Preetam Ola BIM Portfolio

portfolio.

P R E E T A M O L A 2024

BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING

PREETAM

OLA

Recent Graduate student

CONTACT +514-967-8378 preetamola.ola.com 1980 Rue Sainte-Catherine E Montréal, QC H2K 2H7

EDUCATION

ABOUT ME I experienced construction management student with 3 years in India, specializing in VDC/BIM. Proficient in Navisworks, Revit, and AutoCAD. Skilled in clash detection, 4D simulation, and model-based quantity takeoffs. Seeking a full-time VDC/BIM coordination role.

WORK EXPERIENCE Project Coordinator

2020 – 2022

Concordia university

PS Contractor, India

M. Eng in Construction Engineering and Management

Assisted with field operations on projects like the Mega Food Park and state road upgrades, utilizing Bluebeam for takeoffs, Primavera P6 for tracking, and managing budgets, RFIs, and schedule advancements.

2022 - 2024

Lovely Professional university Bachelor in Civil Engineering 2015 - 2019

Project Lead

2019 - 2020

OYO Hotel and Homes, India

• Revit

I led the renovation of approximately 800 rooms in the Jaipur Hub, enhancing workflow efficiency by 20% and minimizing branding costs by 25%. Through effective vendor negotiations, I reduced stakeholder issue resolution time and oversaw logistics, ensuring quality and timely material orders.

• Navisworks

summer intern

• Autodesk Construction Cloud

Rajasthan Public Works Departments

TECHNICAL SKILLS

• Primavera P6 • Bluebeam • Power BI • ProjectWise

LANGUAGE English French

2018- 2018

Worked on a project for strengthening and re-carpeting of road (7km) that links two points of city via scarifying existing granular surface and disposal of scarified material with some lift via laying, spreading and compacting course material according to the design mix.

CERTIFICATES LinkedIn: Advanced Revit and Dynamo for Interior Design.

LinkedIn: Revit Essential Training for Architecture (Imperial and Metric).

Coursera: Construction cost estimating and cost control.

Procore Technology-Student Certificate.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Two-story Commercial Building Project Overview,Scope of Work,Tools & Methods,Estimation Methodology,Quantity Take-off Methodology,Price & Quantity Takeoff,Cost Analysis,Results,Design State & Errors,Level of Development (LOD) Used and Learnings & Conclusions

2 Scheduling and 4D Simulation Introduction, Overview of 4D BIM Process, Schedule Development – Assumptions & Justifications, Result,Conclusion

3 Navisworks Federated Model Introduction, Analysis of the identified TP & FP Clashes ,Clash Grouping Strategies and Reasoning and Conclusion

4 As built model and documentation As-design model, As-built model , comparative analysis of four columns and dimension sculpture with qualitative and quantitative results

1 Two-story Commercial Building

In this commercial building project, I was provided with a model in Autodesk Construction Cloud to estimate modelbased costs.

My responsibilities included assessing Two-story Commercial Building the Level of Development (LOD) of various elements like columns, beams, slabs, walls, and windows to ensure accuracy in the cost estimation.

I also examined how the Quantity Take-Off (QTO) accuracy would vary at different design stages, such as 30% versus 80% completion. Additionally, I identified and addressed errors within the model, such as column repetitions and incorrect dimensions, to refine the QTO and ensure accurate cost predictions.

1.

Project Overview

Commercial Project Total Area: 16,126 sq. ft.

Ground Floor: 8,189.69 sq. ft.

First Floor: 7,936.32 sq. ft.

Rooms: 12 on Ground Floor, 14 on First Floor LOCATION -Montreal, Quebec

2. Scope Of Work

Two-story Commercial Building

3. Tools & Methods Quantity Takeoff: Autodesk Construction Cloud Costing: RS Means Model: 3D Model of Commercial Building

Includes concrete foundations with specified footings and walls, steel columns (W10 x 49), structural framing with beams, 4" floor slabs, EPS roof insulation, brick walls on metal studs, and various window sizes and quantities.

