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

 Impact of Scope Definition on Cost Overruns:

Poor scope definition leads to unrealistic budgets and unforeseen changes, which significantly contribute to cost overruns.

Other factors like change management and WBS definitions are secondary contributors compared to scope inadequacy.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The guide emphasizes scope definition as a critical factor for accurate budgeting and planning​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as scope definition at the estimate stage has the most frequent and significant impact on cost overruns.

Understand Activity B's Status:

Activity B has an original duration of 5 days.

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

Review Actual Duration:

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

Actual duration as of the status date = 7 days.

Cross-Verification:

Option B: Incorrect. Progress exceeds 3 days.

Option C: Incorrect. Progress is not 0 days.

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

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

 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).

 Understanding the Problem Context:

Activity C is currently set to complete on Day 40.

Activity A has a 5-day delay in starting, so adjustments are needed to maintain the Day 40 completion date for Activity C.

The key is to identify which adjustment will fail to maintain the timeline.

 Option-by-Option Analysis:

A. Reduce the duration of 'A' from 20 days to 10 days and replace the relationship from 'B' to 'C' with FSO (Finish-to-Start with Offset):

Reducing Activity A’s duration from 20 to 10 days might mitigate part of the delay, but replacing the relationship between B and C with FSO introduces an offset.

FSO relationships typically delay the start of successor activities (Activity C in this case).

This would likely push Activity C beyond Day 40 because the delay in B's finish, coupled with the offset, would result in C starting later.

This adjustment does NOT maintain the completion date of Activity C.

B. Replace the relationship from 'B' to 'C' with SSO (Start-to-Start with Offset):

An SSO relationship allows Activity C to begin once Activity B starts (with or without an offset).

This adjustment effectively overlaps the schedules of B and C, mitigating delays from A.

This adjustment can maintain the completion date of Activity C at Day 40.

C. Reduce the duration of 'B' from 10 days to 5 days by compressing work effort:

Reducing B’s duration by compressing its schedule shortens its timeline, allowing Activity C to start sooner.

This adjustment offsets the delay caused by Activity A.

This adjustment can maintain the completion date of Activity C at Day 40.

 Final Answer and Justification:

The adjustment described in A will NOT maintain the completion date of Activity C at Day 40 because the FSO relationship introduces delays, making it ineffective in this scenario.

Options B and C offer feasible adjustments to maintain the timeline.

 Study Guide Reference:

Refer to the PSP Certification Study Guide, Chapter 2 – Scheduling, Subchapter 2.2.4: Relationships (p. 151-157), which details the impact of logical relationships (FSO, SSO) on schedule timelines.

Additionally, review AACE Recommended Practice 52R-06: Time Impact Analysis for insights into how delays affect dependent activities and methods for mitigating them.

 Critical Path and Delays:

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

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

 PSP Study Guide References:

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

 Analysis for Selection:

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

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

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

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

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

 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.

 Calculation of Maximum Lifts Per Crane Per Day:

A single crane performs 30 lifts per day.

 Number of Cranes and Days:

3 cranes working for 5 days = 3×30×53 \times 30 \times 53×30×5.

 Total Lifts:

Total lifts = 450450450.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Efficient resource calculation is critical in equipment planning (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Resource Allocation and Optimization).

 The Late Finish (LF) for an activity in CPM is determined by adding the activity’s duration to its Late Start (LS).

 For Activity 9004, if its Late Start is known, adding the activity’s 72-day duration gives the Late Finish date.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.2.4 – Relationships and Calculations, highlights the importance of forward and backward pass calculations to determine ES, EF, LS, and LF.

Activity Overview and Dependencies:

From the provided schedule data, Activity 3001 (Excavation, Dam Site) starts with multiple logical relationships:

Successor activities include SS (Start-to-Start) and FS (Finish-to-Start) dependencies with other tasks.

Specifically, these relationships link 3001 to 4001 (Excavation, Spillway) and 5001 (Drill and Grout, Dam Site).

Normal Schedule Context:

Excluding Activity 1000, we focus on Activity 3001's logical relationships to determine which activities are concurrent.

In the "Normal Schedule", Activity 3001 has a duration of 152 days and overlaps with Activities 4001 (152 days) and 5001 (102 days). Both activities share similar dependencies and durations with Activity 3001, making them concurrent.

Schedule Dependency Analysis:

Concurrent activities are identified by overlapping durations and logical relationships that align their schedules.

Activity 4001 is linked via SS and FF dependencies, ensuring simultaneous start and finish points.

