I’m really stuck in the Case Study#2 Question #6 of the randomized exam (Transportation Hub in a Small Rural Town)
Question ask for the earliest date for install Bike Racks.
I’m unable to follow the math of the response: If Lead Time, as per RFI is 6 weeks, the activity, per schedule is 6 calendar days, why they are displacing the commencement date only 2 weeks?
Besides, question #3 in same Case Study displace another activity one week based on the contigency stated in same Schedule (same resource applied to Question #6).
Why this same condition doesn’t apply in Question #6? Or does, and it is not explained in the response?
The project schedule reflects bike rack installation only - it does not specify which type of bike rack is being proposed here or what the lead time is. Therefore, we need to determine what effect(s) in-ground bike racks would have on the schedule, if any. Does it align with the proposed installation date or does it push the schedule back?
The RFI indicates that in-ground bike racks have a 6-week lead time (resulting in a schedule change) and surface-mount bike racks have a 4-week lead time (resulting in no schedule change). Therefore, we can assume that the project schedule aligns with using surface-mount. If we use in-mount, the lead time increased by 2 weeks and in turn, pushes the installation back by 2 weeks.
The second question you reference is a different situation, where a 1-week contingency has already been factored into the schedule. Therefore, pushing the start date back by 1 week does not affect the completion date.