DDC 1 Angela Guo ModelCoordinationReport

MODEL BASED COORDINATION OF UTS CENTRAL BUILDING 2 

16212 Digital Design and Construction 1 Angela Guo 12552459 Assessment Task 2 Autumn 2017

16212 DIGITAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 1 MODEL COORDINATION 

Table of Contents 

Model Federated Outcome ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 

Model Overview ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

Visualisation of Models ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 

Visual Hotspot Checks ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 

Level 08 Hotpots ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 14 

Roof Level Hotspots ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 

Level 08 Interferences Check ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 18 

Automated Critical Elements Check ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 19 

Automated Services Check .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 31 

Significant Clash ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 

Roof Level Interference Check ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 

Automated Critical Elements Check ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 37 

Automated Services Check .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40 

Significant Clash ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 41 

Key Findings and Recommendation ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 42 

Key Findings ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43 

Recommendations/Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 44 

Appendices .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45 

Page | 1


Executive Summary 

Background 

This report is a Model Based Coordination on University of Technology, Sydney Building 2. A federated BIM model is used to analyse the detailed 

design, building dimensions and conflicts between disciplines. An innovative tool that will be used for clash detection and resolution is 

Navisworks. Navisworks allows the project to be designed and controlled with advance coordination and 5D examination for it to be delivered 

flawlessly. The efficient clash detection on Navisworks allows design collisions and error to be identified early before drawings are completed. 

This reduces the risk of delay and additional cost to fix the error during construction. Hence, this model based coordination will be done on 

Navisworks for maximum quality of design. 

Purpose 

The purpose of this report is to document the following: 

1. Top 3 hot spot issues in Level 8 and Roof Level with suggested actions, disciplines involved, level of severity, and description of hot spots. 

2. Top 2 interference check per discipline of Structure against all five services discipline in Level 08 and Roof level with identification of 

severity, recommendation in resolving the issue, and identification of affected disciplines involved in the clash. 

3. Top 2 interference check per discipline of Architecture against all five services discipline in Level 08 and Roof level with identification of 

severity, recommendation in resolving the issue, and identification of affected disciplines involved in the clash. 

4. Top 2 clashes per service discipline in Level 08 and Roof Level with identification and analysis of root cause. 

5. Identification of one significant clash that cannot be grouped in both Level 08 and Roof Level, and recommendations in resolving the 

clash issues. 

6. Key findings in the model coordination. 

7. Overall recommendation to improve the quality and efficiency of the model. 

Methodology 

The tool that will be used to identify issues and resolution is through Navisworks which enables the eight discipline models to be imported into 

a single platform to analyse the model, conduct clash detection, and identify hot spots. 

Page | 2


PART I: FEDERATED MODEL OUTCOME 

Project Overview 

Visualisation of Federated Model, Discipline Model, and Allocated Level 

Page | 3


Project Overview 

Project Name: Building 2 – UTS Central Project 

Project Address: 15 Broadway Street Ultimo NSW 2007 

Client Name: University of Technology Sydney 

Date of Audit: 07 April 2017 

Model Summary 

UTS BIM Model and Co-ordination 

Federated Model File Name Size Revision Download Date 

Co-ordination Model GUO_BUILDING3.0 747 KB Revision 55 07/04/2017 

Discipline Models File Name Size Revision Date Modified 

Architectural 

CB02__A-FJMT-Architecture- 7.49 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Facade CB02__A-FJMT-Facade-IFC[AE] 10.9 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Structure CB02 Structure IFC2x3 2.13 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Mechanical 

CB02_M-SVA-Mechanical- 9.84 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Hydraulic Pressure RVT[AA] CB02__H-ERB-Pressure- 4.89 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Hydraulic Drainage NWC[O] CB02__H-ERB-Drainage- 4.30 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Electrical 

CB02_E-JHA-Electrical-NWC 1.25 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Fire [AC] CB02__R-ERB-Fire-NWC[O] 15.3 MB Revision 1 07/04/2017 

Page | 4


Visualizations of overall federated model, discipline models, and Level 08 

Page | 5


Structural Federated Model – NORTH WEST PERSPECTIVE 

Page | 6


Architectural Federated Model – SOUTH EAST PERSPECTIVE 

Page | 7


Hydraulic Drainage and Pressure Federated Model – SOUTH WEST PERSPECTIVE 

Page | 8


Fire System Federated Model – NORTH EAST PERSPECTIVE 

Page | 9


Electrical Federated Model – North East Perspective 

Page | 10


Mechanical Federated Model – North East Perspective 

Page | 11


Allocated Level 08 – North East Perspective 

Page | 12


PART II: VISUAL HOTSPOT CHECKS ON LEVEL 08 AND ROOF LEVEL 

A visual hotspot check is a fundamental skill in identifying quality issues of design and construction that cannot be detected using 

Autodesk software such as Naviswork Manage and Revit. It is essential in inspecting the project disciplines to ensure they comply 

with the Building Codes of Australia as BIM software cannot detect designs that have breached the codes. Although, manual hotspot 

checks limited from the capability of detecting if one building service had the same quality issue or not. This resulted to additional 

time used to check every service before moving onto the next discipline. 