4. Estimation Methodology Quantified elements with Autodesk Construction Cloud, validated against 2D plans, exported to Excel, used RS Means, and applied a 1.3% inflation adjustment.

fig-1. Two-story commercial building model elements

5. Quantity Take-Off Methodology Studied model, isolated elements, applied UniFormat codes, used RS Means for accurate costing and resource allocation, Two-story Commercial Building ensuring budget compliance and project efficiency

fig-2 .Structural element details

fig-3. Classification of all elements for accurate costing

6. Pricing Quantity Take-Off: Priced with RS Means 2011, referenced formats, and multiplied unit costs by quantities to estimate project costs, ensuring accurate budgeting, cost control, and resource allocation for efficient project delivery. Detailed quantity takeoffs were also performed to refine the estimates. fig-4. Structural Foundation Details

Two-story Commercial Building

5

fig-5. RS MEANS for accurate costing

7. Cost Analysis Results

Analyzed QTO and RS Means data for Montreal, added 10% provisional sum for design changes, and calculated total cost with overhead and profit.

fig-6. structural columns dimension

8. Design Stage and Accuracy At 30-40% design, models are basic with ±20-25% QTO accuracy. At 80-90%, models are detailed with ±5% accuracy. Contingencies are added without altering BOQ items.

9. Errors and Impact Errors such as column repetition, overlapping beams, unconnected beams, and window dimension variance led to inaccuracies in the Quantity Takeoff (QTO), which affected the overall project estimations. These issues resulted in miscalculations of material quantities, structural inconsistencies, and potential scheduling delays. fig-7. - Repeted Column in the model

To rectify these problems, the team conducted a thorough review of the design model, identifying and correcting misaligned elements, eliminating overlapping beams, and ensuring that all structural components were properlyCommercial Building Two-story connected. Window dimensions were adjusted to match the project’s specifications, and regular quality assurance checks were put in place to prevent future errors. These corrective measures improved the accuracy of the QTO, enhancing the reliability of cost fig-8. - Overlapping beam in the model estimation and facilitating smoother construction planning.

fig-9. - Unconnected beams

Incorrect Window Dimension

fig-10. -Width of Window – Elevation & 3D

Two-story Commercial Building

fig-11. - Height of Window – Elevation & 3D

10 LOD Used

Columns: LOD 300. Model has specific sizes, location and orientation, but does not have modelled gusset plates, anchor rods etc. to classify as LOD 350.

Image 12: Column LOD 300 (Source: Level of Development Specification Version: 2020)

Image 12.1 : Column Model

Beams: LOD 300. Main horizontal beams have specific sizes, slope, elevation and orientation, but does not have modelled cap plates, coping of members, bolts, nuts etc. to classify as LOD 350

Two-story Commercial Building

Image 13: Beam LOD 300 (Source: Level of Development Specification Version: 2020)

Image 13.1 :Beam Model

Slabs: LOD 300. Formwork materials are defined inclusive of its properties, but does not have hardware or fastener specifications, shoring connections etc. to classify as LOD 350

Image 14: Slab LOD 300 (Source: Level of Development Specification Version: 2020)

Image 14.1 :Slab Model

Walls: LOD 300. Modelled to specific dimensions and includes major openings for windows and doors, but does not have modelled support framing around openings or cladding etc. to classify as LOD 350.

Image 14: Wall LOD 300 (Source: Level of Development Specification Version: 2020)

Image 14.1 : Wall Model

Windows: LOD 300. Modelled to specific location, thickness, size and orientation, but does not have defined mullion shapes or anchorage layouts to classify as LOD 350.

Two-story Commercial Building

Image 14: Window LOD 300 (Source: Level of Development Specification Version: 2020)

11. Learning 3D model-based QTO boosts accuracy and efficiency but requires detailed models and cost databases. Autodesk Construction Cloud improves speed but needs integration.

Image 14.1 :Window Model

2 Scheduling and 4D Simulation

Construction projects involve a complex interplay of numerous components that require precise timing to ensure timely completion within budget.

Effective scheduling and visualization are crucial for success. This Project focuses on utilizing Two-story Commercial Building software like MS Project and 4D BIM Simulation through Autodesk Navisworks Manage to schedule a commercial building project with a total covered area of 16,126 sq. ft.

A detailed Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was extracted from Autodesk Construction Cloud, generating an activity list based on RS Means specifications, 3D models, and 2D plans. To identify potential constructability issues, factors such as resource availability, construction process complexity, and trade coordination were considered. This analysis aims to streamline processes and improve efficiency, particularly in fast-tracking project timelines, while also addressing the associated risks.

Overview of 4D BIM Process The 4D BIM process integrates 3D modeling with time-based scheduling to simulate construction sequences, identify potential issues, and enhance project delivery.

First Schedule: Standard Construction Timeline- no major time constraints Second Schedule: Fast-Track Construction Timeline- overlapping tasks and optimizing resource allocation

Schedule Development -Assumption, Justification and Process Task Setup: Autoscheduled tasks; project name entered in task column.

