Construction Scheduling — Capability Sample
What we produce, how we produce it, and how it is checked. Prepared for review by prime contractors and owners evaluating IDCI for a CPM scheduling scope.
1 · What we deliver
A scheduling scope on a heavy-civil contract produces a defined set of documents on a defined cycle. These are ours.
2 · Illustrative baseline — reference job, 60 activities
A calculated network with forward and backward pass, total float, and critical path. Note where the critical path runs: shop drawings, engineer review, and pipe fabrication consume the first third before a joint is laid. On transmission main work, procurement usually governs, and a schedule that does not show that is not modeling the job.
3 · Where the numbers come from
What we bring
Network logic and calendar construction. Float calculation and critical path identification. Constraint and lag discipline. Update mechanics and variance analysis. Fragnet construction for time impact analysis. The narrative that explains movement to an owner in language a project executive can act on. Specification compliance, so submissions are accepted rather than returned.
What you bring
Production rates, crew composition and equipment, sequencing preference, shoring and dewatering method, traffic staging, and the judgment behind reach breaks. We do not invent these and would not want to. The superintendent and the estimator supply them; we convert them into a network that holds up under review and under a claim.
4 · Specification compliance checklist
Schedules are rejected far more often for structural defects than for wrong production rates. Every submission is verified against this list before it leaves our desk.
5 · Monthly update and narrative — worked example
Most updates arrive as a file with no explanation, and the reviewer is left to diff two networks. The narrative is the deliverable that makes an update usable.
Schedule Update No. 7 — Narrative Analysis
Forecast completion. The update forecasts substantial completion at 26 February 2029, a slip of seven working days from Update No. 6. Contract completion remains 13 February 2029, so the project now forecasts seven working days beyond contract time.
Critical path. The controlling path has shifted. Through Update No. 6 it ran through pipe fabrication and delivery. As of this data date, fabrication is complete and delivery has begun, and the path now runs through Reach 1 trench excavation into the Reach 2 start. Control has moved from procurement to production, and management attention should move with it.
Cause of the slip. Reach 1 excavation achieved 31 working days of progress against 38 planned. Daily reports attribute the shortfall to two utility conflicts at Stations 24+50 and 31+10 requiring hand excavation. Neither has been submitted as a change; both are within the potholing allowance and are carried here as contractor-absorbed performance.
Float erosion. The valve delivery path has consumed 22 working days of float since the baseline and now shows 9 working days remaining. It is not yet critical but will become so within roughly two updates at the present rate. We recommend confirming the fabricator's ship date this month rather than next.
Recovery. Seven working days is recoverable within the Reach 2 and Reach 3 train by adding a second welding crew for approximately three weeks. That is a means-and-methods decision for your team; we have modeled it as an option and can issue it as a recovery schedule on direction.
Owner and third-party items. Two submittals exceed the specified review period — cathodic protection materials at 27 days against 21 allowed, and the traffic control plan for Reach 3 at 24 days. Neither currently affects the critical path. Both are logged for entitlement purposes.
6 · Time impact analysis — worked example
Entitlement to time is established by inserting a fragnet into the most recent accepted update and recalculating, contemporaneously with the event rather than reconstructed at the end of the job. The example below models an unmarked utility discovered at the start of Reach 2.
Event. On commencing Reach 2 excavation the contractor encounters an unmarked 24-inch gas main not shown on the drawings and not identified in potholing. Work stops in the reach pending direction.
| Fragnet ID | Inserted activity | Duration | Early start (wd) | Total float |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F0010 | Differing Site Condition Discovered — Unmarked 24" Gas Main, Reach 2 | 3 | 242 | 0 |
| F0020 | Notification, Utility Owner Coordination & Field Verification | 4 | 245 | 0 |
| F0030 | Engineer Direction — Revised Profile Issued | 5 | 249 | 0 |
Finding. The fragnet inserts on the controlling path between Reach 2 traffic control and Reach 2 excavation. Recalculation moves forecast completion by 12 working days. No concurrent contractor-caused delay operates over the same period, so the delay is excusable in full. Whether it is compensable depends on the differing site conditions clause, which is a contract question rather than a schedule question — and we state that boundary rather than blur it.
7 · How we work with your field team
Questions about any of this?
If you are evaluating IDCI for a scheduling scope, the fastest way through is a conversation. Bring the specification, the sequence you have in mind, or the section of this document you want tested — thirty minutes is usually enough to establish whether we are the right fit for the work.