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.

Dry wall partition changed to CHB plastered Finish

4 replies [Last post]
Christian Niedo
User offline. Last seen 9 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 6 May 2008
Posts: 9
Groups: None

Dear planning engineers and claim analyst,

Let me just state my case: We are a General Contractor building a 39-storey medium end Residential Building at our place in Manila, Philippines. The client and its architect decided to have a value engineering by changing the original design of a Dry wall (ficem board) partition into 4" CHB (650 psi non-load bearing) plastered finish to save cost. In view of the client’s convenience they will surely save a lot but I had submitted a time extension claim of 4 months which has an extended overhead of more than what the savings will be due to this change in design. If you agree with me the revision of design would inflict additional time to our schedule since the two activities lies on the critical path.

Here is the dillema: The client’s representative and technical personnel didn’t agree due to their reasoning that CHB wall can start sooner than dry wall since it is the wet works part and it will not wait until the sealing off of the building.

May I hear your own insight on this case?


Replies

Samer Zawaydeh
User offline. Last seen 1 year 19 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 3 Aug 2008
Posts: 1664
Dear Christian,

The situation gets more complicated with changing more parameters.

If you need the time to complete the works, I suggest that in addition to your revised schedule and attempts to claim for extra 4 months you maintain an "As Built" schedule of the activities that are taking place at site.

On one hand you will keep asking for your claim and supporting it with better presentations with more knowledge that you are acquiring after studying the effects of the changes and on the other hand you will be recording the actual happening at site and eventually you can claim if you really need the time.

Good luck,

Samer
Christian Niedo
User offline. Last seen 9 years 31 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 6 May 2008
Posts: 9
Groups: None
Hi Mr. samer and Mr. Mike Testro,

First, thanks for the insight, it helps me to come up with ideas how to present the claim after all when your negotiatiing with the business minded Owner ( who’s very concern was to seek savings on the lump sum contract) and their "middle man / post-office" representatives or what they call them as Project Managers, its only a matter of simplified presentation to make them understand the repercussion of the revised design... The four interfaces that mr. mike had said would be a good start which was luckily mentioned on my submitted Time Extension claim.

Secondly, let me tell you additional information that i didn’t discussed.
1.)Some of outer cladding or perimeter walls w/c was originally precast wall was also changed to cast-in-place RC wall. For this 32 days time extension claim was submitted proportional to the quantity of the revised design.
2.) We had proposed a "sprayed concrete" which has a capacity of 1,200 sq. m. per week accomplishment to be an alternative to the primitive masonry wall. But the owner expects no cost implication so we did not push through since the cost was too high not enough to offset by masonry hauling, repairs, productivity loss.

3.)We have came to a point where the backpropping/reshorings were already removed and we are about to start the architectural wet works on the mock-up floor and this issue was being neglected despite follow-up letters.

Thirdly, I’ve came up the 4 months by adding a percentage of the added CHB which was originally Drywall to the original duration of CHB walls affecting MEPF embedments and major activities would be pushed such as the start of glass windows (8 floors sealed-off consideration) which we assumed to start after the substantial completion of wet finishes for us to protect breakage and dirt on the glass.

Best of luck to the two of you.

Regards, Christian
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4403
Hi Christian

The fact that the spec change will allow partitions to go up before weathertight conditions is not the only factor that drives the partition start point.

Please consider these sort of interfaces:

1. Junction of partitions to outer cladding.
2. High level horizontal M&E.
3. Position of backpropping after form removal.
4. Floor leveling screeds - if under partitions.
5. Weather risk from tropical storms.

Plus as many more that you can think of.

Make sure you take these into account when presenting your revised programme.

You are doing exactly the right thing by pointing out the potential delay now and not later in the project.

Good luck and best regards

Mike Testro
Samer Zawaydeh
User offline. Last seen 1 year 19 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 3 Aug 2008
Posts: 1664
Hi,

Two questions;
1. The Owner should have asked the Contractor to be involved in the change process from the start since you will need to complete the works and know the exact duration for your activities.

2. Planning wise, you can update the program with the new activities. Make sure that your claim of 4 months is solid and based on the modified approved schedule. You will need to base your claim on facts and negotiate it with the Owner side. Always expect to be flexible, because there are several solutions.

If you want more information, please let me know how you calculated the 4 months.

Best,

Samer