The “Modeling Issues” section described three alternative types of precedence relationships besides the usual finish-to-start relationship. The following questions ask you to explore the first of...

The “Modeling Issues” section described three alternative types of precedence relationships besides the usual finish-to-start relationship. The following questions ask you to explore the first of these alternatives for the LAN project.

a. Start-to-start relationships are sometimes useful for activities that can run parallel to one another. Suppose that there is a start-to-start relationship between activities J (developing training program) and M (training users). Specifically, activity M cannot start until activity J has started. In general, do the CPM formulas for earliest start times need to be changed when there are start-to-start relationships? What about the formulas for latest finish times? Redo the CPM calculations with this new relationship.

b. Repeat part a, but now generalize even a bit more. Assume that activity M cannot start until three weeks after activity J starts. This is a delayed startto-start relationship.

c. Getting the correct logic for earliest start and latest finish formulas for the relationships in parts a and b can be a bit tricky. As an alternative, modify the Solver model from Problem 7 for these relationships. This should be more straightforward. Do you get the same results as in parts a and b? (You should.)