Construction Execution Intelligence — From Engineering File to Commissioned System
Heavy engineering construction still runs on spreadsheets — manually transcribing CAD files, tracking welds on paper, and aggregating progress in Excel. Here's how we built a platform that eliminates the entire pattern.
The Spreadsheet Trap in Heavy Construction
Every major FPSO, shipbuilding, or industrial plant construction project follows the same pattern — and it's been broken for decades.
It Starts With Engineering
Engineering delivers a set of piping isometric drawings — IDF files, PCF files, DEXPI data. These files contain every spool, every weld joint, every flange, every instrument connection. They are precise, machine-readable, and rich with data.
Then someone opens Excel.
The Manual Transcription
A planning engineer or document controller manually transcribes those engineering deliverables into a spool register. Hundreds of rows. Each spool entered by hand — spool number, line number, pipe spec, material, diameter, weld count. The IDF file already contained all of this data. But nobody has a system that reads it.
Then Construction Begins
The fabrication yard starts cutting, fitting, welding. Progress is tracked on paper forms, WhatsApp groups, daily standup notes. Someone updates a spreadsheet at the end of the week — if they remember. The numbers are always a few days behind.
The Revision Problem
Engineering issues Revision B. Twenty spools changed — some modified, some new, some deleted. Now the planning engineer has to compare two sets of drawings, figure out what changed, manually update the register, and hope they catch everything. They never do.
ENGINEERING: "We issued Rev B of ISO-3042 on Monday."
CONSTRUCTION: "Which spools changed?"
ENGINEERING: "The PDF markup is on SharePoint."
CONSTRUCTION: "...we already fabricated three of those."
QUALITY MANAGER: "Which three? Were they the modified ones?"
CONSTRUCTION: "Let me check the spreadsheet."
This conversation happens on every project. The result is rework, missed inspections, quality non-conformances, and earned value numbers that nobody trusts. The root cause is always the same: a broken handoff between engineering data and construction execution.
What If Construction Could Read Engineering Files Directly?
Konnect xD Construction Management eliminates the entire spreadsheet pattern by starting from the source — native engineering files.
| Traditional Approach | KXD Construction | |
|---|---|---|
| Data entry | Manual transcription from drawings | Direct IDF/PCF/CIS/2 file ingestion |
| Scope definition | Flat spreadsheet rows | 5-level hierarchy with weighted work steps |
| Progress tracking | Weekly Excel updates | Per-tag, per-step, timestamped recording |
| Change management | Manual drawing comparison | Automatic diff on re-ingestion |
| Quality gating | Separate QC system (paper or standalone) | Integrated — progress held until inspection passes |
| Earned value | Percentage estimates | Computed from quality-gated actuals |
How the Platform Works
ENGINEERING DATA CONSTRUCTION EXECUTION
┌────────────────────┐ ┌──────────────────────────┐
│ │ FILE INGESTION │ │
│ IDF / PCF Files │ ──────────────────► │ Spool Register │
│ CIS/2 Steel Data │ Auto-parsed │ (auto-populated) │
│ DEXPI P&ID Data │ Validated │ │
│ │ │ Work Step Templates │
│ │ REVISION DIFF │ (fit-up → weld → NDE │
│ Rev A → Rev B │ ──────────────────► │ → hydro → paint) │
│ │ Change detected │ │
│ │ Impact assessed │ Quality-Gated Progress │
│ │ │ (inspect before credit) │
│ │ │ │
│ │ PROGRESS EXPORT │ S-Curve & EVM │
│ │ ◄──────────────────── │ (planned vs actual │
│ │ Earned value │ vs forecast) │
│ │ Actual dates │ │
└────────────────────┘ └──────────────────────────┘
The engineering file is the single source of truth. Everything downstream — scope registers, work steps, progress measurement, earned value — derives from it.