Page | 13


VISUAL HOTSPOT CHECKS 

Item 

No 

Location Model Image Clash 

Type 

1.0 Level 08 

Hard 

LEVEL 08 

Description/Root 

Cause 

The fire steel pipe 

is protruding 

from the 

suspended 

plasterboard 

ceiling. The fire 

pipe shows no 

connection to any 

other services 

and it has no 

covering which 

makes it a hazard. 

Suggested Action 

This hotspot is not 

only an interference 

issue but also a 

quality risk. As the 

pipes come so low 

down from the 

ceiling and it is not 

concealed, this is a 

safety hazard for the 

people within the 

building. It is 

therefore suggested 

for the fire pipe to 

be eliminated since 

it has no connection 

to other services. 

Assigned 

To 

Assigned 

to 

hydraulic 

engineer 

while also 

notifying 

the 

changes to 

fire 

technician. 

Severity of 

Clash 

Severity is low 

due to the 

pipes showing 

no connection 

to other 

building 

services, 

which makes 

it easily 

rectified by 

simply 

removing the 

pipe. 

A 

Structural 

building 

element 

B 

Hydraulic 

pressure 

building 

element 

Page | 14


1.2 Level 08 

Hard 

Structural 

concrete beam 

intersecting with 

the Mechanical 

BMA rectangular 

duct. 

By lifting the 

concrete slab above 

the concrete beam 

0.200m higher, it 

can allow clearance 

for the beam to be 

lifted as well. This 

will avoid the 

interference of the 

mechanical duct and 

the concrete beam. 

Structural 

Engineer 

and 

Mechanical 

Engineer. 

Severity is 

medium as 

the solution 

of the clash 

has resulted 

to the 

adjustment to 

other 

structural 

elements in 

the 

upper/lower 

level of the 

building. 

Structural 

building 

element 

Mechanical 

building 

element 

1.3 

Level 08 

Hard 

Fire steel pipes 

extruding from 

the Mechanical 

duct fittings. 

To solve this issue, 

fire pipes must be 

lifted upwards to 

avoid interference 

with the mechanical 

duct. This is a severe 

hazard and needs to 

be resolved quickly. 

Fire 

technician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

Mechanica 

l Engineer. 

Severity is 

high 

because if it 

is not fixed 

as soon as 

possible, it 

would 

become a 

hazard and 

the 

mechanical 

system may 

not function 

correctly. 

Fire Steel 

Pipe 

Mechanical 

Rectangular 

Duct 

Fittings 

Page | 15


ROOF LEVEL 

1.4 Level 08 

Library 

1.5 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Exterior 

mechanical ducts 

and pipes does 

not seem to be 

weatherproofed. 

This can cause 

erosion and 

impact the 

performance of 

other services. 

For instance, A/C 

units could be 

over heated from 

the radiant sun 

resulting to 

additional repairs 

to be made. 

Absence of 

concrete slab 

covering the gaps 

of the building. 

This results to 

moisture damage 

to other services 

to the building. 

For the electrical 

services, it can 

create a fire 

hazard. 

For exterior ducts 

and pipes, it is 

suggested to 

weatherproof it by 

placing an insulation 

board and applying a 

self-adhesive 

membrane. It works 

by simply peeling 

and sticking which is 

cost effective and 

stops corrosion 

under the insulation 

membrane. 

Coverings such as 

concrete slab are 

required to cover 

the empty spacing 

on the roof to avoid 

damages on 

services. 

Mechanica 

l engineer 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

structural 

engineer. 

Mechanica 

l engineer 

in 

coordinati 

on on with 

structural 

engineer. 

Severity is 

high 

because 

nonweatherpro 

ofed 

exterior 

mechanical 

duct and 

pipe can 

affect the 

quality of 

the services. 

Erosion 

underneath 

the 

insulation 

can also 

occur. 

Severity is 

high 

because if it 

is not 

addressed, 

this can 

cause 

internal 

damage of 

the building 

services and 

structure. 

