Module 7 - Schedule Risk Analysis_Rev0 (2)

MODULE 7 - SCHEDULE RISK ANALYSIS

Rev Description Originator Review Approved Date

0 Released for Global Implementation Ed Cimic Project Controls R5 Management Team

Project Controls R5 Management Team

1 Nov 2011

This document has been prepared for the exclusive use of WorleyParsons.

Copying this document without the permission of WorleyParsons is not permitted. SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

Mark Spanos,

NOTE: Review of Module 1– Introduction to Project Controls is required prior to studying this module.

This Training Module is part 7 of an 8 modular training program designed to provide the participants with an overall introduction to the skills & knowledge required by Project Controls when executing an EPCM / PMC project.

The complete training program consists of the following modules:

Module 1 - Introduction To Project Controls

Module 2 - EPC Schedule Development (including P6 user skills)

Module 3 - Services Management (including InControl V8.0 user skills)

Module 4 - Commercial Performance Management

Module 5 - Introduction to TIC Cost Estimation

Module 6 - TIC Management (including Prediction Plus / InControl V10 user skills)

Module 7 - Schedule Risk Analysis (including Primavera Risk Analysis user skills) Module 8 - Cost Risk Analysis (including @Risk user skills)

The aim of this document is to provide a hands-on guideline to assist the project controller in obtaining a basic understanding of the Schedule Risk Analysis process.

Upon completion of Module 7, participants will be able to:



Understand the concept of Schedule Risk Analysis



Convert an EPC Schedule into a Schedule Risk Analysis Model



Understand the Risk Ranging Process



Generate Schedule Risk Analysis Reports / Graphs



Understand and Interpret Schedule Risk Analysis Reports



Utilise the basic functions of Primavera Risk Analysis

Module Content:

1.0 Schedule Risk Analysis?

6

1.1 Uncertainty and Risk in Cost Estimation . . . 6

2.0 Project Risk Management

8

2.1 Risk Planning . . . 8

2.2 Risk Identification . . . 8

2.3 Qualitative Risk Analysis . . . 10

2.4 Quantitative Risk Analysis . . . 13

2.5 Risk Response Planning . . . 15

2.6 Risk Monitoring & Control. . . 18

3.0 Quantitative Schedule Risk

19

3.1 Schedule Risk Analysis: Key Steps. . . 19

3.2 Basic Principles . . . 21

4.0 Cost Risk Analysis Process

28

4.1 Background. . . 29

4.2 Can we meet the deadline? . . . 30

4.3 Main Execution Contracts. . . 32

4.4 Contract 1- EPCM. . . . . . 32

6.6 Contract 3 - Transport & Installation. . . 33

6.7 Contract 4 - Brownfield Modifications / Tie-ins / HUC . . . 33

6.8 Contract 5 - Accommodation Vessel. . . 33

Training Exercises

Exercise 1 - Develop Cost Risk Analysis Model. . . 34

Exercise 2 - Risk Analysis Process . . . 44

Exercise 3 - Risk Analysis Results & Reports. . . 51

5.0 Glossary of Terms

53

ules more often than not overrun their targets.

Schedule slippages can result in schedule Critical Path changes; Changes in the Critical Path often impact originally planned project execution strategies. And so on…

So why does all this happen?

Most of the schedule slippages are usually explained by one of the following factors:



imposed unrealistic targets



completeness/correctness of

activities logical sequencing



improper use of constraints



inadequate resources loading However, the fundamental rea-son for schedule slippages lies in the very nature of CPM (Critical

Path Method):



Activity durations (and costs) are defined by single estimat-ed values, often viewestimat-ed as most likely values



As such, activity durations are defined as deterministic, so the uncertainty is not taken into account



CPM technique itself leads to the optimistic result due to “as soon as possible” approach



Project completion date gets

predicted, and regarded as a certain, solid commitment against which a number of project performance targets are established

The fact that activity durations (and associated costs) are only estimates, and therefore uncer-tain, means that they may not go as planned, but may take more or less time to complete.

This is true even for activities repeated many times over a number of projects.

Figure 1 on page 7 illustrates that fact by showing the original (likely) activities’ durations as bars, along with triangular shapes at the bars right end points representing possible ranges of optimistic and pessi-mistic activity durations. Supported by experience and measured evidence from pro-jects, this likely variability of ac-tivities durations, enhanced by complexities of their logical rela-tionships, often impacts major milestone(s) or overall schedule.

1.1 CPM (CRITICAL PATH METHOD) & CERTAINTY versus UNCERTAINTY

PCDP Module 2 - EPC Schedule Development described the pro-cesses, techniques and tools used by WorleyParsons to build project schedules.

Not much different than with any other organization engaging in project delivery: project plans and schedules are one of the essential tools of project man-agement.

PMI (Project Management Insti-tute) suggest in their best prac-tices documents that all projects must be managed to their sched-ules.

And yet, despite all knowledge, sophisticated software and en-gagement of experienced Project Delivery teams, project

sched-“When you

reach the top,

keep

climbing”

~ / ~

Zen proverb

Sometimes this impact may take place as a surprise, be-tween two reporting periods and have dramatic conse-quence, and some other times, a number of small, incremen-tal changes over longer peri-ods may add to a significant impact on project schedule

With the repeated reference to the PCDP Module 2, where aspects of schedule uncertain-ty are brought up in its sections 5.8 Risks and Opportunities and 5.13 Schedule Reserve, this PCDP module 7 is dedicat-ed to the review of probabilistic approaches and related pro-cesses, techniques and tools.

The processes of project risk management will be described in more detail in the subse-quent sections.

Schedule risk analysis comes with answers not possible or

not available in CPM planning/ scheduling approach:



Probabilistic View offering



Uncertain durations (and

costs) are defined by three-point estimates - optimistic (low or minimum), likely and pessimistic (high or maxi-mum)



Durations (and costs) are expressed as PDFs

(Probability Distribution Func-tions)



The range of expected values (dates, costs) are obtained by simulation

Some of the benefits of schedule risk analysis are:



It provides a range of possible completion dates (range of expected costs) along with corresponding probabilities



Provides the extent of possible overruns and required contin-gency reserve



Identifies the areas of greatest risks, inclusive of analysis of near-critical paths



Provides inputs to risks re-sponse plans



And more…

But before continuing with the more focused and detailed train-ing in quantitative schedule risk analysis, the entire next chapter is dedicated to the broader sub-ject of prosub-ject risk management, and as such it is shared / repeat-ed in the PCDP Module 8 - Cost Risk Analysis.

Risk management is an essential and integral part of the Wor-leyParsons project delivery pro-cess.

Understanding project risks is key for successful implementa-tion of cost risk analysis.

As per PMI PMBOK Guide – 4th Edition (ANSI/PMI 99-001-2008):”The objectives of Project Risk Management are to in-crease the probability and impact of positive events and decrease the probability and impact of negative events in the project.” Project Risk Management in-cludes the processes of conduct-ing risk management plannconduct-ing, identification, analysis, response planning, and monitoring and control on a project.