Activity 5001 starts as 3001 progresses (SS and FS dependencies).

Final Answer Validation:

Other listed activities, such as 2003 and 7001 (Answer A) or 2004 (Answer B), are not logically or temporally concurrent based on their dependencies and durations.

Only 4001 and 5001 have concurrent schedules aligning with Activity 3001.

Study Guide Reference:

Planning and Scheduling Professional Certification Study Guide, Chapter 2 – Scheduling, sections on "Dependencies and Constraints" (p. 157) and "Sequencing Activities" (p. 151).

For further insights into identifying concurrency using logical relationships, refer to AACE's Recommended Practice 10S-90: Cost Engineering Terminology.

This structured approach ensures alignment with PSP standards and principles in evaluating concurrent activities in complex schedules.

 Activity Details (2001 - "River Diversion Stage 1"):

Successor: 2002 ("River Diversion Stage 2").

Relationship: Finish-to-Start (FS) with no lag.

Normal schedule duration for Activity 2001 = 92 days.

 Backward Pass Calculation for Late Finish (LF):

The Late Finish (LF) of Activity 2001 is derived from the Late Start (LS) of its successor, Activity 2002.

Formula: LF.2001 = LS.2002 - 1 day.

 Date Calculation:

Given: LS.2002 = 08-30-01 (as per data in the schedule).

LF.2001 = LS.2002 - 1 day = 08-30-01 - 1 day = 08-29-01.

 Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Misrepresents the Late Finish formula.

Option C: Incorrect. Adds 1 day instead of subtracting.

Option D: Incorrect. Incorrect date application.

Option B: Correct. Matches both formula and calculation.

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.

 As-Planned vs. As-Built (APAB) Analysis:

A simple APAB compares the planned schedule to the actual schedule to identify deviations.

It does not involve inserting delaying events or re-forecasting the schedule, which makes it unsuitable for detailed analysis.

 Limitations of APAB:

Unsuitable for complex projects (A).

Inserting delays is not part of APAB (B).

Accuracy diminishes for long projects (C) or those requiring granular mid-project analyses (D).

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as inserting delays into the as-planned schedule is not a feature of simple APAB analysis.

 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.

 Early Start Constraint:

An early start constraint specifies the earliest date on which an activity can begin, aligning with project constraints or milestones.

It is a planning input and does not dictate actual or remaining durations.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scheduling constraints, including early start, are critical for establishing realistic schedules and milestones​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is C, as an early start constraint refers to the planned start date of an activity.

Crashing increases direct costs as additional resources, equipment, or expedited delivery methods are employed to shorten the project duration. The PSP Study Guide (Section 2.3.5, "Acceleration") highlights that crashing involves trade-offs between time and cost, often resulting in higher demobilization costs due to the increased deployment of equipment and resources.

 Activity 11001 Characteristics:

Activity 11001 (Spillway - Concrete) is logically defined as the final activity in the project.

Final activities in a project typically do not have successor activities since they signify project completion.

 Exclusion of Other Options:

Option A: Circular logic does not apply since the scheduling logic is linear and follows standard precedence diagramming methods.

Option B: Activity 11001 is not penultimate but the final activity.

Option C: The scheduler's error is highly unlikely in a controlled environment following PSP principles.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide explains that final activities represent the culmination of a project's logical sequence and typically lack successors (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Logical Sequencing).

 Understand the Concept of a Hammock Activity:

A hammock activity spans over multiple activities and reflects the cumulative duration from the earliest start to the latest finish of the grouped activities.

 Activities in the Hammock (6001–6003):

Activity 6001: Duration = 102 days, FS relationship with successor.

Activity 6002: Duration = 140 days, FS with 6001.

Activity 6003: Duration = 115 days, FS with 6002.

 Calculate the Duration:

Earliest Start of Activity 6001 → Latest Finish of Activity 6003.

Total duration = 102 + 140 + 115 = 362 days.

 Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Overestimates.

Option C: Incorrect. Underestimates.

Option D: Incorrect. Underestimates.

Option B: Correct. Matches the calculated duration.

 The change order impacts Activity 6001 by increasing its duration and workload. As per Critical Path Method (CPM) principles, this would also affect predecessor activities like 1000, which directly influence the start of 6001.

 Updates to the schedule will ripple through linked activities, but only those immediately affected by the change—1000 and 6001—would be revised in the immediate update.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.3.4 – Schedule Change Management, and Appendix A – Sample Problems on CPM Network adjustments highlight how scope changes propagate through linked activities.