Two-story Commercial Building Start Date: Set project start date and calendar, noting holidays.

WBS Basis: Summary tasks follow initial Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).

Table 2- Cast-in-place Concrete WBS Section

A Level-04 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was created using cost estimates, including specific interior finishes (C20). Resource assumptions like 1 CRAP and SSWK were based on limited data.

The WBS has six categories organized by project lifecycle and RS-means Master Format, incorporating tasks from construction drawings and 3D models.

Task durations were calculated with RS-means data but adjusted for practicality, such as extending cast-in-place concrete (CIPC) from 0.83 days to 2 days.

Floor & Roof Construction: Activities linked for simultaneous execution, reducing significant days for foundations.

Exterior Enclosures: Insulation and metal studs overlapped, speeding up envelope work.

Windows Installation: Frames installed concurrently, reducing installation time from 33 days to 24 days.

Two-story Commercial Building

The above images depict the differences in work progress due to change in sequencing from normal schedule to fast-track. It is evident in week 23 that, in normal track only sub-structure work is completed. However, in fast-track, super-structure (decking slabs, columns and beams) is nearly completed.

Normal Project (without constraints) Once, all activities are added with durations. Then predecessors and successors were added as per field construction sequence. For normal paced project, most of the activities are linked as Finish to Start (FS), with no parallel activities. After defining the total duration and task relations the critical path of the project can be indicated. It can be shown in the Gantt chart by using the format and choosing Critical tasks .

Two-story Commercial Building Normal Track Schedule

Normal Track Schedule

Fast Track Schedule In this fast-tracked construction project, key modifications were made to sequencing and task relationships to accelerate the timeline without compromising engineering principles

Foundation Sequencing: Reinforcement and layout tasks performed concurrently, reducing the timeline from 33 days to 24 days.

Two-story Commercial Building Subgrade Walls: Formwork and reinforcement done in parallel using SS relations, reducing days.

Superstructure: Column erection done simultaneously with slab curing, reducing timeline from 21 days to 16 days.

Fast Track Schedule

conclusion

Duration Comparison - WBS elements(Level 2)

4D simulation is a powerful tool for managing projects during both the design and construction phases. By providing valuable insights into the coordination of construction activities, it helps teams understand the potential impact of delays or changes on the overall project timeline. The simulation’s timebased visualization allows project managers to see how construction evolves over time, offering a clearer picture of how tasks should be sequenced. The two schedules in this project highlight the benefits of logical sequencing, where using leads and lags can significantly reduce overall project duration, as shown in the reduced timeline for WBS Level 02 elements in Table 4.

The pictorial representation of the project timeline in the results section offers a comprehensive visual overview, helping to improve decision-making and schedule updates. This platform also provides a unique opportunity to plan for temporary structures and equipment maneuvering, resolving many constructability issues. The ability to visualize the construction process at any given time is invaluable for stakeholders, aiding in more informed decisions. While 4D simulation is increasingly adopted, there are still gaps in its full implementation across a project's lifecycle that need to be addressed to realize its full potential.

3 Navisworks Federated Model

In this project, Autodesk Navisworks Manage was utilized to detect clashes between electrical, HVAC, and piping systems using a federated model. The model was exported as IFC files into Navisworks Manage, allowing for the differentiation Two-story Commercial Building and segregation of systems, enhancing effective clash detection.

Clashes were classified into True Positives (approved) and False Positives (reviewed), streamlining the resolution process. A detailed analysis of clash trends by floor, location, and material informed the conclusions drawn for effective design coordination.

Manual identification of clashes was conducted using Navisworks Manage's Hard clash type with zero clearance. This process involved visual analysis across disciplines, including architectural/structural elements, HVAC ducts, gravity lines, fire protection, lighting fixtures, and smalldiameter pipes and valves.

1. Clash Detection Workflow In this project, I developed a comprehensive Clash Detection Workflow diagram, outlining the following key steps:

Step 1: Run clash detection tests between electrical, HVAC, and piping disciplines.

Step 2: Analyze and categorize clashes into True Positives and False Positives.

Step 3: Group clashes strategically for streamlined resolution.

Step 4: Generate detailed reports to support data analysis and improve design coordination.

Image 1 :Clash report table

2. Analysis of the identified TP and FP clashes Clashes were divided into True Positives (TP) and False Positives (FP), followed by a thorough segregation and analysis based on the hierarchy of system elements, ensuring effective conflict resolution and design coordination.