2.1 RISK PLANNING

Planning for risk management is the process that defines how to approach, plan, and execute the risk management activities for a project. It creates a roadmap for the remaining risk management processes.

This process is general and high level in nature and therefore takes place early on the project.

The output of the risk manage-ment planning is the Risk Man-agement Plan (RMP).

The RMP details the risk man-agement activities that will be

undertaken by the project includ-ing the purpose, scope, process, responsibilities and extent of technical risk studies.

Another important part of risk management plan is a descrip-tion of how risks will be catego-rized.

A tool for creating consistent risk categories is the Risk Break-down Structure (RBS).

In the RBS, the categories of risks are decomposed into fur-ther details. An example of RBS showing risk categories is shown in Figure 3.

The risk management plan is plotted out by meeting with all appropriate stakeholders.

This is followed up with a further analysis to determine the appro-priate level of risk and the ap-proach warranted on the project.

The RMP is either referred to or included in the Project Execution Plan (PEP) as required. For more information, please refer to the EMS Task Sheet PAP-9002.

2.2 RISK IDENTIFICA-TION

Risk identification is a formalized process that identifies which risks could impact the project and to understand the nature of these risks.

Risk identification builds the “risk

register”, which is a list of all risks, their causes, and any pos-sible responses to those risks that can be identified at this point in the project. (Please refer to WorleyParsons Risk Manage-ment Software Ver. 4.05, its risk register template and guideline) Typically, identifying the risks is the first step in the Cost Risk Analysis process. There are various tools available for the risk identification process:

Documentation Reviews A documentation review is struc-tured review of project documen-tation, including cost estimate and schedule basis, assump-tions, prior project files, and oth-er information.

The documentation is reviewed for completeness, correctness, and consistency.

Information Gathering Techniques

There are numerous techniques for gathering information to cre-ate the risk register.

“My education

was interrupted

only by my

schooling.”

~/~

Winston

Churchill

The techniques most commonly applied in the context of risk are:



Brainstorming



Delphi Technique



Expert Interviews



Root Cause Analysis Checklist Analysis

Checklist analysis uses a Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) to check off items and ensure that all significant risks or categories are being evaluated.

Although it may not be exhaus-tive, this tool provides structure to the Risk Identification process. Assumption Analysis

Assumptions should not only be documented, they should also be analysed and challenged if nec-essary.

Diagramming Techniques Ishikawa diagrams, also called cause-and-effect diagrams and fishbone diagrams, are another way to show how potential caus-es can lead to risks.

Another diagramming method used to identify risks is Influence Diagram. This diagram shows how one set of factors may influ-ence another.

For instance, late arrival of mate-rial may not be a significant risk by itself, but it may influence other factors, such as triggering overtime work or causing quality problems later on in the project due to inadequate time to properly perform the work.

Figure 3– Example Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS)

“I have a

num-ber of

alterna-tives, and each

one gives me

something

different. “

~ / ~

Glenn Hoddle

Finally, flow charts are useful in identifying risks. Flow charts are graphical representation of com-plex process flows.

They are especially helpful when used to “sketch” something very complex into an understandable diagram.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths, Weaknesses, Oppor-tunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis is another practical tool used to identify potential risks and group them into four chart quadrants representing strengths (S), weaknesses (W), opportuni-ties (O), and threats (T).

Strengths and weaknesses are usually of internal nature, while opportunities and threats present themselves as external risks to project.

SWOT analysis can give another perspective on risks that will often help identify the most sig-nificant project risk factors.

WorleyParsons provides a brain-storming prompt list to aid in the identification of Threats and Op-portunities which may arise. Please refer to the EMS CRP-0013 Risk Brainstorming Prompt List for additional details.

2.3 QUALITATIVE RISK ANALYSIS

Qualitative risk analysis process helps to rank and prioritize the

risks so that the right emphasis is put on the right risks.

It helps to ensure that time and resources are spent in the ap-propriate risk areas.

Qualitative risk analysis is a risk probability and impact assess-ment process.

It takes each risk from the risk register and analyses its

proba-bility of occurring and impact to the project.

Risk Event = Risk Probability x

Impact (Value)

Probability = Frequency of

Rel-evant Event / Total Number of Possible Events

Impact = Value of Loss / Gain

Figure 4– SWOT Analysis Chart

“Between two

evils, I always

choose the

one I never

tried before”

~/~

Mae West

By using the probability and impact matrix (PIM), a prioritiza-tion and ranking can be created, which is updated on the risk register.

Each risk in the risk register is evaluated for its likelihood of occurring (probability) and its potential impact on the project. Each of these two values are given a ranking:

Risk Probability Scale falls be-tween 0.0 – no probability, and 1.0 – certainty.

Risk’s Impact Scale can be de-scriptive, i.e. very low, low, me-dium, high, very high; or numeric 0.1/0.3/0.5/0.7/0.9

The risk probability and impact are multiplied together to get a risk score.

This resulting score is used to set priorities and relative risk ranking. WorleyParsons pro-vides guidelines for Likelihood and Consequence scales in risk assessments. (For more, please

refer EMS document CRP-0012) Teams are advised to review the categories and determine a scale that is relevant to their project.

“Sometimes

something

worth doing

is worth

overdoing.

~/~

David

Letterman

“Risk

Analysis is no

more about

risk than

astronomy is

about

telescopes.

~/~

Edsger W.

Dijkstra

The main output from the Quali-tative Risk Analysis is an updat-ed Risk Register. The next step is to add more details to the register including the following:



Relative ranking or priority of

project risks



The urgency of the risks



The categorization of the risks



The Risk treatment plan, and



Any trends that were noticed in performing the qualitative risk analysis.

An example of the risk register is shown in Fig 5 on page 14.

2.4 QUANTITATIVE RISK ANALYSIS

Performing Quantitative Risk Analysis generally follows the risk identification and qualitative risk analysis.

It is the process of numerically analysing the effect of identified risks on project objectives It is performed on risks that have been prioritized by the Qualita-tive Risk Analysis process as potentially and substantially impacting the project’s compet-ing demands.

Quantitative Risk Analysis anal-yses the effect of those risk

events and assigns a numerical rating to those risks individually or evaluates the aggregate ef-fect of all risks afef-fecting the pro-ject.

It also presents a quantitative approach to making decisions in the presence of uncertainty.

There are various tools and methods available for quantita-tive risk analysis process:

Data Gathering & Representa-tion techniques (Interviewing) Interviewing uses a structured interview to ask experts about the likelihood and impact of identified risks.

After interviewing several ex-perts, for instance, the project manager might create pessimis-tic, optimispessimis-tic, and realistic val-ues associated with each risk.

Sensitivity Analysis Sensitivity analysis is used to determine which risks have the most potential impact and the

degree of overall project sensitiv-ity to any of the evaluated risks while all other variables are kept constant.

It’s the simplest form of risk anal-ysis, which helps to determine which risks have the most poten-tial impact on the project.

