Comparing cost uplift in infrastructure delivery methods : a case based approach

The alliance project delivery method is used for approximately one third of all Australian government infrastructure projects representing $8-$10 billion per annum. Despite its widespread use, little is known about the differences between estimated project cost and actual cost over the project lifecycle. This paper presents the findings of research into 14 Australian government alliance case studies investigating the observed cost uplift over each project’s lifecycle. I find that significant cost uplift is likely and that this uplift is greater than that afflicting traditional delivery methods. Furthermore, most of the cost uplift occurs at a different place in the project lifecycle, namely between Business Case and Contractual Commitment.

Pre-eruptive uplift in the Emeishan? [Correspondence]

In their correspondence, He and colleagues question our conclusion of little or no uplift preceding Emeishan volcanism that we reported in our letter1. Debate concerns the nature of the contact between the Maokou limestone and Emeishan volcanics, the depositional environment and volumetric significance of mafic hydromagmatic deposits (MHDs), and evidence for symmetrical domal thinning. MHDs in the Daqiao section are separated from the Maokou limestone by 100 m of subaerial basaltic lavas, but elsewhere MHDs — previously interpreted as basal conglomerates2, 3 — directly overlie the Maokou2, 3. MHDs thus feature strongly in basal sections of the Emeishan lava succession, as also recently shown4 elsewhere in the Emeishan. An irregular surface at the top of the Maokou limestone has been interpreted as an erosional unconformity2, 3, but clastic deposits presented as evidence of this erosion2, 3 are MHDs produced by explosive magma–water interaction1. A clear demonstration that this irregular top surface is an erosional truncation of limestone reef facies (slope/rim, flat, lagoonal) is currently lacking, but is critical because reefs and carbonate platforms show considerable natural relief of tens of metres. The persistent hot, wet climate since the Oligocene has produced well-developed weathering profiles on exposed Palaeozoic marine sedimentary sequences5, but weathering and karst relief of the uppermost Maokou limestone underlying the flood basalts have not been properly documented, nor shown to be of middle Permian age and immediately preceding emplacement of the large igneous province.

Wind uplift strength of trapezoidal steel cladding with closely spaced ribs

When crest-fixed thin trapezoidal steel cladding with closely spaced ribs is subjected to wind uplift/suction forces, local dimpling or pull-through failures occur prematurely at their screw connections because of the large stress concentrations in the cladding under the screw heads. Currently, the design of crest-fixed profiled steel cladding is mainly based on time consuming and expensive laboratory tests due to the lack of adequate design rules. In this research, a shell finite element model of crest-fixed trapezoidal steel cladding with closely spaced ribs was developed and validated using experimental results. The finite element model included a recently developed splitting criterion and other advanced features including geometric imperfections, buckling effects, contact modelling and hyperelastic behaviour of neoprene washers, and was used in a detailed parametric study to develop suitable design formulae for local failures. This paper presents the details of the finite element analyses, large scale experiments and their results including the new wind uplift design strength formulae for trapezoidal steel cladding with closely spaced ribs. The new design formulae can be used to achieve both safe and optimised solutions.

Comparing cost uplift in infrastructure delivery methods : a case based approach

In 2009 the Australian Federal and State governments are expected to have spent some AU$30 billion procuring infrastructure projects. For governments with finite resources but many competing projects, formal capital rationing is achieved through use of Business Cases. These Business cases articulate the merits of investing in particular projects along with the estimated costs and risks of each project. Despite the sheer size and impact of infrastructure projects, there is very little research in Australia, or internationally, on the performance of these projects against Business Case assumptions when the decision to invest is made. If such assumptions (particularly cost assumptions) are not met, then there is serious potential for the misallocation of Australia’s finite financial resources. This research addresses this important gap in the literature by using combined quantitative and qualitative research methods, to examine the actual performance of 14 major Australian government infrastructure projects. The research findings are controversial as they challenge widely held perceptions of the effectiveness of certain infrastructure delivery practices. Despite this controversy, the research has had a significant impact on the field and has been described as ‘outstanding’ and ‘definitive’ (Alliancing Association of Australasia), "one of the first of its kind" (Infrastructure Partnerships of Australia) and "making a critical difference to infrastructure procurement" (Victorian Department of Treasury). The implications for practice of the research have been profound and included the withdrawal by Government of various infrastructure procurement guidelines, the formulation of new infrastructure policies by several state governments and the preparation of new infrastructure guidelines that substantially reflect the research findings. Building on the practical research, a more rigorous academic investigation focussed on the comparative cost uplift of various project delivery strategies was submitted to Australia’s premier academic management conference, the Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM) Annual Conference. This paper has been accepted for the 2010 ANZAM National Conference following a process of double blind peer review with reviewers rating the paper’s overall contribution as "Excellent" and "Good".