Image 2: Hierarchy of system elements

3. HVAC vs Electrical Two-story Commercial Building

For HVAC vs Electrical, clashes were sorted by floor levels and resolved through hierarchical analysis. Clashes like Clash-18, Clash-19, and Clash-20 were classified as True Positives, as relocating the rectangular duct connected to mechanical equipment and air handling units was deemed impractical

Image 3: HVAC vs Electrical clashes (rectangular duct)

Image 4: HVAC vs Electrical clashes ( air handling units)

Clash Number 26 and 29, involving lighting fixtures and air terminals, increased design effort and overall project cost. These clashes necessitated adjustments to the design layout, leading to additional time spent on coordination. Consequently, the cost of materials and labor rose, impacting the overall project budget.

Two-story Commercial Image 5: HVAC vs Electrical clashes (Building lighting fixtures and air terminals)

Clash Detection Analysis

Floor wise Clash Detection HVAC vs Electrical

Two-story Commercial Building

4. Piping vs HVAC In the Piping vs HVAC clash analysis, Navisworks detected a total of 274 clashes, with 85 classified as True Positives (TP) and 189 as False Positives (FP). Upon examining the hierarchy of disciplines, it became evident that relocating the pipe would resolve all identified clashes. Consequently, Clash66 was categorized as a TP, while the remaining clashes were classified as FP. Total Clashes: 274 Groups: 57 TP: 85 FP: 189

Image 8: Piping vs HVAC clashes

Image 7: Piping vs HVAC clashes ( Round Flex Duct vs Victaulic IPS Pipe)

Clash Number - 134, 138, 189, 198, 213, 228 Round Flex Duct vs Victaulic IPS Pipe TP: 228 FP: 134, 138, 189, 198, 213

Two-story Commercial Building

Image 8: Piping vs HVAC clashes ( Domestic Water Pipe penetrating Rectangular Duct and 2 Round Ducts.)

14 Clashes Domestic Water Pipe penetrating Rectangular Duct and 2 Round Ducts.

2 Groups with 1 TP each

Clash Detection Analysis

Floor wise Clash Detection Piping vs HVAC

Level-2

Two-story Commercial Building

Level-3

Penthouse

5. Piping vs Electrical Total Clashes: 17 False Positives (FP): 9 True Positives (TP): 8 Groups: 4 Each clash was investigated separately to ensure accurate identification of TP clashes.

Image 8: Piping vs Electrical clashes ( Lighting Fixture vs Pipe.)

For instance, Clash-11 and Clash-12 were identical. By removing the pipe, both clashes could be resolved simultaneously. Since lighting takes priority over small diameter pipes, the pipe was relocated, classifying Clash-11 as a TP and Clash-12 as an FP .

Two-story Commercial Building

Clash Number - 7,8,9,10, 13,14

Lighting Fixture vs Pipe

Design Effort Cost of Project

Image 8: Piping vs Electrical clashes ( Lighting Fixture vs Pipe.)

Clash Number - 3,5,15

Cable Tray vs Pipe

Changing the pipe elevation was not possible due to the presence of an overhead duct, which restricted the available space for rerouting. This limitation complicated the design process and made it challenging to resolve the clash without significant modifications to other systems.

Image 9: Piping vs Electrical clashes (Cable Tray vs Pipe)

Two-story Commercial Building

Clash Detection Analysis

Floor wise Clash Detection Piping vs Electrical

Two-story Commercial Building

6. CLASH DETECTIONS WITH ANALYSIS

7. CLASH GROUPING STRATEGIES AND REASONING Clashes were grouped by Composite Object Clash after identifying true positives (TP) and false positives (FP) to minimize clashes and improve resolution efficiency.

Multiple clashes often arose from a single entity, allowing resolution through relocating one element.

Each group contained at least one TP, with others as FP. For example, the Victaulic IPS TAP pipe caused multiple clashes (46, 79, 81, etc.), and relocating it would resolve all.

Clash 46 was marked as TP, while the others were FP, and this strategy was applied to other clashes to enhance coordination.

Two-story Commercial Building Image 8: Pipe (Victaulic IPS TAP) along with its fittings and insulation was penetrating mechanical equipment

Two additional grouping strategies were used: by Clash Locality and Level. Grouping by Level helped prioritize clashes per floor, while Locality unified clashes by grid location for efficient resolution.

