PSP Planning & Scheduling Professional (PSP) Exam Questions and Answers

To constrain a project's end date, a Finish-No-Later constraint is applied to the last activity. This ensures any slippage results in negative float, signaling delays relative to the fixed deadline.

Option A and B apply to earlier constraints, which are not relevant for controlling the project's end date.

Option D applies a constraint to the first activity, not the project finish.

This concept aligns with controlling project deadlines as described in the PSP Study Guide​.

 Role of Constraints:

Constraints impose specific conditions on schedule events or activities, such as fixed start dates or imposed milestones.

These are external to the natural logic relationships established in a network (e.g., predecessor-successor relationships).

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide describes constraints as independent factors that override logic-based sequencing when necessary​.

 Analysis of Options:

Option A and C: Constraints impact both forward and backward passes, not exclusively one.

Option D: Constraints supersede activity logic rather than being overruled by it.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as constraints operate independently of project logic relationships.

 Role of Soils Engineer:

Soils engineers address subsurface conditions, such as soil stability, unexpected geology, and underground obstacles.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Survey errors are typically addressed by surveyors.

C: Archeological findings involve specialists in historical preservation.

D: Toxic soils are typically handled by environmental engineers.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide includes subsurface investigations as a key responsibility for geotechnical professionals (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1A: Site Conditions).

Periodic reporting intervals are governed by contractual requirements to ensure consistency, transparency, and compliance.

While monthly reporting (Option A) is common, the exact frequency depends on contractual agreements​.

Requests by the project manager (Option B) or owner (Option C) are secondary to stipulated contractual obligations.

The PSP Study Guide highlights the importance of adhering to contractually specified intervals for periodic reporting to align all stakeholders​.

 The Late Finish (LF) of Activity 7001, when compared with dependencies in the precedence diagram, does not align with logical flow, indicating an error in its calculation.

 Validating LF involves backward pass calculations, which must respect lags and durations.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.3.4 – Schedule Change Management, and 2.4.3 – Schedule Analysis, focus on identifying and correcting logic or calculation errors in schedules.

 Granting Time Extensions:

Differing site conditions are excusable delays under standard contract terms, requiring time extensions.

Centrifuge delays and shop drawings typically fall under the contractor's responsibility and are not excusable.

 Excluded Options:

A & B: Shop drawing-related delays are the contractor's risk unless explicitly agreed otherwise.

D: Combining excusable and non-excusable delays does not entitle an extension.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Granting time extensions aligns with contractual principles outlined in PSP-related contracts (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1C: Delay Analysis and Claims).

Estimate to Complete (ETC) is the forecast of additional costs required to complete the remaining project work.

Option B refers to actual costs incurred (AC).

Option C refers to Estimate at Completion (EAC), which includes both actual costs and ETC.

Option D refers to Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP).

ETC is a critical concept for forecasting and project control as described in the PSP Study Guide​​.

 Arrow Diagramming Method (ADM):

Also known as Activity-on-Arrow (AoA).

Activities are represented as arrows, and only finish-to-start (FS) relationships are supported.

ADM has limitations in representing other relationships like start-to-start (SS), finish-to-finish (FF), or start-to-finish (SF).

 Precedence Diagramming Method (PDM):

Known as Activity-on-Node (AoN).

Activities are represented as nodes (boxes), allowing for flexibility in logic relationships, including FS, SS, FF, and SF.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The PSP Study Guide highlights that PDM has more advanced capabilities compared to ADM, particularly in defining diverse logical relationships​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is A, as ADM is restricted to finish-to-start logic, while PDM offers more flexibility.

 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.

 Cost for 2000 Series Activities:

Activity 2001: $150,000.

Activity 2002: $25,000.

Activity 2003: $18,000.

Activity 2004: $96,000.

Total: 150,000+25,000+18,000+96,000=289,000150,000 + 25,000 + 18,000 + 96,000 = 289,000150,000+25,000+18,000+96,000=289,000.

 Total Project Cost:

Total cost: $7,308,000 (sum of all activities in "normal" schedule).

 Percentage Contribution:

289,0007,308,000×100≈3.95%\frac{289,000}{7,308,000} \times 100 \approx 3.95\%7,308,000289,000​×100≈3.95%.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes accuracy in percentage-based cost contributions as a critical analysis tool in project cost management (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1B: Cost Breakdown Structure).

 Proceeding without completing environmental studies introduces compliance risks, such as legal challenges or project shutdowns. This is not a feasible method for reducing the overall completion time as it contradicts environmental regulations and ethical standards.

 Methods like subcontracting (A) or reallocating resources (B) are feasible, as they leverage resource management.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 1.2.3 – Stakeholder Considerations, and Section 1.3.13 – Risk and Recovery Planning, which emphasize compliance with regulations and avoiding unmanageable risks.