It examines the extent to which the uncertainty of each project element affects the objective examined, when all other uncer-tain elements are held at their baseline values.

The advantage of this method is that it gives a range of possible outcomes in which critical varia-bles are easily compared in a sensitivity diagram.

The weakness of this method is that variables are treated individ-ually, limiting the extent to which combinations of variables can be assessed, and a sensitivity dia-gram gives no indication of antic-ipated probability of occurrence.

Probability Analysis Probability analysis overcomes the limitations of sensitivity analy-sis by specifying a probability distribution for each variable.

Probability distributions are math-ematical representations that show the probability of an event occurring.

The probability is usually ex-pressed as a table or graph. Consider flipping a coin as an example.

There would be two possible outcomes from this event: head or tail.

Now imagine flipping this coin six times. Doing this, the probability of the coin landing on heads a given number of times can be analysed.

Probability distributions are very useful for analysing risks.

They consider situations where any or all of risk variables can be changed at the same time, allow-ing the project manager to take a good look at the probability of an event occurring and to make a rational decision about how to approach the risk.

The most typical probability distri-butions used in quantitative risk analysis are:



Triangular, if Optimistic (Min), Pessimistic (Max) and Most Likely scenarios are used.



Normal or Log Normal, if mean and standard deviation are used.



Other common distribution types include: trigen, uniform, beta, pert, etc.

The disadvantage of using the probability analysis method is that defining the probability of occurrence for any specific varia-ble may be difficult, as every project is different.

Expected Monetary Value Analysis (EMV)

Expected monetary value analy-sis takes uncertain events and assigns a most likely monetary value.

It is a statistical concept that calculates the average outcome of future scenarios.

Opportunities are expressed as positive and threats are ex-pressed as negative values.

EMV is calculated by multiplying the outcome’s values and proba-bilities, and adding them togeth-er.

EMV is typically calculated by using decision tree analysis.

Decision Tree Analysis Decision trees describe a deci-sion under consideration and the implications of choosing one or another of the available alterna-tives. It incorporates probabilities of risks and the costs or rewards of each logical path of events and future decisions.

“When

someone says

he’s going to

put all his

cards on the

table, always

look up his

sleeves”

~ / ~

Lord Leslie

Hore-Belisha

Solving the decision tree indi-cates which decision yields the greatest expected value to the decision maker when all the un-certain implications, costs, re-wards, and subsequent decisions are quantified.

Modelling and Simulation Modelling and simulation meth-ods are approaches that trans-late the uncertainties into their potential impact on project objec-tives.

There are almost as many types of simulation as there are pro-jects; however, one technique used for schedule and cost risk analysis is Monte Carlo simula-tion.

Cost risk modelling and Monte Carlo simulation using @Risk software is the preferred method used by WorleyParsons.

Sched-ule risk modelling and Monte Carlo simulation using Pri-mavera Risk Analysis Expert (formerly Pertmaster) is the pre-ferred method used by Wor-leyParsons.

2.5 RISK RESPONSE PLANNING

Earlier, in the process of Plan Risk Management, we created a general approach to risk ( the risk management plan).

Then, in risk identification pro-cess, we created a list of risks and started our risk register.

Then we qualitatively and quanti-tatively analysed the risks, and now we are ready to create a detailed plan for managing the risks.

This is exactly what Risk Re-sponse Planning does; it creates a plan for how each risk will be handled. The resulting plan is actionable, meaning that it as-signs specific tasks and responsi-bilities to specific team members.

Remember that risk can be a positive (opportunity) or negative (threat) event.

Figure 6 – Sample Decision Tree

EMV of the Chance Node $ 41.5M

EMV of the Decision $ 49

Build or Upgrade?

Build New Plant

Upgrade Existing Plant Strong Demand Weak Demand Strong Demand Weak Demand False - $ 120 True

- $ 50 EMV of the Chance Node $ 49.0M 65% $200 35% $ 90 65% $120 35% $ 60 $80M -$30M $70M $10M

“If builders

built buildings

the way

programmers

wrote

programs,

then the first

woodpecker

that came

along would

destroy

civilization.”

~/~

Murphy's

Laws of

Technology

“If an expert

says it can’t

be done, get

another

expert”

~ / ~

David

Ben-Gurion

Therefore, careful consideration must be given to each risk, whether the impact of that risk is positive or negative.

Avoidance

Avoidance is changing project plan to eliminate risk, to isolate the project objectives form the risk’s impact, or to relax the ob-jective that is in jeopardy.

Examples of this method are extending the schedule, reducing scope to avoid high-risk activi-ties, adopting familiar approach instead of innovative one, and avoiding an unfamiliar subcon-tractor.

Transference

Transferring a risk is shifting the negative impact of a threat, along with the ownership of the re-sponse, to a third party.

Contractual agreements, warran-ties, and insurance are common ways to transfer risks.

Mitigation

Mitigating a risk is the reduction in the probability and/ or impact of an adverse risk event to an acceptable threshold.

For instance, if you were con-cerned about the risk of winter weather damage to a construc-tion project, a mitigaconstruc-tion plan can

be to construct the building out-side of the winter season.

As stressed earlier, risks can be positive or negative, and where positive risks are concerned, the project manager wants to take steps to make them more likely.

The following are specific strate-gies taken to capitalize on the positive risks.

Exploit

Exploit means eliminating the uncertainty associated with an upside risk by making the oppor-tunity definitely happen.

For instance, if a positive risk of finishing the project early is iden-tified, then adding more talented resources to ensure that the project is completed early would be an example of exploiting the risk.

Share

In order to share a positive risk, the project seeks to improve their chance of risk occurring by work-ing with another party.

For example, if a contractor iden-tifies a positive risk of getting a large order, they may determine that sharing that positive risk by partnering with another contrac-tor would be an acceptable strat-egy.

Enhance

Enhancing is modifying the “size” of an opportunity by increasing probability and/or positive im-pacts, and by identifying and maximizing key drivers of these positive-impact risks.

Enhancing a positive risk first requires understanding the un-derlying causes of the risk.

By working to influence the un-derlying risk triggers, you can increase the likelihood of the risk occurring.

For example, an airline might add flights to a popular route during holidays to enhance traffic and profitability during heavy travel times.

“There’s no

secret about

success. Did

you ever meet a

successful man

that didn't tell

you all about

it?”

~ / ~

Kim Hubbard

Acceptance

Acceptance is often a reasonable strategy for dealing with risk, whether positive or negative. When accepting a risk you are simply acknowledging that the best strategy may not be to avoid, transfer, mitigate, share, or enhance.

Instead, the best strategy may be simply to accept it and continue with the project.

There are two kinds of ac-ceptance strategies:

Passive Acceptance: requires

no action, leaving project team to deal with the threats or opportu-nities as they occur.

Active Acceptance: establishing

a contingency reserve, including amounts of time, money, or re-sources to handle known, or sometimes potential, unknown threats or opportunities. Acceptance may be the best strategy if the cost or impact of the other strategies is too great.

