AWP Labs · P6 schedule analytics
Overview · October 2026
Your P6 schedules, reviewed in the browser
Two input routes — a P6 SQLite .db database or .xer exports — feed one shared dashboard suite, with a built-in guide and an optional AI Analyst on both.
.db route · pilot.awplabs.cl
P6 SQLite database
Open a local .db file directly in the browser
.xer route · pilot-xer.awplabs.cl
P6 XER workspace
Organize local XER exports into projects and versions
Shared dashboard suite
One review path
Portfolio forecast, A/B progress, roadmap, Gantt and DCMA-14 audits
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
01
Situation
Schedule reviews today depend on meetings, reports and manual version comparisons
Reporting lag · illustrative
Construction actuals
Today
Status reflected in the schedule
1–2 months or more · reported update delay
Lag described in interview cases, not an industry statistic. Source freshness is measured in a pilot, never assumed.
What a late schedule costs · in priority order
1
Adherence
Consistency with the other project plans
2
Milestones and labor
Changes and demand become harder to assess
3
Review effort
Meetings and manual comparisons accumulate
4
Forecast confidence
Completion analysis relies on stale inputs
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
02
The suite
Two input routes feed one shared dashboard suite
pilot.awplabs.cl
P6 SQLite database · .db route
Drop or pick a local .db file; the browser keeps a reference so every dashboard uses it.
Built-in guide · EN / ES / PT · no AI key needed
AI Analyst · connect your own AI key
pilot-xer.awplabs.cl
P6 XER workspace · .xer route
Connect your XER folder; assign projects and versions, then save the workspace.
Built-in guide · EN / ES / PT · no AI key needed
AI Analyst · connect your own AI key
Shared dashboard suite · ten dashboards, one EPS selector
Progress Tool
BL & Updates
LFH · DCMA-14
Roadmap
Advanced Gantt
Portfolio Forecast
Both routes read the schedule file locally and read-only in the browser; the source file is never uploaded for dashboard processing.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
03
Choosing a route
Pick the route that matches how your schedules are exported
Criterion
.db route · pilot.awplabs.cl
.xer route · pilot-xer.awplabs.cl
Input file
P6 SQLite database (.db)
P6 XER export files (.xer)
How it loads
Drop or pick one local .db file; every dashboard reuses it
Connect your .xer folder (desktop Chrome / Edge), save the workspace
Versions
Versions held in the database, e.g. baseline vs update
Files assigned to projects as Baselines, Updates or Sandbox
Built-in guide
Guide on every page · EN / ES / PT · 16 topics
Guide on every page · EN / ES / PT · 18 topics incl. workspace
AI Analyst
Connect your own AI with your API key
Connect your own AI with your API key
Processing
Local, read-only, in the browser
Local, read-only, in the browser
Same dashboards, same guide, same AI Analyst on both routes — choose by the export your planning team already produces.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
04
Review path
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Follow a finding from the portfolio to the activity and its owner
01
Portfolio
LFH matrix · Portfolio Forecast
02
Project
Schedules · EPS tree
03
Schedule versions
Progress Tool · A vs B
04
Phase / WBS
Roadmap · Advanced Gantt
05
Activity
Advanced Gantt · row, float, links
Schedules · EPS tab: the EPS tree as P6 stores it, with data date, activity count and LFH score per schedule, and the header of the selected schedule
Schedules · EPS: the tree as P6 stores it. Pick A and B once; every dashboard follows.