Mechanica 

l building 

element 

Structural 

building 

system 

Mechanica 

l building 

element 

All services 

Page | 16


1.6 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

HVAC system 

intersecting 

through the 

architectural 

walls resulting to 

a clash with the 

electrical cable 

tray and fire 

pipes. 

It is suggested to remap 

the mechanical 

pipes to another 

appropriate location 

ensuring it does not 

interfere with other 

building services. 

Mechani 

cal 

engineer. 

All other 

discipline 

must 

also be 

involved 

in the 

remappi 

ng 

process 

to ensure 

it is 

adequate 

ly placed. 

Severity is 

high 

because if 

the clash is 

not 

addressed, it 

can interfere 

with the 

function of 

the services. 

Extra time 

and workers 

are used on 

re-locating 

the 

mechanical 

ducts which 

could 

possibly 

result to 

project 

delay. 

Mechanica 

l building 

element 

Fire and 

Electrical 

services 

Page | 17


PART III: LEVEL 08 INTERFERENCE CHECK OUTCOMES 

Level 08 Automated Critical Elements Check and Reporting 

Level 08 Automated Services Check and Reporting 

Page | 18


AUTOMATED CRITICAL ELEMENTS CHECK – LEVEL 08 

Item 

No 

Location Model Image 

Structure vs Mechanical 

STRUCTURE AGAINST ALL SERVICES 

Clash Description Suggested Action 

Type /Root Cause 

Assigned 

To 

Severity 

of Clash 

A B Count 

2.0 

Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Mechanical 

rectangular 

ducts 

clashing 

with 

structural 

concrete 

column. 

After assessing that the 

concrete column cannot be 

shifted due to the 

connection of the structural 

column in level 9, it is 

recommended that the 

rectangular duct to be 

shifted 0.153m to the right 

to avoid intersection with 

the column. 

Mechanica 

l engineer 

Clash 

severity is 

high. This 

is because 

the 

interferenc 

e with the 

structural 

column 

can impact 

the 

supporting 

unit in the 

upper 

levels. 

Structura 

l building 

system 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

system 

3 

Page | 19


2.1 Level 08 

Library 

Soft 

Mechanical 

Duct placed 

too further 

in, creating 

a clash with 

the 

Structural 

concrete 

beam 

2600mm. 

The concrete beam cannot 

be shifted as it is connected 

to other services. To avoid 

the rectangular duct from 

clashing with the concrete 

beam, it is suggested that 

the duct moves slightly 

0.091m out of the structural 

element to provide a 

clearway between the 

structural element and the 

mechanical system. 

Mechanica 

l Engineer 

Severity is 

low as it 

has only 

occurred 

once and 

can be 

easily fixed 

by shifting 

the duct 

out. This 

clash does 

not impact 

other 

discipline. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

1 

Page | 20


Structure vs Electrical 

2.2 Level 08 

Library 

2.3 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hard 

Electrical 

cable tray 

with fittings 

cutting 

through 

Structural 

concrete 

C300 

Electrical 

cable tray 

running 

inside the 

Structural 

concrete 

C300 

After thorough analysing of 

the surrounding area, it is 

suggested to enlarge the 

gap to fit the cable tray 

prevent disruption of the 

structural element. 

Re-locate the cable tray so 

it can safely support 

electrical cable loads while 

removing any structural 

interferences. 

Electrician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

structural 

engineer. 

Electrician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

other 

discipline 

services 

Severity is 

medium as 

the 

structural 

discipline 

is involved 

to enlarge 

the gap to 

fit the 

cable tray. 

This results 

to 

additional 

cost to 

modify the 

structure. 

Severity is 

low as it 

can be 

easily 

rectified 

by relocation 

and does 

not impact 

other 

discipline. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Electrical 

building 

element 

Electrical 

building 

element 

1 

1 

Page | 21


Structural vs Fire 

2.4 Level 08 

Library 

2.5 Level 08 

Library 

Fire steel 

pipes 

clashing with 

Structural 

C300 wall 

Cable tray 

with fittings 

clashing 

with 

Structural 

C300 wall 

The direction of the pipe 

must be altered to avoid 

intersection of the 

structural wall. The 

modification of this root 

cause can solve all 9 

clashes. 

Cable tray is suggested to 

be moved 0.597 to the left 

through the hole in the 

structural wall, shown 

below. 

That way, cable tray can run 

without disruption. 

Fire 

system 

technician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

other MEP 

engineers 

to assist in 

remapping 

of the fire 

steel pipe 

to ensure 

it does not 

clash with 

other 

discipline. 

Fire 

system 

technician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

Electrician. 

Severity is 

high as 

extra time 

is used on 

remapping 

the fire 

pipes to 

ensure it 

does not 

impact 

other 

disciplines. 