Contingent Response Strategy A contingent response strategy is one where the project team may make one decision related to risk, but make that decision con-tingent upon certain conditions. It is a response designed for use only if certain events occur, or predefined conditions take place.

For example, a project team may decide to mitigate a technology risk by hiring an outside firm with expertise in that technology, but that decision might be contingent upon the outside firm meeting intermediate milestones related to that risk.

The Risk Response Planning is recorded in the Risk Register. The risk register which is devel-oped in risk identification is fur-ther updated during qualitative and quantitative risk analysis. In Risk Response Planning pro-cess, appropriate responses are chosen, agreed-upon, and in-cluded in the risk register. Components of the risk register at this point can include:



Identified risks, their

descrip-tions, their causes (eg. RBS element), and how they may affect project objectives.



Risk owners and assigned

responsibilities



Outputs from the qualitative and quantitative risk analysis, including prioritized risks and probabilistic analysis of the project.



Agreed-upon response strate-gies.



Specific actions to implement the chosen response strategy.



Symptoms and warning signs

of risks’ occurrence.



Budget (or schedule) activities required to implement the cho-sen responses.



Contingency reserves de-signed to provide for stake-holders’ risk tolerances.



Contingency plans and triggers

that call for their execution.



Fallback plans for use as a reaction to a risk that has oc-curred, and the primary re-sponse proves to be inade-quate.



Residual risks that are ex-pected to remain after planned responses have been taken, as well as those that have been deliberately accepted.



Secondary risks that arise as a

direct outcome of implementing a risk response.



Contingency reserves that are calculated based on the quanti-tative cost risk analysis.

“If opportunity

doesn’t knock,

build a door”

~ / ~

Milton Berle

2.6 RISK MONITORING & CONTROL

Plans have to be re-assessed and re-evaluated.

Where risk is concerned, we’ve done quite a bit of planning, iden-tifying, analysing, and predicting, but the process of Risk Monitor-ing & Control takes a look back to evaluate how all of that plan-ning is liplan-ning up with reality.

Monitor and control risks is a process that is performed almost continually throughout the pro-ject.

Risk Assessment

As you perform a project, your information about risks changes. You should assess this infor-mation as often as necessary in order to make sure that the risk needs of the project are current and accurate.

Risk Audits

Risk audits are focused on over-all risk management. In other words, they are more about the top-down process that are about the individual risks.

Periodic risk audits evaluate how the risk management plan and the risk response plan are work-ing as the project progresses and

also whether or not the risks that were identified and prioritized are actually occurring.

Variance and Trend Analysis Variance analysis focuses on the difference between what was planned and what was executed.

Trend analysis shows how per-formance is trending.

The reason trend analysis is important is that a one-time snapshot of cost may not cause concern, but a trend showing worsening cost performance may indicate that things are steadily worsening and may indicate that a problem is imminent.

Technical Performance Measurement

Performance can take on many flavors. In the risk context, tech-nical performance measurement focuses on functionality, looking

at how the project has met its goals for delivering the scope over time.

Reserve Analysis

The project reserve can apply to schedule or cost.

Periodically, the project’s re-serve, whether cost or time, should be evaluated to ensure that it is sufficient to address the amount of risk the project ex-pects to encounter.

Status Meetings

This particular technique is not necessarily suggesting that spe-cially called status meetings related to risk are called.

Instead, it is suggesting to create a project culture where bringing up items related to risk is always acceptable and risk is discussed regularly.

3.1 SCHEDULE RISK ANALYSIS: KEY STEPS

In Section 1 we briefly addressed the subject of CPM (Critical Path Method) and its deterministic nature in relation to uncertainty and probabilistic approach.

It is important to understand that the schedule risk analysis does not replace the CPM but it takes it beyond its reach.

The CPM remains the key build-ing block in the whole process, as the quality of the CPM sched-ule is directly related to the quali-ty of risk analysis outputs.

In other words, the results of the schedule risk analysis (and the same applies to cost risk analysis for cost estimates), do not change the project schedule (or cost estimate) but may directly or

indirectly help to improve them based on the informed decisions made in conjunction with these results.

In practice, we also see more of “risk adjusted schedules”, but more as a result of informed decisions made...

The major steps in schedule risk analysis are:

CPM Schedule Development



Develop a quality CPM

sched-ule that reflects the project scope and execution strategy



The schedule should show the

important project structure and clearly define parallel paths and their meeting points



In the case of large number of

activities, focus on those on critical and near critical paths

first, then expand if necessary — use of “risk banding” or QRTs (Quick Risk Templates) may be an option for large numbers of activities



Avoid open ends in the sched-ule logic, they compromise the schedule integrity



Date constraints should be removed, or minimal

Risk Inputs and Activity Dura-tion Ranges

Risk inputs into the model can be performed in a number of ways, depending on which tool is cho-sen for it: Primavera P6 or Pri-mavera Risk Analysis (previously known as Pertmaster), and using one or combination of techniques explained in Section 2:

“Nothing is so

good as it

seems

beforehand’

~ / ~

George Eliot



Assess the activity duration ranges as three point esti-mates: optimistic, likely and pessimistic



Keep in mind that in the CPM schedule, original activity dura-tions may not be the most likely ones.



Choose / Determine appropri-ate PDFs (Probability Distribu-tion FuncDistribu-tion)

Simulation, Reporting, Deci-sion Making

Simulation is performed using the Primavera Risk Analysis

(Pertmaster), a Monte Carlo Method based schedule and cost analytics tool.

The results of simulation provide the answers to a number of criti-cal questions like:



Are the major milestones dates and project completion date feasible or achievable



How likely those dates are,

therefore whether the overall project duration is the most likely one or not



How much time or how many days of contingency might be needed to bring the completion date(s) to an acceptable risk tolerance levels.

Schedule Risk Analysis and Flow Diagram

The following flowchart illustrates the major steps and processes involved:

Review Project Sched-ule and Aspects of each Project Stage

Develop Schedule Risk Model in Primavera P6 or in Primavera Risk

Analysis

Conduct Risk Ranging Session

Run Simulation

Generate Analysis Graphs

Prepare Schedule Risk Analysis Report

Schedule Basis Document Critical & Near-Critical Paths, Logic, Constraints, Calendars,

Key Schedule Drivers

Risk Inputs Layout

Appropriate Participants Risks Register

Choice of PDFs

Monte Carlo Simulation using Primavera Risk Analysis

Probability Distribution Sensitivities, Index ‘Tornado’ Graphs, P10 / P90 Windows and Mean Dates

Detailed narrative of Schedule Development

Rationale behind Key Schedule Drivers

Conclusion / Recommendation Risk Analysis Outputs and Graphs

“The truth is

like sunlight,

people used

to think it

was good for

you”

~ /~

Nancy

Gribble

3.2. BASIC PRINCIPLES Single Logical Path Schedule To demonstrate the basic princi-ples of what was described on previous pages, we will start with the simple schedule shown in Figure 3.2.1 - Single Logical Path Schedule.

