Comments on: SOLVED: Project 2003/2007/2010 Does Not Calculate Work or Duration Correctly https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/ Technology Doesn't Stop & Neither Does URTech.ca Sun, 08 Jan 2023 09:26:04 +0000 hourly 1 By: Ray https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-252479 Sun, 08 Jan 2023 09:26:04 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-252479 Your articles are extremely helpful to me. MS Project calculations are a hard to understand.

]]>
By: Muhammad Azzizan https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-186511 Thu, 27 Aug 2015 06:57:36 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-186511 Bengkek

]]>
By: Kevin https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-7720 Mon, 17 Mar 2014 17:05:36 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-7720 In reply to kiran.

Kiran,

Duration does not count non-working days (weekends, holidays).

]]>
By: kiran https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-5753 Mon, 30 Dec 2013 21:07:13 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-5753 nothing is working with my problem.

i’m just calculating days (duration) from (start) 01.11.2013 to (finish) 30.12.2013. simply it should count 60 days in duration column but its calculating 42 days :/

i have tried changes in MS Project options but problem still exists 🙁

any solution please???

]]>
By: Ian Matthews https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-2803 Tue, 12 Feb 2013 02:55:52 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-2803 In reply to rsc.

I’m sorry, this is beyond my scope. 🙁

]]>
By: rsc https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-2771 Thu, 07 Feb 2013 07:29:48 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-2771 I have a MS Project problem: say you have 3 rooms and 5 clerks, they will work for 3 weeks, one clerk in each room daily , 5 days a week. How do you get that schedule done (which clerk works when) ?

]]>
By: Sloane https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-2722 Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:10:45 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-2722 In reply to DCapps.

I thought I’d be here all night trying to figure this out. Thank you so much. Completely saved me a night’s sleep!

]]>
By: Henning https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-1944 Tue, 10 Jul 2012 21:52:46 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-1944 In reply to DCapps.

OMG! Thank you for adding your 2 cents on this. It totally helped me out. I had the exact same issue and it was highly annoying.

Thanks again!

]]>
By: DCapps https://www.urtech.ca/2011/04/solved-project-200320072010-does-not-calculate-work-or-duration-correctly/comment-page-1/#comment-1138 Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:09:05 +0000 http://www.urtech.ca/?p=1239#comment-1138 Had an activity that was not started with 2 days in the duration field and yet showed 5 days in the between the scheduled start and finish date. It made no sense as there were no resources involved, the predecessors were not driving out the finish date and the calendar did not have any non-working periods within the start and finish dates, apart from a sunday. Everything looked right and I experimented with all kinds of options. Finally, I started making random changes to one field after another, calcing after each one. That is when I hit pay-dirt. I changed the % complete from 0 to 1 and hit enter and the program finally calculated the activity correctly. I then changed the % complete back to zero and all was fine.

Has anyone experienced anything like that before?

]]>