APPAREL INTERNSHIP DOCUMENT ON DELAY ANALYSIS REPORT AND SMEDDescription complète
ok..berbagi pengetahuanFull description
APPAREL INTERNSHIP DOCUMENT ON DELAY ANALYSIS REPORT AND SMEDFull description
Delay analysisFull description
Descripción: Dorothy Delay's rules for students
pediatriDeskripsi lengkap
Delay analysisFull description
primavera p6
Delay & Extension of TimeFull description
Descripción: Principio de operación de temporizadores.
DELAYDeskripsi lengkap
Delay Analysis ReportFull description
sapDeskripsi lengkap
ff
presentasi kasus Global Delay Development pada anak
Astrology And Vasatu Consultant.
BcFull description
DELAYFull description
speech delayFull description
DELAYS & DELAY ANALYSIS
DELAYS AND DELAYING EVENTS
• Change happens… • Events occur that require a Contractor’s planned intent for executing the works to be changed. • Delays: • Delay to progress. • Delay to completion. completion.
CAUSATION
• Step 1: (Analysis of Facts) • Identify that an event has occurred. • Step 2: (Analysis of Facts) affects progress of the works. • Show that the event affects
• Step 3: (Delay Analysis) Demonstrate that this delay delay to progress progress causes a delay to • Demonstrate completion.
TIME EFFECT OF AN EVENT - PLAN • Planned programme: • Accepted programme update
TIME EFFECT OF AN EVENT - 1 • Condition 1: • The event causes no delay to progress and no delay to completion. Planned Completion
TIME EFFECT OF AN EVENT - 2 • Condition 2: • The event causes a delay to progress but no delay to completion. Planned Completion
TIME EFFECT OF AN EVENT - 3 • Condition 3: • The event causes a delay to progress and a delay to completion. Planned Completion 1
Planned Completion 2
INTRODUCTION TO DELAY ANALYSIS
• Impact of different types of delay event. • Impact of prospective and retrospective perspectives on the calculation of delay to completion.
Seek agreement What does the contract say? – Likely or Actual delay to completion – Method Specified What is to be proved? – EOT or compensation or both What materials are available? – Availability and Integrity of an As-Planned Programme , progress and/or As-Built Data; Limitations on budget and time? Complexity of Works in question Proportionality – Small disputes do not justify expensive and time consuming analyses
CONTRACT TERMS - "If the Contractor is or is likely to be unavoidably delayed in achieving a completion obligation or milestone ... either prospectively or retrospectively the time ... shall be extended“ - "... an extension of time ... shall be subject to the requirement that ... the event was the operative cause of the delay suffered ...“
• Likely to cause delay? • Likely to cause or has caused delay? • Has caused delay? • To what? • In relation to what?
WHAT IS TO BE PROVED • The prospective likely effect on the completion date for the purposes of an interim EOT • A retrospective actual effect on completion for the purpose of an EOT • A contemporaneous or retrospective actual effect on progress for the purposes of compensation for disruption • A retrospective actual effect on the contractor’s overheads for the purpose of prolongation
MATERIALS AVAILABLE As built records available? Programme available?
As-Planned –vAs-Built Measures the difference between planned and actual activity durations
Recovery or acceleration ? Measures the effect of an event on completion by tracing the critical path through change in intent
AsPlanned Impacted
CPM ?
Updated with progress ?
Time-Impact
Retrospectively create a CPM programme
Retrospectively create a simulated asbuilt CPM programme
As-Built ButFor
Illustrates the effect of an Event on the chosen programme
Measures the effect of an Event on completion in the sequence of construction finally followed
PROPORTIONALITY • Quick, cheap and tend to be rough – As-planned v as-built – As-planned impacted • Time consuming, costly and tend to be thorough – As-built But-for – Time impact
METHOD
• Disregard labels, identify what is done. • AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R-03
AS-PLANNED V AS-BUILT • Many variances of the type – May have a Critical Path network as the as-planned programme; – May have a reconstructed programme as a baseline – May be carried out in “windows” or “time slices” • Simply compares; – Planned programme and as-built programme – Difference = delay & relief from LADs ( EOT) • Often amounts to a “total time claim”
AS-PLANNED V AS-BUILT
• METHOD: • Prepare an As-Built schedule with same activities as the AsPlanned schedule. • Identify the sequence of activities on the As-Built schedule which control the overall project duration – the Controlling Path. • Identify critical delay by comparing the duration, sequence and timing of the controlling activities of the As-Planned and As-Built schedules. • Research evidence to identify causes of the identified critical delays.
