Delay Analysis Using Window Analysis Method

NICMAR
DELAY ANALYSIS BY WINDOW ANALYSIS

METHOD
REASERCHERS
MR. DASARI DOLI GOPI KRISHNA
MR. VADLAMURI YASWANTH
MR. PALLA VIJAY KUMAR
PGP QSCM 13th Batch
(2016- 2017)
GUIDED BY
PROF. B. RAVINDER
A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the Academic

requirements for the Post Graduate Programme in Quantity
Surveying & Contract Management
(PGP QSCM)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION

MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH
HYDERABAD
DECLARATION
We declare that the research thesis titled “Delay Analysis by Window Analysis Method” is
bonafide work carried out by us, under the guidance of Prof. B. Ravinder, further we declare
that this has not previously formed the basis of award of any degree, diploma, associate-ship
or other similar degrees or diplomas, and has not been submitted anywhere else.
Dasari Doli Gopi Krishna (QH16023)

Date:
Palla Vijay Kumar (QH16080)
Vadlamuri Yaswanth (QH16123)
PGP QSCM 13th Batch

(2016-2017)
NICMAR -Hyderabad
ii
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research thesis entitled “Delay Analysis by Window Analysis
Method” is bonafide work of Mr. Dasari Doli Gopi Krishna, Mr. Palla Vijay Kumar and Mr.
Vadlamuri Yaswanth in partial fulfilment of the academic requirements for the award of Post
Graduate Programme in Quantity Surveying and Contract Management (PGP QSCM). This
work is carried out by him/them, under my guidance and supervision.
Date:
Prof B. Ravinder
NICMAR- Hyderabad
Prof R. Satish Kumar

Head-QSCM
NICMAR- Hyderabad
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The research thesis is a team work and the satisfaction that accompanies the
successful completion of this task would be incomplete without the mention of the
people who made it possible. Though it is possible to thank them personally, we take
this opportunity to express gratitude to them.
We are deeply indebted and highly obliged to our thesis guide Prof B. RAVINDER,
NICMAR, Hyderabad, without whose help we couldn’t have started the thesis and
would not have got any lead for whom to approach and the methodology to be
followed and for guiding and correcting us on the right track.
We would also thank prof. Dr T Seshadri Sekhar, Dean, NICMAR Hyderabad,
prof. R. Satish Kumar ,Head QSCM ,NICMAR Hyderabad for their supporting
nature.
We would like to thank our friends studying in various institutes all over the country
in providing us with the relevant data and the references required for the successful l
completion the thesis.
Last but not the least we would like to thank our parents for reposing so much faith
and care in us, giving us the financial and mental support to strive through and
complete thesis. Their constant encouragement and guidance provided us infinite
motivation throughout the thesis work.
Dasari Doli Gopi Krishna (QH16023)

Palla Vijay Kumar (QH16080)
Vadlamuri Yaswanth (QH16123)
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A vital section specified in the construction contract is the performance period or time
of project execution, which is established prior to bidding. The successful execution of
construction projects and keeping them within estimated cost and the prescribed
schedules depend on a methodology that requires sound engineering judgment. The
time required to complete construction projects is frequently greater than the time
specified in the contract.
We know that every construction project is unique and cannot be managed in a same
way. Exhaustive planning and proper coordination are the basic paradigms which are
needed for successful completion of project. Each and every party involve in projects
is responsible for its completion without incurring time and cost overrun.
It is a project slipping over its planned schedule and is considered as common
problem in construction projects. To the owner, delay means loss of revenue through
lack of production facilities and rent-able space or a dependence on present facilities.
In some cases, to the contractor, delay means higher overhead costs because of longer
work period, higher material costs through inflation, and due to labour cost increases.
Completing projects on time is an indicator of efficiency, but the construction process
is subject to many variables and unpredictable factors, which result from many
sources.
This report included the various types of delays encounter in the construction projects.
Different types of delays for eg. Excusable, non - excusable, compensable and critical,
non-critical delays etc. have been elaborated.
This report provides the various factors and reasons which leads delay in completing a
project. In each stage of construction project, there are some critical issues which
results in delay and these factors are discussed in detail.
It is found that there are differences in perceptions as to causes of delays by different

groups of participants in building and civil engineering works. Perception by Different
groups of participant (eg. Owner, contractor & consultant) as to cause delay is studied
in detail.
To complete the project successfully these delays must be avoided, or reduced.
Therefore, we should do delay analysis, this will help in determining the reasons of
v
delays and can identify to whom these are attributable to. Carrying out delay analysis
help to prepare the mitigation plan required to bring the project back on schedule. This
will also help in substantiating the claims in case of disputes. There are number of
Delay analysis methods (DAM) which are used now a day by construction experts.
Each method is having some advantages and disadvantages, and different process of
implementation. In general, CPM based DAMs are used by experts in construction
projects.
Selection or choice of suitable method for delay analysis depends upon many factors
like contractual conditions, availability of necessary information, cost etc. Checklists
have been prepared to choose particular DAM depending on various factors and
project environment.
A case study on the construction of a 2x800MW thermal power plant project has been
analysed in detail.
Reasons leading to delay in this project were identified and delay analysis is carried
out using Window slicing.
It is found that proper planning, coordination, accurate record keeping, updating
baseline plans, and preparing mitigation plan on regular basis and generating progress
reports help a lot in doing delay analysis. With these, exact reason for delay can be
identified and responsible party can be held accountable. By carrying delay analysis
on regular basis helps us to judge the specific activity or event causing delay and
significant action can be taken before propagating or cumulating the delays.
Delay analysis also helps us in doing risk analysis in preliminary or conceptualisation
stage of the projects i.e. identifying the possible factors in advance that may cause
delay of project in future; hence to avoid such causes prior precautions can be taken.
vi
CONTENT
DECLARATION…………………………………………………………………………...ii
CERTIFICATE………………………………………………………………………...….iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………………………...…….iv
EXECUTUVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………......v
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………....ix
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………..…ix
CHAPTER SCHEME…………………………………………………………………....
1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….…….1
1.1 Background………………………………………………………………….......1
1.2 Objective………………………………………………………...……………....2
1.3 Need & Importance……………………………………………………………....3
1.4 Research Methodology……………………………..…………………………....3
1.5 Chapter scheme…………………………………………………………..………4
1.6 Limitations………………………………………………………………….……5
1.7 Scope of Work……………………………………………………………………5
2. Literature Review……………………………………………………………………6
2.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….6
2.2 Literature Review………………………………………………………………….6
3. Delay and Types of Delays……………………………………………………….….8

3.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………...….8
3.2 Types of Delays …………………………………………………………………..9
3.2.1 Excusable, Non Excusable and Compensable Delays………………...…..9
3.2.2 Critical and Non critical Delays………………………………………….13
3.2.3 Independent, Serial and Concurrent Delays……………………..……….13
4. Delay Analysis Methodologies……………………………………………………16

4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..…16
4.2 Delay Analysis……………………………………………………………….…16
4.3 Delay Analysis Methodologies…………………………………………………16
vii
4.4 Difference Between Methodologies……………………………………….……17
4.4.1 Schedule Techniques Used………………………………………...……18
4.4.2 Baseline for Analysis……………………………………………………18
4.4.3 Mode of Application……………………………………………….……19
4.5 Delay Analysis Methods…………………………………………………...……20
4.5.1 Non CPM Based Techniques…………………………………………....22
4.5.2 CPM Based Techniques……………………………………………....…23
5. Case Study…………………………………………………………………………..27
6. CONCLUSION………………………………….…………………………….........39
BIBILOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………….40
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No Name of Table Page No
4.1 Methodologies of delay analysis 20
LIST OF CHARTS
Chart No Name Page No
3.1 Chart on Delay Classification 14