The activities in the CPM sched-ule are sequential, with all FS (finish-to-start) relationships, (with the exception of project finish milestone having FF, finish-to-finish relationship).

The activity durations are fixed and because of no overlap be-tween them, the total project duration is the sum of all activity durations.

The CPM also predicts the finish date. But how likely is the pre-dicted project finish date?

As the Figure 3.2.2 shows, the introduction of schedule probabil-istic view, where activities dura-tions are not certain but can take any value between defined

mini-mum and maximini-mum, a number of project finish dates are obviously possible.

Figure 3.2.3 shows an example of a triangular PDF for one activity minimum, likely and maximum (Activity A1010 - Design Line #1). Figure 3.2.1 - Deterministic Single Logical Path Schedule

Figure 3.2.2 - Probabilistic Single Logical Path Schedule

Figure 3.2.4 shows the result of simulation with the range of pos-sible project finish dates.

Given the defined risk inputs (Figure 3.2.2), the risk outputs show that the original (deterministic) project finish is unlikely - only 15% (P15).

A number of days of contingency would be needed to bring the project completion date to P50 or higher.

Parallel Logical Paths Schedule

Most of our project schedules are not as simple as the one used on

the previous page.

Typical scenario is that there are many more activities, with more complex logical relationships, with multiple logical paths, etc.

To prove that the more complex schedules are more risky, we expand the single logical path schedule to two parallel logical paths schedule.

Also, the second logical path added is identical to the first one. (See Figure 3.2.5 on page 23).

The activity durations, length of both paths and project finish date are the same.

It is also assumed that the uncer-tainties around both paths’ activi-ties are the same.

Performing the simulation based on these risk inputs generates the output report with the range of different expected project fin-ish dates.

More importantly, the output shows that the deterministic pro-ject finish is now only 2% likely, a product of two independent logi-cal paths probability of 15% each (15% X 15% = 2.25% or P2!). Figure 3.2.4 - Single Path Range of Project Finish Dates

“Being on a

tightrope is

living,

everything else

is waiting”

~/~

Karl Wallenda

The comparison of results shows that:



Two-paths schedule is more risky because each logical path may delay the project



The risk is increased at the

logical paths converging points

(that can be said for any inter-im project milestone where two or more logical paths merge)



Two-paths schedule is more risky at the optimistic and mean ranges of dates than at the pessimistic ranges of dates

As the range of expected finish dates is different, in this scenario we would need to add more time (days) in contingency to bring the project finish to P50 or more. This is illustrated by Fig. 3.2.6 Figure 3.2.5 - Probabilistic Parallel Logical Paths Schedule

Criticality Index

The CPM schedule critical path analysis is useful for a number of reasons:



It represents the longest logi-cal path determining the earli-est project finish date



Because of that, the delay on

the critical path delays the project



It is usually the path that re-quires most attention

Figure 3.2.7 shows a slightly modified schedule from the previ-ous page example, only one activity has changed as follows:



A0120 - Supply, Prefab &

In-stall Line #1 is now 45 instead of 50 days



The logic for Piping Line #1 has different inputs for mini-mum and maximini-mum ranges The shorter likely duration “promoted” the second logical path to be critical. (Logic Path Piping Line #2)

If we were to follow the CPM schedule, the logical course of

action would be to focus man-agement attention to the activi-ties on the critical path Pipeline #2.

However, the results of risk anal-ysis show that we should focus on the logical path that is near the critical path because it is more risky - See Figure 3.2.8. Therefore, the CPM approach can potentially miss the risks by focusing on the critical path ac-tivities instead on those that are more uncertain and risky Criticality Index represents the percentage of iterations for each activity that was on a critical path during the simulation.

Criticality index of 100% means that regardless of how the task durations varied, the critical path always included that activity. Activities with the high criticality index are more likely to cause delay on projects.

Criticality Index is typically plot-ted in the form of “Tornado Dia-gram”.

Probabilistic Branching When the schedule was created the most likely path and activities have been created.

Unlike with CPM approach, the schedule risk modeling allows for probabilistic branching in situa-tions when it is not clear what the outcome of an activity may be.

The successor activities may be on different logical paths (branches), depending on the probability of the predecessor outcomes.

Figure 3.2.9 shows that two logical paths are possible after the lines are declared ready for testing:



Pass the test (70% chance) and go to commissioning, or



Fail the test, for which 30% chance of occurrence is given, which would then require lines to be fixed and re-tested, thus delaying the system commis-sioning.

“Look twice

before you

leap”

~/~

Charlotte

Bronte

For every iteration of the simula-tion one acsimula-tion is chosen ran-domly using the assigned proba-bility and the other outcomes are ignored.

The results of risk analysis, as in Figure 3.2.10, show that:



Frequency distribution results (histogram) get a shape of distinct humps that represent

branched probabilities



Cumulative probability

distribu-tion gets a “shoulder” shape at the branching probabilities

Conditional Branching Similar to probabilistic branching, the conditional branching models special project conditions and their consequences.

It is helpful in what-if scenarios where triggers like missed dates or excessive costs reach beyond preset thresholds.

The outcomes and logical paths beyond these triggers are then different than originally planned.

“And the

trouble is, if

you don’t risk

anything, you

risk even

more”

~/~

Erica Jong

Figure 3.2.8 - Criticality Index

Figure 3.2.10 - Probabilistic Branching Result

Correlation

In broad statistical terms, correla-tion represents a relacorrela-tionship between two or more random variables…

Correlation can be positive or negative, and is expressed as a range between 1 (perfect in-creasing correlation) and –1 (perfect decreasing correlation).

Correlation value of 0 (zero) indi-cates that variables are uncorre-lated.

Using correlation in schedule risk modeling is useful and recom-mended, as it prevents unrealis-tic situations during the simula-tion.

The random sampling gets “driven” in a sensible way to reflect the degree of correlation between variables.

For example, if the foundation size increases, the excavation requirement will likely increase which in turn will proportionally increase the time required for back filling and compacting.

In this case of positive correla-tion, a single iteration random sampling will choose the values from the variables PDFs reflect-ing the degree of correlation.

PDF Selection

Probability Distribution Functions (PDFs) were already mentioned earlier.

In this sub-section just a few additional details are added.

It is clear that PDFs are used to model the range of activity possi-ble durations (or costs).

There is a number of available PDFs to be chosen, each meant to provide the best representa-tion of possible values and corre-sponding probabilities for a varia-ble, in this case activity duration.

Using the example of two PDFs, used quite often, we want to demonstrate the importance of choosing the appropriate PDF for activities risk inputs modeling:

Triangular distribution is com-monly used due to its simple set of parameters that make it easy to relate to real life situations— Figure 17

The expected value is calculated as a simple arithmetic mean of minimum, likely and maximum values.

Triangular PDF is regarded as a “conservative” distribution.

