Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

As built but for programmes

23 replies [Last post]
Sudharma C.
User offline. Last seen 2 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 15
Groups: GPC Malaysia, TILOS
hi there
been working as a project planner for a number of years and recently got into the claims aspect side of it.

currently working on a project that uses P3 and has an activity count of about 3500. had attempted to do ’Collapse as built program’, i.e. to remove the clients delay from the program to see what is the contractor’s entitlement.

However the high number of activities does not make this attempt feasiable, though the books we have in the market with regards to delay and disruption attempts to make this look like an easy excerise.

my questions is:
1. has anyone attempted to do a collapse as built program, where the activity count is high ??

2. if the answer is yes, how did you go about doing it??

3. Is there a simpler method to do a collapse as built program when the activity count is high??

4. Is there a better way of doing this ??

PS. to get the time entitlement is in my opinion is fairly easy, because we are also looking at the delay and disruption aspect on the project, that makes this a bit more tedious.

regards
sudharma

Replies

Khuong Do
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 1 hour ago. Offline
Joined: 22 Feb 2010
Posts: 114
Groups: None

Hi,

I wrote an article regarding How to perform Collapsed As-Built / As-Built But-For Schedule Delay Analysis in Primavera P6.

If you're interested, kindly read it here https://doduykhuong.com/2018/09/29/how-to-perform-collapsed-as-built-as-built-but-for-schedule-delay-analysis-in-primavera-p6/

Thanks.

Sherif Fam
User offline. Last seen 8 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 28
Groups: None
Thanks Mike; this clarifies the difference between "Impacted as Planned" and "Time Impact Analysis".

We try to implement the "Impacted as Planned"; whenever possible, as most of the circumstances and arguments will be fresh in all parties minds. (It is a MUST in case of nec3).

Thanks and regards,
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 6 days 15 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4393
Hi Sherif

The process you have described is known as Impacted as Planned Analysis in the UK - used when works are in progress.

Time Impact Analysis is used when work is completed when the delay effect of impacted events is compared to the As Built situation in an attempt to demonstrate cause and effect of events in relation to what actually happened.

Best regards

Mike Testro
Sherif Fam
User offline. Last seen 8 years 16 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 28
Groups: None
Hello,

with my humble knowledge in this field; Time Impact Analysis is mainly used to "forecast" the effects of events which occured on the past; on the future completion of the project.

For example; u r in the middle of a project. One event occured (let’s say climate condition); which caused the site to stop working for 2 days (note: the event occured already). Time Impact Analysis is used to "forecast" the impact on the completion date.

As-Built (despite I never used it); however I presume it is used in case you cannot update the program due to the fact that the relations in the program are not matching the way the construction took place. In this case; u cannot use Time Impact Analysis, specially if the activities are completed.

Under nec3; with each update; u change the relations to realistic ones (actually, u r revising the baseline with each update; and supersedes the previous one).
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Ethel,

This site has an internal message system, click on the envelope symbol next to my name or if it’s easier just use:

aflowerdew@construction-dispute.co.uk

NEC3 – when you said that I was a bit surprised you were looking at an as-built analysis, (My initial thought was something didn’t quite add up as you were asking about what to do with progress data and data dates in an as-built programme).

NEC contract - the early warnings that have to be given, regular programme updates, (usually monthly), the notice requirement with an eight week time bar, (which although never tested in a court I believe to be enforceable), compensation events once agreed not to be revisited, etc –

If you think you have an EoT claim you need to ensure that there’s a contractual basis for it first and you aren’t time barred etc. As you are contemplating an as-bulit analysis, ie looking back at events, I’m guessing there’s a chance that you might be.
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 6 days 15 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4393
Hi Ethel

While Andrew is away sorting out your contractual problems you asked what method of analysis to use with your As Built Data.

I notice you are using P6 - I have no knowledge of this system but I do beleive you can cut and paste dates between spreadsheets - this is big time saver so make use of it.

For the work in progress - where there is no As Built - use an Impacted as Planned method where the events are inserted into the programme and linked up to the affected activity and the programme rescheduled.

