Omitted items in the comprehensive material table
Thread Content
In one guy’s construction drawings, the comprehensive material list is missing the sections for pipe racks and paint; upon checking the details for those two items, there is also no summary provided. Unfortunately, for these two sets of documents, only design and verification/signing are required; the review and approval processes were completely unaware that these two elements were missing. 1. How harmful is this? 2. How can such omissions be avoided procedurally?
The comprehensive material form requires signatures at three levels, right? Won’t the review catch that? Just two levels of signing for the separate pipe rack and painting documents are sufficient.
This post was last edited by Sammy_Wang on 2015-11-4 at 16:01. As long as it is done manually, anything is possible. 1. How harmful is this? Materials are missing, which will affect both costs and project timelines. 2. How can such omissions be avoided procedurally? I suggest you create a comprehensive document verification sheet; the more detailed it is, the better. At the same time, documents requiring secondary approval also need to be submitted to management for review before being issued. At the same time, I’m not sure if it’s possible to do a weight comparison, namely the model’s weight versus the weight of the material being lifted.
If procurement and budgeting are based on the material lists, it will certainly affect the project timeline and costs. However, the workload is always determined by the blueprints; the material lists serve only as a supplementary reference. Any experienced construction worker will first examine the blueprints to calculate the difference between the actual amount of material needed and what is listed in the material lists
It severely impacts the project timeline, and the management costs for the entire project increase significantly.
There will be some impact, but fortunately the procurement cycles for these two types of materials are not too long.
Due to the scale of the project and the large number of individual tasks, these simple matters were not properly coordinated; some items were overlooked, and others did not match what others had chosen. All sorts of errors arose, along with numerous changes, which ultimately forced the contractor to create new drawings from scratch. Coupled with other problems, this led to a significant delay in the project timeline. The contractor shifts the responsibility to the design institute – it’s an obvious and straightforward mistake.
In my opinion, purely in terms of pipe racks and painting materials, neither the procurement time nor the total cost will have a significant impact on the project timeline; it’s sufficient to initiate the procurement process as soon as such issues are identified. As for how to avoid them, it’s a matter of inadequate internal processes
There are some small projects that have been omitted; since the volume is not large, one can decide as needed during construction. Large projects should not be missed.