BetaPert distribution uses the same set of parameters as Trian-gle PDF, and it also models many activity durations well— Figure 18.

Using BetaPert PFD suggests greater confidence in the most

likely duration and its extremes tail off more quickly.

The expected value is calculated using PERT formula.

Figures 17 and 18 show the dif-ferences in expected values for the same uncertainty ranges with two different PDFs applied.

Figure 17—Triangular PDF

Figure 18—BetaPert PDF

“When you

work alone, all

your annoying

habits are

gone”

~ / ~

Marrill Markoe

Previous sections covered the project risk management in gen-eral and also focused on key aspects of the schedule quantita-tive risk analysis.

Applying the techniques and tools available brings us to the actual simulation, running the reports, interpretation of results and final decision making.

Some of these may involve going back to the model inputs or other parameters in order to modify them, and through this iterative process we expect to arrive at the outcomes that will best sup-port project objectives.

The importance of the risk regis-ter is outlined in Chapregis-ter 2 along with the available WorleyParsons in house developed tool and/or other external tools.

Primavera Risk Analysis (Primavera Risk Expert) also offers the same in a convenient and powerful way.

Risk register, risk scoring matrix, risk tolerance criteria, are all integrated within the model, so that linking the risks with the schedule activities becomes an easy task.

This functionality allows the risk analysis facilitator and team, to build “risk impacted schedule”, refine it, re-run it, and analyze results, both pre and post-mitigation.

A number of additional features are available in Primavera Risk Analysis including the cost risk management capability, probabil-istic cash-flows, etc., but these will not be the subject of

discus-sion in this module.

Module 8 is dedicated to Cost Risk Analysis, along with the examples of modeling using the @Risk as the tool of choice.

As the whole process of sched-ule risk analysis and simulation using Primavera Risk Analysis will be demonstrated in the com-ing chapters and traincom-ing exercis-es, we will not repeat that pro-cess here.

Instead, we will start with the (re) introduction of our Tatanka pro-ject facts, as in other PCDP modules, and take it though the schedule risk modeling, simula-tion and interpretasimula-tion of results in step-by-step increments.

Power - Cheyenne Power

Midstream - Sioux Terminal

Upstream - Apache ‘A’ Platform TATANKA GAS TO POWER DEVELOPMENT

4.1 BACKGROUND

Creer Oil Company (CROC) is the operator of the Tatanka Gas to Power development located in South East Asia. The development is based on the Apache gas fields.

Gas is delivered from the Apache ‘A’ Platform via a 377 km marine pipeline to the Sioux Terminal for processing prior to onward transmission to the Cheyenne Power station.

Production commenced from the Apache Platform in Decem-ber 2002. Original design

throughput was 356 MMscfd.

In response to sustained high-er demand, a compression module shall be designed to handle an increase in pro-cessing capacity from 356 MMscfd to 530 MMscfd.

A provision was made in the original platform design for the addition of a compression module to boost gas pressure to the required pipeline pres-sure.

It was envisaged that compres-sion would not be required until 2012, when the reservoir

pres-sure was predicted to fall below that required for design export gas flow rate.

The start up date for the com-pression facilities is currently targeted for 26 Aug 2012.

The FEED for the compression project commenced on 19 Sep 2010, and is scheduled to com-plete on 25 Dec 2010.

The execution-phase is sched-uled to commence on Jan 1, 2011

4.2 CAN WE MEET THE DEADLINE?

WorleyParsons has been award-ed the FEED (consisting of Eval-uate and Define phases) with the option to take responsibility for the EPCM (execute) work-phase for Apache Compression Module.

As part of the due diligence, the question that is often asked is can the schedule deadlines be met? Are the dates realistic? Are there major concerns?

As discussed in PCDP Module 2, the EPC schedule was prepared as part of the modular training program.

Therefore, reference within this document is made to the EPC Schedule prepared in Module 2.

Schedule delays cause problems for the project owners and con-tractors.

Delay claims for equitable adjust-ments can amount to millions of dollars. Experience tells that

projects often overrun their schedules.

The level of uncertainty is the highest during the start of the project and gets progressively better as the project continues.

This is applicable during each of the project phases.

The level of uncertainty decreas-es as one movdecreas-es from Evaluate phase (FEED) to Execute phase (Detailed Engineering) .

The schedule clearly identifies the activities that need to be performed. It has the timeline required along with its activites’ logical relationships . It might be resource loaded to complete the task at hand.

All this is based on the known scope and best available infor-mation at the time of a project plan / schedule being developed.

The method by which the plan-ner could have obtained these inputs from, could be as follows:

Expert Judgement: The planner and the stakeholders might pro-vide their expert judgement with respect to the durations and resources required to complete the task.

Analogous Estimating: In other cases the duration could be based on a the actual duration expended on a previous similar project activity.

Parametric Estimating: The activity durations are estimated quantitatively based on dividing total work by the productivity rate and the number of resources being employed.

As these activities are all esti-mated durations; there is still uncertainty in achieving the dates.

As activities are also logically linked we find that some inputs from preceding activities might have greater impact in pushing out certain succeeding activities.

This uncertainty arises because planners do not have perfect information about future events and because assumptions that underpin a schedule may not be accurate or well understood. For example, technical infor-mation, which often forms the basis of the schedule, is at times, uncertain, undefined, or unknown when EPC schedules are pre-pared.

New system development may involve further uncertainty due to unproven or advanced technolo-gies, and optimistic program assumptions can lead to extend-ed development or the neextend-ed to substitute alternative technolo-gies.

Future economic conditions (availability of skilled resources) are another example of uncer-tainty that planners face. The accuracy of the activity

dura-tions are improved if one takes into account the risk involved and then baseline the schedule. Schedule risk analysis is the process of associating a degree of confidence with each schedule duration estimate.

The combination of defining probability distributions for vari-ous scheduled task durations and establishing network rela-tionships among the tasks allow one to forecast the probability of meeting the targeted key mile-stone dates.

The key objectives of conducting a schedule risk analysis are to:



Determine the probability or

“chance” of completing the project on time



Identify the probabilistic com-pletion date of the project ra-ther than the deterministic

date (as determined in the EPC Schedule)



Determine the confidence level (measured in %) of com-pleting the project by a specific date



Determine what the ‘true’ Criti-cal Path of the project is



Identify what Activities are most likely to cause a delay to the overall project completion date

The aim of this PCDP Training Module is to provide hands-on guideline to assist a project con-troller in developing and conduct-ing a schedule risk analysis on the previously developed EPC schedule for the Tatanka project.

4.3 MAIN EXECUTION CONTRACTS

In an effort to meet aggressive target completion dates, CROC has decided to execute the pro-ject using a combination of the following execution contracts:



Single EPCM Contractor (WorleyParsons)



Single Module Fabrication Contract



Single Transport & Installation Contract



Single Brown Field Modifica-tion / Tie-In / HUC Contractor



Single Accommodation Vessel

Contract

The contract strategy is based on all Procurement to be done by EPCM contractor and free-issued to the respective contractors. 4.4 CONTRACT 1 - EPCM WorleyParsons has been award-ed the EPCM Contract and as such, responsible to deliver this project on time and on budget.

