tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post3058366413506382297..comments2011-05-28T13:15:20.020+08:00Harwinderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17448550860024926123noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-17835802816939082902011-05-28T13:15:20.020+08:002011-05-28T13:15:20.020+08:00@Anon.,<br /><br />That&#39;s a good catch. It was a typo and I&#39;ve corrected it now. The answer is still $7200.<br /><br />Thanks.Harwinderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17448550860024926123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-55745056443238247742011-05-28T09:50:39.884+08:002011-05-28T09:50:39.884+08:00in formula 4 why did you change the CPI from 0.66 to 0.625 and I am not sure how you got $7200, What am I missing here ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-20165603319173199682011-05-06T05:20:14.606+08:002011-05-06T05:20:14.606+08:00This is excellent. Thank You!!!Larry Molmudhttp://montereycert.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-69609446998267296702010-09-11T03:12:56.463+08:002010-09-11T03:12:56.463+08:00thank you very much, esp on answering the question on AC + ( BAC- EV ) / CPI because while reading through your article, i was also wondering how come you are having SPI.SKPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-37696080764630853662010-07-14T06:36:37.326+08:002010-07-14T06:36:37.326+08:00Hi Harwinder,<br /><br />in this questino for the first case shouldnt increasing by 0.5 metres cost 250$ since the entire 2 metres cost 1000$. so using direct proportion it should be 250$ or 1000$ for 1 metre. Correct me if I am wrong<br /><br />Thanks,Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-25386980104170411922010-02-01T00:03:23.277+08:002010-02-01T00:03:23.277+08:00Thanks Man.<br /><br />Its clear now. Yes I refer to BODMAS.<br /><br />I am really grareful for all your contribution. I have read all your posts and I understood all the concepts that you have explained very well. The best thing is that they are for free to us.<br /><br />Beleive me I am not buttering but your explanation of all these topics are so impressive that with one read a person gets into the depth.<br /><br />I will appear on Wednesday most propably and will share the LL.<br />Uptil now, I am stuck with 60% on all the Mock Exams for the past Two Months and now as I have understand the Earned Value concepts, Thanks to you. May be I score better....<br /><br />Thankyou very much..Mian Amir Abbas Kaka Khelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04420643865633959466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-71112101980506123012010-01-31T14:09:34.821+08:002010-01-31T14:09:34.821+08:00Hello Amir,<br /><br />Thanks for your compliments :)<br /><br />You are referring to the BODMAS rule. For simple addition and substraction, it doesn&#39;t matter which you do first. The brackets have been used just to show a logical segregation between the two components. The end result will be the same no matter in which order you perform the calculations. <br /><br />So, you could do (AC + BAC) - EV or (-EV + AC) + BAC or any other combination and you&#39;d get the same answer. Don&#39;t just take my word, try it out. <br /><br />The BODMAS rule will come into play in equation 4 though, where you&#39;d have to do division before addition. <br /><br />Hope it helps.Harwinderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17448550860024926123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-69852427287578419952010-01-31T14:00:44.504+08:002010-01-31T14:00:44.504+08:00Hi Guru,<br />Who ever you are, you are the best person in explaining the PMP concepts in a great way, and in continuation to that this post is indeed a great asset.<br />I have one question for the formula no 3.<br />you have mentioned it:<br />EAC=AC+(BAC-EV).<br />While in PMBOK4, It is<br />EAC=AC+BAC-EV.<br />And I think in Mathematics the preference of calculation is in the following order of preference:<br />Bracket<br />Divide<br />Multiply<br />Add<br />Minus.<br />and since you have mentioned (BAC-EV)in bracket so that got the highest preference in calculating the equation first..<br />Don&#39;t you think it will change the whole course of the calculation, if its done the other way, meaning adding AC+BAC first.