Open Access

Estimation of ideal construction duration in tender preparation stage for housing projects

Hakan Tirataci
Hakan Tirataci
 and 
Hakan Yaman
Hakan Yaman
   | Nov 25, 2023
Organization, Technology and Management in Construction: an International Journal's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Article Category: Research Paper
Published Online: Nov 25, 2023
Page range: 192 - 212
Received: Jan 01, 2023
Accepted: May 23, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/otmcj-2023-0014
Keywords
© 2023 Hakan Tirataci et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Fig. 1:

Comparison of the post-test BCD, ideal construction duration and contract durations. BCD, baseline construction duration.
Comparison of the post-test BCD, ideal construction duration and contract durations. BCD, baseline construction duration.

Fig. 2:

Comparison of the pre- and post-test delay times of public housing projects.
Comparison of the pre- and post-test delay times of public housing projects.

Comparison of the validity results of the regression, CHAID and CART methods.

Statistical methods Number of significant variables Estimation Standard error
Regression 6 36,495.932 3,039.935
CHAID 5 37,227.186 3,109.763
CART 3 33,379.646 3,166.306

j.otmcj-2023-0014.tab.013

Project No. Construction project description District Number of flats Number of working days with construction documents Number of working days with schematic design Number of non-working days Contract duration (days) Number of time extension Delay (days)
1 North Ankara city entrance 7th stage 318 houses, 1 commercial centre, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 318 500 550 145 505 1 0
2 North Ankara city entrance villas 584 houses, 3 elementary schools, 1 kindergarten and mosque, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 584 500 550 388 554 1 681
3 Elazig city centre 336 houses and social facilities (mosque, fountain, trade centre, library) infrastructure and landscaping City centre 336 500 550 120 365 1 0
4 Isparta 96 houses, 1 trade centre, infrastructure and landscaping Yalvaç 96 400 450 90 504 0 0
5 Karabük 2nd region 432 houses, 1 primary school, 2 trade centres, 1 mosque, infrastructure and landscaping City centre 432 500 550 105 44 1 359
6 North Ankara city entrance 477 houses, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 477 500 550 165 651 1 0
7 North Ankara city entrance 488 houses, 1 unit centre, 1 nursery, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 488 500 550 165 651 1 0
8 North Ankara city entrance 799 houses, 1 unit centre, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 799 550 600 175 654 1 0
9 Trabzon urban transformation project 96 houses, 1 health centre, infrastructure and landscaping Çağlayan 96 400 450 97 554 1 0
10 Trabzon Çamli area 88 houses, infrastructure and landscaping Of 88 400 450 97 454 1 0
11 Tunceli city centre Atatürk neighbourhood 222 houses, trade centre, infrastructure and landscaping City centre 222 400 450 150 483 1 0
12 Ankara upper Yurtçu Kuyupınar area, 3rd region 1272 houses, 1 commercial centre, infrastructure and landscaping City centre 1,272 600 650 160 514 0 0
13 North Ankara city entrance, 3rd stage 530 houses Altindağ 530 500 550 120 505 1 730
14 North Ankara city entrance 341 villas, infrastructure and landscaping Altindağ 341 500 550 360 602 1 444
15 Ankara 5th region 226 houses, 1 primary school, 1 high school, infrastructures and landscaping Yapracik 226 400 450 360 654 1 427
16 Ankara 196 houses, trade centres, mosques, fountains, infrastructure and landscaping Haymana 196 400 450 360 554 1 451
17 Antalya revenue sharing business for urban service area Çiplakli 406 500 550 0 548 1 478
18 Antalya 892 houses, infrastructure and landscaping Çiplakli 892 550 600 0 395 1 539
19 Bingöl 89 farm village houses, infrastructure and landscaping Kiğı 89 400 450 150 404 0 0
20 Bolu city centre Paşaköy 2nd stage 500 houses, 1 commercial centre, health centre, infrastructure and landscaping City centre 500 500 550 240 454 1 211

Description of factors used to determine the total construction duration for public housing projects.