Five Pillars of Construction Execution Intelligence
1. Ingest — Read the Engineering File, Not a Spreadsheet
When a piping isometric file (IDF or PCF) is uploaded, the system parses it automatically:
- Spool extraction — every spool with its unique ID, material spec, and pipe class
- Weld joint detection — every weld joint with its type, diameter, wall thickness, and WPS requirement
- Component identification — elbows, tees, reducers, flanges, valves, instruments
- Line-to-spool mapping — which spools belong to which piping line, which system, which area
For structural steel, CIS/2 files are parsed to extract assemblies, members, bolted connections, and weld details. For instrumentation, the system reads DEXPI-compliant P&ID data to establish the instrument index.
No manual transcription. No spreadsheet. The engineering file becomes the scope register.
2. Define — Configure What "Done" Means
Not every spool follows the same fabrication path. A 24-inch high-pressure spool has different work steps than a 2-inch utility line. The system supports configurable scope templates with up to 5 levels:
Level 1: Discipline (Piping)
Level 2: Area (Module 3 — Topsides)
Level 3: System (Fuel Gas)
Level 4: Tag (Spool FG-3042-SP-001)
Level 5: Work Step (Fit-up → Weld → NDE → PWHT → Hydro → Paint)
Each work step carries a weighting — reflecting the actual effort and value of that step. Welding might be 30% of a spool's value, NDE 15%, hydro test 10%. These weightings drive earned value calculation downstream.
Some work steps are gate steps — progress cannot advance past them without a corresponding quality inspection passing. You cannot credit a spool as "welded" until the weld inspection is recorded and accepted.
3. Track — Record Progress Where Work Happens
Progress recording happens at the lowest level — per tag, per work step:
- Timestamped entries — when did fit-up start? When did it complete? Who recorded it?
- Mobile-compatible — supervisors record progress on tablets at the workface
- Barcode and QR scanning — scan a spool tag to pull up its status and record the next step
- Batch operations — mark 50 spools as "painting complete" in a single action
The system rolls up automatically. If 408 of 1,850 spools have completed welding (weighted at 30%), and 312 have completed NDE (weighted at 15%), the piping progress is computed from the weighted sum — not from someone's estimate.
4. Detect — Engineering Changes Don't Hide
When Revision B of an isometric is uploaded, the system performs an automatic diff against the previous revision:
- New spools added to scope — flagged for inclusion in the work register
- Modified spools — geometry changed, material changed, or weld count changed
- Deleted spools — removed from scope with audit trail
- Impact assessment — were any of the modified spools already fabricated? Already welded? Already inspected?
Every change creates a traceable change incident with:
- What changed (the engineering delta)
- What was affected (construction work in progress)
- What action is required (rework, re-inspect, scrap)
- Who approved the disposition
Rev A: ISO-3042 — 12 spools, 34 weld joints
Rev B: ISO-3042 — 14 spools, 38 weld joints
──────────────────────
Diff: +2 new spools (SP-013, SP-014)
~3 modified spools (SP-004: new elbow, SP-007: material change,
SP-009: diameter change from 6" to 8")
-0 deleted spools
+4 new weld joints
Impact: SP-004 already fabricated (fit-up complete, welding in progress)
SP-007 material already issued — wrong spec
SP-009 not yet started — safe to update
Action Required:
SP-004 → Hold welding, review fit-up against new geometry
SP-007 → Raise NCR for material mismatch, reissue material
SP-009 → Update scope register, proceed with new spec
This entire analysis happens automatically on file re-ingestion. On a traditional project, it takes a planning engineer 2-3 days to manually compare revisions for a single piping system.
5. Report — Earned Value That Means Something
The system computes earned value from quality-gated field data — not from percentage estimates:
- Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS) — derived from the scope baseline and time-phased plan
- Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) — computed from actual quality-gated progress weighted by budget
- S-curves — planned vs actual vs forecast, updated with every progress entry
- Cut-off snapshots — freeze progress at any date for period reporting
The critical insight: when a construction manager reports "22% complete," that number is computed from 1,850 individual spools × 6 work steps each = 11,100 discrete progress events, each quality-gated. Not from a Friday afternoon estimate.
