Published in the Formosa Journal of Science and Technology (FJST), the study demonstrates how flood-related delays can be measured, documented, and managed through a practical framework that protects project continuity while maintaining cost efficiency and contractual accountability.
The findings matter because infrastructure projects across Indonesia and other flood-prone regions increasingly face weather-related uncertainty. Delays can trigger financial losses, administrative disputes, and prolonged disruption to transportation and local economic activity.
Why Flood Delays Are Becoming a Major Construction Challenge
Bridge infrastructure supports mobility, logistics, regional connectivity, and economic growth. In many rural areas, bridges serve as essential links between communities and markets.
Yet construction projects remain highly vulnerable to external disruptions. Weather extremes, river overflows, and flooding can halt foundation work, interrupt material movement, and create cascading delays across construction schedules.
Traditional project management methods often focus only on recovering lost time after delays occur. According to the authors, that approach leaves contractors with weak technical evidence and insufficient contractual support when requesting deadline extensions or calculating additional costs.
The study responds to that gap by proposing a framework that treats delay management as a continuous process rather than an emergency reaction.
Turning Flood Events into Measurable Project Decisions
The researchers used a case study design based on a bridge construction project affected by repeated flooding.
Instead of collecting new field observations, the team analyzed secondary project documentation, including:
- Technical specifications
- Construction drawings
- Cost plans and budgeting documents
- Weekly progress reports
- Project S-curves and schedules
- Historical records of work interruptions
- Supporting environmental and contractual documentation
To evaluate project disruption, the researchers applied a scheduling analysis method that identifies which construction activities directly determine the final completion date.
They then connected the scheduling results with legal procedures for requesting additional project time and with recovery planning through controlled schedule acceleration.
The result was an integrated operational model consisting of three connected phases.
The Three-Phase Intervention Model
The framework developed by the Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya team includes:
1. Preventive Phase Build the Baseline
The first phase establishes an official baseline schedule before construction begins.
This schedule becomes the benchmark for measuring future disruptions and determining whether delays justify contractual adjustments.
2. Responsive Phase Measure Impact and Validate Extension Rights
Once flooding occurs, project data are analyzed to determine how much of the delay affects critical construction activities.
The study found that flooding created:
- 14 additional days for structural excavation work
- 28 days of disruption in the Vero River work area due to inundation
The analysis showed the project completion date shifting from 17 November 2025 to 1 December 2025.
Based on Indonesian contract law, particularly Articles 1244–1245 of the Civil Code, the delay qualified as an excusable non-culpable delay, meaning the contractor was entitled to a 14-calendar-day Extension of Time (EOT) without delay penalties.
3. Recovery Phase Accelerate Efficiently
The final phase focuses on recovering lost time through controlled acceleration.
The researchers tested 14 staged acceleration scenarios across 12 critical-path activities using additional working hours.
The optimal scenario restored the project to its original completion target with an additional direct cost of:
IDR 30,130,315
According to the study, that cost was substantially lower than the financial risk associated with contractual delay penalties.
From Academic Model to Practical Work Guideline
One of the most practical outcomes of the study is that the framework was converted into an implementation guide.
The final model includes:
- 21 systematic operational steps
- 12 formal legal supporting documents
- Procedures for Extension of Time (EOT) claims
- Cost acceleration documentation standards
- Technical justification for contract amendments
Rather than separating engineering calculations from contract administration, the model combines both into one decision-making process.
The authors argue that this integration can strengthen transparency and reduce disputes between contractors, project owners, and supervising consultants.
As paraphrased from the work of Zakaria, Marleno, and Nugroho at Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya, infrastructure resilience depends not only on stronger structures but also on stronger project governance systems that can respond to unavoidable disruptions with measurable and legally supported decisions.
Implications for Infrastructure and Climate Adaptation
The research offers practical value beyond a single bridge project.
For contractors, the model provides stronger documentation for requesting schedule extensions.
For project owners and consultants, it creates clearer standards for evaluating delay claims and acceleration proposals.
For policymakers, the framework highlights the need to integrate climate risk management with construction governance.
As weather-related disruption becomes more frequent, structured intervention models may become increasingly important for keeping infrastructure investment on schedule and under control.
Author Profiles
Nizamuddin Fairus Zakaria — Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya
Risma Marleno — Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya
Laksono Djoko Nugroho — Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya
0 Komentar