AS-PLANNED V AS-BUILT
Planned bars
1. identify a secondary effect
2. Infer a primary cause As built bars
DELAY
3. argue that the tertiary effect has resulted from the primary cause
AS-PLANNED V AS-BUILT Advantages • Cheap and quick to carry out • Useful review of delays and possible merits of allegations • Can be an acceptable proof where the effect is indisputably on the Critical Path, eg; • at the start of the job • at the end of the job • total suspension of the work
Limitations • Only retrospective • Easily manipulated to suit the preferred case • Cannot deal effectively with concurrent causes of delay • Does not calculate the effect of a cause but asserts the cause of the effect • Not related to the critical path
AS-PLANNED IMPACTED • Based on the planned programme • METHOD: 1.Identify the planned programme/ baseline 2.Establish excusable event based on planned intent 3.Model the event in planning software; 4.Add the event to the programme & recalculate the completion date 5.Compare revised end date to original end date. 6.Claim relief for the shift in timing on the programme 7.Repeat for next event
AS-PLANNED IMPACTED
1. Start with planned programme foundations
Contractual Completion Critical Date
structure roof & cladding
inspections
AS-PLANNED IMPACTED
Period of Delay
2. Identify a causal event
foundations
Contractual Completion Critical Date
Unforeseen ground structure roof & cladding
inspections
AS-PLANNED IMPACTED Primary cause
Inferred delay to progress
3. Calculate effect
Revised Completion Date
foundations
Contractual Completion Date
Unforeseen ground structure roof & cladding
Causes secondary effect – a delay to progress
inspections
Causes tertiary effect – an impact on the planned completion date
IMPACTED AS-PLANNED Advantages
•
Fairly quick and easy to carry out
•
Easily understood
•
It can be used where as-built information is limited/ does not exist
•
Can be suitable method of proof if:
•
Project is of simple character
•
The planned programme was realistic and achievable
•
The critical path remains largely unchanged except for the effect of events
Limitations
• Ignores the as built history of the works • Cannot deal with concurrency • Ignores the effect of any change in sequence or acceleration • Takes no account of: • Progress • Resources • Changing logic
AS-BUILT BUT FOR • METHOD: • Remove delays from as-built schedule to ascertain when the project would have been completed “but for” these delays. • “Gross” method – remove all at once; • “Stepped” method – remove delays in reverse chronological order.
• Also known as “Collapsed As-Built ”. • Performed after the works are completed using as built programme as baseline • Evaluates effect of Events on the basis of the sequence of work that was actually followed • Analyses the earliest completion date but-for identified delaying events
AS-BUILT BUT-FOR •
Step 1: Creation of baseline
1. 2.
Create/assess as built programme Identify variances between planned & actual performance & infer cause for each Produce simulated as built programme – Wind back the data-date – Remove the “fixed” dates – Substitute with planned dates and a logic network
3.
•
Logic can be based on updated progressed programmes produced during works
AS-BUILT BUT-FOR • Step 2: – Remove delay events from simulated as-built programme – Remove delaying activities in reverse chronological order & recalculate completion date
AS-BUILT BUT-FOR
1. identify secondary effect on progress
2. infer a primary cause
Original duration
Unforeseen ground
Actual Completion Date
foundations structure roof & cladding inspections
AS-BUILT BUT-FOR
3. Convert to critical path program foundations
Actual Completion Date Unforeseen ground structure roof & cladding inspections
AS-BUILT BUT-FOR
Secondary effect delay to progress foundations
4. Subtract identified effect
Causes tertiary effect - delay to completion
Earliest Completion Date
Unforeseen ground Reduced to zero days structure roof & cladding
inspections
AS-BUILT BUT FOR Strengths
• Factually based on actual built times - Easily understood • Can be used where there is no effective planned programme • Demonstrates cause and effect of actual timing of event, in sequence in which work was actually built • Can be used to demonstrate both • Excusable delay • Compensable delay ie loss and expense was suffered • Takes account of concurrency Limitations • Complicated • Requires accurate and complete as-built data • Requires logic reconstruction - Inferred logic may be challenged • Subjective?
• Takes no account of the planned intent • Does not identify the effect of events on the contractors intention at the time
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS
• METHOD: • Research details of claimed event causing delay; • Model the event in planning software; • Link event into updated schedule; • Recalculate the critical path & Completion date. • Compare revised end date to updated dated schedule end date; • Repeat for all events in chronological order.
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS
•
Analysis of the effects of delays – – –
over the life of a project, sequentially, In light of the Contractor’s progress & future intentions
•
Update Contractor’s current planned programme to period before the Event.
•
Add Event to programme & calculate effect upon the planned programme
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS
Preparation:
–
Identify events & create ‘Fragnet’ for each event.
–
List Events chronologically
–
Identify planned programme current at time of Event current programme
–
Check programme reasonable & fit for use as a baseline
–
Re-create or review as-built programme.
–
Assess progress information.
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS As-planned programme
Contractual Completion Critical Date
foundations
structure roof & cladding inspections
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS Updated programme
Slow progress
Revised Completion Critical Date after Update Contractual Completion Critical Date
foundations
structure
Updated data date
roof & cladding
Progress to activity Culpable delay to completion
inspections
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS Revised Completion Critical Date after Update Contractual Completion Critical Date
foundations
Unforeseen ground structure
Updated data date
Event
roof & cladding
Progress to activity Culpable delay to completion Period of event delay to progress
inspections
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS Revised Completion Critical Date after Event
Impacted programme
Foundations completed to update date
Remainder of foundations
Contractual Completion Critical Date
Unforeseen ground structure Event
Updated data date
roof & cladding
Progress to activity Culpable delay to completion Period of event delay to progress Period of event delay to completion
inspections
TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS • Advantages – Cause and Effect – Takes account of Progress/Resource/Logic – Is the most accurate because it uses all planned, progress and as-built information – Takes account of inadequate progress – Takes account of changes in methodology and re-sequencing – Can be used to resolve concurrent delay – Takes account of acceleration – Can deal with multiple Key Dates & Milestones • Limitations: – Requires high quality information – Can be time consuming and expensive – Produces a high volume of output – Complicated (and therefore slow) – Prospective results can be inaccurate – Difficult to communicate ( Skanska v Egger [2004])
SMOKE AND MIRRORS • Smoke and mirrors - analysis that is not what it is described to be by its originator • Found in discrepancy between description of methodology and that actually adopted
SMOKE AND MIRRORS • As-planned v As-built generally understood • API & ABBF methodologies often understood • Few really understand Time impact analysis • “Windows”, “time impact” “time slice” and “snapshot” often used indiscriminately