This could 

solution 

may cause 

movement 

with other 

disciplines. 

Severity is 

high 

because 

moving the 

cable tray 

to the left 

will cause 

other 

connected 

cable tray 

to be 

shifted as 

well. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

9 

3 

Page | 22


Structure vs Hydraulic Drainage 

2.6 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

drainage 

uPVC pipes 

conflicting 

with 

Structural 

concrete 

slab 300mm 

Due to the lack of adequate 

hydraulic drainage system 

set up in the concrete slab 

to allow for the pipes to 

penetrate, it is 

recommended to create 

one. Another option is to 

shift the drainage pipes into 

the free openings. 

However, this would impact 

the drainage pipes in other 

levels. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with 

Plumbers 

and 

Architects 

to assist in 

relocation. 

Severity is 

high as it 

has 

occurred 

multiple 

times. 

Solution 

would 

either 

incur 

additional 

cost and 

time or 

impact 

other 

levels as 

the shift of 

pipes may 

clash with 

disciplines 

from other 

levels. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Hydraulic 

Drainage 

building 

element 

22 

2.7 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

drainage 

uPVC pipes 

conflicting 

with 

Structural 

concrete 

beam PT 

750mm. 

Clash is like above, 

therefore the suggested 

action is to re-route the 

drainage pipes so the pipes 

are separated from the 

concrete beam. Another 

option is to create 

penetration for the pipes 

from the concrete beam. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer 

Severity is 

low as this 

clash only 

occurred 

once and 

can be 

solved by 

rerouting. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Hydraulic 

Drainage 

building 

element 

1 

Page | 23


Structure and Hydraulic Pressure (water & gas) 

2.8 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

pressure 

fire steel 

pipes 

protruding 

from the 

Structural 

concrete 

slab 

160mm, 

showing no 

connection 

to services. 

This hydraulic pressure pipe 

must be removed as no 

other plumbing system is 

attached to it. This is evident 

in the photo below, where 

all disciplines are added 

onto level 08 but shows no 

connection to MEP services. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer 

whilst 

advising 

the 

plumber, 

fire 

technician 

and 

architect 

of the 

removal of 

pipes. 

Severity is 

medium as 

it impacts 

the level 

below 

clashing 

with level 

7 services. 

Although, 

this issue 

can be 

fixed by 

simply 

removing 

the pipes. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Hydraulic 

Pressure 

building 

element 

1 

2.9 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Structural 

C300 beam 

cu 

Hydraulic 

pressure 

fire steel 

pipes. 

After analysing the 

penetration of the pressure 

pipe, it is suggested to 

expand the pipe hole for 

the pressure pipe to 

penetrate without 

interfering with the 

structure. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with 

Structural 

Engineer 

and 

structural 

alterations 

needs to 

be made. 

Severity is 

low as it 

has only 

occurred 

once and 

can be 

easily fixed 

by 

expanding 

the hole. 

Structura 

l building 

element 

Hydraulic 

Pressure 

building 

element 

13 

Page | 24


ARCHITECTURE – CEILING AGAINST ALL SERVICES 

Architecture vs Mechanical 

3.0 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Architectur 

al Ceiling 

Suspended 

Plasterboar 

d conflicting 

with 

Mechanical 

Rectangular 

Pipes 

With close evaluation of the 

level below, the height of 

the ceiling from the floor is 

2.690m. The Australian 

legal ceiling height from the 

floor in a habitable room is 

minimum 2.400m. In this 

situation, this allows the 

ceiling to be dropped 

150mm down to resolve all 

the clashes of the 

rectangular duct and 

suspended plasterboard. 

Architect 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

mechanica 

l engineer 

and 

structural 

engineer. 

Structural 

engineer 

and 

architect 

needs to 

adjust wall 

and door 

height and 

structural 

columns to 

accommod 

ate the 

lowered 

ceiling. 

Severity is 

high as the 

solution 

for the 

clashes will 

impact 

other 

disciplines 

in other 

levels. For 

instance, 

in the fire 

and 

electrical 

discipline, 

the 

lowered 

ceiling may 

clash with 

fire 

sprinklers 

and 

detectors. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

130 

based 

on total 

automa 

tic 

clash 

Page | 25


3.1 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Architectur 

al Basic 

Wall in 

contact 

with the 

Mechanical 

Rectangular 

Pipes 

It is suggested to shift the 

mechanical pipes to the 

right by 0.060 and lift all the 

pipes 0.550m up to avoid 

contact with the basic wall. 

Similar to the solution 

above, this can resolve all 

mechanical clashes with the 

architectural wall. 

