Construction–Automation Misalignment

Slab Clashes, Power Gaps — $240K Saved and Liability Reassigned

The Situation

The Situation

During a greenfield 60,000 sqm automated DC build, two critical issues emerged simultaneously:

  • Power Delivery Gap
    The automation system had been fully powered internally — from the distribution boards to the system — but no party had been assigned responsibility for bringing mains power from the main building board to the automation distribution boards. The builder’s subcontractor quoted $420K to rectify the oversight.

  • Slab and Pit Installation Misalignment
    Slab works and pit installations had progressed without alignment to final automation layouts, triggering major mechanical clashes. These included:

  • Slab joint conflicts where major racking was to be anchored

  • Reinforcement bar depth clashes with drilled anchor points

  • Incorrect penetrations and slab dimensions, forcing system baseplate redesigns

  • Resulting in reengineering of drill locations, new plate manufacturing, and potential delay to downstream commissioning.

Despite automation vendors having submitted layouts and drawings well in advance, the builder challenged costs and denied accountability. The client was at risk of absorbing hundreds of thousands in unplanned cost just to keep the project moving.

During a greenfield 60,000 sqm automated DC build, two critical issues emerged simultaneously:

  • Power Delivery Gap
    The automation system had been fully powered internally — from the distribution boards to the system — but no party had been assigned responsibility for bringing mains power from the main building board to the automation distribution boards. The builder’s subcontractor quoted $420K to rectify the oversight.

  • Slab and Pit Installation Misalignment
    Slab works and pit installations had progressed without alignment to final automation layouts, triggering major mechanical clashes. These included:

  • Slab joint conflicts where major racking was to be anchored

  • Reinforcement bar depth clashes with drilled anchor points

  • Incorrect penetrations and slab dimensions, forcing system baseplate redesigns

  • Resulting in reengineering of drill locations, new plate manufacturing, and potential delay to downstream commissioning.

Despite automation vendors having submitted layouts and drawings well in advance, the builder challenged costs and denied accountability. The client was at risk of absorbing hundreds of thousands in unplanned cost just to keep the project moving.

During a greenfield 60,000 sqm automated DC build, two critical issues emerged simultaneously:

  • Power Delivery Gap
    The automation system had been fully powered internally — from the distribution boards to the system — but no party had been assigned responsibility for bringing mains power from the main building board to the automation distribution boards. The builder’s subcontractor quoted $420K to rectify the oversight.

  • Slab and Pit Installation Misalignment
    Slab works and pit installations had progressed without alignment to final automation layouts, triggering major mechanical clashes. These included:

  • Slab joint conflicts where major racking was to be anchored

  • Reinforcement bar depth clashes with drilled anchor points

  • Incorrect penetrations and slab dimensions, forcing system baseplate redesigns

  • Resulting in reengineering of drill locations, new plate manufacturing, and potential delay to downstream commissioning.

Despite automation vendors having submitted layouts and drawings well in advance, the builder challenged costs and denied accountability. The client was at risk of absorbing hundreds of thousands in unplanned cost just to keep the project moving.

Our Role

Our Role

As Stream Lead and Superintendent, we:

  • Verified all upstream automation deliverables and drawing submissions, confirming the vendor had fulfilled its obligations

  • Coordinated with technical and commercial stakeholders to trace the exact point of miscommunication and responsibility

  • Engaged internal industry contacts to secure a competitive power delivery quote at $180K, cutting the exposure by over 50%

  • Led contractual reviews, applying AS4910 clauses and program logic to assign liability correctly

  • Ensured revised sequencing and layout coordination was implemented to prevent recurrence

The Outcome

The Outcome

  • $240K+ saved on power scope

  • Reengineering costs correctly assigned to the builder — not the client

  • System installation protected, with no schedule slippage

  • Future interface and sequencing protocols rewritten for clarity

Clarity Over Cost and Clash

Clarity Over Cost and Clash

This wasn’t about blame — it was about accountability. With airtight governance and proactive stream leadership, we resolved high-risk issues without compromising progress.

Why It Mattered

Why It Mattered

Left unaddressed, the client would’ve paid for errors it didn’t make — jeopardising trust, timeline, and budget. By combining technical oversight with contractual and commercial fluency, we preserved delivery integrity and protected all parties’ long-term relationships. On builds of this scale, structure matters — not just for today’s install, but for the decades of operation to follow.

Ready to build with us?

Contact us today to start your project.

Ready to build with us?

Contact us today to start your project.

Ready to build with us?

Contact us today to start your project.

Ready to build with us?

Contact us today to start your project.