What Changes for Your Project
For the Construction Manager
Before: You manage 200 fabrication workers across three shifts. Progress lives in your head, in your superintendent's notebook, and in a shared spreadsheet that three people update independently. The weekly progress meeting is a negotiation — "I think we're at 22%, maybe 24%." The main contractor asks why your numbers don't match their schedule and you spend two hours explaining the difference.
After: You open the Progress Overview and see hard numbers: Actual 22.1% | Planned 28.0% | Variance −5.9%. You drill into the variance — it's concentrated in Main Deck piping where cold weather delayed fit-up. Lower decks are actually 2.3% ahead of plan. You export the progress file and the main contractor's planning system updates within the hour. No meetings about numbers. Just facts.
For the Quality Manager
Before: QC inspectors carry paper forms. Inspection results get entered into a standalone QC database — completely disconnected from progress tracking. When someone asks "are the welds on spool FG-3042-SP-007 inspected?", you search through folders. When the NDE rejection rate spikes, you find out a week late. The weld repair cycle (re-weld → re-inspect → re-accept) is tracked on paper with no connection to progress impact.
After: Every inspection is linked to the work step it gates. The weld inspection for SP-007 is recorded against the specific weld joint, linked to the welder who performed it, referencing the WPS that governed it. When the system NDE rejection rate exceeds the threshold, it triggers automatic escalation — increased inspection frequency from 10% to 25% random. Weld repairs update the progress model automatically — you see the schedule impact of quality issues in real time.
For the Project Controls Planner
Before: You maintain a separate earned value spreadsheet. Every week, you collect progress percentages from three superintendents, a QC lead, and a material controller. The numbers never add up. You spend Thursday and Friday reconciling. By Monday morning, your S-curve is ready — showing data that's already 5 days old. The forecast line is your best guess.
After: The S-curve updates automatically from field data. BCWP is computed from quality-gated progress — 11,100 discrete work step completions weighted by budget. The forecast line is computed from actual performance trends, not from your optimism. Your SPI of 0.79 is real — it means the project is earning value at 79% of the planned rate, and you can trace it down to the exact disciplines and areas that are driving the variance.
The Piping Story: A Complete Lifecycle
Piping is the most complex discipline in heavy construction — and the one that drives the most schedule risk. On a typical FPSO, piping accounts for 35-45% of total construction manhours. KXD Construction treats piping as a first-class citizen with ten integrated modules:
Spool Tracker
Every spool has a lifecycle: material issued → fit-up → welding → NDE → PWHT (if required) → hydro test → painting → insulation → installed → tested. The tracker follows each spool through every step, with timestamps, responsible persons, and linked quality records.
Weld Management
Every weld joint is a trackable entity with its own properties — diameter, wall thickness, weld procedure (WPS), welder qualification, NDE requirement. The system maintains the weld log across all spools, all areas, all contractors.
NDE Rate Engine
Non-destructive examination rates are configurable per contractor, per weld procedure, per material group. When a contractor's rejection rate exceeds the threshold, the system automatically escalates — increasing the random NDE percentage from 10% to 25%, or from 25% to 100%, depending on the configured escalation matrix.
Welder & WPS Registry
Every welder is registered with their qualifications — which weld procedures they're certified for, which positions, which materials. The system validates that the welder assigned to a joint is qualified for that specific WPS before allowing progress to be recorded.
Test Packs
Hydrostatic and pneumatic test packs are generated from the scope register — the system knows which spools belong to which test pack, which welds need to be completed and inspected before the test pack can be pressurized. Test readiness is computed automatically.
Quality-Gated Progress: Two Systems, One Truth
The core innovation in KXD Construction is the integration of quality management and progress measurement into a single system. These are traditionally separate — a QC database and a progress spreadsheet — with no formal link between them.
