PROJEKTERINGSÖVERSYN PÅ NCC I UMEÅ

Sammanfattning: During the design phase of a building and construction project, blueprints are reviewed. This can be done in slightly different ways, which can also give different consequences for the involved tasks or increased costs for the company if faults were not noticed in time before the next stage of the construction process. At the start of the study, NCC Infrastructure Department Civil SE North experienced problems with review routines of drawing material, which hired consultants developed. Therefore, this exam work was established to generalize the reviewing process, save time but also ensure the accuracy of the work. The purpose of the study was to study parts of the planning process at NCC and to note deficiencies regarding their design review, but also to create an overview of how the blueprint review is done in a company like NCC and what problems that can arise during the reviewing process. To achieve the goal, the establishment of a supplementary basis in the form of a checklist to follow when reviewing blueprints, several methods were used. Literature study for theory of the area, document study for understanding the problems in the blueprints, which also formed the basis for the interview study's questions that resulted in what is to be examined, which areas that are critical and the staff's perception of today's reviewing process. Like many professions and projects, time is a critical aspect. At NCC it was felt that there was too little time allocated for the review, but also for the projection itself for some projects. More than half of the interviewees also felt that the number of resources allocated for review was too few. The most critical areas for blueprints were considered to be ground as well as water and sewer blueprints. Within these, the height and dimensions plan for ground blueprints were considered to be the most inadequate and ground plans for water and sewage as well. Another problem that everyone interviewed at NCC Infrastructure mentioned was that they experienced a lack of communication between hired consultants. This as each parts blueprint collided with another one’s solutions or not agreed on object locations. It is important that NCC improves clarity and guiding against hired consultants so that the quantities of materials and the choice of materials do not exceed the calculated price for the offered project. The same applies to the review process, it should be generalized and there the checklist comes in handy and can clog up uncertainties and errors that otherwise might occur or be missed, as well as simplify the work for those who are to conduct the review. In addition, the Bluebeam program should always have a significant degree of utilization when reviewing, and traditional review (by pen and paper) should only be used when collaborating with colleagues and then entering Bluebeam.