 Understand Free Float:

Free float is the time an activity can be delayed without delaying the start of its immediate successor.

 Review Activity F in the Diagram:

Activity F has a successor that starts later, providing room for 2 months of free float.

 Cross-Verification:

Option A: Incorrect. Overestimates the float.

Option B: Incorrect. No float is incorrect for F.

Option C: Incorrect. 1 month is insufficient.

Option D: Correct. Matches the calculated free float for Activity F.

 Total Float Analysis:

Total float = Late Finish (LF) - Early Finish (EF) or Late Start (LS) - Early Start (ES).

Activity C (Draft Product Manual) lies on the critical path, so its float is 0.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide defines total float as the amount of time an activity can be delayed without delaying the project (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Float Analysis).

 Scenario Overview:

A change order has been approved, adding 33 days for weather delays. This requires updating the schedule to reflect the extended contract duration.

 Impact on Scheduling:

The simplest and cleanest way to include the change is to create a new activity that represents the delay (e.g., Activity 1050).

The new activity is linked to Activity 1000 using a start-to-start (SS) relationship. This ensures the delay begins in parallel with the original contract start.

The finish-to-finish (FF) relationship with the final activity ensures that the extended duration impacts the project's overall timeline.

 Cross-Verification with PSP Principles:

PSP principles emphasize the importance of maintaining logical integrity and clarity when updating schedules for change orders (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Schedule Maintenance/Controlling). This method ensures traceability of the delay without affecting activity logic unnecessarily.

 Impact of Overrun:

Drafting (Activity C) and manufacturing (Activity D) are critical path activities.

A 5-day overrun in drafting consumes all available time for manufacturing.

Therefore, manufacturing cannot be delayed without affecting the release of the product.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide specifies that critical path activities have zero float, so delays propagate directly to the project finish (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path and Float).

The early finish date and total float are determined using CPM calculations. The PSP Study Guide outlines that early finish is calculated as the early start date plus activity duration, adjusted for calendar constraints (PSP Study Guide, Subchapter 2.2.5, "Constraints and Calendars").

Steps:

Determine early start using forward pass calculations.

Add the activity duration.

Consider non-working days or holidays as per the project calendar.

Calculate float as the difference between late start and early start or late finish and early finish.

Scheduling Professional Study Guide and Documents References

Forward Pass Calculation:

A forward pass determines the earliest start (ES) and earliest finish (EF) dates for all activities, progressing from project start to finish.

Total float is calculated later by comparing early and late dates.

PSP Study Guide References:

Forward and backward pass calculations are core elements of CPM scheduling methodology​.

Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as forward pass provides ES and EF for activities.

To calculate the duration:

Total hours required: 240 hours.

Daily work hours per crew: 5 workers × 8 hours/day = 40 hours/day.

Duration = Total hours ÷ Daily work hours = 240 ÷ 40 = 6 days.

This calculation aligns with standard resource planning principles​.

 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).

 Crashing is a technique to reduce project duration by allocating additional resources to critical path activities. The most critical factor when crashing a schedule often pertains to external constraints that could severely disrupt progress.

 Avoiding adverse weather conditions, such as the 2023-2024 winter/wet season, is paramount since such conditions can render activities impossible or highly inefficient.

 The PSP Study Guide emphasizes that constraints, such as environmental conditions, play a pivotal role in project planning and execution. Managing these constraints effectively through schedule adjustments like crashing is critical to project success.

 Financial incentives (bonus or penalties) and cost minimization, while important, typically take secondary priority when natural constraints risk derailing the project timeline entirely (PSP Guide, Section 1.2.4 – Project Variables and Constraints).

Minimum Project Duration Calculation:

The critical path determines the minimum project duration.

Path: A → B → G → H → 16 months.

Cross-Verification with Network Diagram:

Other paths have shorter durations or do not impact the overall project finish date.

Verification with PSP Guidelines:Critical path analysis is central to determining project duration (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path Method).

 Crashed Schedule Predecessors to Activity 2004:

Activity 2004 (River Diversion to Pipeline) depends on completion of:

1001 (Preliminary Civil Work).

2001 (River Diversion Stage 1).

2002 (River Diversion Stage 2).

2003 (River Diversion Dam).

 Exclusion of Other Activities:

Activity 2007 is not part of the crashed schedule's direct predecessor chain.

Other options include duplicated or incorrect entries.

 PSP Study Guide Reference:

Logical sequence analysis confirms these predecessors (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Activity Sequencing and Critical Path Analysis).

 Time-Scaled Logic Diagrams:

Represent activities with respect to a time scale (e.g., a calendar).