 Critical Path Identification:

The critical path is the longest sequence of activities that determines the project’s minimum duration.

Path: A → B → G → H.

 Exclusion of Other Options:

Paths involving F, J, or non-critical activities do not align with the longest duration.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide emphasizes identifying the critical path for schedule optimization (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Critical Path Analysis)

A fundamental limitation of Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling is its assumption of unlimited resources, meaning it does not account for resource constraints when calculating schedules.

Option A (backward pass) is a standard part of the CPM process.

Option C is incorrect as CPM considers activity dependencies.

Option D refers to flexibility in diagramming methods, not a drawback.

The PSP Study Guide highlights resource constraints as a significant challenge in CPM application​​.

Scheduling Professional Study Guide and Documents References:

Total float is the amount of time an activity can be delayed without delaying the project's overall completion date.

Option B (buoyancy) and Option D (end of that activity) are irrelevant.

Option C refers to free float, not total float.

This definition is fundamental in critical path analysis​​.

 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.

 The column volume is 2,000 cubic feet (56.64 cubic meters), and each lift using a 1.75 cubic yard bucket corresponds to: Lifts required=Column volume (cubic yards)Bucket capacity (cubic yards)\text{Lifts required} = \frac{\text{Column volume (cubic yards)}}{\text{Bucket capacity (cubic yards)}} Lifts required=Bucket capacity (cubic yards)Column volume (cubic yards)​ Convert 56.64 cubic meters to cubic yards: 56.64×1.308=74.1456.64 \times 1.308 = 74.1456.64×1.308=74.14. Lifts required=74.141.75≈133 lifts.\text{Lifts required} = \frac{74.14}{1.75} \approx 133 \text{ lifts}.Lifts required=1.7574.14​≈133 lifts.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 1.3.7 – Resource Calculations and Allocation, which emphasizes unit conversions and resource management.

 Precedence Diagramming Method (PDM):

PDM allows for Start-to-Start (SS), Finish-to-Start (FS), Start-to-Finish (SF), and Finish-to-Finish (FF) relationships between activities.

This flexibility makes PDM distinct from Arrow Diagramming Method (ADM), which uses arrows to depict dependencies.

 Evaluation of Options:

Option A: Incorrect. This describes ADM, not PDM.

Option B: Incorrect. Both PDM and ADM can represent multiple critical paths.

Option C: Incorrect. Late start and finish calculations apply to both methods.

Option D: Correct. PDM uniquely allows multiple relationship types.

 Understanding the Cycle Time:

A cycle time includes all the operations needed for one complete lift:

Sling Up: 5 minutes

Hoist Up: 4 minutes

Discharge: 3 minutes

Clear Unload Area: 3 minutes

Hoist Down: 2 minutes

 Calculate Total Cycle Time:

Cycle Time = 5 + 4 + 3 + 3 + 2 = 17 minutes.

 Cross-Verification:

Option A (5 minutes): Incorrect. Excludes operations.

Option C (14 minutes): Incorrect. Underestimates.

Option D (6 minutes): Incorrect. Miscalculation.

Option B (17 minutes): Correct.

 Estimating Activity Durations:

The critical factors are crew size, labor hours, and the standard workday.

Cost estimation is not directly required to calculate durations.

 Evaluation of Options:

Option A: Incorrect. Crew size is needed for productivity estimation.

Option B: Incorrect. Labor hours are directly tied to durations.

Option C: Incorrect. Workday hours define the available time.

Option D: Correct. Cost is not directly linked to duration

 Critical Path Characteristics:

The critical path is the longest path through the network, defining the minimum project completion time. It cannot be the shortest path.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Critical path analysis emphasizes that it is determined by network logic and represents the chain of activities controlling the project duration​.

 Analysis for Selection:

Option A, C, and D: Accurately describe the critical path.

Option B: Incorrect; the critical path is not the shortest path.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is B, as the critical path is the longest path, not the shortest.

 Purpose of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS):

The WBS organizes the project into manageable components, breaking it down to the smallest defined work packets or work packages.

These packages serve as the foundation for schedule and cost management.

 PSP Study Guide References:

The WBS is discussed as the primary organizational tool to define the scope, cost, and activities of a project​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as the WBS is used to organize the smallest work packages.

Activity Details (9001 - "Spillway - Concrete"):

Duration: 175 days in the Normal schedule.

To calculate Late Start (LS), the Late Finish (LF) is required. LS is calculated by subtracting the activity's duration from the LF.

Formula for Late Start (LS):LS = LF.9001 - Dur.9001.

