Hegazy, T and Zhang, K (2005) Daily windows delay analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(5), pp. 505-512. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Critical path method delay analysis techniques are widely applied in the construction industry, with the windows method being regarded as technologically advantageous. The approach looks at different schedule snapshots (windows) throughout the project and analyzes the contractor versus owner responsibility for delaying the critical paths. Accordingly, decisions regarding time and/or cost compensation could be made. While the technique is beneficial, it is computationally intensive and produces different results with different window sizes. Commercial software provide little support in this regard and the analysis is usually done manually. In this paper, a modified windows approach is introduced with computerized daily analysis of delays so that accurate and repeatable results are produced. The new approach is coupled with a new representation of progress information and is readily usable by professionals and researchers to evaluate project delays. Details of the daily analysis are introduced along with two case studies that demonstrate its advantages over the traditional windows approach. A downloadable version is made available for experimental use by researchers and professionals.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | claims; computer applications; contractors; delay time; information management |
| Index terms: | critical path, window, delay analysis, critical path method, project delay, case study, computer application, owner, compensation, construction industry |
| Subjects: | software systems, architectural elements, sociology, project controls, industry analysis, data collection methods, dispute resolution, operations research |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here