You can then compare Planned v Impacted and demonstrate the likely effect.

Make sure that the event date is the "Impact Date" which allows for procurement and mobilisation of any changed work.

For the work already completed - a Time Impact Analysis is required.

Again you schedule your events with the Impact Date into chronoligical order.

Impact the first one into your programme and see what happens - there will be one of four effects.

1. The critical path will not change but some float may have been used up.
2. The critical path does change but the affected activity does not reach the As Built zone - in which case something else delayed the work so either do some more research or accept that it was the Contractors problem.
3. The impacted eactivity corresponds pretty well with the As Built bar which means that you have "reasonably demonstrated" cause and effect - this is the least likely outcome.
4. The impacted activity overshoots the As Built which means that the Contractor did not follow the programme - if you know what was done differently then replicate the changes - if you do not know then you must use your experience to make whatever changes would be available to the contractor and use the most plausible ones first until your Planned corresponds with the As Built.

Now continue with every other event making a detailed record of what you have done and what the results were so that someone else can replicate your work.

Good luck.

Mike Testro
Ethel Esiso
User offline. Last seen 7 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Groups: None
Would really appreciate that but on what email address do i sen the private massage private?
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Oh, would be that one, the situation has just become a little more complicated, not just saying that for the hell of it, but early warnings and all, retrospective claiming of an eot was not ever the intention of that contract.

More details please.
(you can send me a private message if you prefer)
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Ethel,

Now that’s a different situation - what conditions of contract are you working under?
Ethel Esiso
User offline. Last seen 7 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Groups: None
Thanks Andrew, but just to mention that my project is still on and not in the past although the events we want to claim on is in the past.

Cheers

Ethel
Ethel Esiso
User offline. Last seen 7 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Groups: None
Its the nec3
Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Ethel,

You are composing an as built programme – everything is in the past so the data date is the very last date in your programme. You will never reschedule this programme, it is a statement of what actually happened on the project. Everything will be to the left hand side of the data line.

You should only be using actual start and actual finish dates, (or possibly actual durations in conjunction with actual starts), and as Mike pointed out, do not try and insert logic links.
Ethel Esiso
User offline. Last seen 7 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Groups: None
Mike,

Thank you for your assistance, I have actually started putting together a spreadsheet as a start which will enable me put the programme together. Like, you guess I am using the P6 and have being thinking seriouly on what path to take with the as built plan.

Also with the plan after using the actual dates, do I still check the date boxes as is done during progress updating or just use the actual dates and leave box unchecked?

Also what datadate do I use?

I work with the contractor/Project Manager for the project what will the best method of delay analysis to use with the P3 software to put together the claim. Thanks again
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 6 days 15 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4393
Hi Ethel

Regarding As Built Programmes it all depends on the type of software you are using - since you are a railway specialist I suspect it is P3 which is a pity as it will take 3 times longer than if you use PowerProject.

Don’t start on your barchart until you have all the data on a spreadsheet.

This should comprise a column with the activity references and another with dates - percentages - comments etc.

Once you have a complete spreadsheet it can be sorted into activity references and date order.

Save your baseline programme into a different file and set up a "target" programme for your original durations.

Delete ALL logic links

Now adjust your planned durations to actual start and actual finishing dates. If there are non working gaps then either split the bars or draw multiple bars under a summary.

You now have an As Built Programme.

What you do with it is another matter.

In PowerProject I would set up another "target" programme on the As Built basis and then close the file without saving the changes thus I have a planned programme overlaying the As Built.

This is ideal for a Time Impact Analysis or if it is subcontract work an As Planned v As Built analysis.

You cannot do this in P3 so it is difficult to show a direct comparison on one sheet without re drafting the original baseline.

Do not try to put the logic back into your As Built programme - it will always be challenged.

As I said before with collapsed As Built - just don’t go there.

