CONSTRUCTION DELAY ANALYSIS USING DAILY WINDOWS TECHNIQUE
Main Article Content
Abstract
Delays occur commonly in construction projects. Assessing the impact of delay is sometimes a contentious
issue. Several delay analysis methods are available but no one method can be universally used over another in
all situations. The selection of the proper analysis method depends upon a variety of factors including
information available, time of analysis, capabilities of the methodology, and time, funds and effort allocated to the analysis. This paper presents computerized schedule analysis programmed that use daily windows analysis method as it recognized one of the most credible methods, and it is one of the few techniques much more likely to be accepted by courts than any other method. A simple case study has been implemented to demonstrate the accuracy and usefulness of the proposed delay analysis model. The results of the study indicate that the outcomes of delay analyses are often not predictable that each method may yield different results. The study also revealed that depending on the time and resources available, and the accessibility of project control documentation, one method may be more practical or cost-effective.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
• AACEI (2007). “Recommended Practice No. 29R-03, Forensic Schedule Analysis.” AACE International, Morgantown, West Virginia, U.S.A.
• Assaf, S. A., and Al-Hejji, S. (2006). “Causes of Delay in Large Construction Projects.” International Journal of Project Management, 24, 349-357.
• Arditi, D. and Patel, B. K. (1989) “Impact analysis of owner-directed acceleration.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol.115, No. 1, pp. 114- 157.
• Arditi, D., and Pattanakitchamroon, T. (2006). “Selecting a delay analysis method in resolving construction claims.” International Journal of Project Management, 24(2), 145– 155.
• Braimah, N., and Ndekugri, I. (2007). “Factors influencing the selection of delay analysis methodologies.” International Journal of Project Management (Paper in Press).
• De la Garza, J. M., Vorster, M. C., and Parvin, C. M. (1991). “Total float traded as commodity.” Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, ASCE, 117(4), 716–727.
• Hegazy, T., and Menesi, W. (2008). "Delay Analysis under Multiple Baseline Updates." Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 134 (8), 575-582.
• Hegazy, T., and Zhang, K. (2005). “Daily Windows Delay Analysis.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 131(5), 505-512.
• Hegazy, T. (2007). “EasyPlan Project Management System.” Available from:http://www.civil.uwaterloo.ca/tarek/Easy
Plan.html.
• Jafar, S. S. (2010) “Construction Delay Analysis Using Daily Windows Technique", M.Sc., Thesis, University of Baghdad.
• Pickavance, K. (2005). “Delay and Disruption in Construction Contracts” 3rd Ed., LLP Reference Publishing, London.
• SCL (2002) “Society of Construction Law. Delay and Disruption Protocol”. Print most (Southern) Ltd, England (http://www.eotprotocol.com).
• Stumpf, George R. (2000). “Schedule Delay Analysis.” Cost Engineering Journal, AACE International, 42(7), 32-43.
• Shi, J., Cheung, S., and Arditi, D. (2001). “Construction Delay Computation Method.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, 127(1), 60-65.
• Salsabeel S . Jafar (2009) " Construction Delay Analysis Using Daily Windows Technique" M.Sc. Thesis, College of
Engineering, Al-Baghdad University.