3.2 Different scenario that defines concurrent delay 15
4.1 Methodologies of Delay Analysis 18
ix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Today, India is the second fastest growing economy in the world. The Indian
construction industry is an integral part of the economy and a conduit for a
substantial part of its development investment, is poised for growth on account of
industrialization, urbanization, economic development and people's rising
expectations for improved quality of living'. In India, construction is the second
largest economic activity after agriculture. Construction accounts for nearly 65 per
cent of the total investment in infrastructure and is expected to be the biggest
beneficiary of the surge in infrastructure investment over the next five years.
Investment in construction accounts for nearly 11 per cent of India's Gross Domestic
Product (GDP). Rs.17980 billion is likely to be invested in the infrastructure sector
over the next five to 10 years - in power, roads, bridges, city infrastructure, ports,
airports, telecommunications, which would provide a huge boost to the construction
industry as a whole. Investment into this sector could go up to R billion by
FY2010.Real Estate is a Rs.600 bn (by revenue) Industry in India. It is projected to
grow to Rs.2550 bn by 2010. It has witnessed a revolution, driven by the booming
economy, favourable demographics and liberalised foreign direct investment (FDI)
regime. Growing at a scorching 30 percent, it has emerged as one of the most
appealing investment areas for domestic as well as foreign investors. The second
largest employing sector in India (including construction and facilities management),
real estate is linked to about 250 ancillary industries like cement, brick and steel
through backward and forward linkages. Consequently, a unit increase in expenditure
in this sector has a multiplier effect and the capacity to generate income as high as
five times.
All these developments have a positive effect on the industry. The main competency
in projects is speed of work. Speed is the essence and tight deadlines are common. A
vital section specified in the construction contract is the performance period or time
of project execution, which is established prior to bidding. The successful execution
of construction projects and keeping them within estimated cost and the prescribed
schedules depend on a methodology that requires sound engineering judgment. The
time required to complete construction projects is frequently greater than the time
specified in the contract.
At the time of awarding the contractor only, completion time of project is decided but
project generally incurred time overrun because of various reasons. These delays
leads to loss to the each and every participant directly or indirectly involve in the
construction. To the owner, delay means loss of revenue through lack of production
facilities and rent-able space or a dependence on present facilities. In some cases, to
the contractor, delay means higher overhead costs because of longer work period,
higher material costs through inflation, and due to labour cost increases. Delay leads
to claims in term of extension of time or liquidated damages, disputes, arbitration etc.
from the concern parties. Completing projects on time is an indicator of efficiency,
but the construction process is subject to many variables and unpredictable factors,
which result in delay in completion of projects.
This thesis aims at finding the most critical factors leading to delays, delay analysis
methods those are employed to reduce the delay and hence saving in terms of time,
cost, revenue generation.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
 Identifying the reasons of delays in construction projects, evaluating & presenting
the same.
 Detail understanding of various delay analysing methods.
 Determining the advantages & disadvantages of each analysing methods.
 Assessing the suitability & reliability of analysing methods.
 Factors influencing the selection of delay analysing methods used for different
projects.
2
1.3 NEED & IMPORTANCE
 To help the project manager for corporate professionals for efficient & effective
accomplishment of projects.
 To provide a readymade platform to evaluate and resolve the critical issues by
applying delay analysis techniques.
 To emphasize on positive traits requisites for timely and successful completion of
projects.
 To ease the criticality of project management controls and approach.
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A detailed literature search and review was undertaken to provide theoretical
background and context of research. A case study approach was adopted for the
study, thus the cases involving delayed were identified and analysis of the same is
carried out.
 Literature survey:
Data collected from textbook, magazines, internet etc.
 Data collection:
 Primary: Our primary methodology is a survey based on a questionnaire
that covers all the major aspect of delay in construction in India.
 Secondary: Information for internet, magazines, various manual and
professional's comments.
 Analysis
 Understanding & analysing the delay analysis techniques.
 Determining suitability & reliability of delay analysis techniques.
 Case study approach to analyse delay & applying suitable delay analysis
technique to it.
 Generation & Data interpretation
 conclusion
3
1.5 CHAPTERISATION SCHEME
Chapter 1:
First Chapter is all about the introduction of thesis topic. It includes background of
study, need of carrying out the research on this particular topic. This part of the
report discussed the objective of thesis, research methodology adopted, extent of our
study and limitation of the work. This chapter is the introductory part and describe
our approach to the thesis.
Chapter 2:
Second chapter devoted to the literature review that has been carried out regarding
the subject of research. Many articles & previous work done on the same topic has
been referred. Literature review from various books, journals, papers studied is
mentioned in this chapter. All theories that have been derived earlier are collected
through the secondary sources and these are mentioned in this chapter.
Chapter 3:
Third Chapter is mainly focused on types of delays & various delays that are
encounter in the construction process. Excusable Non excusable and compensable
delays etc. are highlighted over here.
Description of the reasons of these delays & also the client, contractor, and
consultant point of view on delay causes etc. is theme of the fifth chapter.
Chapter 4:
Next chapter dealt with the various delay analysis methods (DAM). It mentioned the
entire DAM in detail with their advantages and disadvantages.
Chapter no. 7 covers the suitability of these DAM in specific project. It also covers
the factors that affect the selection delay analysis method used for the project under
consideration.
Case Study:
Case study of one of the project of Golden Quadrilateral has been analysed and
expressed. Reasons of delays are pointed out and various DAMs are applied on it.
Program of the project showing each method of DA has been prepared and included
in chapter no.8.
4
1.6 LIMITATIONS
Research suffers from the limitations in term of responses from the industry. Most of
the company avoid giving any confidential information. Report discusses the general
analysis of separate opinion given by client, consultant & contractor. One of the
major problems in carrying out this research work is reliability of responses gathered
from questionnaire survey. Responses obtained through questionnaire approach may
have likely chances having of false or unrealistic data.
1.7 SCOPE OF WORK

Research work focussed on delays in construction projects, reasons & causes of
delays, who are responsible for delay. It talks about the different delay analysis
methods, their advantages, disadvantages & suitability of each method under
different project environment.
Scope also includes collection of various reasons of delay from the entities involved
in construction field through questionnaire & then responses were analysed, on this
basis, some remedies to avoid delays in construction projects are recommended.
One case study has been analysed and various delay analysis methods have applied
on the project and their suitability is judged.
5
CHAPTER-2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Delay occurs in almost all construction projects. It is defined as time overrun

beyond the contract date for the delivery of the projects. Researcher defines the
delay as an approval delay or a piece of work to be later than originally planned.
The researcher adds that where there are a number of delays coming together at a
particular point, this may result in causing a compounding effect.
Many articles and studies have been conducted on analysis of delays in construction
projects. As we know that delay in construction projects leads to claims in term of
EOT or LD, disputes, & hence loss to all parties involved in construction. Therefore,
delay is the most concern part of construction projects.
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Many articles have been published on reasons of delays in construction projects.

Surveys conducted by Assaf et al. (2006) outlined 76 main causes of delay in large
construction projects. Delay factors are assembled into nine major groups with
different levels of importance to different parties.
Another survey has been carried out by Abdalla M. Odbh et al. (2002) on causes of
delay in traditional contracts. Survey aimed at identifying the most important causes
of delay in construction projects with traditional type of contract from view point of
contractor & consultants. Result of the survey concluded that contractor & consultant
both agreed that client interfere, inadequate contractor experience, financial
problems, payments, labour productivity, slow decision making, improper planning
and subcontractors are among the top ten most important factors.
A paper published in International Journal of Project Management 24 (2006) 145-155
on selecting a delay analysis method in resolving construction claims by David Arditi*
Thanat Pattanakitchamroon (1995) review 20 research studies that discuss various
aspects of delay. analysis methods and summarizes the advantages and disadvantages
of widely used delay analysis methods, including the as-planned vs. as-built, impact
as-planned, collapsed as-built, and time impact analysis methods. The paper also
6
discusses the most important issues in delay analysis that affect the results of the
analysis. The selection of a suitable analysis method depends heavily on the
availability of scheduling data, the familiarity of the analyst with the capabilities of the
software used in the project, clear specifications in the contract concerning the
treatment of concurrent delays and the ownership of float.
Another article by Ayman H. Al-Momani (2002) on Construction delay: a quantitative