Factors Description of factors Variable type
F1 + F2 + F3 (standardised) BCD Independent
F4 Priority of project Independent
F5 Complexity of project Independent
F6 Special request for project Independent
F7 Difficulty of project Independent
F8 Financial risk of project Independent
F9 Logistic conditions of project region Independent
F10 Climatic conditions of project region Independent
F11 Seismicity of project region Independent

Findings of the three statistical methods.

Variables Regression CHAID CART
Standardised BCD (F1 + F2 + F3) Significant Significant Significant
Priority of project (F4) Significant Significant Significant
Complexity of project (F5) Significant - -
Difficulty of project (F7) Significant - -
Financial risk of project (F8) Significant - -
Logistic conditions of project region (F9) - Significant Significant
Climatic conditions of project region (F10) Significant Significant -
Seismicity of project region (F11) - Significant -
Special request for project (F6) - - -

Validity of the CHAID method.

Method Estimation Standard error
CHAID 37,227.186 3,109.763
10-fold cross-validation 40,115.651 3,524.340
Training set (70%) 36,616.334 5,011.920
Test set (30%) 42,521.916 4,823.904

Results of the regression analysis.

Variables R2 β t P VIF
Regression method 0.356 663.630 21.009 0.000**
Standardised BCD (F1 + F2 + F3) 146.447 27.833 0.000** 1.160
Priority of project (F4) –48.437 –3.733 0.000** 1.341
Complexity of project (F5) –47.053 –4.057 0.000** 1.402
Special request for project (F6) –0.029 –1.249 0.212 1.279
Difficulty of project (F7) 43.870 3.800 0.000** 1.047
Financial risk of project (F8) –18.510 –2.326 0.020* 1.011
Logistic conditions of project region (F9) –3.953 –1.716 0.086 1.088
Climatic conditions of project region (F10) –13.676 –4.768 0.000** 1.045
Seismicity of project region (F11) –0.024 –1.205 0.228 1.115

Literature review of factors affecting construction duration.

Authors Factors affecting construction duration Type of projects Significance level
Kaka and Price (1991) Project type, form and type of tender Public buildings and civil engineering projects
Chan and Kumaraswamy (1997) Project characteristics, ground conditions, project design complexity, procurement scheduling and environmental factors Building and civil works
Kaming et al. (1997) Weather conditions, project location, inadequate planning and project design High-rise projects
Chan and Kumaraswamy (2002) Site condition, project characteristics, design aspects and pre-construction planning Public housing, public non-residential buildings and private sector buildings
Meeampol and Ogunlan (2006) Construction method and schedule management Highway construction projects p = 0.000
Hoffman et al. (2007) Project cost, design/construction agent and temperature Facility projects p = 0.01, p = 0.0072 and p = 0.0028
Salleh (2009) Weather and site conditions, and inadequate planning Residential, office, hotel, academic buildings and mosques p < 0.05
Mauriya et al. (2010) Geological condition, seismicity and difficult terrain Tunnel construction
Doloi et al. (2012) Client’s influence and improper planning Construction projects p = 0.000 and p = 0.003
Dursun and Stoy (2012) Project type, project location, availability of construction area and market conditions Buildings p < 0.05
Shanmugapriya and Subramanian (2013) Market conditions, contract modification and project location Buildings, roads and bridges, industrial projects and others –
Sweis (2013) Planning and scheduling, and weather conditions Public construction projects –
Faremi et al. (2016) Design and documentation issues, poor labour productivity and financial resource management Construction projects p < 0.05
Oyedele (2017) Cash flow, type of design (complexity), project type, topography and geology, supply chain management and weather Construction projects –
Nayak (2019) Environmental conditions, equipment and cash flow Rural infrastructure projects –
Mahmoodzadeh et al. (2022) Geological conditions and machinery Tunnel construction p = 0.000

Descriptive statistics for the ideal construction duration.