<br /><br />Can you please explain...Amirnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-8322369098682431892010-01-11T20:32:49.643+08:002010-01-11T20:32:49.643+08:00Harry .. Excellent explanation and workaround.. Thanks for this info.Chellurihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17709051727240948719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-87107362164120691232010-01-05T01:57:07.308+08:002010-01-05T01:57:07.308+08:00Excellent. Thanks for prompt and excellent responsePreethamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-63731144217846515972010-01-05T01:53:20.715+08:002010-01-05T01:53:20.715+08:00Excellent. Thanks for prompt and excellent responsePreethamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-33209809574836374332010-01-05T00:45:48.176+08:002010-01-05T00:45:48.176+08:00@ Anonymous: <br /><br />That&#39;s an excellent question. I think I&#39;ve seen that formula too, but never really gave it a serious thought until today when you brought it up.<br /><br />Let me try to answer it with 2 simple tricks.<br /><br />1. Consider EAC formula #4 above. What if I don&#39;t need to meet a deadline? In that case, I don&#39;t need to worry about SPI. So, if I substitute SPI = 1 in formula #4, I&#39;ll get the same formula that you are referring to, i.e. EAC = AC + (BAC - EV)/CPI. <br />Easy, isn&#39;t it?<br /><br />2. Now let&#39;s do some math tricks with this to have more fun.<br /><br />EAC = AC + (BAC - EV)/CPI<br />=&gt; EAC = (AC*CPI + BAC - EV)/CPI ... (a)<br /><br />We also know that CPI = EV / AC<br />=&gt; EV = AC*CPI ... (b)<br /><br />Now substitute EV from (b) in place of AC*CPI in (a), and we get<br />=&gt; EAC = (EV + BAC - EV)/CPI<br />=&gt; EAC = BAC/CPI<br /><br />Isn&#39;t this same as EAC formula #2 in my blog post? <br /><br />CONCLUSION: <br /><br />When we don&#39;t worry about meeting specific deadlines (schedule performance), EAC formula #4 becomes the same as EAC formula #2. And both #2 and #4 will become the same as the formula that you referred. Basically, in this case, we only consider the cost performance.<br /><br />It is important that you understand the situation and apply the appropriate formula.<br /><br />I might in fact do a separate blog post just on your question. Thanks for bringing this up. It shows that you are a keen student. <br /><br />If you have more questions, feel free to post them. I believe that there are no dumb questions. If you have a doubt, it&#39;s likely that many others might have the same doubt too. <br /><br />All the best.Harwinderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17448550860024926123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-46991766677774533612010-01-04T23:37:20.304+08:002010-01-04T23:37:20.304+08:00Sir,<br />I have seen an equation AC+(BAC-EV)/CPI.. Not sure when it used or is it really required. Please can you explainAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-41036555590929978302009-09-06T00:39:11.500+08:002009-09-06T00:39:11.500+08:00Hello Dr. PDG,<br /><br />Thanks for your feedback. I&#39;ll try to learn more on this subject, though I don&#39;t think I completely understood your point. It would be great if you could point us to some online reference material. As usual, I appreciate your comments. <br /><br />On the lighter side, I think people are learning to walk here and you are asking them to take on skateboarding.<br /><br />Thanks :)Brain Washerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17448550860024926123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-14960832588967820762009-09-05T10:46:58.655+08:002009-09-05T10:46:58.655+08:00Sorry folks, but while using BAC instead of BCWS is mathematically correct, it presupposes that no change orders have been implemented.<br /><br />If you look at older formulae, the &quot;best practice&quot; was to use BCWS (or PV in PMI speak) with the understanding that while BCWS SHOULD always equal BAC, often it does NOT.<br /><br />The reason I know this and recommend it, is I work as a contractor and I often use EVM as the basis for establishing and quantifying CLAIMS. So what I recommend is not academic theory, but practical, first hand experience.<br /><br />To get a much better grasp on Earned Value than what PMI preaches, I would urge you to pick up AACE&#39;s Skills and Knowledge of Cost Engineering, 5th Edition. Chapters 13 and 14 cover Earned Value in much more detail than what PMI has covered in their Manual of Practice.<br /><br />BR,<br />Dr. PDG, Jakarta<br />http://www.getpmcertified.comDr. PDGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05172942276812795581noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6229831349550879590.post-68089178908617576512009-09-05T01:32:14.682+08:002009-09-05T01:32:14.682+08:00brilliant, outstanding !!<br /><br />Just in Time...<br /><br />I was seriously searching to have better understanding on EAC, the article provides a good understanding of it..Vikasnoreply@blogger.com