INTRODUCTION ‘The time it takes to complete a construction contract directly affects the profitability of the project for all involved parties. Ainall GI RY) cased 65 pall Aaa) gle ple JS igh ll she Sud Se For project Employers, delays mean lost revenue because they cannot use the project as planned. For contractors, delays often mean additional costs due to extended site presence. a camel sl Bg 9 pall cp Sita) Ra) 9 cy lad Eig pb hal 5 ll oll yay HL) GNSS 1) GE se ping paBIGI CE cADball Apailly ggg pSLaM cal tall Ay To manage delays, standard construction contracts usually include clauses that define how to handle delays caused by the contractor, the owner, or external events beyond their control. AGA al SEN we abet ARS Gada gl ny ple Bale Apps gall) apptill a gle gin cil ppSLit) ee Jalailly ee ae Ce AQ tk Glan) yi Lad 4) igh) In some cases, contractors are entitled to time extensions or compensation for delays they did not cause. On the other hand, if the contractor is responsible for the delay, the owner may claim liquidated damages. AS 13) Lal OF aly pe | gh gS p13) ca get g) Stall Gb yas fe punt Cyl glad gay canal Guaes gb iy pSLN laa gett Aad atta gad cagio GSU slat) Liquidated damages are usually calculated 3 AUG C4 & peel gH psy US Ce Cyt as yd LGtl fixed amount for each day or week of delay. jg) ileus, aly La UE y In both scenarios, a detailed schedule analysis is needed to understand what caused the delay and who is responsible AE ype GY) yng SL tpl gl abs gin alas ol Agta Ain gyi lS hy many cases, dit vieading to ‘egal or financial disputes. CHEN Si cpl) ga'gg Law TMB! ped aah cy ob oly Asgeall oe pla abla Julad Gis 56 yp ght 9G Aadla 6) Aui gid Delay claims are now one of the main sources of conflict in the construction industry and are often difficult to resolve. Saall Aan Cy Si be Eg al) Adin ph Oe) jill Anaad lI jalacaall Oe OY) Sli) Cle Cima! 3Despite these efforts, many delay analyses still fail to address key scheduling issues, which makes fair resolution more difficultJats cal} peng Jay Lae Ui gals Gets Apa Lda Jatact fs Y pL Dulas Gyo asset) Cb aggall oda ob 59 Ay gase sisi Vai Ase This paper aims to highlight common DATs, discuss common issues overlooked in practice, and suggest ways to improve their application Fea all gh UDA LS pi cpl) Sal] ACh 9 Anibet) paSlS! Jala Caihs ge get daybed ol) al Jk Giga 5 Ugeladin! uasnil 5b Cl sly The broader goal is to develop a framework that helps reduce disputes and improve claim resolution SMa ty gad panty NE Suis lo ae Jat Uh yh ga Quast! Gaglly A hypothetical case study is used to demonstrate how each technique works and its strengths and weaknesses . . . oe Ugh Chinas g 5 gill tis g Aas JS Yas Ayass Cpl Aca! pill Ate Aaa) js alah aly DELAY ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES In general, delay analysis techniques fall under two categories: Cosi Cosh ol) pS LGM plas ci Gana aly ple JSy 1. Techniques not based on the Critical Path Method (non-CPM) Cal eld bye ay 2. Techniques based on the Critical Path Method (CPM) Goal bel digg ye ad CLs Each category includes multiple methods. The most commonly used ones in contract and claims analysis are oy be halal) g glad! Jats (pb Lal adi Leis) Gag Ayla 5 yb Sac puta Aid Js 1. As-Planned vs. As-Built: compares the original baseline schedule with the actual executed timeline ea gE Bg uct) (pia 5 Sgt ay Ai tie : ial tie Iabdal) Impacted As-Planned: adds delay events to the planned schedule to assess their impact AY! jyatt abalt J gaa (pte 5 Abia) Sioa) 86 48 iia} ; ital bball 3. As-Planned But-For: shows what would have happened if the delaying events didn’t occur Sh ygSLGN AG a) gl Aa shal) Ag i tng 1 SL) Gy gay Bhd) 4. Collapsed As-Built: removes delays from the actual executed schedule to see how it would have progressed without them ess As Ug gy a pina OLS HS AB aad ALAN J gn pe col Sat) Ga ty pa gical! Sa) Va sghlly Eyal) a A il) Say Gang 4 pe Slay Apps lily yd yh ss 5. Window Analysis: breaks the project into time segments and analyzes delays within each