analysis is reviewed in detail. The dual underlying theme of this paper is to investigate
the causes of delays on 130 public projects in Jordan and to aid construction managers
in establishing adequate evaluation prior to the contract award using quantitative data.
Projects investigated in this study included residential, administration buildings,
school buildings, medical centres and communication facilities. Results of this study
indicates the main causes of delay in construction of public projects relate to
designers, user changes, weather, site conditions, late deliveries, economic conditions
and increase in quantity.
Article by Nuhu Braimah *, lssaka Ndekugri (2008) on Factors influencing the
selection of delay analysis methodologies reports on a study into the factors that
influence analysts' selection from these methodologies. Eighteen factors were
identified through literature review and pilot surveys and then ranked on their relative
importance based on data collected in a nation-wide survey of UK construction
organisations. Factor analysis was used to reduce the factors into 6 group factors:
project characteristics, contractual requirements, characteristics of baseline
programme, cost proportionality, timing of the analysis and record availability.
Surveys conducted by Sadi A Assaf and Sadiq Al Heijji (2006) outlined 73 causes of
delays in large construction projects in Saudi Arabia. They studied the frequency,
severity and importance of causes of delay. The important index of each cause was
calculated as a product of both, the frequency & the severity indices of each cause.
The identified cause is combined in nine groups. The field survey included 23
contractors, 19 consultants & 15 owners. Study indicated that owner and consultant
realises that awarding to the lowest bidder is the highest frequency factor of delay,
while contractor consider the several causes of delay are related to the owner.
7
CHAPTER-3
DELAYS & TYPES OF DELAYS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
Delays occur in most of the construction projects. In construction, delay can be

defined as the time overrun either beyond the contract date or beyond the date the
parties agreed upon for delivery of the project.
The term "delay" in construction contracts has no precise technical meaning. It can be
used in different sense to mean different conditions in project execution However, the
term is often used in its basic sense to mean any occurrences or events that extend the
duration or delay the start or finish of any of the activities of a project. Delays
therefore increase the time and cost allocated for executing the various project
activities, resulting in project cost overruns and late completions. The latter effect will
only occur when the delay lies on the critical path of the programme.
It is also defined as the delays in progress compared to baseline. Researchers define
delays as an approval delay or a piece of work to be later than originally planned, and
disruptions as events hindering the contract completing the work as bid. The
researcher adds that where there are a number of delays and disruptions coming
together at a particular point, this may result in causing a compounding effect.
A project is consisting of a collection of activities. Delays can occur in any or all of
these activities, and these delays can concurrently cause delays in completion of the
project. A project delay is the accumulated effect of the delays in the individual
activity.
A review by Morris & Hough (1987) of some 3500 projects revealed that overruns are
norm, being typically between 40 to 200 %. Project delays are generally addressed at
two levels in literature. Some researchers have considered the influence of various
factors on the life cycle of the projects. Others have focused on specific phase of the
project life cycle.
8
When delays occur in a project, there are basically two options: prescribing overtime
work and injecting additional resources, in order to accelerate certain activities of the
project scheduled. This can significantly increase the project costs. Prolonged
overtime working may cause declines in productivity and performance.
3.2 TYPES OF DELAYS
Before analysing construction delays, a clear understanding of the general types of

delays is necessary. There are four basic ways to categorize delays:
 Critical or Non-Critical
 Excusable or Non-Excusable
 Concurrent or Non-Concurrent
 Compensable or Non-Compensable
3.2.1. EXCUSABLE, NON EXCUSABLE AND COMPENSABLE DELAYS
Delayed completion of projects is generally caused by the actions or inactions of the
project parties including the employer, contractor, subcontractors, project designers/
supervisors and neither of these parties (e.g. acts of God). Based on these sources and
the contractual risk allocation for delay-causing events, three main categories of
delays are generally recognized: excusable, non excusable and compensable delays.
It is important to note that the terms compensable, excusable and non excusable are
from the perspective of the contractor. Thus a delay that is compensable is
compensable to the contractor but non-excusable to the employer. On the other hand,
a delay deemed non-excusable non compensable is compensable to the employer
because it results in levying of liquidated damages.
Excusable - Non compensable delays:
A Non-Compensable Delay normally encompasses such things as strikes, unusually
severe weather, acts of God, fires, floods, etc. There is a general lack of understanding
concerning the Non-Compensable Delay for weather. It should be noted that a Non-
Compensable Delay is for unusually severe weather. That is weather which is not
anticipated at that time of year in that part of the country. It does not mean that any
time there is inclement weather or weather that may prevent the contractor from
working that the contractor is entitled to a time extension. The contractor is only
entitled to a time extension when the weather is unusually severe.
9
The determination of what constitutes unusually severe weather is based upon a
review of the historical weather data for that area. For a contractor to request a time
extension for unusually severe weather he should demonstrate what the weather was
that he experienced and compares this with historical weather data. Normally, the
weather1data comparison is for the preceding five-year period.
It goes without saying that merely the occurrence of unusually severe weather does
not necessarily constitute a delay nor warrant a time extension. The contractor must
demonstrate that the unusually severe weather actually delayed the critical path work
on the project. If the building is enclosed and the unusually severe weather had no
effect to the contractor's work then, obviously, there is no delay and a time extension
is not warranted. Some Federal Agencies, particularly the Corps of Engineers, have
specified in their construction contracts what normal weather is anticipated for that
area particularly with regard to precipitation. Many Corps of Engineers' contracts will
state how many days of a specified amount of rain are expected each month for the
year in that part of the country. They then will consider unusually severe weather as a
number of days of a specified amount of rain which exceeds that number of days
specified in the contract. Similarly, some Corps' contracts also specify the magnitude
of the precipitation that may be expected. The present Corps of Engineers'
Regulations note that unusually severe weather occurs when rain is in excess of 5
inches. However, a careful reading of the contract is required to insure what is exactly
specified concerning weather.
One other item concerning unusually severe weather is worthy of note. Should a
contractor experience two days of unusually severe weather in terms of rain it may
well occasion a delay which is greater than two days? For instance, should the
contractor be performing site work and experience two days of unusually severe rain,
the site may become saturated such that the contractor is unable to work for five or six
days. Therefore, the time extension which is requested is for the five or six days
which is the actual time frame during which the contractor was delayed because of the
unusually severe weather.
Non-Compensable Delays are delays for which the contractor is entitled to a time
extension; however, he is not entitled to any additional monetary compensation, hence
the Work Non-Compensable Delay. Though the contractor might assert that he had no
control over the weather or a strike and the delay indeed cost him.
10
Additional money such as his general conditions cost, he still is not entitled to
compensation for this. The theory is that neither the contractor nor the federal
government has control over the Non-compensable delay. Therefore, both the parties
assume their own additional costs. The contractor absorbs his delay costs for being out
on the project longer and the Federal Government absorbs its cost normally in the
form of the liquidated damages by granting a time extension to the contractor and
extending the contract. One might consider it a form of a non-fault approach to delays.
Neither party can control them nor do both parties accept any extra cost resulting from
them.
Excusable. Compensable delays:
Compensable Delays are delays that are unforeseeable and beyond the contractor's
control, but for which the contractor is entitled to not only a time extension but also
additional compensation. Normally a Compensable Delay is caused by the
Government. It may be caused by a direct change, it may be caused by a suspension of
work, or it may be caused by any of the constructive changes. For a contractor to
request both a time extension and compensation for that time extension, he must
demonstrate that the Government was the cause of that delay.
These delays result from circumstances such as:
1) Failure of owner to have the work site available to the contractor in a timely
manner.
2) Owner initiated changes in the work.
3) Owner delays in issuing a notice to proceed.
4) Architect I engineer supplied designs which are defective.
5) Owner not properly coordinate the work of other contractors.
6) Owner is not providing furnished equipment in a timely manner.
7) Owner is providing misleading information
8) Owner interfering with the performance of the contractor
9) Owner, or the architect I engineer, delaying the approval of contractor
submitted shop drawings etc.
11
Non excusable delays:
NED is the responsibility of the contractor and client may be entitled to claim the
damages. When a contractor causes delays to the completion of a project, such delays
excludes the contractor from obtaining a time extension and may trigger delay
damages against the contractor. Examples of these causes of delay includes: material
related delays, labour related delays, equipment related delays, improper planning &
financial delays. The contractor usually assumes the risks of costs and consequences
of delay events which are within its control e.g. shortage of staff or equipment, late
mobilization, etc.
This type of delay is referred to as "nonexcusable-noncompensable" (NN) delay,
which could be compensated to the employer in the form of liquidated or actual
damages paid by the contractor for late completion.
Classification of causes of non- excusable delays:

Several studies have been carried out to determine the causes of delays & classify the
main clauses of delay in to the group such as labour related delays, improper planning
etc. Asaaf et. LI (1995), yates (1993) & arditi el. (1985) classify the main causes of
delays in the several groups these are as follows:
1) Material related delays
2) Labour related delays
3) Equipment related delays
4) Financial delays
5) Improper planning
6) Lack of control
7) Sub-contractor delays
8) Poor coordination
9) Inadequate supervision
10) Improper construction methods
11) Poor communication
12) Lack of technical staff
Each main cause of NED is because of several factors. The ability to isolate &
identify these factors will help the construction manager to take appropriate actions to
avoid these delays.
12
M.Z. Abd. Majid and Ronald Mc Gaffer use the Ishikawa or fish bone diagram in
identifying the cause & its effect. Ishikawa diagram is useful when factors causing the
effect are many & interrelated. M.Z. Abd. Majid and Ronald Mc Gaffer, they have
identified the various factors causing the delays & do analysis on basis of ishikawa
diagram.
3.2.2 CRITICAL & NON-CRITICAL DELAYS

Delays are also distinguished between "critical & non critical delays". The former are
those that cause delay to project completion date whilst the later affect progress but
not overall completion. Most of the contracts require that in order for delay to warrant
an extension of contract time, it must affect the completion of the project (i.e. the
delay must be critical) This provide the basis for the high importance attached to the
use of critical path method of scheduling for proving or disproving time related claims
such as EOT. (Wickwire et.)AI. 1989 b; Bramble and Callahan, 2000).
3.2.3 INDEPENDENT DELAY, SERIAL DELAYS & CONCURRENT DELAYS

The terms "independent delays", "serial delays" and "concurrent delays" are also used
to describe delays based on the interrelation of the above delay types with respect to
their duration and time of occurrence. Independent delays are delays that occur in
isolation or without other consecutive or simultaneous delays while serial delays
occur in sequence consecutively and not overlapping with each other on a particular
network path. On the other hand, two or more delays in which their time of
occurrence or effects overlaps are often termed "concurrent delays". Independent and
serial delays are relatively easy to resolve compared to concurrent delays. As a
summary, following figure classifies the different types of delays based on their
various attributes.
13
DELAY CLASSIFICATIONS
FIG 3.1 Delay Classifications

Source: A Report by Nuhu Braimah of the University of Wolverhampton.
Concurrent delays
The resolution of this type of delay has been a contentious legal and technical subject
in construction and engineering contracts. The reason for this is largely due to the fact
that resolving it requires the consideration of the interaction of different factors such
as the time of occurrence of the delays, their length of duration, their critically, the
legal principles of causation and float ownership.
Rubin et al. (1983) defined concurrent delays as the situation in which two or more
delays occur at the same time either of which had it occurred alone, would have
affected the ultimate completion date. It means each of the delays must independently
affect the critical path. The SCL Protocol (SCL, 2002) defines a true concurrent delay
as "the occurrences of the delays, one an employer risk event and the other a
contractor risk event, at the same time, and their effects felt at the same time". This
occurrence is, however, extremely rare in practice since time is infinitely divisible. For
instance, two delay events occurring on the same day would not necessarily be true
concurrent delays because one may have occurred in the morning while the other in
the afternoon. Concurrent delay is also somewhat misleadingly used to refer to the
occurrence of two or more delay events at different times but their effect is felt (in
14
whole or in part) at the same time. To avoid confusion, this is termed "concurrent
effect" of sequential delay events (SCL, 2002).
To clarify the above definitions, various scenarios of concurrent delays illustrating
these definitions are shown in following figure.
Different scenarios that define Concurrent delays:
FIG 3.2 Different Scenarios that define Concurrent Delays

Source: A Report by Nuhu Braimah of the University of Wolverhampton.
The figure shows a project of 4 activities (A, B, C and D), suffering a 4-weeks project
delay, which was caused by employer and contractor delays each lasting 4 weeks.
Scenario 1 is where both delays, starting and ending at the same, affect a single
activity on the same critical Path. In scenario 2, both delays affect different activities
on different critical paths but start and end at the same time Scenario 3 is similar to
scenario2 except that both delay start and end at different times.
15
CHAPTER 4
DELAY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES
4.1 INTRODUTION:
As we know most construction projects suffers delays that result in huge losses, claims
in terms of EOT and LD. Delay analysis help us to analyse particular activity or event
which lead to time overrun. Delay analysis can be carried out on regular basis, for eg:
Our project has been delayed because of event A then we can go for its detailed
analysis by using suitable method and can able to find the impact of this delay on
overall completion of project. Once the factors pertaining to delay have been
identified, these can be control on later stages & prevent the subsequent delays.
Delay analysis is also carried out to substantiate the claims. Proper delay analysis by
using the suitable methodologies gives factors resulting delays and to whom it is
attribute to.
It should be noted that there are several important considerations for choosing an
appropriate analysis methodology. Each claim is unique and deals with different
contract requirements, situational context and level of documentation, complexities,
legal jurisdictions and dispute resolution forums among other factors. The selection of
particular delay analysis method should be based on professional judgement and
diligent factual research and evaluation.
4.2 DELAY ANALYSIS:

Delay analysis is a forensic investigation into the events or issues that caused a project
to run late. During the past decade developments in computer technology and the
availability of more advanced planning software packages has, in my view, changed
the way in which delay claims and the results of a delay analysis are Presented.
4.3 DELAY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY:

The first type of delay analysis methodology is prospective; which
demonstrates the theoretical or likely impact of the consequences of delaying
events-rather than showing what in fact occurred. The basis of this
methodology is to establish a programming model of the project, usually the
contractor's planned programme then impacts the model by the application of
16
delaying events. This type of methodology is commonly used to demonstrate
what extension of time a contractor is due, as a result of the application of
employer responsible delaying events. This is said to be the contractor’s
entitlement. Entitlement in this context is derived from the results of a delay
analysis and is not to be confused with contractual entitlement. In summary
the prospective type of methodology is a theoretical calculation of the likely
delay a delaying event(s) would cause to project completion. In other words, it
focuses firstly on the delaying event and then demonstrates the likely delay to
progress and ultimately project completion that is likely to flow from the
event. The Second type of delay analysis methodology is retrospective. The
retrospective analysis tries to show what actually occurred on a project; where
the delays were; and what caused the delay to project completion. The analysis
shows how actual progress differed from what was planned. By focusing on
how the works actually progressed, the analysis will show when work
activities were delayed, and from the results of the analysis, investigation of
what caused the actual delays can be carried out. In summation, this type of
methodology looks at what actually happened, what activities were actually
delayed and only thereafter what caused the delay. Both types of delay
analysis methodology are to some degree subjective. The prospective analysis
relies heavily on a programming model of the project and the delay analyst's
opinion on how the delay event was likely to influence the model. The
retrospective analysis is, in my opinion, less subjective as it relies on actual
progress. However, interpretation of the results as to what caused delay is
subjective. This is because the delay analyst will usually have to consider a
number of related issues as to what caused delay and apply his own experience
and judgement. (Analysis of project delay -theoretical or interrogation of the
facts, By Roger Gibson 9 June 2003)
4.4 DIFFERENT BETWEEN METHODOLOGIES:

The methodologies differ from each other based on the type of schedule
technique they require, the baseline schedule used and the mode of application.
Based on these criteria, the various DAMs can be classified as shown in
following figure:
17
Figure No 4.1 Methodologies of Delay Analysis
Source: A report by Nuhu Braimah of the University of Wolverhampton
4.4.1 SCHEDULE TECHNIQUE USED:

On the type of schedule technique used, the methodologies can be grouped as CPM
based techniques and non CPM-based techniques. The former are more popular and
highly recognized because of the numerous advantages of CPM in DA. On the other
hand, the non-CPM based techniques, particularly bar charts, are of limited help in
proving the impact of delays because of their inability to show the true effects of
delays on project completion (Wick wire and Groff, 2004. However, they can
successfully use to analyse some types of delay claims particularly those involving
fewer activities and simple relationships (Pickavance, 2006).
4.4.2 Baseline for analysis:

According to wickwire et al. (1989), the base line or reference point used in delay
analysis varies for the various methodologies depending on the choices between the
following three options:
(i) Forward pricing- Valuing the delay at its inspection by impacting the
contractors base line programme with the delaying events. Methodologies relaying
on such analysis include a the impacted As- planned and As-Planned.
18
(ii) Contemporaneous pricing - Valuing the delay as it is occurring or immediately
after it has occurred. Methodologies for performing this include the contemporaneous
analysis and the Time Impact Analysis.
(iii) Hindsight pricing – Determining and valuing the delay after the project is
completed. This is performed by the methodologies such as Collapsed – as built, As –
planned v/s As – Built and the Window analysis.
These options are highly influenced by the timing of the analysis. However, in practice
methodologies suitable for performing forward and contemporaneous pricing (i.e.
prospective analysis) can also be used for Hindsight project (retrospective analysis).
4.4.3 Mode of application:

The mode of application of methodologies varies on three different modes: Direct
analysis, Subtractive simulation and additive simulation.
(i) Direct Analysis
This involves the analyst examining the schedules as it is without carrying out any
major adjustments or evaluations on the schedule. The methodologies using this type
of analysis are therefore relatively easy, simple and less expensive to implement.
Examples include As – planned v/s As – built, Net impact and global impact.
(ii) Subtractive simulation:
This mode entails the delays from each party from the as – built programme to
establish their effects on the completion date of the project. There are two main ways
through which delays can be removed (Trauner, 1990): removing all the delays in one
go from a single as – built schedule (i.e. single stage simulation) or removing the
delays in stages from multiple schedule (multistage simulation). The collapsed as built
method is example for this type of simulation.
(iii) Additive simulation:
Under in this mode, the analysis formulates the delays as activities and adds them to a
schedule (the base line programme or its updates) to establish their effects on the
project completion date. As in subtractive method, the addition can also be done in
single stage or multistage. Methods falling under this type of analysis are impacted as
– planned, as – planned but for, window analysis and time impacted analysis.
Based on different modes of operations, the level of analysis detail required varies for
the various methodologies. Methodologies that make use of direct analysis are
therefore often termed “simplistic method” while those involving extensive
19
modification of schedule as in additive and subtractive simulation are termed
“sophisticated methods” (Alkass et al., 1996). The later group tend to give more
accurate results than the former but they require more expensive, time, skills, and
resources and project records to operate (Lovejoy, 2004ss)
4.5 DELAY ANALYSIS METHOD:

Various DAMs, known by different terminologies among practitioners, have been
reported in the literature (see Table 6.1). The common aim of these methodologies has
been to investigate how delays experienced by the various project activities affect
others and the project completion date and then to determined how much of the overall
project delay is attributable to each party. However, the various methodologies
achieve this at different levels of accuracies due to their different attributes. The
following gives an overview of the difference between the various methodologies and
their brief descriptions.
Table 4.1 Names of Existing DAMs
Common name Literature Review Alternative names

used by different
Authors
S-CURVE (Non-CPM based Rubin et al. (1999) Dollar to Time

techniques) Relationship
(Tranuer, 1990)
Global Impact technique (Non- Leary and Bramble (1988)

CPM based techniques) Alkass et al. (1996)
Pinnell, (1998)
Net Impact (Non-CPM based Leary and Bramble (1988) Bar chart Analysis
techniques) Alkass et al. (1996) (Zack, 2001;
Lucas,2002)
As-built bar chart
(Bardoli and Balswin,
1998)
20
As-planned vs. As-built Stumpf ; Lucas (2002); Lovejoy Adjusted as-built CPM
(CPM based techniques) (2004); Pickavanceand (Leary and
Bramble, 1988; Alkass
et al., 1996)
Total time (Zack, 2001;
Wickwire and
Groff, 2004)
Impacted as-built CPM
(Pinnell,
1998)
As-Planned but Alkass et al. (1996); Pinnell,
For (CPM based techniques) (1998)
Impacted As planned Trauner, (1990); Pinnell What if (Schumacher,
(1998); 1995)
(CPM based techniques)
Lucas (2002); Lovejoy (2004) Baseline adding
Pickavance (2005) impacts (Bordoli and
Baldwin, 1998)
As-planned-plus delay
analysis (Zack,
2001; Chehayeb et al,
1995)
As-planned CPM
(Pinnell, 1998)
Collapsed As built Pinnell (1998); Stumpf But-for (Schumacher,
(2000); 1995; Zack,
Wickwire and Groff (2004); 2001; Lucas, 2002)
Lovejoy (2004) As-built but-for
(Pickavance, 2005)
As-built subtracting
impacts (Bordoli
and Baldwin, 1998)
As-built-minus analysis
(Chehayeb et
al, 1995)
Window Analysis Galloway and Nielsen (1990); Contemporaneous
Bordoli and Baldwin (1998); Period Analysis
Finke (1999); Lovejoy (2004); (Schumacher, 1995;
Pickavance (2005) Lucas, 2002)
Snapshot (Alkass et al.,
1995;
1996)
Periodic update
analysis
(Chehayeb et al., 1995)
Watershed
(Pickavance, 2005)
Time Impact Leary and Bramble (1988); End of every delay
Analysis Alkass et al. (1996); analysis
21
(CPM based techniques) Pickavance (Chehayeb et al, 1995)
(2005). Chronological and
cumulative
approach (Wickwire
and Groff, 2004)
4.5.1 NON-CPM METHODS:

S-Curve:
This methodology analyses delay based on the relationship between cost and time. It
involves developing a time/cost S-curve for the original plan together with the S-curve
representing actual income. The actual S-curve must exclude any cost for additional
works so that comparison of the two curves is valid. The amount of delay at any point
along the actual curve is the horizontal distance between these curves at this point
(Rubinet al., 1999). The limitations of this technique are as follows:
It does not identify and track the activities on the critical path; the original planned S-
curve might not be accurate due to "front end loading" or other factors; payments for
stored materials and equipment could result in misleading progress of an updated S-
curve.
Global Impact Technique:
This is a relatively simple approach of analysing the impact of delay on projects. All
the delay events are first shown on a summary bar chart by determining their start and
finish dates. The total project delay is then calculated to be the sum total of the
durations of all delaying events (Alkasset al.,1996; Pinnell,1998; Brambleand
Callahan,2000). Though this technique provides a simple and clear statement of the
amount of delay that is incurred, it has a major limitation: it does not consider
concurrent delays and the actual delay types that took place presuming that all delays
automatically caused project delay.
Net Impact technique:
This is an improvement on the preceding methodology to deal with the problem of
concurrency. Under this technique, all delays are plotted on an as-built bar chart
schedule where the actual durations, start and finish dates of activities are shown
(Learyand Bramble,1988). By this, only the net effect of all the delays is depicted and
the amount of delay to the project is the difference between the as-planned and the as-
built completion dates. The limitation of the methodology is that it does not scrutinize
delay types and could lead to over statement of the amount of delays having an effect
22
on the project completion date (Alkasset al.,1996). The major limitation common to
the above three methodologies is that because CPM network is not used, float,
criticality and interdependencies of activities are not readily apparent making it
difficult to determine true impact of delays. For this reason, use of this methodologies
are generally discouraged by most practitioners. (SCL, 2002; Wickwire and Groff,
2004)
4.5.2 CPM BASED TECHNIQUES:
(i) As Planned Vs As-Built:
The as-planned versus as-built schedule delay analysis is a retrospective method
which involves comparing the baseline, or as-planned, construction schedule against
the as-built schedule or a schedule that reflects progress through a particular point in
time. This analysis method is typically utilized when reliable baseline and as-built
schedule information exists, but the contemporaneous schedule updates either do not
exist or Are flawed to the extent that they are not reliable to support a delay analysis.
Implementation of the as-planned versus as-built schedule delay analysis can vary
from a simple graphical comparison to a more sophisticated implementation which
considers the start and finish dates and relative sequences of the various schedule
activities. As an example, linear construction projects, such as road or pipeline
construction projects with discrete delay issues, may utilize a simpler implementation
of the as-planned versus as-built schedule analysis.
A more sophisticated implementation of the as-planned versus as-built schedule
analysis methodology compares the start and finish dates, durations, and relative
sequences of the activities and seeks to determine the root causes of each variance.
The complexity of the implementation generally depends on the nature and
complexity of both the project and the issues being evaluated.
Advantages:
1. It is simple to use and understand.
2. Mathematical Computations only.
Disadvantages:
1. It assumes that baseline relationship logic remains holds
2. It cannot deal with the issues of concurrent or parallel delays.
3. It makes no allowance for mitigation.
23
(ii) Collapsed As-Built:
The collapsed as-built delay analysis methodology is a retrospective technique that
begins with the as-built schedule and then subtracts activities representing delays or
changes to demonstrate the effect on the completion date of a project but for the delay
or change. Generally, this method is applied in cases where liable as-built schedule
information exists, but baseline schedule and/or contemporaneous schedule updates
either do not exist or are flawed to the extent that they are not reliable to support a
delay analysis, Implementation of the collapsed as-built delay analysis involves
identifying project delays or changes, and then subtracting activities representing these
delays or changes from the as-built construction schedule. The resulting "collapsed as-
built" schedule demonstrates when a project would have been completed but for the
delays or changes; demonstrating the effect of the delays or changes on a project's
completion date.
Advantages:
1) As it is based upon the as-built schedule, the certainty is enhanced that the
outcomes coincide with actual situation of site.
2) It is easy to understand.
3) It is the technique that is well established and recognized in arbitration or
litigation.
Disadvantages:
1) It assumes that existence of As-Built critical path as perceived by the
scheduler, in other words methodology and techniques are open criticism
between owner and contractor
2) Since the process involves re construction of As-Build logics, the recreation
critical path following delay events may not be same as the critical path that
actually exists at the time of delay events
(iii) Impacted As-Planned:

The impacted as-planned method of delay analysis is a technique which forecasts or
predicts a delay's effect on a project's completion date. This delay analysis method
24
involves the insertion or addition of activities representing delays or changes into the
baseline schedule to determine the impact of those delay activities. Use of the
impacted as-planned schedule analysis method is generally restricted to the
quantification of delays for contemporaneous requests for time extensions.
Implementation of the impacted as-planned delay analysis involves identifying project
delays or changes and then inserting or adding activities, which represent these delays
or changes, into the baseline construction schedule. The resulting schedule
demonstrates the effect of the delays or changes on a project's completion date.
Advantages:
1) Relatively easy to implement.
Disadvantages
1) Highly subjective and theoretical
2) The contractor caused delay are not considered
3) It does not consider the dynamic nature of critical path those changes from time
to time by delayed activities and I or by consuming float by other activity in
other paths.
4) The pre genital logics may exaggerate the delays.
5) It assumes that owner is responsible for all the delays
(iv)Time Impact Analysis:

The time impact method of delay analysis, also referred to as TIA, is a technique
similar to the impacted as-planned analysis, which forecasts or predicts a delay's effect
on a project's completion date. This schedule analysis method involves the insertion or
addition of activities indicating delays or changes into an updated schedule
representing progress up to the point when a delay event occurred to determine the
impact of those delay activities.
Implementation of a time impact delay analysis involves identifying project delays or
changes, and then inserting or adding activities which represent the delays or changes
into an updated schedule representing job progress just prior to the occurrence of the
delay or change. The resulting schedule demonstrates the effect of the delays or
changes on the project completion date.
25
(V)Windows/Contemporaneous Period Analysis:
Windows analysis, also referred to as contemporaneous period analysis, is a
retrospective schedule impact analysis technique that generally utilizes
contemporaneous schedule updates, in conjunction with as-built facts related to a
delay or change, to quantify impacts to the as-built critical path associated with the
change or delay. This analysis takes into account the change's or delay's relationship to
past and/or concurrent events and circumstances. The windows method relies on the
forward-looking schedule calculations at the time that updates were prepared which
reflect the current status of the project and the contractor's plan for project completion
at various points in time. This technique allows for examination of the dynamic nature
of the critical path from period to period as the project unfolds. Implementation of
windows method of analysis typically begins with the baseline construction; schedule,
and then proceeds chronologically from update to update, tracking progress along the
critical and near critical paths. For each analysis period, the prior update becomes the
baseline for the analysis of delays or accelerations.
The windows method compares start dates, finish dates, and durations of the activities
and identifies changes to schedule logic between analysis periods. As such,
implementation of the windows analysis depends on reliable baseline schedule
information, contemporaneous schedule updates, and as-built schedule information.
Although the windows method of analysis is performed in a retrospective context,
either shortly after a delay event occurs or after the completion date of the entire
project, it is not a hindsight analysis approach. Rather, the windows analysis is a
forward-looking technique because the analysis generally proceeds from the beginning
of a project and moves forward in time on a chronological and cumulative basis. The
windows analysis evaluates as-built performance information and records to determine
whether delays or changes actually delayed the critical path of a Project.
Advantages
1. The method considers the dynamic nature of critical path
2. It is the technique well accepted and recognized in arbitration and litigation
Disadvantage
1. It is time consuming to develop.
26
CHAPTER 5
CASE STUDY
This case pertains to Design, Engineering, Quality surveillance, Test’s at

manufactures works, packing, supply ex-works of general mechanical works for 2 x
800 MW – yeramarus Thermal Power Plant in Raichur district of Karnataka. The said
contract was awarded to the contractor in the third quarter of 2013. The total cost of
agreement was Rs.238 crores and later it escalated to Rs.320 cores due to change in
electrical transmission line form 11 Kva to 33 Kva.
The total agreement was divided into two parts:
1. Supply
2. Services
And the type of contract is EPC contract.

The scope of work involves construction of various components like:
 Raw water jack well cum pump-house
 Ash water jack well cum pump-house
 Workshop building
 Switch gear building
 Laying of pipe lines of various diameter
 Approach bridges for PIPE LINES
The date of commencement of work was finally agreed to be 4th September 2013 and
date of completion of project was as per the contract, was by 4th may 2015 allowing a
period of completion of 20 months.
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES:
The liquidated damages payable by the contractor to the owner for delay in achieving
performance acceptance after the guaranteed completion date of plant shall be at the
rate of Half (0.5) percentage of contract value per week or part thereof of delay.
Contractor aggregate liability for cumulative liquidated damages foe delay shall not
exceed 15% of total contract price.
Engineer, in terms of contract provisions, was appointed in order to perform the duties
specified in the contract, which included supervision and certification of the works
executed by the contractor. The contractor had planned to finish the works in 4 months
ahead of schedule and earn maximum contract bonus. However, there were various
27
delay and disruptions to the works due to non-handling over of site free of
encumbrance, delay in approval of designs, drawings & instructions, fundamental
changes in design of works, stoppage of works by local villagers etc., Which
hampered the progress of works.
How ever various resons behind the control, the work was not completed within thw
scheduled time and project schedule is delayed due to delay in providing clearances
and approvals
Table 5.1
Sl.no Description of works Unit Scope Executed % of Balance
Qty Qty Completion Quantity
PIPELINE WORKS
1 Raw water pipe line
(1100 NB)
MS PIPES - Supply Rmt 25064 25064 100%
MS- PIPES- Freight Rmt 25064 25064 100%
MS- PIPES- ERECTION Rmt 25064 21276 85% 3788
Supply, Freight & Erection Ls 100% - - 100%
Of valves, Surge devices &
Misc. fittings
2 700NB pipe line