The EPCM contract covers ser-vices for Engineering, Procure-ment & Construction Manage-ment & Support, and includes the following scope of work:



Detail Design of Module



Detail Design of Brownfield

and Tie-in works



Follow-on engineering, Con-struction support



Procurement services of all equipment and material (issue RFQ’s, Technical & Commer-cial Bid Evaluations, Award Recommendations to CROC and prepare P.O on behalf of CROC)



Vendor inspection and expe-diting for materials and equip-ment (ROS-dates and VDR).



Provision of full EPC

Manage-ment (fabrication, installation and commissioning The contract will be on a reim-bursable basis.

Due to the fast-track nature of the project, the Execution Phase (EPCM) will commence directly after Completion of the Feed Phase.

In order to achieve the target project schedule-dates, the intent is to award the EPCM contract to WorleyParsons (Roll-over).

Subsequently, there is no re-quirement for ITB package prep-aration for the EPCM contract.

4.5 CONTRACT 2 –

MODULE FABRICATION

This contract will be for the fabri-cation of the Apache Compres-sion module.

This contract is intended to be placed on a fixed price lump-sum basis, with the alternative option for a unit rate contract, depend-ing upon timdepend-ing for contract award.

The IFB-Package will be devel-oped by WorleyParsons as one of their deliverables.

The module fabrication contract shall be awarded 4 weeks prior to mobilisation of the fabrication contractor.

A further 6 weeks was allowed for mobilisation and site-preparations prior to commence-ment of the fabrication works.

CROC KEY MILESTONE DATES

The contracting strategy above has been developed to support the following key milestone dates:



PO Award Compressor/Turbine Package 17 Oct 2010



Start EPCM 2 Jan 2011



ETA Compressor/Turbine Package 14 Jan 2012



Module Load-out 10 Jun 2012



Module Installation 25 Jun 2012

4.6 CONTRACT 3 – TRANSPORT & INSTALLATION

A separate contract for the transport and installation of the compression module. The contract would be a fixed price lump-sum with risk associ-ated with weather to be mutually agreed.

The IFB Package will be devel-oped by WorleyParsons as one of their deliverables.

The Transport & Installation con-tract shall be awarded early in the Execution-phase to lock-in the heavy lift vessel and to allow the installation contractor to have the necessary input into the de-sign.

4 weeks was allowed for mobili-sation prior to Module Load-out date.

4.7 CONTRACT 4 - BROWN FIELD MODIFICATIONS / TIE-INS / HUC

Contract for all offshore Module Installation Pre-works, Brown Field Modifications, Shutdown Tie-in works, and Hook-up &

Commissioning works.

The contract will be awarded on Cost+ reimbursable basis with an agreed budget-cap per work-package.

The IFB Package will be devel-oped by WorleyParsons contrac-tor as one of their deliverables.

The BF/HUC contract shall be awarded 4 weeks prior to mobili-sation of the BF/HUC contractor.

6 weeks was allowed for mobili-sation and site-preparations prior to commencement of the BF/ HUC works.

4.8 CONTRACT 5 - ACCOMMODATION VESSEL

A contract for the Accommoda-tion barge to be utilized for the Maintenance/Tie-in Shutdown through to Final Hand-over.

Contract will be based on Day-rates for bare vessel plus addi-tional charge per person. The available barges will be re-viewed during the FEED, and award should be early in the EPCM to ensure availability.

4 weeks was allowed for mobili-sation prior to commencement of Maintenance/Tie-in Shutdown.

The initial task of a project con-trols planner is to identify what the key schedule drivers of the project are and use these to de-velop a schedule risk model which can be used as the basis for schedule risk analysis.

In other words, what aspects of the project will have the biggest impact on the overall success (or failure) of the project’s comple-tion.

Areas of the project that will need to be considered are:

Detail Engineering



Request For Quotation Deliv-erables to support Procure-ment Phase



Technical Evaluations to meet Major Equipment award dates



Technical Evaluations to meet Sub-Contract award dates



AFC Deliverables to support

Fabrication Phase

Procurement



Request For Quotation to meet Major Equipment award dates



Expediting of Equipment deliv-ery to site



Expediting of Vendor Data to support Engineering AFC De-liverables

Construction / Fabrication



Delivery Major Equipment and

Bulk Material



Maximising of Onshore Pre-commissioning Works

Transport & Installation



Availability of Heavy Lift

Ves-sel



Load-Out Milestone Date



Hook-Up and Commissioning:



Identification and priority of

Commissioning Systems handover



Expediting of Mechanical Completion dates

In a ‘live’ project environment, the key schedule drivers for each of the project’s stages will be determined by undertaking a group discussion with the follow-ing project participates (both from CROC and WorleyPar-sons):



Project Manager



Project Controls Manager and/ or Project Planner



Engineering Manager



Procurement / Contracts

Man-ager



Construction Manager



Commissioning Manager

Based upon these discussions, for which earlier risk manage-ment processes and steps have been used as inputs (i.e. risk register, risk ranking, etc.), the schedule risk model can be de-veloped

EXERCISE 1:

DEVELOP SCHEDULE RISK ANALYSIS MODEL

The exercise here is to develop the schedule risk-model in Pri-mavera Risk Analysis.

Preparatory Work

Once logged onto Primavera Risk Analysis, selection can be made as:



File / Open, if the project schedule from Module 2 has already been imported and saved as “.plan” in PRA for-mat schedule from Module 2., or



File / Primavera, with a cou-ple of key options: Open Pri-mavera Project (via link to P6 Database—admin only) or Open Primavera XER file.

1. If Open Primavera import selection is made, then the first step will be the Schedule Validation, resulting in an Im-port Log and Schedule Check Report. Please review both log warnings and report.

2. Use Menu Item Plan / Plan Information / General tab to define plan titles and company details, and Dates tab to de-fine:

Start: 12-Sep-2010 (as per the EPC Project Schedule)

Time Now (Data Date): 02-Jan-2011

1

3. Use Menu Item Plan / Plan Options / Date tab to define date format and related preferences.

4. Use Menu Item Plan / Plan Options / Time tab to de-fine working time, as well as Plan / Calendars to define working week: Each week is

7 days (as with the EPC

Schedule, the Schedule Risk Model will be using a 7 day calendar)

5. Once all the above steps are completed, please save the file as a Primavera Risk Analysis Plan: File name: 042_TRN007_XX {Particpant’s initials}

5

3

4

Schedule Risk Model - Layout and formatting

Prior to the Project Services En-gineer developing the Schedule Risk Model, certain formatting needs to be completed as de-scribed below:

6. Select Menu Item Format / Timescale to define how the timescale is to be displayed (please choose the Dates on-ly), timescale format and other available options.

7. Select Menu Item Format / Columns —the default col-umns on a left hand side of a bar chart are as shown in the Screenshot No. 7.

