Primary Author: Mr James G Zack Jr CFCC Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Co-author(s): Mr. Steven A. Collins Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Audience Focus: Advanced
Application Type: Experience-Based
Venue: 2012 AACE International Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX, USA
Abstract: AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03 - Forensic Schedule Analysis, provides detailed insight in how CPM based schedule delay analysis should be performed. This RP provides thorough and detailed protocols for each of the nine methodologies identified. However, industry surveys from around the globe indicate that a substantial portion of construction projects do not employ critical path method scheduling techniques. Other industry studies indicate that a large percentage of projects complete later than planned. Therefore, it can only be concluded that there are a large number of delays and delay claims on projects that do not use CPM schedules. RP 29R-03 offers no guidance concerning the performance of schedule delay analysis if there are no CPM schedules on the project. This paper presents recommendations on how schedule delay analysis can be performed on projects using nine different non-CPM scheduling techniques. The paper also discusses the five types of constraints present on most, if not all, construction projects and how these constraints must be used in non-CPM schedule delay analysis. The goal of this paper is to initiate Chapter 2 of RP 29R-03 - Forensic Schedule Analysis on Projects with No CPM Schedules.
Co-author(s): Mr. Steven A. Collins Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Audience Focus: Advanced
Application Type: Experience-Based
Venue: 2012 AACE International Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX, USA
Abstract: AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03 - Forensic Schedule Analysis, provides detailed insight in how CPM based schedule delay analysis should be performed. This RP provides thorough and detailed protocols for each of the nine methodologies identified. However, industry surveys from around the globe indicate that a substantial portion of construction projects do not employ critical path method scheduling techniques. Other industry studies indicate that a large percentage of projects complete later than planned. Therefore, it can only be concluded that there are a large number of delays and delay claims on projects that do not use CPM schedules. RP 29R-03 offers no guidance concerning the performance of schedule delay analysis if there are no CPM schedules on the project. This paper presents recommendations on how schedule delay analysis can be performed on projects using nine different non-CPM scheduling techniques. The paper also discusses the five types of constraints present on most, if not all, construction projects and how these constraints must be used in non-CPM schedule delay analysis. The goal of this paper is to initiate Chapter 2 of RP 29R-03 - Forensic Schedule Analysis on Projects with No CPM Schedules.