Misc. fittings
3 400 NB pipe line
Misc. fittings
4 350 NB Pipe line
MS PIPES – Supply Rmt 65200 65200 100%
Supply, Freight & Erection Ls 100% 100%
Misc. fittings
CIVIL WORKS
1a Raw water jack well Ls 100% 95% 95% 5%
1b Approach bridge @RWJW Ls 100% 95% 95% 5%
Approach embankment@ Ls 100% 90% 90% 10%
RWJW
28
Ash water jack well & Ls 100% 15% 15% 85%
Approach bridge
Switch gear building Ls 100% 90% 90% 10%
Work shop building Ls 100% 30% 30% 70%
Service road Ls 100% 100%
CROSSINGS
Heggasanahalli Bridge Ls 100% 70% 70% 30%
6.93Km
Other minor nalla crossings Ls 100 35% 35% 65%
Railway Crossings
Supply of casing pipes Ls 100% 100% 100%
Laying of casing pipe by Ls 100% 100% 100%
pipe jack pushing
NH Road Crossing
Supply of casing pipes Ls 100% 100% 100%
Laying of casing pipe by 100%
pipe jack pushing
Other minor road crossings
ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL & INSTRUMENTATION WORKS
Supply of material to site Ls 100% 70% 70% 30%
Erection of material to site Ls 100% 100%
Sub- station works Ls 100% 15% 15% 85%
Transmission line
Supply of poles No’s 311 311 100%
Erection of poles No’s 311 107 34% 204
Cable erection 100% 100%
There are some wise facts for the delays stated to have been caused are herewith
explained in detail.
1) Raw water Jack well pump house:
To avoid the hindrances to the ongoing work progress due to monsoon effect,
contractor had proposed the location of raw water jack well pump house adjacent to
river bed, but the employer had finalised the location of jack well in river bed only
and compelled contractor to execute the said work in river portion.
But during the construction activities, the work progress was disturbed due to curtail
of access to the jack well and held up due to heavy rain fall from 05/07/2014 to
02/08/2014 for almost about one month, resulted re doing the entire area development.
And there is delay of approval of drawings by the client. As the material procurement
requirement will be planned after receipt of drawing approval.
29
2) RCC Foot bridge to jack well:
Coming to this structure the client had approved drawings of Wing wall (L/S) earth
work excavation had taken up and completed and further the soling work was started.
In the meantime, the client engineer had insisted to go further deep than the level
mentioned in approved drawing. Finalizing the level itself consumed a precious time
continuity of 15-20 days.
In addition to the above after completion of staging erection on through compacted
murrum surface for deck slab in almost three spans, client execution team compelled
us to remove the erected staging and restart the work after laying PCC bed over the
murrum. In due course valuable time of 15 days has been lost.
And further work had been held up due to heavy rainfall all the works were hampered
from 05/07/2014 to 02/08/2014 for almost 1 month.
Structural drawings of this structure have been approved vide B- category on 1st
November 2013 and the site execution had been carried out according to that revision
of drawings. But later it was informed by the client execution team that work should
be executed as per latest revised submitted drawings. Because of this, a lot of
activities which were already being processed buy contractor were forced to alter
suddenly as per latest revision of drawings.
3) Ash water Jack well pump house:
In this one of the keen structure of the scheme, from the date of contract a major delay
is taken place for providing drawing approval from client side.
The geotechnical investigation report was curbed from client end by noting down the
geological values are not matching as they viewed and asked contractor to re-
geotechnical investigations for evaluating the type of foundation. This is the one of
the major hindrances to contractor for starting up the jack well works since the
beginning of project.
Although the GAD drawings have been approved by the client in B-category the
contractor is not in a position to take up the activities without approval of structural
drawings for a long duration.
4) Switchgear Building:
After completion of roof slab concrete work on 13/08/2014, Roof water proofing
treatment drawing has been submitted to client execution team by the contractor dated
29/08/2014 and execution of works at site is still being awaited for approval.
30
During the time of cable trench Raft concrete works as per A-category approved
electrical drawing layout, almost than 20 days has been lost due to execution team
opinions in finalizing the distance between cable trench wall & column inner surface
in section A-A.
Though the activities like columns, tie beam etc, of the framed structure had been
completed.
5) Workshop Building:
Coming to this structure substantial delay in providing area site clearance by the client
and later shifted the structure location more than 50% from the prior approved layout
after taking up earthwork activities, where in contractor had executed about 5000cum
of earth work. This situation had made delay in the project for around 6 months.
And the building structural drawing had been submitted on 05/07/2014 and the
foundation drawings up to plinth beam level had been approved in B category during
January 2015 after a lapse of 07 month and foundation work up to plinth beam levels
are taken up by contractor as per B category approved drawings.
In addition, the RC detail drawing of tie beams at EL +7.5m was approved vide B
category on 30/11/2015 after huge delay of 19 months.
6) HeggesanahalliNalla Crossing Bridge at Ch.6.93km:

Structural drawing of this has been approved vide B-category. Preliminary activities
of foundation works started at site by the contractor. The started works could not
continue due to rainfall and flood extend for the more than 02months and couldn’t
execute the works at the site continuously because of unavailability of land clearance
from client as per drawings approved for more than 02 months.
working site has been submerged with the flood water of nalla coming from upstream
side. After the recede of flood water, dewatering and slush removal works have been
carried out for 20 days
7) Pipe laying works up to RTPS plant:

Due to unavailability of area clearance for laying of Ash recovery pipeline between
Ch. (-) 1.4km to (-)0.110km, as proposed by client official during their site visits,
contractor have submitted the re-routed alignment. This re-alignment costed
And the client made delay in the approval of drawings at various chainages especially
forthe drawings of nala crossings for around 45 days.
31
8) Pipe laying works inside the RTPS plants:
The pipe line is to be layed inside the existed power plant so the contractor requested
to client through various correspondences to provide area clearance for pipe corridor.
Due to this there is a delay of around 2 Months.
Along with this there is delay of Drawings approval of varying heights pedestals (cast
insitu) of Ash of water recovery, Ash slurry Disposal & bottom ash overflow disposal
pipelines which were submitted to client for approval. The client had approved after a
lapse of 95days valuable time.
9) Electrical system:
The 33kv system was required in place of 11kv system for providing the power supply
to Raw water pumping station &Ash water recovery pumping station of YTPS for
general mechanical works subjected scheme and amendment for the same had been
issued after a huge time loss. And immediately after approval /amendment of 33kv
system; it had been taken up on fast track for supply and execution of the said work
from contractor.
Considerable delays had been happened in finalization of drawings of electrical
equipment i.e., HT Switch gear/panel for more than one month and also drawing
approvals from client side. In addition, there was a delay of approval for 33kv isolator
for about one month and LT Cable sizing &schedule and cable routing from
switchgear room to raw water pump house submitted to client.
From this case we have taken two structures and applied window analysis as per
scheduled construction. The structures taken are
 Raw Water Jack well
 Work shop building
In the method of window analysis, we have adopted As- Planned Schedule as its base
line, but due to the various delays occurred in the meantime the base lines have
changed. Totally we have taken three windows at various project duration and
updated as per impacted.
WINDOW 1:
1) Raw Water Jack well:
Description Delays occurred Delayed Dates Remarks
Under Bed 10 Days 10-04-2014 to 20-04- Monsoon
Foundation 2014
32
Total duration as per scheduled = 185 Days
Total delay occurred = 10 Days
Total Duration after window-1 = 195 Days
Extension of Time (EOT) = 10 Days
2) Construction of Work shop building:
Description Delays occurred Delayed Remarks
Dates
Foundation 30 days 11-03-2014 to Delayed in finalisation
21-04-2014 of foundation
design(type of
foundation)
Columns 5 Days 25-05-2014 to Delayed due to bad
30-05-2014 weather conditions.
Total duration as per scheduled = 250 Days

Total delay occurred = 35 Days
Total Duration after window-1 = 285 Days
WINDOW-2:
Shell Concreting 5 days 5-06-2014 to10-06- Due to
2014 unavailability of
material for shell
concreting
Motor Floor Slab 20 Days 16-06-2014 to 04-07- Delays occurred
2014 due non availability
of Motor slab
drawings
RCC Column Above 15 Days 11-08-2014 to 25-08- Delay occurred doe
Crane Beam 2014 to non-finalisation
of Crane
Specifications
Total duration as per Scheduled (Updated from Window-1) = 195 Days

Total delays occurred in Window-2 = 40 days
Total Duration after window-2= 195+40 = 235 Days
Extension of Time (EOT) = 50 Days.
33

Column upto 10 Days 05-06-2014 to Rain fall
roof 15-06-2014
Roof works 19 Days 27-07-2014 to Due to non availability of
14-08-2014. drawings

WINDOW-3:

Plastering 6 days 21-09-2014 to 26-09- Monsoon
2014
Painting 5 Days 06-11-2014 to 11-11- Monsoon
2014

Brick Work 5 days 01-10-2014 to 05- Non
10-2014 availability
of materials

34
As Planned
Sl
Delay
Duration in Delay
Description of Works Start Date Finish Date finish March april May June July August September October November December January
days start date
date
No.
Construction of Ash Water Recovery Jackwell Pumps with Approach Bridge
1 Earthwork Excavation 15 01-Apr 15-Apr
2 Under bed foundation (PCC) 10 16-Apr 26-Apr
3 Under bed foundation (Raft) 25 27-Apr 17-May
Completion of Jack well from foundation

4 60
to roof
I. Shell concreting of total height
5 15 18-May 01-Jun
up to motor floor
II. RCC motor operating floor slab
6 15 02-Jun 17-Jun
III. RCC columns, tie / ring beams

