MODEL-TO-MODEL SCOPE RECONCILIATION | NORTHERN ONTARIO GOLD MILL
WHY PIPE FOOTAGE
TOLD ONLY PART
OF THE STORY.
In the aggregate current model, total straight-pipe length increased 38.3%. Selected component, connection, cable-tray and support quantities increased 155.0% to 475.4%.
At a glance
Straight-pipe footage described route length. The model and drawing-BOM quantities described the components, connections and supporting infrastructure that had multiplied around it.
Download the full case study
The story
The comparison boundary
The original-scope Plant 3D model served one lime-addition destination: the Trash Screen, also referred to as the Trash Bin. The aggregate current model combines that baseline with two later routing additions. Combining them provides a complete view at the comparison date, but it does not reclassify the separately authorized CIP work as a change to the original scope.
One number, part of the story
Total straight-pipe length rose from 427′-8.92″ to 591′-8.05″—an increase of 163′-11.13″, or 38.3%. That was a real increase, but it did not describe how much the network changed internally.
The result
Creative GOAT converted a general assertion of “more work” into a model- and drawing-derived comparison that could be evaluated using a clear baseline, comparator and scope lineage.
FULL REPORT
Download the full case study
Straight-pipe footage increased 38.3%, but it was an incomplete description of the aggregate model. Several component, connection, cable-tray and support quantities increased by much larger percentages, showing why route length alone could not describe the modeled scope and routing complexity.
We will email you a copy as well, so you can find it later.
Start a project conversation
Does route length appear to understate the change visible in your model or BOM?