How Quality Gates Work
Work Step: Welding Complete
│
▼
Gate: Weld Inspection Required
│
├── Inspection Result: ACCEPT
│ │
│ ▼
│ Progress Credit: 30% earned for this spool
│
└── Inspection Result: REJECT
│
▼
Repair Cycle Initiated
│
├── Re-weld
├── Re-inspect (mandatory 100% NDE)
└── Accept → Progress Credit: 30% earned
(repair manhours tracked separately)
Progress is only earned when work is done AND quality is verified. This means:
- You cannot inflate progress by skipping inspections
- Quality issues immediately impact the S-curve — making them visible to project management
- The earned value number is trustworthy because it represents verified, quality-gated completions
- Repair cycles are tracked separately, so their schedule impact is measurable
The S-Curve Tells the Real Story
| Metric | What It Shows | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Planned curve | Where you should be based on the baseline | Scope baseline × time-phased schedule |
| Actual curve | Where you are based on quality-gated field data | Weighted rollup of verified work steps |
| Forecast curve | Where you're heading based on current performance | Performance trend extrapolation |
| Variance | The gap between planned and actual | Computed per discipline, per area, per system |
When the construction manager sees a 5.9% negative variance, they can drill down: Is it piping or structural? Is it Module 3 or Module 4? Is it fabrication or installation? Is it a productivity issue or a material issue? Every level of the hierarchy is backed by discrete, auditable progress events.
Engineering Change: The Hidden Schedule Killer
On a complex FPSO project, engineering revisions arrive continuously throughout construction. A typical project sees 3-5 revision cycles per piping isometric, with peak revision activity occurring precisely when construction is at its most intense — 40-60% through the fabrication programme.
The Traditional Approach
- Engineering issues Rev B as a PDF or CAD file
- Someone downloads it and compares it to Rev A — visually or using a markup tool
- A planning engineer manually identifies what changed
- The changes are manually entered into the spreadsheet register
- Someone checks if any affected spools are already fabricated
- If rework is needed, it's tracked on a separate NCR register
- The progress impact is estimated — usually incorrectly
Time to assess a single revision: 1-3 days. On a project with 500 isometrics and an average of 3 revisions each, that's 750-2,250 engineer-days spent on change assessment alone.
The KXD Construction Approach
- Engineering issues Rev B as an IDF/PCF file (the same native format they produce)
- The file is uploaded to KXD Construction
- The system performs an automatic diff — spool by spool, weld by weld
- Changes are classified: new, modified, deleted
- Impact is assessed automatically — which changed items have work in progress?
- Change incidents are created with full traceability
- Progress model updates — earned value adjusts for scope changes
Time to assess a single revision: minutes. The system does what a planning engineer does in 1-3 days, but does it automatically, completely, and without errors.
Why This Matters
Industry Context
In a typical $400M FPSO construction contract:
- Piping alone accounts for 35-45% of total construction manhours (~$140-180M)
- Engineering revisions affect 15-30% of fabricated spools — most discovered after fabrication starts
- Manual progress tracking consumes 12-20 engineer-hours per week per discipline
- Quality data latency means NCR trends are identified 1-2 weeks late — after the damage is done
- Earned value accuracy is typically ±10-15% when based on estimated percentages
What We Enable
| Metric | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Scope register creation | 2-4 weeks manual transcription | Hours (automated file ingestion) |
| Engineering change assessment | 1-3 days per revision | Minutes (automatic diff) |
| Progress data currency | Weekly (Friday spreadsheet) | Real-time (per work step) |
| Quality-to-progress link | None (separate systems) | Integrated (quality gates progress) |
| Earned value source | Estimated percentages | Quality-gated actuals |
| Revision impact detection | Manual comparison (error-prone) | Automatic (complete and auditable) |
| NDE escalation response | 1-2 weeks after trend detected | Automatic on threshold breach |
From Shop Floor to System Handover
Construction doesn't end at fabrication. The platform tracks the complete lifecycle through four phases:
CONSTRUCTION MECHANICAL COMPLETION PRE-COMMISSIONING COMMISSIONING
───────────────── ───────────────────── ─────────────────── ─────────────
Fabrication Punch list A Flushing / Blowing System turnover
Installation Walk-down verification Leak testing Performance testing
Welding & NDE System boundary sign-off Loop checking (E&I) Handover to ops
Pressure testing MC certificate Pre-comm certificate Acceptance cert
Painting & insulation Handover to pre-comm Handover to comm As-built dossier
Each phase has its own progress measurement, quality gates, and reporting. The system tracks the handover chain — from the construction subcontractor to the main contractor to the pre-commissioning team to operations — with digital dossiers containing every inspection record, test certificate, and as-built document for every tag in the system.