Mechanica 

l engineer 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

Architect 

Severity is 

high 

because 

the shift of 

the ducts 

results to 

major 

alteration 

of the 

structure. 

Connectin 

g ducts 

may be 

impacted. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element. 

130 

based 

on total 

automa 

ted 

clash 

Architecture vs Electrical 

3.2 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Electrical 

Cable Tray 

clashing 

with 

Architectur 

al Basic 

Wall 

A solution to solve all 24 

cable tray clashes with the 

wall is to end the cable tray 

lining when it lands on a 

wall, leaving a small 

clearance space between 

the cable tray and the wall, 

as noted below. 

Electrician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

Architect 

Severity is 

high as 

due to the 

multiple 

occurrence 

and redesigning 

of the 

length of 

the cable 

tray can 

take up 

time. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Electrical 

building 

element 

24 

Page | 26


Architecture vs Fire 

3.3 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Fire Semi 

Recessed 

Sprinkler 

lifted too 

high up into 

Suspended 

Plasterboar 

d Ceiling. 

It is determined that all the 

fire sprinkler clashes can be 

resolved by adjusting the 

placement of the sprinkler. 

It is advised that the 

sprinkler to be brought 

down by 0.030 for it to sit 

flush with the suspended 

ceiling. 

Fire 

technician 

Severity is 

high as it 

has 

occurred 

in multiple 

instances 

and 

interferenc 

e with the 

ceiling can 

is a hazard 

of 

disrupting 

the fire 

systems. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

234 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

3.4 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Fire steel 

pipe 

clashing 

with Ceiling 

feature 

100mm 

The fire steel pipe has no 

connection to any fire 

sprinklers or other systems. 

To avoid the clash, it is 

suggested to eliminate the 

pipe. 

Fire 

technician 

Severity is 

low due to 

the simple 

eliminatio 

n of the 

one pipe. 

Architect 

ural 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

234 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

Page | 27


Architecture vs Hydraulic Drainage 

3.5 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

Drainage 

Pipes 

protruding 

from the 

Architectur 

al Floors. 

Based on the observation 

from under the floor, to 

avoid the protrusion of the 

pipes it is suggested to 

lower the drainage pipes for 

it to sit flat beneath the 

floor. This solution can fix 

all the interference with the 

drainage pipes and the 

floors. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer 

Severity is 

high due 

to the high 

number of 

the same 

clash issue 

that needs 

to be 

resolved. 

As the 

levels are 

usually 

built 

identically 

in terms of 

building 

services, 

this issue 

may also 

be fixed in 

other 

levels. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

Building 

element 

84 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

Page | 28


3.6 Level 08 

Library 

Architectural vs Hydraulic Pressure (water & gas) 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

drainage 

pipe 

intersecting 

with 

suspended 

ceiling 

above and 

the floor 

below. 

To prevent the 

all hydraulic 

drainage pipes 

from clashing 

with the 

ceiling and 

floor, it is 

suggested to 

move it inside 

the empty wall cavity 

displayed in the photo. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with 

Structural 

Engineer 

to ensure 

the 

hydraulic 

system sits 

flush. 

Severity is 

low as the 

hydraulic 

pipes can 

be easily 

moved 

inside the 

wall cavity. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

building 

element. 

84 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

3.7 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

water and 

gas pipe 

colliding 

into the 

basic walls. 

After assessing other similar 

clashes to avoid the clashes 

with the pipes and the wall, 

it is suggested to lower the 

height of the basic wall 

giving clearance for the 

pipes. It is estimated that 

dropping the height of the 

wall by 0.500m can allow 

for pipe to run smoothly. 

By using this solution, it can 

solve other similar clashes. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with 

Architect 

Severity is 

high as 

adjusting 

the height 

of one 

basic wall 

will 

require the 

height of 

the other 

walls to be 

changed as 

well. This 

knock-on 

effect of 

the walls 

will be 

costly. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

building 

element 

25 

Page | 29


3.8 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Hydraulic 

fire steel 

pipe 

clashing 

with the 

suspended 

ceiling 

bulkhead 

Allow penetration through 

ceiling cladding giving 

50mm clearance above and 

below the pipe by installing 

wall penetration seals. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with 

Architect 

Severity is 

low as it 

can be 

easily 

rectified 

by creating 

wall 

penetratio 

n seals. 

Architect 

ural 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

building 

element 

6 

Page | 30


AUTOMATED SERVICES CHECK – LEVEL 08 

SERVICES AGAINST SERVICES 

Mechanical vs Hydraulic Pressure 

4.0 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Fire steel 

pipe 

conflicting 

with several 

rectangular 

ducts 

The root cause for 

mechanical and hydraulic 

pressure clashes are found. 