A finding should lead to supporting evidence and an accountable owner; cross-plan checks stay with the review team.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
05
Dashboard evidence · LFH portfolio matrix
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Score every schedule in the EPS from its own record
Looking for Healthy portfolio matrix: four schedules with LFH score and the DCMA-14 checks side by side, with Excel, CSV and thresholds controls
TEST_AWPLabs_v25.db · 4 schedules · 3 analysed · score without official weights, every check weighs 1
1
One line per schedule: data date, activities, LFH score
2
The 14 checks side by side, exportable to Excel or CSV
3
Diagnostic aid with exact denominators, not a scorecard
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
06
Dashboard evidence · Portfolio Forecast
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
See forecast labor effort accumulate across projects
Portfolio Forecast dashboard: cumulative labor hours across six synthetic projects, Upd Month 9, Forecast Early, reaching 591,086 HH with the Data Date 2026-09-04 marked
1
One current version per project
2
Cumulative labor hours, forecast early
3
Visible contribution of each project
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
07
Dashboard evidence · BL & Updates Progress Tool
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Progress, SPI and milestones against the baseline
25.38%
Δ = B − A: +25.38 pp
Progress to date
1.02%
2026-09 · Δ +1.02 pp
Progress in period
0.74
25.38% ÷ A plan 34.45%
SPI at the data date
105,352
A 96,704 · Δ +8.9%
At completion (HH)
Critical Progress Timeline: A plan dashed blue and A actual, B actual orange then B forecast dashed, B data date line, numbered milestone markers 1 to 4 in A and B, with the legend
1 · Engineering
0 days
PN-0001 · achieved
2 · Civil works
+12 days
PN-0027 · achieved
3 · Electrical & instrumentation
+18 days
PN-0103 · forecast
4 · Commissioning
+18 days
PN-0148 · forecast
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
08
Dashboard evidence · BL & Updates Progress Tool · Roadmap tab
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Follow the milestones through the phase-level roadmap
Same selection and date basis as the previous slide · A PN-BL1 phase bars vs B PN-UPD12 · Milestones A and B tracks · phase rows arranged by latest-update start for this presentation, Commissioning last
Phase-level roadmap: A and B phase bars from Engineering to Commissioning with Milestones A and Milestones B tracks
1 · Engineering
0 days
PN-0001 · achieved
2 · Civil works
+12 days
PN-0027 · achieved
3 · Electrical & instrumentation
+18 days
PN-0103 · forecast
4 · Commissioning
+18 days
PN-0148 · forecast
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
09
Dashboard evidence · Progress Tool A/B
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Compare any two schedules with one delta everywhere
Progress Tool A/B comparison, Curves and Progress tab: S-curve plus incremental progress per period for A and B with an early/late band from each data date, budget by cut, EPS selector on the left and resources and scope panel on the right
1
Two schedules, always
A reference (blue), B compared (orange); every KPI, curve and milestone reads Δ = B − A.
2
Curves and progress
Each schedule against its own budget: actuals to its data date, forecast after it, early / late band.
3
One selector, every tab
Pick A and B once on the EPS tree; summary, phases, resources, schedule and roadmap tabs follow.
A PN-UPD06 (dd 2026-06-01) · B PN-UPD12 (dd 2026-09-04) · early / late band drawn from each data date
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
10
Dashboard evidence · Resource matrix
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Compare loaded quantities in their own unit, A vs B
Progress Tool resource matrix: budgeted, actual, remaining, at completion and changes for labor and non-labor categories of the reference and the latest cut, followed by the differences latest cut minus reference
1
Five P6 quantities
Budgeted, actual, remaining, at completion and changes, straight from the assignments (TASKRSRC).
2
Units stay native
Labor hours stay hours (HH), equipment stays equipment hours, material keeps its own unit.
3
Δ latest cut − reference
Red = more than the reference, green = less. Here labor budget +20,460 HH and actual +10,110 HH.
A PN-UPD06 · B PN-UPD12 · rows: Labor / Non-labor by resource category · REV-GEN-06
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
11
Dashboard evidence · Roadmap A/B
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Read phases, critical stretch and milestones, A vs B
Roadmap A/B, Gantt by phase and milestones: WBS level-1 phase bars with their critical stretch, labor and non-labor resource rows and milestone diamonds for schedule A, with schedule B below
1
Phase bars, critical stretch
WBS level-1 phases as thick bars; the red stretch inside marks critical activities (TF ≤ 0).
2
Resources by class
Labor (HH), non-labor (eq-hr) and material rows under each schedule, each in its own unit.
3
Milestones, then A vs B
Milestone diamonds per schedule; the Compared Gantt tab overlays A and B, with or without resources.
A PN-UPD06: 6 phases · 59 critical act. · B PN-UPD12: 42 critical act. · labor 68,260 → 88,720 HH
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
12
Dashboard evidence · Advanced Gantt
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Inspect every activity of B with its A bar underneath
Advanced Gantt, all levels: EPS selector with A and B on the left, WBS tree with activity rows, start, finish and float columns, and A reference bars under B compared bars with critical and progress colours
1
A overlay under B
Each activity of B shows the matching A bar underneath; critical in red, progress in green.
2
WBS at every level
Expand or collapse the WBS tree; Level 1 / 2 / 3 views; Months or Quarters; links and resources.
3
Filters and float
Float per activity; filters for critical, milestones and incomplete; search by ID or name.
B PN-UPD12 vs A PN-UPD06 · 148 tasks · 19 WBS summaries · dates read by status
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
13
Dashboard evidence · LFH schedule audit
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Audit DCMA-14 quality with exact denominators
Looking for Healthy schedule audit: overall LFH score gauge, relationship and activity type counts now and at baseline, and DCMA-14 check cards with count over denominator and baseline values
1
Score now and at baseline
LFH 46.4% for PN-UPD12 against 42.9% for its reference; every check weighs the same, N/A excluded.
