Flagship 01 · Pre-pour structural
The last hour the steel is still visible
Pre-Pour Structural Verification. Formwork dimensions, slab thickness, bar size, spacing, cover, laps, chairs, embeds, anchor bolts and every sleeve — measured in blue laser from the drone and differenced against the structural drawings while a fix is still one ironworker and twenty minutes.
The system
Plans → scan → discrepancy engine → report
Plans / BIM
Structural drawings, the rebar schedule and the embed plan load as the reference model.
Scan
One multi-sensor flight walks the deck: LiDAR geometry plus high-res RGB down into every mat.
Computer vision
Bars detected and sized, spacing and cover measured, embeds and sleeves indexed.
Discrepancy engine
Every measured value differenced against spec; only exceptions reach a human.
Embeds · anchor bolts · sleeves
A bolt pattern is cheap to move and brutal to relocate
The drone indexes every embedded item on the deck against the embed plan: plate location and orientation, anchor bolt pattern and bolt-circle diameter, thread projection above the finished slab, and each sleeve or block-out by size and position. Anything present on the deck but absent from the drawings is flagged as hard as anything missing.
- PlatesLocation, rotation, elevation
- Anchor boltsPattern, spacing, projection
- SleevesDiameter and position
- Block-outsSize vs the opening schedule
- ExtrasUnplanned items flagged too
Cost of not catching it
A misplaced anchor bolt group found before the pour is a carpenter moving a template. The same group found after the steel arrives is core drilling, epoxy anchors, an engineer's repair detail and a crane sitting idle — and it lands squarely in the rework column that costs US construction roughly $65B a year.
Coverage
Every pre-pour check, and the sensor that makes it
| Inspection | What is verified | Sensor |
|---|---|---|
| Formwork dimensions | Slab and footing plan dimensions, edge lines, blockout sizes | LiDAR + photogrammetry |
| Formwork alignment | Forms square, plumb and on the gridline before pour | LiDAR tied to site control |
| Slab thickness | Formed depth from soffit to screed line, point by point | LiDAR depth map |
| Rebar size | Bar diameter classified off the deformation pattern | High-res RGB + computer vision |
| Rebar spacing | Centre-to-centre in both mat directions, top and bottom | RGB + measurement |
| Rebar cover | Clear distance from steel to the form face and top of pour | LiDAR + RGB |
| Lap splices | Splice length at every bar overlap | RGB + measurement |
| Chair / support height | Top mat held at the specified elevation | LiDAR profile |
| Embeds & plates | Location, orientation and elevation of embedded plates | LiDAR + RGB |
| Anchor bolts | Bolt pattern, projection, spacing and bolt-circle diameter | LiDAR + RGB |
| Sleeves & block-outs | Every penetration present, sized and positioned | LiDAR + BIM comparison |
| Post-tension layout | Tendon profile and support heights where used | RGB + profile scan |
| Vapor barrier | Coverage and lap continuity under the slab | High-resolution RGB |
| Pour volume | Formed volume less steel displacement, for the order | LiDAR volumetric |
Sample output
The exception list your super gets before the pump arrives
| Location | Checked item | Spec | Drone measured | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deck 3 · Bay C4 | Top mat spacing | 12" O.C. each way | 15½" O.C. east-west | Fix now |
| Deck 3 · Edge E | Clear cover to form face | 1½" | ¾" over 9 ft | Fix now |
| Col. line B | Anchor bolt projection | 3½" above slab | 2⅜" | Fix now |
| Deck 3 · Bay A2 | Lap splice length | 40 dᵦ (25") | 19" | Fix now |
| Blockout 12 | Sleeve position | Grid B + 4'-0" | Grid B + 4'-1⅞" | Review |
| Deck 3 | Formed slab thickness | 8" | 8⅛" avg, 8½" at C6 | Review |
| Deck 3 · Bay D1 | Bar size, bottom mat | #5 | #5 confirmed | Pass |
Illustrative report format. Passing items are collapsed by default — the crew only sees what needs a hand on it.
What it costs when nobody's watching
Everything under the pour is priced at demolition rates.
~$65B / yr
U.S. construction rework cost — about 5% of $1.3T in total construction spend.
Source: Autodesk / FMI, Harnessing the Data Advantage in Construction (2020/2022)
5–9%
of total project cost lost to rework on a typical job; 20–30% on troubled projects.
Source: CII; Dodge Data & Analytics, SmartMarket Report on Project Rework (2018)
52%
of total cost overrun on a project traces back to rework.
Source: CII, analysis of 150+ industrial construction projects
up to 70%
of rework traces to engineering, design and coordination errors — short laps, wrong spacing, missed cover.
Source: General industry claim, repeated across rework literature — no single primary citation
~$31B / yr
rework tied to bad, missing or wrong project data reaching the field.
Source: PlanGrid / FMI, Construction Disconnected (2018)
$60.1M · 12.5 months
average U.S. construction dispute value and duration — a dated pre-pour record is the cheapest defense there is.
Source: Arcadis, 2025 Global Construction Disputes Report
Government-grade sources (BLS, OSHA, NIST/NIBS) are cited as published. Industry research (Arcadis, FMI/Autodesk, CII, NSC) is survey- and estimate-based. Vendor case studies and vendor pricing pages are labeled where used and should be read as documented examples, not industry averages.