2002 is directly succeeded by Activity 2003 in the schedule.

The late start (LS) of Activity 2003 determines the late finish (LF) of Activity 2002, adjusted by any lags or additional constraints.

 Late Finish Calculation Formula:

LF of 2002 = LS of 2003 - 1 day.

This accounts for the predecessor-successor logic and the sequence of activities.

 Date Calculation:

Late start of 2003 = 10-06-01.

Late finish of 2002 = 10-06-01 - 1 day = 10-05-01.

 Verification:

PSP guidelines emphasize that late finish values are derived by subtracting any relevant time constraints from the successor's late start (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Backward Pass Calculations)

When planning a contractor's baseline critical path schedule for constructing a high-clearance bridge near an airport, a planner/scheduler must consider documents directly relevant to the project's execution and constraints. Here's the detailed reasoning:

Project Plans and Specifications (Option A):These documents contain the detailed design, materials, and methods necessary for construction. They are indispensable for planning the baseline critical path schedule.

Project Geotechnical Report (Option B):The geotechnical report provides critical information about soil conditions, foundational requirements, and potential challenges, which significantly influence construction sequencing and methods.

Regulations Published by the Government Aviation Agency (Option C):As the project is near an airport, these regulations will likely impose height restrictions, flight path considerations, and safety requirements. Compliance with these regulations is crucial to avoid project delays or legal issues.

Government's Report on Future High-Clearance Bridge Projects (Option D):This document provides information on future projects and does not pertain to the current construction project. It does not provide actionable data or constraints affecting the planning or execution of the baseline critical path schedule for the awarded project.

Conclusion: Option D is the least valuable document in this scenario as it does not contribute directly to the planning or scheduling of the current project.

 Early Finish Date Calculation:

Duration of Activity 10002: 7 days.

Assuming the start date aligns with project calendars, calculate the early finish by adding the duration to the early start, considering working days.

Early finish date: 12-17-03.

 Float Calculation:

Total float is the difference between the late finish and early finish dates or derived by backward pass calculations.

Total float: 4 days.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Float and early finish calculations are foundational in the PSP framework and involve analyzing forward and backward pass data (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Calculations and Float Analysis).

Understanding As-Built Critical Path Analysis:

Determining the as-built critical path of a project involves identifying the sequence of activities that actually dictated the completion of the project. This is especially important in projects that are underway, as schedules often deviate from the original baseline due to progress updates and unplanned changes​​.

Explanation of Each Option:

A. Use the progressed portion of the critical path of all the updates previous to the current update:This is correct. To determine the most likely as-built critical path, analyzing the progressed portion of the critical path from all previous updates provides the most accurate representation of the project’s actual execution. By reviewing the progression over time, you can piece together the actual sequence of critical activities​​.

B. Use the progressed portion of the critical path of the baseline schedule:This is incorrect. The baseline schedule reflects the original plan, which may no longer be accurate due to progress deviations, delays, or changes in logic. Using the baseline alone does not account for the dynamic nature of the project​.

C. Interview the project personnel for their perceptions and opinions because the schedule is usually inadequate:This is incorrect. While project personnel may provide insights, relying solely on subjective opinions introduces biases and inconsistencies. A properly maintained and updated schedule is far more reliable for determining the critical path​.

D. Use the forward-looking critical path of the most current updates:This is incorrect. The forward-looking critical path only reflects what is expected to happen from the current point onward. It does not provide an accurate representation of the as-built critical path up to the current point​.

 Study Guide References:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of analyzing progress updates to trace the actual sequence of critical activities. Section 2.3.2 (Tracking Schedule Progress) discusses the role of historical updates in understanding project performance​.

The guide also highlights that a proper as-built analysis requires a review of all updates to identify shifts in the critical path over time​.

Analyze Activity 2001 in the "Normal" Schedule:

Activity 2001 ("River Diversion Stage 1") has a duration of 92 days under the "Normal" schedule.

The logic column shows it has a Successor ID of 2002, and a Finish-to-Start (FS) relationship with no lag. This indicates that Activity 2002 will begin immediately after Activity 2001 finishes.

Identify Concurrent Activities Using the Schedule Logic:To determine concurrency, we need to look for activities that overlap in time with Activity 2001 during its duration. Concurrent activities must either:

Start before Activity 2001 finishes, or

Finish after Activity 2001 starts.

Review Activities in the Normal Schedule:

Activity 1001 ("Preliminary Civil Work"):

Has a duration of 85 days, starts before Activity 2001, and overlaps with it.

Logic: Its successor is Activity 2001 (Start-to-Start [SS] relationship), confirming the overlap.

Activity 1000 ("General Conditions"):

Duration is 1072 days. However, this is an overarching activity, and its inclusion is not specific to being concurrent with Activity 2001.

Activity 7001 ("Permanent Roads"):

Starts much later, after Activity 2001 ends, and thus is not concurrent.

Activity 2003 ("River Diversion Dam"):

Starts after Activity 2001 completes (FS relationship), so it is not concurrent.

Conclusion:The only activity that overlaps and runs concurrently with Activity 2001 in the "Normal" schedule is Activity 1001.