7 15 18-Jun 02-Jul
upto & including crane beam
IV. RCC columns above crane beam,
8 15 02-Jul 17-Jul
Roof works
9 V. Brick work 15 18-Jul 01-Aug
VI. Plastering
10 40 02-Aug 11-Sep
Painting (inside)
11 10 12-Sep 22-Sep
12 Painting (outside) 10 22-Sep 02-Oct
Construction of Work Shop Building

Earthwork Excavation
1 10 01-Mar 10-Mar
Foundation
2 30 11-Mar 10-Apr
Column upto Roof

3 60 11-Apr 10-Jun
Roof Works
4 40 11-Jun 21-Jul
5 Brick work 45 22-Jul 16-Aug
Plastering
6 40 17-Aug 25-Sep
7 Painting 25 26-Sep 20-Oct

As Planned Schedule With Delay in Window 1
Sl
Delay
Duration in Delay
days start date
date
No.
2 Under bed foundation (PCC) 10 16-Apr 26-Apr 21-Apr 30-Apr
3 Under bed foundation (Raft) 25 27-Apr 17-May 01-May 26-May

4 60
to roof
5 15 18-May 01-Jun
up to motor floor
6 15 02-Jun 17-Jun

7 15 18-Jun 02-Jul
8 15 02-Jul 17-Jul
Roof works
9 V. Brick work 15 18-Jul 01-Aug
VI. Plastering
10 40 02-Aug 11-Sep
Painting (inside)
11 10 12-Sep 22-Sep

1 10 01-Mar 10-Mar
Foundation
2 30 11-Mar 10-Apr 21-Apr 21-May
Column upto Roof

3 60 11-Apr 10-Jun 22-May 26-Jul
Roof Works
4 40 11-Jun 21-Jul
Plastering
6 40 17-Aug 25-Sep

Sl
Delay
Duration in Delay
days start date
date
No.

4 60
to roof
5 15 18-May 01-Jun 27-May 15-Jun
up to motor floor
6 15 02-Jun 17-Jun 05-Jul 20-Jul

7 15 18-Jun 02-Jul 21-Jul 04-Aug
8 15 02-Jul 17-Jul 05-Aug 04-Sep
Roof works
9 V. Brick work 15 18-Jul 01-Aug 05-Sep 20-Sep
VI. Plastering
10 40 02-Aug 11-Sep
Painting (inside)
11 10 12-Sep 22-Sep

1 10 01-Mar 10-Mar
Foundation
2 30 11-Mar 10-Apr 21-Apr 21-May
Column upto Roof

3 60 11-Apr 10-Jun 22-May 26-Jul
Roof Works
4 40 11-Jun 21-Jul 15-Aug 25-Sep
Plastering
6 40 17-Aug 25-Sep

Sl
Delay
Duration in Delay
days start date
date
No.

4 60
to roof
5 15 18-May 01-Jun 27-May 15-Jun
up to motor floor
6 15 02-Jun 17-Jun 05-Jul 20-Jul

7 15 18-Jun 02-Jul 21-Jul 04-Aug
8 15 02-Jul 17-Jul 05-Aug 04-Sep
Roof works
9 V. Brick work 15 18-Jul 01-Aug 05-Sep 20-Sep
VI. Plastering
10 40 02-Aug 11-Sep 27-Sep 06-Nov
Painting (inside)
11 10 12-Sep 22-Sep 12-Nov 22-Nov
12 Painting (outside) 10 22-Sep 02-Oct 23-Nov 03-Dec

1 10 01-Mar 10-Mar
Foundation
2 30 11-Mar 10-Apr 21-Apr 21-May
Column upto Roof

3 60 11-Apr 10-Jun 22-May 26-Jul
Roof Works
4 40 11-Jun 21-Jul 15-Aug 25-Sep
5 Brick work 45 22-Jul 16-Aug 26-Sep 15-Nov
Plastering
6 40 17-Aug 25-Sep 16-Nov 26-Dec
7 Painting 25 26-Sep 20-Oct 27-Dec 20-Jan

CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
The main study findings and conclusions are summarized as follows:
• The reliability of delay analysis depends on the programming and record keeping
practice. An analyst should meticulously review the data obtained from the project
records because none of the methods yields reliable results if the information used is
invalid.
• There are a number of methodologies available for analysing delays and these are
differ from each other based on the type of schedule techniques required, the baseline
schedule used and the mode of application in their use. Therefore, a fair and effective
evaluation of delay impact is possible if the most appropriate delay analysis method is
selected that provides a reliable solution with the information available and within the
time and cost allocated for this purpose.
• None of the existing delay analysis methods is perfect as each has its own strengths
and weaknesses. Windows analysis method is clearly accepted by the literature as the
most reliable delay analysis method among the four standard methods discussed in
this research. However, the transient nature of construction projects not often allowing
scheduling data being well documented as well as time and budget limitations lead a
number of researchers to suggest that the choice of a simpler method may be sensible.
• Daily windows delay analysis method is considered an accurate method and suitable
to use as it takes into consideration the effects of baseline updates, resource allocation
and the effects of actions taken by the contractor to accelerate the project and
minimize potential delays as it usually ignored in delay analysis.
• It is necessary for analyst to be very familiar with the capabilities of the software
used in project scheduling and progress control in order to be able to generate
legitimate schedules for the analysis.
39
BIBILOGRAPHY
• 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).
40
• 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.
41

Delay Analysis Using Window Analysis Method

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Delay Analysis Using Window Analysis Method

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

NICMAR

DELAY ANALYSIS BY WINDOW ANALYSIS

A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the Academic

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION

Dasari Doli Gopi Krishna (QH16023)

Vadlamuri Yaswanth (QH16123)

PGP QSCM 13th Batch

Prof R. Satish Kumar

Dasari Doli Gopi Krishna (QH16023)

It is found that there are differences in perceptions as to causes of delays by different

3. Delay and Types of Delays……………………………………………………….….8

4. Delay Analysis Methodologies……………………………………………………16

Table No Name of Table Page No

4.1 Methodologies of delay analysis 20

3.1 Chart on Delay Classification 14

1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1.7 SCOPE OF WORK

Delay occurs in almost all construction projects. It is defined as time overrun

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Many articles have been published on reasons of delays in construction projects.

Another article by Ayman H. Al-Momani (2002) on Construction delay: a quantitative

Delays occur in most of the construction projects. In construction, delay can be

3.2 TYPES OF DELAYS

Before analysing construction delays, a clear understanding of the general types of

Classification of causes of non- excusable delays:

3.2.2 CRITICAL & NON-CRITICAL DELAYS

3.2.3 INDEPENDENT DELAY, SERIAL DELAYS & CONCURRENT DELAYS

FIG 3.1 Delay Classifications

FIG 3.2 Different Scenarios that define Concurrent Delays

DELAY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES

4.2 DELAY ANALYSIS:

4.3 DELAY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY:

4.4 DIFFERENT BETWEEN METHODOLOGIES:

4.4.1 SCHEDULE TECHNIQUE USED:

4.4.2 Baseline for analysis:

4.4.3 Mode of application:

4.5 DELAY ANALYSIS METHOD:

Common name Literature Review Alternative names

S-CURVE (Non-CPM based Rubin et al. (1999) Dollar to Time

Global Impact technique (Non- Leary and Bramble (1988)

4.5.1 NON-CPM METHODS:

(iii) Impacted As-Planned:

(iv)Time Impact Analysis:

1. It is time consuming to develop.

This case pertains to Design, Engineering, Quality surveillance, Test’s at

And the type of contract is EPC contract.

2 700NB pipe line

6) HeggesanahalliNalla Crossing Bridge at Ch.6.93km:

7) Pipe laying works up to RTPS plant:

Total duration as per scheduled = 250 Days

Total duration as per Scheduled (Updated from Window-1) = 195 Days

Description Delays occurred Delayed Dates Remarks

Total duration as per Scheduled (Updated from Window-1) = 285 Days

Description Delays occurred Delayed Dates Remarks

Total duration as per Scheduled (Updated from Window-2) = 235 Days

Total duration as per Scheduled (Updated from Window-2) = 314 Days

Construction of Ash Water Recovery Jackwell Pumps with Approach Bridge

1 Earthwork Excavation 15 01-Apr 15-Apr

2 Under bed foundation (PCC) 10 16-Apr 26-Apr

3 Under bed foundation (Raft) 25 27-Apr 17-May

Completion of Jack well from foundation

III. RCC columns, tie / ring beams