Multi-Discipline, One Platform
While piping is the flagship, KXD Construction supports four disciplines in a unified platform:
| Discipline | Scope Entity | Key Work Steps | Quality Gates |
|---|---|---|---|
| Piping | Spool | Fit-up → Weld → NDE → PWHT → Hydro → Paint | Weld inspection, NDE, pressure test |
| Structural | Assembly / Member | Fit-up → Weld → NDE → Bolt-up → Paint | Weld inspection, bolt tensioning, NDE |
| Electrical & Instrument | Cable / Junction Box | Pull → Terminate → Megger → Loop Check | Megger test, loop check, point-to-point |
| Instrumentation | Instrument Tag | Mount → Connect → Calibrate → Loop Check | Calibration certificate, loop check |
Every discipline follows the same pattern: ingest engineering data → define scope and work steps → track quality-gated progress → report earned value. The disciplines share a common progress model, enabling a single project S-curve that combines all disciplines with their respective weightings.
Part of the Konnect xD Ecosystem
KXD Construction doesn't operate in isolation. It's one application in a connected ecosystem:
Konnect xD Ecosystem
┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Konnect Core (Omega) │
│ Data engine • Ingestion • Analytics │
└──────┬──────────┬──────────┬─────────────┘
│ │ │
┌──────▼───┐ ┌────▼─────┐ ┌─▼──────────────────┐
│ Smart │ │ KXD │ │ KXD Construction │
│ P&ID │ │ Planning │ │ Management │
│ │ │ │ │ │
│ P&ID │ │ Schedule │ │ Scope & Progress │
│ parsing │ │ analysis │ │ Quality & Materials │
│ 3D↔2D │ │ 4D / EVM │ │ Change management │
└──────────┘ └──────────┘ └─────────────────────┘
│ ▲ │
│ │ │
│ Schedule Intelligence │
│ Bridge │
│ │ │
└──────────────┴──────────────┘
Smart P&ID reads the engineering design and establishes the data model. KXD Construction executes against that model and tracks reality. KXD Planning connects the schedule to field progress through the Schedule Intelligence Bridge. Together, they create a closed loop from engineering intent to construction reality — with every change tracked, every quality gate enforced, and every earned value number backed by verifiable field data.
Built for the Industries That Need It Most
FPSO & Offshore Modules
Modular topsides and hull construction with hundreds of piping systems running concurrently. Revision management across multiple engineering contractors. AWP (Advanced Work Packaging) methodology for workface planning. Progress reporting to classification societies (ABS, DNV, Lloyd's).
Shipbuilding & Marine
Block assembly, outfitting, and commissioning workflows. Integration with classification society inspection requirements. Multi-contractor coordination with shared progress visibility. Zone-based and system-based progress tracking running in parallel.
Industrial Plant & Refinery
Turnaround and expansion projects with tight shutdown windows. DCMA-compliant scheduling integration. Multi-contractor progress consolidation. Safety-critical system handover with full traceability.
Built by engineers who've tracked spools on spreadsheets, chased revision markups on SharePoint, and spent Friday afternoons reconciling progress numbers that never added up. We built the platform we wished we'd had.