...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>AACE International Transactions >The Great Debate-TIA vs WINDOWS A Better Path for Retrospective Delay Analysis?
【24h】

The Great Debate-TIA vs WINDOWS A Better Path for Retrospective Delay Analysis?

机译：大辩论-TIA与WINDOWS追溯延迟分析的更好方法？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Today's construction industry is in great disarray [1]. As a matter of course, capital projects are increasingly arenas of conflict over intractable problems, extended time of performance resulting in significant losses. Simple bad fortune is not the root cause, rather the problems often torn from an inability to identify and resolve complex performance issues through a contemporaneous process, before the dispute blossoms into costly litigation. Understanding and explaining performance issues is a significant obstacle to resolution and has increasingly led the parties to this arena. One of the most contentious of issues is schedule and delay and "the principal dimension measured by schedules is delay [2]." Over the past 20 years the number and complexity of delay claims has escalated exponentially. However, amid the variety of delay analysis methodologies, which in turn can lead to different results, it becomes more difficult to resolve disputes early and presents more challenges for the trier of fact. In addition, the blending" of methodologies and/or the misuse of methodologies has further led to the difficulties in resolving the issue of delay.
机译：当今的建筑行业非常混乱[1]。理所当然的是，基本建设项目越来越成为解决棘手问题的舞台，延长的执行时间会造成重大损失。简单的坏运并不是根本原因，而是在争端演变成代价高昂的诉讼之前，常常无法通过同时进行的过程来识别和解决复杂的性能问题而引起的问题。理解和解释性能问题是解决问题的重要障碍，并越来越多地引领各方进入这一领域。最有争议的问题之一是进度和延误，“进度表衡量的主要方面是延误[2]”。在过去的20年中，延迟索赔的数量和复杂性呈指数级增长。然而，在各种各样的延迟分析方法中，这反过来可能导致不同的结果，因此尽早解决争端变得更加困难，并且对事实的挑战者提出了更多的挑战。另外，方法的混合和/或方法的滥用进一步导致解决延迟问题的困难。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号