Image 9: Clash analysis and resolution

8. Clash Detection Result

9. Proposed Plan for Clash Resolution Mechanical Equ.

By moving Mechanical equipment 56% of TP would be solved in HVAC-Piping.

Pipe

By moving Pipes 52% of TP would be solved in HVAC-Piping.

Cable Tray

By moving Cable trays 38% of TP would be solved in Elec-Piping.

Pipe

By moving Pipes 75% of TP would be solved in Elec-Piping.

Lighting Fixture Air Terminals

By moving Lighting fixtures 73% of TP would be solved in Elec-HVAC .

Two-story Commercial Building

By moving Air terminals 42% of TP would be solved in Elec-HVAC .

10. Advantages Constructability analysis improves project feasibility and safety, enhances cost and time control, reduces change orders, boosts productivity, and decreases coordination errors, resulting in smoother construction processes and better overall outcomes.

11. Limitations

Challenges include accuracy issues with 3D models, high false positives in clash detection, restricted scope of analysis, limited interoperability among software, manual and time-consuming processes, and a steep learning curve for new users.

conclusion

In this project, it was found that Autodesk's Navisworks is a crucial tool for construction professionals, enabling the identification and resolution of potential conflicts before the construction phase begins. The software effectively integrates design and construction data, enhancing coordination and collaboration among multiple disciplines. Analysis revealed that in the ELEC-HVAC clashes, 90% were classified as True Positives (TP), demonstrating high accuracy in detecting conflicts that need resolution. In contrast, only 47% of clashes in ELEC-Piping and 31% in HVAC-Piping were TP, highlighting the varying effectiveness across different systems.

However, it is important to recognize that while Navisworks is a powerful tool, it should not be relied upon exclusively for clash detection. Engineers must carefully examine the 3D model and apply their expertise to identify real clashes that may go unnoticed by the software.

This combination of technological support and professional insight is vital for reducing the overall number of clashes, ultimately leading to more efficient project execution and improved outcomes in construction management.

4 As-Built Modeling and Documentation

In this project, I worked on a universitywide digital twinning initiative for Concordia University, focusing on modeling the as-built data of the existing sculpture and column structure in the EV building.

We used tools like Matterport and Two-story Commercial Building Autodesk Recap Photo, which employ photogrammetry algorithms to convert 2D images into highly accurate 3D models.

Digital twin technology allows us to simulate and analyze building behavior throughout the design, construction, and operational phases. By creating precise digital models, we can identify critical issues related to the structure, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems before they arise. This proactive approach minimizes the risk of operational problems and enhances overall facility management and efficiency for future university projects.

Image 1: As-design model of Concordia university logo

Dimension analysis of the sculpture with qualitative and quantitative results.

The table presents a quantitative analysis of the “C” sculpture outside the EV building. Using Autodesk ReCap Photo, the final model was created from 135 images captured at various distances, heights, and angles.

Initially, four models were generated with 35-40 images each.

Image 2. As-built model of Concordia university logo

Two-story Commercial Building

Image 3.. Comparative Analysis

Recommendations for Precision To improve the development of as-built models using photogrammetry, it's essential to capture images from diverse angles, ensure accurate alignment between as-built and baseline models, and make precise scaling selections.

Limitations of Autodesk Recap The process can be lengthy and time-consuming, especially for large datasets, as ReCap Photo is mainly designed for smaller projects. Additionally, environmental factors such as lighting, weather conditions, and moving objects can negatively impact the quality and accuracy of the final digital model.

Analysis of four columns with qualitative and quantitative results.

The table uses data from the Matterport scanner. The team captured images as per the app instructions, creating a 360degree model. After uploading to the Two-story Commercial Building Matterport cloud, a 3D model was processed, and distances between columns were measured for accuracy.

The model was then edited with annotations and labels for clarity.

Findings of Matterport Scanning and processing can take hours or days based on space size.

Limited range makes it unsuitable for large outdoor areas or multi-story buildings.

Accuracy is affected by lighting, scanner quality, and measurement discrepancies.

Image 4.. Horizontal distance between two columns

Image 5.. Vertical distance of columns

Limitations of Matterport

Limited customization and interactivity within the software.

Not ideal for large-scale projects like factories.

Compatibility issues restrict flexibility.

User experience is controlled by the platform, limiting customization.

For instance, in below image two different dimensions are shown by the software, even though it was measured from the same point as the software was taking object snaps.

Two-story Commercial Building

Image 6. Two different dimensions between two columns

Thank You