Date Calculation:

Late Finish (LF.9001) = 11-20-02 (given or derived).

Apply the formula:LS.9001 = LF.9001 - Dur.9001= 11-20-02 - 175 days.

Cross-Verification of Dates:

After subtracting 175 days, LS.9001 = 11-20-02.

Cross-Verification with Answer Options:

Option A: Incorrect. EF (Early Finish) is not needed for this calculation.

Option B: Incorrect. Uses LS and Dur incorrectly without connecting to LF.

Option C: Incorrect. Data provided is sufficient.

Option D: Correct. Matches both the formula and the date calculation.

 Time-Scaled Value for Reporting Intervals:

BCWS (Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled) is plotted over time to represent the planned expenditure at specific intervals.

BCWS provides the basis for schedule and cost performance comparisons.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

B: BCWP is used to track actual progress.

C: SPI is a ratio, not a time-scaled value.

D: Actual cost of work scheduled is not a standard metric in earned value analysis.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

The PSP Study Guide identifies BCWS as essential for time-scaled earned value analysis (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 1D: Earned Value Analysis).

 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).

 Calculation of Total Lifts Required:

3 column pours = 28×3=8428 \times 3 = 8428×3=84.

Additional lifts = 150150150.

Total lifts = 84+150=23484 + 150 = 23484+150=234.

 Lifts Per Day with One Crane:

1 crane performs 30 lifts per day.

 Required Duration:

Minimum planned working duration = ⌈234÷30⌉=18\lceil 234 \div 30 \rceil = 18⌈234÷30⌉=18.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Aligning workload with equipment capacity ensures practical schedule planning (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2B: Workload Balancing).

 Relationship Analysis:

Activity 4001 starts 15 days after Activity 3001 begins, based on their logical dependency (SS +15).

This indicates partial concurrency, as both activities overlap in execution.

 Evaluation of Other Options:

A: Incorrect, as the statement refers to Activity 5001, not 3001.

C: Incorrect, as Activity 4001 does not start before Activity 3001.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

PSP guidelines stress precise interpretation of activity relationships (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Logical Relationships and Lags).

 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)

 The Critical Path comprises the sequence of activities that directly impact the project’s completion time.

 If only the last half of Activity B delays the subsequent activities, then this portion lies on the critical path.

 References: PSP Study Guide, Section 2.4.3 – Schedule Analysis, emphasizes identifying segments of activities that are critical due to dependencies and float values.

 Position Analysis:

Activity C (Develop Draft Plans and Specifications) has a duration of 5 months and is preceded by Activity A.

The diagram positions Activity C incorrectly since it starts simultaneously with Activity B, but Activity C should start after the completion of Activity A.

 Cross-Verification:

Based on the dependencies, Activity C’s incorrect positioning violates the logical sequencing rule.

 Verification with PSP Guidelines:

Correct logic representation is critical for network diagrams (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Logical Sequencing).

 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).

Industry-recognized methodologies for quantifying critical delays include:

Periodic Windows Analysis, which evaluates delays in defined time periods.

Collapsed As-Built Analysis, comparing completed work to a hypothetical as-built schedule without delays.

Time Impact Analysis, assessing the impact of delays based on scheduled activities​​.

A Gantt Chart (Option A) is a scheduling visualization tool, not a methodology for delay analysis. It lacks the analytical rigor and methodology required for critical delay quantification.

 Input Data for Construction Planning:

Construction planning relies on data from the owner, contractor, and contract terms to establish project parameters.

Bonding capacity is not typically part of the planning inputs but rather a procurement and contractual concern.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Key inputs include project requirements, constraints, and stakeholder inputs as outlined in the PSP guide​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is C, as bonding capacity is not a direct input to the construction planning process.

 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.

 Workweek Period Analysis:

Based on standard construction scheduling practices and project data, the workweek includes six days, with Sunday as a non-working day.

 Verification in Project Details:

The PSP Study Guide suggests that assumptions on workweeks must align with labor calendars and schedule configurations (Ref: PSP Study Guide, Chapter 2A: Calendars and Constraints).

 Update Process Essentials:

Schedule updates track the current status of the project using actuals (start/finish dates), progress (percent complete), and future plans (remaining duration).

The original duration does not change and is part of baseline data, not required for routine updates.

 PSP Study Guide References:

Scheduling update procedures are discussed, emphasizing active progress tracking elements like actual start, percent complete, and remaining duration​.

 Conclusion: The correct answer is D, as original duration is not a variable considered in regular updates.