2
Count over denominator
Each check shows its count over the exact population, e.g. high float 23 / 111, missed tasks 27 / 46.
3
Auditable, not a scorecard
Failed checks list the activities behind them; export to Excel or CSV; import your own thresholds.
PN-UPD12 vs PN-UPD06 · 148 activities · 147 relationships · passed 5 · warning 3 · failed 6
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
14
Data handling
Existing dashboard · Synthetic demonstration data
Your schedule file stays on your machine
AWP Labs dashboards home: load your P6 SQLite database, the file is never uploaded to a server and is read in the browser read-only, then pick a dashboard
Local, read-only processing
Both routes read the file in your browser (PRAGMA query_only). It is never uploaded; nothing writes back to P6.
Built-in guide on both SaaS
A Guide button on every page, EN / ES / PT, step-by-step topics. Static help: no AI account, API key or credits.
AI Analyst on both SaaS
Optional. Connect your own AI with your API key. The model receives tools, never your file — next slide.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
15
AI Analyst · on both SaaS · bring your own key
Connect your own AI — the file stays local
Your own API key, direct
Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini, Azure OpenAI or any OpenAI-compatible endpoint. The key stays in your browser (session only, unless you tick Remember) and the page talks to the provider directly. A prepaid API account, not a consumer subscription.
Through the AWP Labs relay
For providers that do not accept browser calls (DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, Llama, Mistral, xAI): the relay forwards the request with your key and never stores or logs it. Allow-listed providers only.
Enterprise
Your IT’s Azure OpenAI deployment, under your own contract and retention terms; AWP Labs pays nothing and sees nothing.
What leaves the browser
Your question · the 7 tool schemas · the rows the model asked for (visible in the chat) · the system prompt and your notes.
What never leaves
The .db or XER workspace · rows the model did not request · your key in direct mode · exported CSVs (built locally).
Seven read-only tools, run in your browser
get_context · list_schedules · describe_table · run_sql (one SELECT, row-capped) · export_csv · saas_help (built-in guide) · propose_note (saved only on your click)
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
16
Scope of the tools
A clear boundary between the dashboards and your review team
What the dashboards do
Read .db and .xer exports in the browser
Compare any two schedule versions, Δ = B − A
Audit DCMA-14 quality with exact denominators
Filter activities by float, WBS, code and UDF
AI Analyst: read-only questions on the file
What stays with your review team
Update P6 — the dashboards never write to it
Adherence checks against the other plans
Confirm activity and action owners
Set comparison reference, tolerances, cadence
Interpret changes: a moved bar is not a cause
All demonstration views in this deck use synthetic data. No client results, savings, ROI, forecast-accuracy figures or prices are presented.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
17
Next step
Start a pilot on your own P6 exports
Validate the review path on your active schedules, on the route your planning team already uses.
01
Choose your route
A P6 SQLite .db database or XER exports — whichever your planners already produce.
02
Share current evidence
Current schedule plus the baseline or an agreed prior version; scope basis and a field-status cutoff.
03
Scoping workshop
Agree counterparts, pilot scope, evidence, success targets, data-handling and commercial terms.
Decision requested: approve a scoping workshop on your current exports.
awplabs.cl
Continuation is decided on demonstrated planning quality and decision usefulness, measured during the pilot.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
18
Appendix · Evidence package
What to bring to the scoping workshop
Evidence package
Existing records to bring
Schedule exports
Current P6 .db or XER files plus the baseline or agreed prior versions
Scope basis
Approved scope document or a WBS / scope coverage matrix
Designated project plans
Current Capex, AWP, execution or permits plans selected by you
Mappings
Activity / WBS to plan-item identifiers, or an agreed initial mapping sheet
Field status
Agreed cutoff; activity progress and resource actuals where reported, with supporting records
A link establishes traceability. A check tests consistency.
Existing exports support a low-friction start; missing fields stay marked unverified, never assumed. Each resource category keeps its own units.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
19
AWP Labs · contact
Let’s review your schedules
Project controls for mining and infrastructure: Advanced Work Packaging, 4D BIM, Primavera P6 scheduling, automated reporting and AI-driven planning.
Talk to us
contact@awplabs.cl
email
+56 9 6516 7239
mobile · WhatsApp
Web
awplabs.cl
website
LinkedIn · Santiago, Chile
Pilots · access by invitation
pilot.awplabs.cl
.db route
pilot-xer.awplabs.cl
.xer route
AWP Labs · Santiago, Chile · Demonstration views in this deck use synthetic data.
AWP Labs | P6 schedule analytics · .db and .xer routes
20