It is evaluated that by lifting 

the drainage pipes up by 

0.150m, it can solve all 50 

the clashes. In doing this, 

pressure pipes are 

prevented from interfering 

with other services. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer in 

coordinati 

on with all 

other 

discipline 

specialist. 

Severity is 

high due 

to the 

additional 

cost and 

time to 

hire a 

specialist 

to move 

50 pipes 

higher. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

building 

element 

50 

Mechanical vs Hydraulic Drainage 

4.1 Level 08 

Library 

Soft 

Plumbing 

fixture and 

drainage 

pipe in 

contact 

with 

Mechanical 

duct 

This clash can 

be simply 

solved by 

moving the 

plumbing 

fixture and 

drainage pipe 

out of the mechanical duct 

Plumber in 

coordinati 

on with 

Hydraulic 

Engineer 

Severity is 

low as it 

occurred 

once and is 

easily 

fixable. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Hydraulic 

building 

element 

2 

Page | 31


Mechanical vs Electrical 

into the empty wall cavity – 

leaving a gap between the 

two elements. 

4.2 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Mechanical 

standard 

BMA duct 

interfering 

with 

Electrical 

horizontal 

cable trays. 

All standard BMA duct and 

horizontal cable tray related 

clash can be resolved by 

simply altering the cable 

tray down providing 

clearway between the cable 

tray and BMA duct. 

Electrician 

in 

coordinati 

on with all 

discipline 

to ensure 

by moving 

the cable 

tray down, 

it would 

not clash 

with other 

elements. 

Assessed 

as medium 

risk as it 

results to 

many 

expert 

involved to 

determine 

how far 

the cable 

tray can be 

moved. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Electrical 

building 

element 

16 

4.3 Level 08 

Library 

Soft 

Mechanical 

rectangular 

duct 

clashing 

with the 

vertically 

running 

cable trays. 

Simple rectification of this 

clash can be done, where 

the rectangular duct moves 

slightly to the right so the 

two different elements are 

separated and not 

disrupted. 

Mechanica 

l engineer 

Severity is 

low due to 

the one 

occurrence 

and the 

simple 

method of 

resolving 

the clash. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Electrical 

building 

element 

1 

Page | 32


Mechanical vs Fire 

4.4 Level 08 

Library 

Bottom view of clash 

Hard 

Fire pipes 

running 

through 

mechanical 

rectangular 

duct. This is 

the root 

cause to all 

the pipe 

and duct 

clashes. 

If lowering the fire pipes 

does not impact other 

service disciplines, then 

dropping the fire pipes 

down to avoid contact with 

the all ducts, can solve all 

clashes with the fire pipes 

and mechanical duct. 

Fire 

technician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

mechanica 

l engineer. 

Severity is 

high due 

to multiple 

occurrence 

and 

additional 

time 

needed to 

alter this 

clash. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

75 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

4.5 Level 08 

Library 

Top view of clash 

Hard 

Fire 

sprinkler 

intersecting 

through the 

rectangular 

duct. 

Rerouting an appropriate 

location for the fire 

sprinklers to ensure it does 

not only disrupt with the 

mechanical services but 

also other plumbing and 

electrical services. 

Fire 

technician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

the 

mechanica 

l engineer 

and 

structural 

engineer. 

Severity is 

high as 

several fire 

sprinklers 

are located 

inside 

mechanica 

l ducts. 

This is a 

hazard. 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

75 

based 

on 

total 

autom 

ated 

clashe 

s 

Close up view of clash 

Page | 33


Hydraulic Drainage vs Electrical 

Hydraulic Drainage vs Fire 

Hydraulic Pressure vs Electrical 

Hydraulic Pressure vs Fire 

Electrical vs Fire 

4.6 Level 08 

Library 

Hard 

Fire 

sprinkler 

cutting 

through the 

electrical 

cable tray 

with fittings 

resulting to 

a fire 

hazard. 

To solve all two electrical 

and fire clashes, it is 

suggested to shift the fire 

piping 0.070m to the left to 

provide a clear gap 

between the two elements. 

Electrician 

in 

coordinati 

on with 

Fire 

technician. 

Severity is 

low as fire 

sprinkler 

can be 

easily 

shifted. 

Electrical 

building 

element 

Fire 

building 

element 

2 

Page | 34


LEVEL 08 – SIGNIFICANT CLASH ISSUE (CANNOT BE GROUPED) 

Description: This significant clash shows a hydraulic pressure fire steel pipe intersecting through 9 building elements and 3 disciplines. 