Methods Number Average (days) Standard deviation Minimum
Regression 1,530 679.16 133.20 387
CHAID 1,530 704.38 113.13 635
CART 1,530 705.98 109.50 640

Test results for the developed calculation method.

Pre-test Post-test
Number of delayed housing projects 40 23
Delay percentage 100% 57.50%
Reduction amount of delayed housing projects (%) 42.50

Results for the implementation of the proposed calculation method.

Before implementation After implementation
Number of delayed public housing projects 720 350 285 299
Percentage of delayed public housing projects (%) 47.06 22.88 18.63 19.54
Amount of decrease for delayed public housing projects (%) 51.39 60.42 58.47

Validity of the regression method.

Group 1 (enter method) Group 2 (stepwise method)
B t p β t p
Regression variables 696.696 18.876 0.000** 646.473 21.562 0.000**
Standardised BCD (F1 + F2 + F3) 146.765 27.548 0.000** 148.020 28.551 0.000**
Priority of project (F4) −55.102 −3.981 0.000** −50.401 −3.897 0.000**
Complexity of project (F5) −48.665 −4.179 0.000** −47.116 −4.060 0.000**
Special request for project (F6) −18.039 −1.329 0.184 −0.033 −1.431 0.153
Difficulty of project (F7) 43.636 3.781 0.000** 47.520 4.185 0.000**
Financial risk of project (F8) −17.797 −2.231 0.026* −18.340 −2.304 0.021*
Logistic conditions of project region (F9) −4.285 −1.800 0.072 −0.037 −1.716 0.086
Climatic conditions of project region (F10) −13.893 −4.835 0.000** −14.443 −5.081 0.000**
Seismicity of project region (F11) −5.978 −1.205 0.228 −0.014 −0.680 0.496

List of factors affecting construction duration from the literature.

