SS + so and so days predecessor logic

[KingKikapu]

I know it's generally considered bad form to link a predecessor b
negative lag (ex: FS - 1day), so I try to go from the other end (ex: S
+ 5 days).

I have a problem though: what if I have a task that is expected to b
split in work (let's say 4 days then split for a while, then another
days of work), and I want to schedule a successor that will wait until
days of ACTUAL work are done until it starts. Does project know th
difference between 5 days lag and 5 days of work lag

 

[vanita]

Hi

Lag is working days lag. In MSP durations, lag all consider working days as
per your project calendar.

I hope it helps.
Vanita

 

[KingKikapu]

Trevor I don't always have FS logic on tasks because I'm building
apartments and management likes to run with very little lag. Sure, I
can schedule the painters to come start a floor once the drywall tapers
have finished the floor, but our floors are massive: the painters can
chase the drywallers on the same floor without ever running into each
other. If I schedule using only FS, that means I would have to either
subdivide my tasks even further (ex: "Drywall: Tape and Finish 1st
quadrant of 4th floor") which gets really cumbersome really fast, or I
stretch out our schedule by several additional weeks so that everything
is FS.

Neither of these options is really appealing at this point. I've
already subdivided most trades by 2 or 3 tasks per floor. To have me
subdivide those 2 or 3 tasks by what region of a floor they're on will
get out of hand quickly.

Maybe I'm looking at it in the wrong light though. Given the context,
what would you do in my position?