Window Analyses of Compensable Delays
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 125, Issue 2
Abstract
The identification and analysis of compensable delays become necessary on most construction projects. Although there are several different analytical techniques available, the window method of contemporaneously analyzing delays is the most realistic. The reasons for the superiority of the window method are discussed. The possible results of a window analysis are evaluated and graphically presented. Also discussed are a correction, or intermediate step, in the method, necessary to avoid incorrect findings of false concurrency, and the proper method for handling apportionable and nonapportionable delays. Finally, an argument is made that the burden of proving noncompensable delays, assuming a proper window analysis of compensable delays by a contractor, should be borne by the owner.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bramble, B., and Leary, C. ( 1988). “Project delay: Schedule analysis models and techniques.” 1988 Annu. Seminar/Symp. Proc. (San Francisco), 63–69. Project Management Institute, Newton Square Pa.
2.
Galloway, P., Neilsen, K., and Ramey, M. ( 1997). “Delay: Use of CPM schedules for concurrency, allocation, proof, and window analysis.” Hurry up and slow down: Dealing with delays in construction projects. American Bar Association, Chicago.
3.
James, D. ( 1991). “Concurrency and apportioning liability and damages in public contract adjudications.” 20 Public Contract Law J. 490. American Bar Association Section on Public Contract Law, Chicago.
4.
Kutil, P., and Ness, A. ( 1997). “Concurrent delay: The contractor's burden to unravel competing causes of delay.” Hurry Up and Slow Down: Dealing with Delays in Construction on Projects. American Bar Association, Chicago.
5.
Smith, R., Cox, R., and Crider, G. ( 1997). “Presenting and defending a CPM expert.” Construction Advocacy and All That Jazz, 29–35. American Bar Association, Chicago.
6.
Wickwire, J., Driscoll, T., and Hurlburt, S. ( 1991). Construction scheduling: Preparation, liability, & claims . Wiley, New York, Sect. 9.3, 9.15.
7.
Wickwire, J., and Warner, P. ( 1995). “Scheduling.” Sticks & bricks: Construction technology for lawyers, 95–99. American Bar Association Forum, Chicago.
8.
Wiezel, J. ( 1992). “Refining the concept of concurrent delay.” 21 Public Contract Law Journal 161. American Bar Association Section on Public Contract Law, Chicago.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 125 • Issue 2 • March 1999
Pages: 96 - 100
History
Received: Aug 19, 1997
Published online: Mar 1, 1999
Published in print: Mar 1999
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.