No. Factors Factors encountered during the implementation stage Factors encountered during the bidding stage Factors caused by the contractor Factors caused by the owner Factors selected for the calculation method Factors encountered during the bidding stage and caused by the owner Authors
1 Delivery of material on time + – + – – – Alaghbari et al. (2007), Asnaashari et al. (2009) and Tunji-Olayeni et al. (2018)
2 Productivity of labour + – + – – – Faremi et al. (2016) and Smugala and Kubečková (2021)
3 Using an effective construction programme (schedule) + + + + + – Chan and Kumaraswamy (2002), Sweis (2013) and Lines et al. (2015)
4 Design–implementation coordination + – + – – – Faremi et al. (2016)
5 Recruitment of labour + – + – – – Ahuja and Nandakumar (1985)
6 Changes in design + – + + – – Shanmugapriya and Subramanian (2013)
7 Seismicity of project location + + + + + + Mauriya et al. (2010) and Mahmoodzadeh et al. (2022)
8 Sufficient number and experience of management staff + – + – – – Lo et al. (2006)
9 Selection of subcontractors + – + – – – Polat et al. (2015)
10 Project type and features – + + + + – Dursun and Stoy (2012) and Oyedele (2017)
11 Effective organisation structure + – + – – – Arditi et al. (1985)
12 Company-based financial issues + + + – – – Lo et al. (2006) and Nayak (2019)
13 Technology used in construction + + + + + – Chan and Kumaraswamy (2002)
14 Ensuring business continuity + – + – – – Alfalasi (2016)
15 Ensuring additional drawings, specifications and technical details provided on time + – – + – – Ahuja and Nandakumar (1985)
16 Scope changes + – – + – – Arditi et al. (1985) and Shanmugapriya and Subramanian (2013)
17 Maintaining coordination between subcontractors + – + – – – Hwang et al. (2013)
18 Motivation of labour + – + – – – Nasirzadeh and Nojedehi (2013)
19 Natural disasters FM – FM – – – Nayak (2019)
20 Degree of project difficulty + + + + + + Kaka and Price (1991), Chan and Kumaraswamy (1997), Chan and Kumaraswamy (2002) and Oyedele (2017)
21 Design-planning coordination + – + – – – Walker and Vines (2000)
22 Efficient auditing and control – – + + – – Long et al. (2008)
23 Delays in site handover – + – + + – Iyer et al. (2008)
24 Rational use of construction equipment + – + – – – Oleinik et al. (2019)
25 Having experienced staff during design phase + + + + + – Oyewobi and Ogunsemi (2010) and Lessing et al. (2017)
26 Maintaining suitable site conditions + – + – – – Dursun and Stoy (2012)
27 Implementation mistakes + – + – – – Kaliba et al. (2009)
28 Extreme weather conditions FM – FM – – – Kaming et al. (1997), Salleh (2009) and Oyedele (2017)
29 Sufficiency of design consultancy services + + + + + – Le-Hoai et al. (2008)
30 Efficiency of engineers + – + + – – Chan and Kumaraswamy (1995)
31 Selection of suitable construction equipment + – + – – – Mahmoodzadeh et al. (2022)
32 Efficient use of information technologies – + + + + – Li et al. (2005)
33 Experience in use of applied construction technology + – + – – – Memon et al. (2012)
34 Equipment failures + – + – – – Aibinu and Odeyinka (2006) and Mahmoodzadeh et al. (2022)
35 Excess bureaucracy + + + + + – Abd El-Razek et al. (2008)
36 Adaptation to work and willingness to learn tasks + – + – – – Doloi et al. (2012)
37 Selection of material + – + – – – Koushki et al. (2005)
38 Financial risk of project + + + + + + Arditi et al. (1985), Türesoy (1989), Hoffman et al. (2007) and Musarat et al. (2021)
39 Sufficiency of construction consultancy services + – + + – – Alaghbari et al. (2007) and Hwang et al. (2013)
40 Claim issues and disputes between stakeholders + – + + – – Al-Khalil and Al-Ghafly (1999) and Aibinu and Jagboro (2002)
41 Ground conditions and topography of construction site + + + + + – Cheng, (2014) and Oyedele (2017)
42 Communication with other authorities + – + + – – Doloi et al. (2012) and Hwang et al. (2013)
43 Changes in importance levels of activities + – + + – – Woolery and Crandall (1983) and Nguyen et al. (2013)
44 Emergency plans for unforeseen conditions, risk, and crisis management plans + + + – – – Hosseinian and Reinschmidt (2015)
45 Document control and management + – + – – – Faremi et al. (2016)
46 Suitability of contract for project type + + – + + – Oyedele (2017)
47 Using imported materials + + + + + – Odeh and Battaineh (2002)
48 Material storage facilities + – + – – – Kumar and Cheng (2015)
49 Project procedures + + + + + – Williams (2008)
50 Quality control + – + + – – Aliverdi et al. (2013)
51 Distance to construction site + + + + + – Ramli et al. (2018)
52 Applied tax policies and government incentives to construction industry + – – – – – Chan and Kumaraswamy (1995) and Girth and Lopez (2019)
53 Legislative changes and legal regulations + – – + – – Ahuja and Nandakumar (1985)
54 Preparation of reliable project programme (schedule) + + + + + – Meeampol and Ogunlan (2006) and Salleh (2009)
55 Cultural, religious and social factors in project location + + + + + – Assaf and Al-Hejji (2006) and Al-Sabah et al. (2014)
56 Theft + – + – – – Haas et al. (2022)
Total 50 21 48 29 18 3

Validation of the CART method.

Method Estimation Standard error
CART 33,379.264 3,166.306
10-fold cross-validation 41,092.216 3,860.222
Training set (70%) 43,341.801 5,111.257
Test set (30%) 41,189.758 5,133.594
eISSN:
1847-6228
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Engineering, Introductions and Overviews, other
Journal RSS Feed