The dynamics of float, logic, resource allocation, and delay timing in forensic schedule analysis and construction delay claims

Delay claims in construction projects present various tough and controversial issues. How to prove the three elements, namely entitlement, causation, and quantum in the "triad of proof" is an onerous task. The analyses of schedule delays and their associated damages especially concern claims analysts, project parties, courts, Boards of Contract Appeals, and so forth. On the one hand, the industry has employed various forensic schedule analysis techniques to support delay claims. Paradoxically, schedule-related factors such as float, logic, and resource allocation are frequently ignored even though they can affect project completion time and delay responsibility, too. On the other hand, the current 'one-size-fits-all' methods for calculating financial consequences undermine the relative importance of delayed activities and the fluctuating nature of overhead levels. The effects of the context of a delay in terns of the timing of the delay and decree of suspension should be therefore paid attention in quantifying delay damages. Accordingly, this research develops novel techniques for analyzing causation and calculating damages in construction delay claims. They address the dynamics of (loan, logic, resource allocation and the delay context in forensic schedule analysis and delay claims. Several published and hypothesized case studies are used to illustrate their applications. Among other things, this research proposes: (1) an enhanced window analysis technique considering resource allocation; (2) an activity-specific overhead allocation process (ASAP) for quantifying field-overhead damages; (3) FLORA as a novel forensic schedule analysis technique that can capture the dynamics of float, logic, and resource allocation; and (4) a framework which integrates FLORA and ASAP for analyzing schedule delays and their field overhead damages in a real-time and interactive manner. Through the applications, comparisons, and evaluations in case studies, these developments really overcome various limitations of the available techniques and practices currently used in forensic scheduling and delay claims. This research recommends that the schedule-related factors should be captured in forensic schedule analysis. In addition, the quantification of delay damages should emphasize the context of a delay. This also enables equitable apportionments when concurrent delays occur. ASAP and FLORA developed in this research are able to tackle these issues.