The Challenge

During the construction of a connecting bridge between a newly built structure and an existing building, the project came to an unexpected halt. What was intended to be a smooth integration became a technical deadlock, and the fabricated structural steel frames on-site weren’t aligning with the existing trusses or the BIM design model. The misalignment wasn't just a few millimeters it was enough to stall progress entirely. The construction team faced the risk of major delays, expensive rework, and escalating costs. At the heart of the issue was one recurring theme: the disconnect between digital design and physical execution.

Client’s Initial Hurdles

• Fabrication had already begun assuming design and site conditions were aligned.
• On-site steel components showed visible misalignment with the design.
• Manual verification methods were inadequate for the precision required.
• No system existed to compare real-world conditions with the digital model.
• Both Revit and IFC models had incorrect coordinates, compounding the issue.

Why This Was Critical

Why was it impossible to proceed with the connection?

Because the actual steel members didn’t match their digital counterparts, continuing construction would compromise the structure's safety and design intent.

What would have happened if the issue went unchecked?

The result would have been costly dismantling, re-fabrication, and a potential compromise in the bridge’s alignment and load-bearing capabilities.

What did the client expect from a solution partner?

They needed more than just validation they needed data-backed confidence, delivered quickly, with minimal disruption to site activities.

How did traditional methods fall short?

Manual checks couldn’t offer the precision or scale required to analyze multiple connection levels across structures.

What was at stake?

Beyond time and cost, this project’s success represented a benchmark for future digital integration efforts in their construction pipeline.

Gaps in Existing Information

• Incorrect coordinate systems in both Revit and IFC models caused spatial misalignment.
• Models were floating in digital space, making them unreliable for real-world comparison.
• Lack of precise geolocation prevented accurate assessment of bridge alignment.
• No digital record of actual site conditions existed
• Client had no trusted method to validate construction accuracy.

Why Specific Requirements Mattered

The bridge was not just a design feature it was a functional, load-bearing connection between two buildings. Every millimeter of misalignment could affect the bridge’s safety, longevity, and compliance. The integration of multiple structural levels (5, 6, and 7) made the geometry even more sensitive. Without highly accurate, geo-referenced data, even a small deviation could turn into a major structural issue. These weren’t preferences they were critical performance standards, and they demanded digital precision.

The Desapex Solution

Desapex was brought in as the digital verification partner, and our first step was to deploy LiDAR-based laser scanning of the bridge area. We captured the site conditions with high-resolution point cloud data, referenced with accurate coordinates. From there, our team corrected the flawed model coordinates, re-registering both the Revit and IFC files to the real-world scan.

Once alignment was achieved, we ran dimensional deviation checks at the key structural levels. Our analysis revealed a consistent variance between 20 mm and 40 mm critical data that explained the misalignment and enabled the client to move forward with informed corrective actions.

Project Timeline & Milestones

• Week 1: LiDAR scan, registration, and coordinate correction
• Week 2: Model alignment, deviation analysis, and reporting

Software & Technology Used

• Cyclone Field 360
• Cyclone Register 360
• Revit 2025

The Real Business Value Delivered

• Prevented rework by accurately diagnosing fabrication deviations before installation.
• Enabled data-backed correction plans, reducing guesswork and engineering risk.
• Saved significant time and effort compared to traditional inspection methods.
• Increased confidence among all stakeholders with clear, visual comparison data.
• Established a repeatable digital workflow for similar future bridge connections.

What This Means for Future Projects

This project didn’t just resolve a problem it created a new standard. By digitally bridging the gap between what was designed and what was built, the team avoided rework, delays, and structural uncertainty. The ability to see misalignment before it became a construction error saved more than time it protected the project’s integrity.

Moving forward, this experience has embedded digital verification into the client's workflow. Projects like this prove that digital tools like LiDAR and BIM are not just innovation they’re necessity. What was once a reactive fix is now a proactive step in their quality assurance process. The bridge is more than just a physical connection it’s a symbol of how technology, precision, and foresight can come together to build better, faster, and smarter.