window6. Time Impact Analysis (TIA): simulates the effect of delays by adding them to a live or baseline schedule eth com ela} stm le Uglied IS Ge Sl SL) Slag sce Nl ls alas Each method has strengths and limitations. Choosing the right technique depends on several factors such as the nature of the delay, availability of data, and contractual terms Bag yy cil) Big «yySLil Aagabe She Jal yo gle ating Apia Ay Sy cLnagtn.y Lab ja ys Ad Jb JS ail! 1-AS-PLANNED YS. &S-BUILT Figure 1. As-planned schedule. @ pctty Desapion eae a - GaN Excaveto foundation 5 = | Bie Tm hah 3 [Sorption oa Brickwork to r00f level ¥ S| oom wwe | S ee ; a W aterprocf roof 2 as Ta oo ; ' DREN [tate boots aie |p t De Tarmacecem to driven 5 ——4t | Table | presents the different types of delays that occurred in the simulated project case BLY Gs all od cindy (i Aaa Ot Stall El gil 1 Ab) dsl Ga The actual construction duration ended up being 51 days, based on the as-built schedule which includes all rec SAAN NS cbse Gt) al Slt ua aaky (gill gL yall le bly Lagy 50 gg plall Kail Ayal) Sal cacy The critical path—the sequence of tasks that determined the project duration—ran through the drive-in activities, as shown later in Figure 3 | Blyeall pas Abas) IE Ge yay gg lial gall juosall ots aby (drive-in) 3 USE) (b lisy Hage gp LSTo make it easier to identify the type of delay, two visual codes were used: gs ol Om ey Cay pli i Gl Sli & 9 jana Sugaily * EC delays (caused by the employer/client) appear as dark horizontal bars Deal! alee Gl Sls (EC) Aisa Aull Ue pci Ise od Gr gl * NN delays (neutral or non-attributable delays) are shown as dark diagonal stripes eB at) sa Ay gested yu i) aS) Lal (NN) 4GS)4-4y ph bs gas Ue jase pid In addition to delays, there were also changes to the sequence of activities when compared to the original schedule abel) ABS 4G le Ak BAG Gd id Ley) ce ct St Gala y For example, in the garage section, the first two activities were carried out with a start-start logic and a lag of 2 days, instead of the initially planned finish-start sequence Ca Yay Caps oth in GUE ea Moa oa" ABs plaids abl yh Mth od cl pall aad GB hall ape pe sap elgal" Glue Aaialt" Similarly, in the drive-in section, the first two activities followed a start—start logic but with a lag of 3 days AU) ADE 0 8 inj Gb ee Mea cyt Miley GubLts Jig) SA 9S SB lal pan Abatil 8 ay aN) Gul y These modifications in activity relationships, combined with the delay events, played a key role in shaping the final project timeline Eg pceal) Leki yagi Sted) yang Gb eS 99 YI GS SLD Glaai ) BLayy dada cite (8 colar! ole Figure 2. As-built schedule. s “Actirty Descroton = ~ on =| seats [| S| Teese Le 3) memes F Sj | seule | were —[S s[ meee S| tarmceme fF Beemer 7 | S| temo Ps Case, JS; Mabel! Calan Tl Quen gh 5.8 sill pSsle Led Labas ally 5 fia Lylad Mall e jell SI‘Table 1. Delays events that affected the sample project. Ae planned non oe = in Ane oto oo 9 Dome metewetwe ys openieivoinfn3rasndeinincnenday EC uo 4 mare yg man whoa be cpa of x * in A iy oar re i ci chm oft AS-PLANNED VS. AS-BUILT TECHNIQUE This technique compares the originally planned schedule with what actually happened during construction (the as-built schedule) play) 5 ab JS ike ga Gg pall Milas gh bball pie gual) Ai lide le Ay sh! ode ania All types of delays—whether caused by the owner (EC), the contractor (NN), or external factors—are added to the as-built schedule etl) AMEN J gall panda Balas al go gh glial! 9f AMLad) Gap CS 6 pau il Sli) 61 gti am Th yal aly The total delay is calculated as the difference in completion dates between the planned and actual schedules Upland gh Lad ad gl Gey Milly all US GG oy Gyldll DA Gye Gost plat Guia ay This technique identifies the critical path twice: once in the planned schedule, and again in the as-built one Mba 55) Gobo Ai Bay bball Iga) Bi pe di gall Jena) dpsed oly It gives an overview of the net effect of all delays without breaking them down individually Baa ge Upie dal g JS chiles p93 Si) dla!) apes blued) BVI 6 Abed 5 plas Ua, dell ode