Static v Dynamic Analysis

Hi Liaqat

A static delay analysis is where nothing is linked up - impacted or moved.

The classic example being As Built v As Planned.

Best regards

Mike Testro

can somebody explain static method with a simple case study or example .I actually need one such example

for me, you don’t need to select because you’ll always need both for comparison



my understanding (very little) is that Static Analysis applies to your Baseline / Target Program, while Dynamic Analysis applies to all

Both Uri and Toby have valid points.



It comes down to what your EoT clauses say and why you are claiming:



For example, an EoT clause which says the contractor is entitled to "likely or future delays" will need some form of prospective (normally dynamic) analysis to determine when that contractual right accrued. One that says "has caused delay" will possibly lend itself to a retrospective method (generally static) but a dynamic method could still be used, it would just need careful consideration as to when in the analysis the right to an EoT acrued.



But, say your claim is for late information and the employers obligation is to supply it "with regards to the progress of the works". The method of analysis would have to take this into account and therefore a dynamic one probably be more suited.



But, as Toby said, everything in proportion to the value of the claim. Dynamic methods tend to take along time to do and are hence more expensive than a static method.



Static methods though are usually quite easy to tear apart and dispute, dynamic methods more are difficult as they demonstrate cause and effect much more clearly.

Allan,



If you want some bedtime reading and a very thorough read on the subject, try Keith Pickavance’s "Delay & Disruption in Construction Contracts", now in its 3rd edition.



Generally, static methods of analysis are relatively quick, simple and cheap to perform, but if the planned activities vary in duration or sequence during the course of the project these methods of analysis will not produce as accurate a result as a dynamic method such as time impact analysis, which takes changes in the baseline into account.



I don’t think you should rely on the person doing your claim submission to decide the method for you; the choice of method should depend on your timescale and budget (which should be proportional as to the amount in dispute) as well as what information available to you.

Allan,



I believe that the key is the requirements of the Contract. Some Contracts require frequent monitoring / statusing of the Contract Programme. This programme can not be static then, can it?



I failed to attach the link to Daniel’s paper, if you know his web site, go the the "Role of the Programme of Works"

article and then look for the dynamic role of the programme

Allan,



You’ll find that there are two main schools of thought in Delay Analysis: the ’old’ school, and the modern way of thinking.



the old school will probably support the static aproach whereas the modern - dynamic approach.



where is this seminar taking place? who is running it?



I’m interested because we run EOT seminars for Project managers and CA’s in Sydney.

Allan,



can u elaborate? r u refering to the Contract Program? In that case i am defintely for the dynamic!



there is an excellent web site by a Brit solicitor, Daniel Atkinson. You’ll find there an article, i think it is called "the dynamic role of the program" or something. If u can not find it let me know, and I’ll soirce it for you.