Menu Item Format offers a num-ber of additional formatting options, like Lines, Gantt Chart, Individual Task Styles, etc.

6

8. In order to develop a Sched-ule Risk Model containing the most relevant information, it is required to setup the Bar chart Columns with the fol-lowing fields, as a minimum. Additional fields are recom-mended, like Risk Input— Duration Function, Risk In-put—Duration Correlation, Risk Input—Probabilistic Branch, and so on...

Each column is selected from the Format / Columns lists (Grouped Fields or Alphabet-ic Fields) and placed prefera-bly on the right side of the bar chart..

The table above identifies the sequence and naming of some of the columns.

9. Select Menu Item Format / Bars and also Format / Gantt Chart and follow some of the basic instructions, as a

formatting options, i.e. modify as follows:



Float: Hide all float—this will hide float bars from on-screen displays and schedule

print-outs, if preferred that way



Uncheck Show Task Down-time—Periods of inactivity will not be displayed on on-screen displays and schedule print-outs Field Top Heading Bottom Heading Text Alignment Column Width Left Columns

1 Name Activity ID Left 8

2 Description Activity Description Left 45

3 Remaining Duration Rem. Duration Right 8

4 Early Start Early Start Centre 10

5 Early Finish Early Finish Centre 10

Right Columns

6 Risk input – Duration Minimum Minimum Duration Right 9

7 Risk input – Duration Most Likely Most Likely Right 6

8 Risk input – Duration Maximum Maximum Duration Right 9

8

Once the Project Services Engi-neer has completed the format-ting of the Schedule Risk Model, the risk inputs layout may look like the one shown above.

The next step is to start populat-ing activities’ risk(s) data.

Schedule Risk Model - Popu-lating Activities

For training purposes, the partici-pant will determine a summary of Activities from the overall EPC Schedule that represent the key

schedule drivers for the project. A suggested activity listing is shown on page 40.

With the exception of Activity IDs 1-17-GEN-13 (Start Milestone) and 6-05-PED-00 (Finish Mile-stone), all other Activities have a “Normal” Activity Type (as indi-cated in the General tab of the Task Details window – please see page 41)

As indicated in Chapter 5, CROC has certain key Milestone Dates

that are required to be met. Of this list, the following mile-stones were included as “constraints” in the list of identi-fied schedule drivers.

Note 1: Activity ID 1-17-GEN-13 “Start EPCM” is constrained as a Must Start On date of 02/Jan/11

Note 2: Activity ID 6-05-PED-00 “ETA Compressor & Turbine Package” is constrained as a Must Start On date of 16/Oct/10

Predecessor

Activity Activity Rem. Early Early

ID Description Dur. Start Finish

(Days)

Activity Type Lag

ID

1-17-GEN-13 Start EPCM (Note 1) 0 02/Jan/11* n/a

1-03-EDA-00 Module Detailed Design 266 2-Jan-11 24-Sep-11 1-17-GEN-13 SS 1-03-EDB-00 Brown Field Mods Detailed Design 266.00 2-Jan-11 24-Sep-11 1-17-GEN-13 SS 6-05-PED-00 ETA Compressor & Turbine Package (Note 1) 456 16-Oct-10 14-Jan-12 n/a 6-05-PBA-00 RFQ, TBE, PO, ETA Piping, E & I Bulks 281 9-Apr-11 14-Jan-12 1-17-GEN-13 SS 97 6-05-PSA-00 RFQ, TBE, PO, ETA Primary Struct. Steel 294 28-Nov-10 17-Sep-11 n/a 6-05-PEA-00 RFQ, TBE, PO, ETA Suction Scrubber 379 12-Feb-11 25-Feb-12 1-17-GEN-13 SS 41 2-17-MFD-00 Contract Award / Mobilise – Module Fabrication 197 23-Jan-11 7-Aug-11 1-17-GEN-13 SS 21 3-17-IND-00 Contract Award / Mobilise – Transport & Installation 345 5-Jun-11 14-May-12 1-17-GEN-13 SS 154 4-17-BFM-00 Contract Award / Mobilise – BF/Tie-Ins/HUC 197 13-Mar-11 25-Sep-11 1-17-GEN-13 SS 70 5-17-ACV-00 Contract Award / Mobilise – Accommodation Vessel 239 24-Apr-11 18-Dec-11 1-17-GEN-13 SS 112 2-06-MFD-20 Pre-Fab / Erection Primary & Secondary Steel 217 18-Sep-11 21-Apr-12 3-17-MFD-00 FS

6-05-PSA-00 FS

2-06-MFD-28 Mechanical Equipment Installation 21 26-Feb-12 17-Mar-12 6-05-PEB-00 FS 0

2-06-MFD-24 Piping Pre-Fabrication / Erection 154 6-Nov-11 7-Apr-12 6-05-PBA-00 SS 211 2-06-MFD-30 Elect. / Inst. Equipment & Bulks Installation 112 1-Jan-12 21-Apr-12 2-06-MFD-20 FF

2-06-MFD-28 SS 14

2-07-MFD-20 Onshore Pre-Commissioning 105 13-Feb-12 27-May-12 2-06-MFD-30 FF

1-03-EDA-00 FS

1-03-EDB-00 FS

6-05-PBA-00 FS

6-05-PED-00 FS 29

2-08-MFD-22 Load Out & Sea fastening 14 28-May-12 10-Jun-12 2-07-MFD-20 FS

2-06-MFD-28 FS

2-06-MFD-24 FS

2-06-MFD-30 FS

4-06-BFM-20 Tie-In Pre-Works & Major Hot Works 84 6-Nov-11 28-Jan-12 6-05-PBA-00 SS 211

3-17-BFM-00 FS

3-17-ACV-00 FS -42

4-13-BFM-24 Module Pre-Works 140 29-Jan-12 10-Jun-12 4-06-BFM-20 FS 3-09-IND-20 Module Transportation and Installation 21 11-Jun-12 1-Jul-12 3-17-IND-00 FF

4-13-BFM-24 FS

4-15-HUC-20 HUC Compression Module / Start-Up Works 56 2-Jul-12 26-Aug-12 3-09-IND-20 FS 1-17-GEN-24 Start Up / Hand-Over (Note 1) 0 26-Aug-12 4-15-HUC-20 FS

Similar to the functionality of Primavera P6, Primavera Risk Analysis is relatively straightfor-ward to populate with Activity Details:

10. Select Menu Item Insert / New Task, if a new task needs to be inserted.

With the Task Details General tab selected, enter in the data as follows:

Name: Activity ID from page 40 list of schedule drivers

Description: Activity Description from page 40 list

Remaining Duration: Remaining Duration from page 40 list.

Calendar: 7 Day

10

Tasks Details window is dis-played at the bottom section of the screen. I

f not, the Task Details can be viewed in two ways: A.– Menu Item View / Task Details toggle item, or B.– while on activity line, by right click and selection of Task Details.