A comparison of design-bid-build and design-build project delivery methods on military construction projects

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren Dwayne McWhirt
2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 157-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren McWhirt ◽  
Junyong Ahn ◽  
Jennifer S. Shane ◽  
Kelly C. Strong

Author(s):  
Birtice Garner ◽  
Kathleen Richardson ◽  
Daniel Castro-Lacouture

Design-Build is rapidly becoming one of the most commonly used project delivery methods in the facility construction industry. The United States Air Force and the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) are expected to establish a target of 75% of all Military Construction (MILCON) projects delivered using the Design-Build method. The use of this delivery method will bring significant changes in the relationships between the various parties associated with facility project delivery when compared to the traditional Design-Bid-Build method. This paper demonstrates that Design-Build delivery with a best value selection is an important tool in accomplishing AFRC’s cost efficient, rapid response transformation goals applicable to facility construction. Three hundred thirty two projects in program years 2002 through 2006, constructed using both traditional Design-Bid-Build or Design-Build delivery methods, were examined. Parameters used for comparisons were construction cost and schedule growth, project cost, vertical versus horizontal construction, and number of days required to prepare solicitation documents, advertise and accomplish construction award. This research reveals significant project schedule advantages with Design-Build best value selection delivery. The advantages are apparent in both pre and post construction award activities. Potential Design-Build cost advantages are hindered by Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations requiring firm fixed price contracts at construction award.


2009 ◽  
Vol 135 (7) ◽  
pp. 579-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren R. Hale ◽  
Pramen P. Shrestha ◽  
G. Edward Gibson ◽  
Giovanni C. Migliaccio

Author(s):  
R. Edward Minchin ◽  
Parth Choksi ◽  
Linda Konrath ◽  
Sid Scott ◽  
Yuanxin Zhang

Department of Transportation (DOT) budgets are being stretched to the limits, while the infrastructure needs of the nation continue to grow. To address this issue, a few DOTs have adopted strategies that promote innovation and motivate industry to propose cost or time saving ideas. The advent of the Design Build (D-B) and General-Contractor-as-Construction-Manager (CM/GC) project delivery methods in highway and bridge construction has established the early involvement of the contractor in the design phase of a project. The next step on this evolution may be Alternative Technical Concepts (ATCs). The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has defined an ATC as “a request by a proposer to modify a contract requirement, specifically for that proposer’s use in gaining competitive benefit during the bidding or proposal process and must provide a solution that is equal to or better than the owner’s base design requirements in the invitation for bid (for a design-bid-build project) or request for proposal (for a D-B project) document”. ATCs have been reported to improve constructability, enhance innovation, and ultimately save costs. Issues with ATC use includes: time and resource constraints, confidentiality concerns, submittal issues, and difficulties in conducting fair “apples to apples” evaluations. This paper will report the findings of the research team as it goes through the early stages of identifying best practices for the FHWA to bring uniformity to the ATC process.


Author(s):  
R. Edward Minchin ◽  
Reihaneh Samsami ◽  
Dan Tran ◽  
Dan D’Angelo ◽  
Sidney Scott ◽  
...  

The US Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Every Day Counts Program (EDC) has resulted in state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) putting evermore emphasis on speeding up the delivery of highway and bridge construction projects for use by the driving public. This has resulted in an increase in the use of integrated project delivery methods and adding alternative technical concepts (ATCs) to traditional design-bid-build (DBB) contracts. ATCs have exhibited great potential for delivering substantial benefits like cost savings, increased constructability, and quicker project delivery. Previous research has found that knowledge of project constructability was lacking in state DOT planning, programming, and environmental staffs. At the same time, the permitting process for several government agencies has become increasingly restrictive. The intent of this paper is to report on the research team's progress in an ongoing effort to furnish the US government with a uniform set of guidelines for the application of the constructability process during all phases of project development and delivery. The research uses surveys, focus groups and interviews to determine which states have implemented formal programs to ensure that the constructor is furnished with a set of contract documents that affords said constructor with the best possible opportunity to successfully construct the project with the highest quality standards, within the contract duration and without exceeding the construction budget.


Author(s):  
Robert Schultz ◽  
Ahmad Sarfaraz ◽  
Kouroush Jenab

Risk and reliability are two main factors that must be studied in order to measure the successful rate of a project. As a result, innovative project delivery methods have been proposed to mitigate the risk and improve reliability of a project. The intent of this study is to compare the use of the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) and fuzzy AHP for decisions surrounding the early stages of construction projects based on risk and reliability measures. Financial risk is especially high during the early design stages of a project due to the unknown obstacles that will follow. The case study uses the selection of a project delivery method as an example, and provides a sample project to highlight the project-specific variability of the multi-criteria decision analysis.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 54-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Schultz ◽  
Ahmad Sarfaraz ◽  
Kouroush Jenab

Risk and reliability are two main factors that must be studied in order to measure the successful rate of a project. As a result, innovative project delivery methods have been proposed to mitigate the risk and improve reliability of a project. The intent of this study is to compare the use of the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) and fuzzy AHP for decisions surrounding the early stages of construction projects based on risk and reliability measures. Financial risk is especially high during the early design stages of a project due to the unknown obstacles that will follow. The case study uses the selection of a project delivery method as an example, and provides a sample project to highlight the project-specific variability of the multi-criteria decision analysis.


Author(s):  
Douglas D. Gransberg ◽  
Keith R. Molenaar

Progressive design-build (PDB) is an emerging variation of alternative contracting methods (ACMs) in the highway construction industry. It is widely used in water/wastewater and airport projects, but it is new to federally-funded highway projects. A few state department of transportations (DOTs) have begun to experiment with the method, using their experience with qualification-based selection (QBS) and a subsequent negotiated construction price from construction manager/general contractor (CMGC) contracting. There has been little written that provides guidance to public highway agencies who are interested in implementing PDB. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to first describe the mechanics of PDB project delivery to provide consistent foundation information from which DOTs can inform their decision as to when to use it. The paper also provides a comparative analysis of PDB with CMGC and finds that they are nearly identical with regard to format, differing only in whether the owner retains the design responsibility in CMGC or assigns it to the design-builder in PDB. It also finds that PDB is more appropriate than traditional design-build (DB) for projects in which the owner needs to engage the design-builder in the preliminary engineering and environmental permitting process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document