Comparison
RainDelayLog vs Procore
Procore is built to run the whole commercial project from contracts to closeout, while RainDelayLog is built to make one weather day hold up in front of a reviewer who was never on the site.
Comparison
RainDelayLog vs Autodesk Construction Cloud: scope and fit
Autodesk Construction Cloud connects design, models and field execution across a project, while RainDelayLog stays on one narrow contractual problem that starts the morning it rains.
The short answer
These tools do not really overlap. A design to field platform exists so drawings, models, issues and field work stay connected on a complex commercial build, and that is a genuinely different problem from proving a weather day. If your project is model driven and coordination heavy, that platform earns its place regardless of what you use for weather. The question is only whether the weather day record inside a broad platform is strong enough for the contract you signed. On owner agreements that name a station and publish a day table, it usually needs help.
RainDelayLog and Autodesk Construction Cloud side by side
| What you are deciding | RainDelayLog | Autodesk Construction Cloud |
|---|---|---|
| Problem it solves | Proving qualifying weather days and defending schedule extension requests. | Connecting design, model coordination and field execution across the project lifecycle. |
| Primary users | Superintendents, project engineers and the person who will write the delay claim. | Project teams spanning design, VDC, preconstruction and field operations. |
| Weather evidence | Station reading captured and stamped daily against the contract threshold on that job. | Weather is captured within general field logs, with sourcing left to the project team. |
| Schedule impact | Affected activities, lost crew and equipment hours, and dry out days recorded per event. | Schedule and coordination handled at project level across a broad module set. |
| Contract clause tracking | Notice window, named station and monthly day allowance stored per contract. | Contract clause mechanics sit outside the platform's coordination focus. |
| Deliverable when challenged | A dated claim packet ordered the way a reviewer reads one. | Project documentation and reports drawn from across the connected modules. |
| Time to value | A site is set up and logging the same morning you subscribe. | Implementation is normally planned with their team around the project workflow. |
| Cost shape | $59 Single Site, $149 Multi Site, $349 Enterprise Site, month to month. | Sold as a platform for a company or project portfolio, so ask them for current terms. |
The right hand column places Autodesk Construction Cloud by scope and by the sort of operator it serves, with no attempt at a priced feature list. None of it stands still, so take the current position from them rather than from here. RainDelayLog is published by MLJ, SASU and this page is written by Jimenez Julien.
Choose RainDelayLog when
- When the model coordination is going fine and the thing bleeding money is unrecovered calendar time from rain.
- When an owner rejected a schedule extension request and asked where the precipitation figure came from.
- When your contract sets an electronic notice route with a short window and nobody is watching that clock.
- When you need a weather day record on a job that is not model driven at all, such as a warehouse shell or a parking structure.
Choose Autodesk Construction Cloud when
- If the project is coordination heavy and the real risk is clashes and drawing versions, that platform is solving your actual problem.
- If the design team and the trades need one connected environment from model to field, a weather tool does not touch that.
- If your company has standardized on a design to field environment, adding tools outside it needs a real reason.
Coordination risk and weather risk are separate ledgers
A commercial project carries several independent risks. Coordination risk shows up as rework in the field when the model and the drawings disagree. Weather risk shows up as calendar days you do not get back and general conditions you keep paying. They are managed by different people, proved with different evidence and argued in different meetings.
Trying to run both out of one system usually means one of them gets the thin version. On most jobs it is the weather record, because it only matters intensely for about thirty mornings a year and then not at all until somebody disputes the schedule.
The evidence a weather day needs is unusual
Most construction records describe what your own team did. A weather day record has to lean on a third party source, because your word about the rainfall is not evidence. That means the nearest qualifying station, its distance from the site, the archived record you can pull later, and where a site gauge fits when the contract allows one.
That third party dependency is why weather documentation drifts out of general platforms. The tool has to know which station the contract names, what threshold counts as a qualifying day, and how to keep the reading attached to the entry so nobody has to reconstruct it from a browser tab a year later.
What to run on a job that has both
On a model driven hospital or lab project, keep the coordination platform doing what it does and let the superintendent run the weather day entry separately. The entry takes about two minutes on the mornings it fires, and the export attaches to the project record when notice goes out.
The measure of whether the split is working is simple. Ask the project engineer to produce every qualifying weather day from the last six months with source data and notice dates, and see how long it takes. If the answer is under five minutes, the setup is right. If it turns into an afternoon of searching, the record is not claim ready.
Questions people ask before they choose
We already use a full platform. Is this redundant?
Only if your weather days are already being approved without argument. The overlap is one field in a daily log; the difference is everything the contract requires around that field. If your last denial cited insufficient documentation, the overlap was not enough.
Can the weather packet be attached to our project record?
Yes. The export is a dated document set with the logs, station data, photos, hours and day table in claim order. Teams normally attach it to the project record when written notice goes out, so both the notice and the evidence carry the same date.
Does this work on a job with no model at all?
It does, and that is a large share of our accounts. Warehouse shells, parking structures, site packages and tenant work carry heavy weather exposure with very little coordination technology. The weather clause reads the same either way.
Other comparisons on raindelaylog.com
Comparison
RainDelayLog vs Raken
Raken is built so a foreman can finish a complete daily report from the field without dreading it, while RainDelayLog is built so one of those days survives an owner's challenge a year later.
Put the two side by side on a wet job
A criteria table only takes the decision so far. Send us a job that is already losing calendar time and we will enter one qualifying morning the way a reviewer reads it, from the station reading through the released crew hours to the notice date. If what you run today already produces that packet, we will say so and you can get back to the schedule.