Severity: This clash severity is high due to the knock-on effect the fire steel pipe has caused. The pipes have intersected with the architectural 

walls, structural walls, and the mechanical ducts, and has incurred additional time spent on redesigning the hydraulic system to avoid the 

interconnection with other disciplines. Additional cost has also incurred for the adjustments of the hydraulic systems. Hence, severity of this 

clash is high. 

Recommendation of resolution: After analysing the building services, architectural walls, and structural systems, it is suggested that the 

hydraulic fire steel pipes to be re-mapped to a suitable route that would avoid clashes with architectural and structural walls. Pipes is suggested 

to go beneath the HVAC system. 

Discipline involved: Hydraulic Engineer along with Fire technician to adjust the location of the pipes. Architects, Structural Engineers, and other 

service discipline must be notified of the changes to ensure where the pipes have located to and their plans/drawings to be updated. 

Page | 35


PART IV: ROOF LEVEL INTERFERENCE CHECK OUTCOMES 

Roof Level Automated Critical Elements Check and Reporting 

Roof Level Automated Services Check and Reporting 

Page | 36


CRITICAL ELEMENTS CHECK – ROOF LEVEL, 18 LMR & LEVEL 17 HYDRAULICS (ONLY) 

STRUCTURE AGAINST ALL SERVICES 

Item 

No 

Location Model Image Clash 

Type 

Structure vs Mechanical 

Description/ 

Root cause 

Suggested Action 

Assigned 

To 

Severity 

of Clash 

A B Count 

5.0 Roof 

level and 

18 LMR 

Hard 

Structural 

steel is 

clashing 

with the 

Mechanical 

duct 

To solve all 12 

clashes, it is 

suggested to 

ensure all 

structural 

elements sit 

flush above or 

next to the 

mechanical duct 

to avoid contact 

with each other. 

Structural 

engineer in 

coordination 

with 

Mechanical 

engineer. 

Severity is 

high 

because 

the 

structural 

element 

would be 

modified to 

suit the 

mapping of 

the 

mechanical 

ducts. This 

resolution 

will impact 

other levels 

of the 

building as 

it may 

weaken the 

structural 

system. 

Structural 

building 

element 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

37 

Page | 37


5.1 Roof 

level and 

18 LMR 

Soft 

BMA 

rectangular 

duct 

clashing 

with 

structural 

C250 wall. 

It is 

recommended 

that the BMA 

duct to be 

shifted out to the 

left leaving a 

small clearance 

gap to prevent 

disruption to the 

structural wall. 

Mechanical 

engineer 

Severity is 

low due to 

easy 

rectification 

of shifting 

the HVAC 

building 

element 

out. Other 

disciplines 

would not 

be affected. 

Structural 

building 

element 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

element 

37 

Structure vs Electrical 

Structure vs Fire 

Structure vs Hydraulic Pressure (water & gas) 

Structure vs Hydraulic Drainage 

5.2 Roof 

level, 

level 18 

LMR, 

and level 

17 

hydraulic 

Hard 

Six hydraulic 

pipes 

intersecting 

through the 

concrete 

slab 300mm. 

Allow 

penetration of 

the concrete slab 

to enable the 

hydraulic 

drainage pipes to 

penetrate 

without 

impacting the 

performance of 

both discipline. 

Hydraulic 

Engineer 

Severity is 

low as 

penetration 

seals can 

be simply 

installed to 

avoid the 

clash. 

Structural 

building 

system 

Hydraulic 

Drainage 

building 

service 

6 

Page | 38


ARCHITECTURE AGAINST ALL SERVICES 

Architecture vs Mechanical 

5.3 Roof 

Level 

and 

Level 18 

LMR 

Soft 

Architectural 

basic wall 

extended 

too far out 

causing a 

clash with 

the 

BMA square 

elbow 

mechanical 

duct and 

BMA 

standard 

rectangular 

To solve all 4 

clashes, shorten 

the length of the 

basic wall by 

0.140m to allow 

the wall to stand 

flush against the 

mechanical 

ducts. 

Architect 

and advising 

structural 

engineer of 

the changes 

of the wall. 

Severity is 

low 

because 

simple 

alteration 

of the basic 

wall can fix 

all 4 

clashes. 