Show logical relationships and durations in a visually aligned manner, aiding in analysis and reporting.

 Common Misconceptions:

They are not the same as pure logic diagrams (B).

While often created using computer software, manual versions are also possible, so (A) is incorrect.

They are not specifically for calculating activity durations (C).

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide identifies time-scaled logic diagrams as a tool for better visualization of schedules, where activities align with calendar dates​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as time-scaled logic diagrams are drawn to align activities with a calendar.

Defining the execution plan is the foundational step in creating a CPM schedule. This involves understanding the project's scope of work and outlining how it will be executed to meet project objectives.

Option A (bar chart) is a visualization step but does not address planning the sequence or scope execution.

Option C (resources) comes later in schedule development after the scope and plan are defined.

Option D (logic diagram) is a subsequent step that relies on the execution plan​​.

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes scope and execution planning as critical first steps​.

 Owner’s total project cost is calculated by summing all direct and indirect costs, including any adjustments for delays or bonuses.

 Using the normal schedule, the provided cost aligns with $12,990,000 after applying standard rates and durations.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 1.3.10 – Cost Estimate Development, which highlights cost aggregation methods.

 Scope Planning Tools and Techniques:

Tools for scope planning include methods to define and refine the project scope. These involve cost-benefit analysis, expert judgment, and alternatives identification.

Schedule performance indexing is a performance tracking tool used during execution and is unrelated to scope planning.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scope planning methods are detailed in the PSP guide, emphasizing tools like expert judgment, alternatives analysis, and structured decision-making techniques​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A: A common method to analyze the costs and benefits of scope components.

Option B: Incorrect. This is a tracking tool, not a scope planning method.

Option C: Expert judgment is a key technique in defining project scope.

Option D: Alternatives identification supports exploring various approaches to project goals.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as schedule performance indexing is not a scope planning tool.

Analyze the Relationship Details:The table shows that Activity 3001 ("Excavation, Dam Site") and Activity 4001 ("Excavation, Spillway") have a Start-to-Start (SS) relationship with a lag of 15 days. A Start-to-Start relationship indicates that the successor activity (4001) can only start after a specified lag period once the predecessor activity (3001) begins.

Understand the Concept of Lag:In scheduling terminology, lag refers to a delay or waiting period between the start (or finish) of one activity and the start (or finish) of a dependent activity. Here, the 15-day lag means that Activity 4001 will commence 15 days after Activity 3001 has started.

Interpret the Relationship:The SS relationship combined with a lag indicates that the two activities (3001 and 4001) are not starting exactly at the same time but are still overlapping or concurrent. This concurrency happens after the lag period elapses.

Verify PSP Study Guide and Relevant Terminology:According to AACE International’s Recommended Practices and the PSP Certification Study Guide:

Start-to-Start relationships are widely used to model overlapping work in schedules where one activity can start before its predecessor is fully complete (PSP Study Guide, Chapter on Scheduling Relationships and Constraints).

Lags provide flexibility to model realistic conditions where tasks start partially overlapping or with delays (PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 Relationships).

Cross-Check the Answer Options:

Option A (Correct): Matches the described logic – "These activities are concurrent with Activity 4001 starting 15 days after the start of Activity 3001."

Option B: Incorrect – Lag is applied to the successor activity, meaning 4001 cannot start earlier than 3001.

Option C: Incorrect – This relationship (SS with a lag) indicates concurrency, not series.

Option D: Incorrect – Though concurrent, the lag makes the start times offset by 15 days, so they do not start at the same time.

 Scenario Review:

Delay in the parking structure foundation is an off-critical path activity.

No impact on the overall project completion date.

 Delay Analysis:

While the foundation activity is delayed, the float ensures that no downstream activities are impacted.

 Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Assumes a 4-day impact.

Option C: Incorrect. Overestimates delays.

Option D: Incorrect. Miscalculates delays.

 Understand Total Float:

Total float is the amount of time an activity can be delayed without affecting the project completion date.

 Review the Network Diagram and Logic:

Activity F is not on the critical path, which allows for flexibility.

Analyzing the paths and slack in the diagram confirms that Activity F has the most total float.

 Cross-Verification:

Option A: Incorrect. Activity I is on the critical path with no float.

Option B: Incorrect. Activity C is not the most flexible.

Option D: Incorrect. Activity D has limited slack.

Option C: Correct. Activity F has the maximum total float.

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.

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.

 Late Finish (LF) is calculated by adjusting the Late Start (LS) of the subsequent activity (2003) by the lag value.

 The formula, LS of 2003 - 1 day, aligns with CPM principles where the predecessor's LF must occur before the successor starts.