Best regards

Mike Testro.
Ethel Esiso
User offline. Last seen 7 years 9 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 4 Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Groups: None
Hi Mike, I am just getting started with putting together an as-built programme. Can you tell me what the best approach will be as I have already done an impacted as-planned but like you say its too theoritical.

thanks
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 6 days 15 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4393
Hi Peter

The most important factors to take into account when deciding on a delay analysis are:

1. Is the work in progress? Then the only suitable method is an Impacted as Planned.

2. Is the work complete? Then everything depends on how good your As Built Records are.

3. If you are a sub-contractor sandwiched between other trades then an As Built v As Planeed works well for the other trades if combined with a Time Impact Analysis for your own work.

4. An Impacted as Planned in a forensic scenario will be criticised for being theoretical and unreallistsic and should be avoided.

5. A time Impact Analysis works well if your records are up to it. If not you are exposed by a contesting approach using better or different records.

6. Don’t bother with an As Built But For at all.

Best regards

Mike T.
Peter Holroyd
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 14 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 6 Jun 2005
Posts: 110
We are basing our choice of analysis method on:
SoCL Delay & Dispute Protocol. Further explanation and legal background is given in Causation in Construction Law by Daniel Atkinson. After that look at the legal newsletters for latest cases.
Sudharma C.
User offline. Last seen 2 years 6 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 15
Groups: GPC Malaysia, TILOS
thanks for the feedbacks.
it was interesting to read the various different approach available to prepare the claim.

i do agree with the point on logic links on the as built program. unfortunately most planners when it comes to updating the program, they only update the progress percentages and the actual dates. they miss out on updating the logic links as they dont understand its relevance in the future, from the claims side of it. i have experienced doing a collapse as built where the result produced was not good.

thanks again
rgds
sudharma
Roger Gibson
User offline. Last seen 1 year 51 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Jun 2001
Posts: 71
Charleston,

I have written a book about this. Its called ’Construction Delays; Extensions of Time and Prolongation Claims’. It was published a rew weeks ago, and is available at all good bookshops and probably a few bad ones too! Can be purchased through Amazon and many internet stores.

All is revealed in the book. Approach, methodology, definitions and fully-worked examples. I also address the ’thorny issues’ of who owns the float, concurrency, mitigation & acceleration and time at large.

Roger
Charleston-Joseph...
User offline. Last seen 7 years 48 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 1347
Groups: None
ROGER,

What’s that all about???

’as planned impacted’ retrospective analysis using the ’windows’ methodology"

Please share with us your process, methodology, difinitions??

Have you written a book about this?? Can we buy in amazon?

Or if not, you have some referrals, reference??
Roger Gibson
User offline. Last seen 1 year 51 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Jun 2001
Posts: 71
Sudharma,

I agree with what Mike and Andrew have said. Although, the ’as built but for’ approach appears simple in concept, and many lawyers like it, it is realy the analyst’s own subjective view. The as built records are never good enough and detailed to create a true as built.

My approach would be to use an ’as planned impacted’ retrospective analysis using the ’windows’ methodology.

Roger Gibson

Andrew Flowerdew
User offline. Last seen 5 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 960
Groups: None
Would agree with Mike on that.

As built but for programmes require the analyst to put in / take out links that are "in his or her opinion" the correct thing to do.

One of the easiest forms of programmes to attack and find errors in or possible different interpretations - as Mike pointed out, resulting in the analysis being thrown out.

Mike was rather charitable in his remarks, from memory there was alot of wrong links in the analysis in the City Inn case.
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 6 days 15 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4393
Hi Sudharma

There are three problems associated with an As Built But For delay analysis.

1. The requirement for very detailed As Built data.

2. The necessity to get true and reliable logic links into the As Built programme.

3. It is impossible to demonstrate concurrency of events.

The larger the number of tasks the greater the difficulty.

In a recent case Shepherd v City Inns the expert for Shepherd produced an As Built But For programme that was found to have one or two incorrect links and the Judge threw it out and found for the employer.

My advice is don’t even try to do it.

Depending the quality of your As Built Data you are better advised to go for the Time Impact analysis or as a very last resort an Impacted as Planned.

Best regards

Mike Testro