Architectur 

al building 

system 

Mechani 

cal 

building 

services 

4 

Architectural vs Electrical 

Architectural vs Fire 

Architectural vs Hydraulic Drainage 

Architectural vs Hydraulic Pressure (water & gas) 

Page | 39


Mechanical vs Hydraulic Drainage 

Mechanical vs Hydraulic Pressure 

Mechanical vs Electrical 

Mechanical vs Fire 

Hydraulic Drainage vs Electrical 

Hydraulic Drainage vs Fire 

Hydraulic Pressure vs Electrical 

Electrical vs Fire 

Hydraulic Pressure vs Fire 

AUTOMATED SERVICES CHECK – ROOF LEVEL, LEVEL 18 LMR & LEVEL 17 HYDRAULICS (ONLY) 

SERVICES AGAINST ALL SERVICES* 

*Services clash are conducted in Roof Level and Level 18 LMR only. Level 17 is only used for Hydraulic Systems where there is no Roof Level and Level 18 LMR. Confirmed 

with Julie. 

Page | 40


ROOF LEVEL – SIGNIFICANT CLASH ISSUE (CANNOT BE GROUPED) 

Description: This is a significant and lengthy clash that involves 4 Hydraulic drainage pipes slightly cutting through the structural system, followed 

by direct cut into 5 architectural walls, and into several HVAC mechanical ducts. 

Severity: Severity is high as it involves multiple disciplines to resolve this significant clash. The knock-on effect has resulted to clashes into 11 

building system. Substantial re-designing is required to ensure the 4 hydraulic drainage pipes are running smoothly without interferences. From 

re-designing it can result to additional costs and time needed for installing certain systems to fix the clash. Therefore, severity is high. 

Recommendation of resolution: Through in depth analysis of the surrounding, the 4 Hydraulic drainage pipes are main pipes that cannot be 

remapped or moved due to multiple connections for different services. Instead, it is recommended to install wall penetration seals into the 

architectural walls to produce a secure and durable pressure tight seals for drainage pipes to pass through the basic walls. The pipes can be lifted 

slightly to avoid the collision with the HVAC systems. 

Discipline involved: Hydraulic engineer in coordination with Architects to assist in installing the penetration seals. 

Page | 41


PART V: KEY FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATION/CONCLUSION 

Page | 42


Key Findings 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the proficiency of Navisworks to detect collisions, it can determine the high numbers of clashes such as Architecture with Fire 

building system resulting to 234 clashes, Architecture with Mechanical resulting to 130 clashes, and Architecture with Hydraulic 

drainage with 84 clashes. 

There tend to be more interferences in the Architectural, Hydraulic, and Mechanical disciplines than the others due to the high number 

of building systems involved in those disciplines. The building is made up of architectural walls and ceilings, therefore the chances of it 

clashing with other building system is high. 

Based on discussion with other students, it is assumed that the higher the allocated level the less clashes there will be. For instance, 

some students with levels higher than 11 allocated to them generated numerous “no clashes” in their disciplines, whereas level 8 

experienced clashes in every discipline. 

Quality issue is also visually spotted in level 08, where hydraulic pipes are protruding from walls or ceilings showing no connection, 

concrete slab missing in roof level resulting to the exposure of the building and the risk of moisture damage, and significant clashes 

where one building system conflicts with several building elements. 

In the Roof Level and Level 18 LMR, there is no service clashes at all. 

Some interferences are at low risk where it is easily rectified by simply shifting the building element or eliminating it, whilst others are 

at high risk where other disciplines or levels are involved in the modification of a building element. 

The significant issues that cannot be grouped are mainly poor placement of a building service resulting to multiple clashes against 

several elements. 

Page | 43


Recommendation/Conclusion 

By conducting a model coordination review, it monitors the detailed design and pre-construction phase of the project. This review focuses on 

interference checks using 3D review tools such as Navisworks. Regular model coordination ensures any error that arises with the design of the 

project can be resolved efficiently. The function of Clash Detective in Navisworks allows users to link the project to 4D simulation and 

animation to examine design faults in real time and data. Additionally, it enables users to select specific geometry to effectively find the 

conflict and resolve it. Ultimately, the combination of the model coordination review in conjunction with Navisworks ensures design errors are 

resolved at its early stages to avoid costly delays and possible problems during construction. Below are final recommendations engendered to 

assist with the model coordination and final design to enhance the quality of the delivery of UTS Central Building 2. 

Recommendations 

1. Solve the building services clash immediately to ensure it does not get left behind and not fixed. 

2. Any changes made to resolve the conflicts must be notified to the affected disciplines so they are aware of the potential risk during the 

rectification process. 

3. Close assessment of the surrounding area of the clash must be done to ensure the resolution of the clash does not cause a more severe 

clash. 

4. Examine the design again to ensure measurements and location of building services all comply with the Building Code of Australia. 

5. All disciplines must be updated with the change of drawing plans and route of hydraulic and fire pipes. 

Page | 44

DDC 1 Angela Guo ModelCoordinationReport

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?