 The date calculation, considering lags and dependencies, results in 06 Oct 2021.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 – Relationships and Calculations, Appendix A – Sample Calculations for LF and LS relationships.

 Activity Duration Estimation Techniques:

Accurate estimation methods include detailed breakdowns, using experienced personnel, and analyzing specific factors for individual activities.

Relying on gross estimates or averages (as in A) introduces significant inaccuracies.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of detailed and specific input to improve estimation accuracy​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A: Incorrect method, as averages do not provide accurate results for individual activities.

Option B: Misguided suggestion; focusing independently on activities without logic paths introduces potential errors.

Option C: Correct. Dividing activities enhances detail and estimation precision.

Option D: Correct. Involving the executors ensures realistic and experienced-based durations.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is A, as using gross estimates is not an effective method for improving accuracy.

 Preventing Structural Steel Delays:

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

 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.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

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

 Activity-specific costs in CPM schedules typically include direct expenses like materials (C), field-related overhead (D), and specific schedule management tasks (B).

 Home office expenses are classified as indirect costs and are not associated with any specific activity within the project schedule. They are accounted for in broader financial statements rather than in the activity-based budget.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 1.3.10 – Cost Estimate Development, explains how costs are categorized and assigned in schedules.

 Purpose of Multiple Calendars:

Multiple calendars account for varied work/non-work periods among resources, regions, or activities, accurately representing project execution.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

B, C, D: These may be secondary benefits but are not the primary reason.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of calendars for realistic scheduling (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Calendars and Constraints).

 Explanation of Critical Path:

A network can have multiple critical paths if multiple sequences of activities have zero float.

While it is common to have one critical path, having more than one is possible in complex projects.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Remaining durations exceeding original durations can occur in updated schedules due to delays.

B: Constraints (e.g., finish-to-start, time constraints) can alter longest path calculations.

C: Multiple calendars influence total float when activities use different working days.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide mentions the possibility of multiple critical paths in large or complex schedules (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path Analysis).

Driving Activity Concept:

The driving activity in a backward pass is the one that determines the late start or finish of the dependent activity.

Activity 10001 (Valve House - Complete) is directly dependent on its successor, Activity 11001 (Spillway - Concrete).

Backward Pass Logic:

In backward pass calculations, the late start of Activity 11001 establishes the late finish of Activity 10001 due to their finish-to-start (FS) relationship.

This makes Activity 11001 the driving activity.

Verification:

According to the PSP Study Guide, driving activities are identified based on their logical ties and the critical path's constraints (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Activity Relationships and Critical Path Analysis).

Thus, the driving activity for Activity 10001 is A. Activity 11001.

Free float is a concept in Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling that refers to the amount of time an activity's early start can be delayed without affecting the early start of any immediately succeeding activities.

Option A refers to total float, which considers early and late dates of an activity​.

Option C also points to total float.

Option D does not define free float.

Free float is critical for project planners as it provides flexibility in scheduling without impacting downstream activities​.

 Mitigating Late Completion:

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

 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.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

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

 Logic Organization Requirement:

Activity 6002 is required to begin 10 days after the start of Activity 6001.

A start-to-start (SS) relationship with a 10-day lag effectively captures this requirement.

 Exclusion of Other Options:

Option B: Placing the lag on Activity 6002 introduces unnecessary complexity.

Option C: Start-to-finish relationships are not appropriate for this situation.

Option D: A finish-to-start relationship does not meet the requirement of aligning start times.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes using SS relationships with lags for activities that need staggered starts (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Relationships and Lags).

Impact of Changing Activity E's Duration:

Activity E's new duration = 4 months.

The critical path passes through Activities A → C → D → E → H → I.

Recalculate Project Duration:

Original duration with E = 3 months: 19 months.

Increasing E to 4 months does not impact the overall path since it remains within the critical path's time allowance.

Overall project duration remains 19 months.

Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Assumes additional delays.

Option C: Incorrect. Overestimates delays.

Option D: Incorrect. Miscalculates path changes.

Option A: Correct. Matches revised critical path duration.

 Activity Details (7001 - "Permanent Roads"):

Duration: 48 days in the Normal schedule.

Precedence Diagram Information: The schedule correctly reflects the logic and relationships as FS (Finish-to-Start) with successors.

 Total Float and Dates Review:

No discrepancies are provided in the diagram.

Early Start (ES) and Early Finish (EF) align with the planned duration and dependencies.

 Validation:

Total float is not specified as incorrect.

Early Finish dates, while not explicitly displayed, do not contradict the sequence.

Start-to-Start and Finish-to-Finish relationships are correctly oriented.

 Conclusion:

The activity is correctly represented with a duration of 48 days.