Intera Survey
← All projectsScan to Model · Facade Survey · Romania

Facade Cladding Fabrication Model

3Buildings
16,000 m²Facade area
3Cladding materials

The situation

Three buildings, 16,000 m² of facade between them, three different cladding materials in play — composite panel, glass curtain wall, and HPL cladding. The fabrication team needed a 3D model matching the real, as-built geometry of all of it, not an idealized drawing.

The approach

Panel and joint lines were drawn directly from the point cloud for every material, not estimated from reference photos — composite panel, curtain-wall glazing, and HPL cladding each carry their own real-world irregularity a purely drawn model would miss, and each needed its geometry captured on its own terms rather than assumed from the others.

The outcome

The fabrication team received a model of the actual facade geometry across all three buildings and all three materials, not a nominal one — reducing the risk of a panel that doesn't fit once it reaches the wall.

Reference photo of the building's brick-and-glass-panel facade
Reference photo of the building's brick-and-glass-panel facade
3D model of the facade with cladding panel and joint lines highlighted
3D model of the facade with cladding panel and joint lines highlighted

Services used

Scan to Model →Facade Survey →Romania →

Questions about this project

Why did the panel and joint lines need to come from the point cloud instead of reference photos?
A photo can't capture true dimensions or out-of-plane irregularity; drawing directly from the point cloud is what let the fabrication team work from each building's actual as-built geometry instead of an estimate.
Does working across three different cladding materials change the modeling approach?
The underlying method stays the same — draw from the point cloud, not estimate — but composite panel, curtain-wall glazing, and HPL cladding each have their own real joint and fixing logic, so each material's geometry gets captured and modeled on its own terms.
What format was the panel model delivered in?
A 3D model per building, with panel and joint lines drawn to the captured geometry, ready for the fabrication team's own detailing software.
How did this reduce risk for the fabrication team?
By working from the real facade geometry rather than a nominal one, the risk of a fabricated panel not fitting once installed dropped substantially across all three buildings — the model already reflects any real-world irregularity in each wall.
Could this same approach support a single-elevation re-cladding project instead of a multi-building one?
Yes — the same point-cloud-first modeling approach scales down just as easily; facade work is scoped per elevation or per building, whichever fits the project.

Scope your project in one call.

Tell us the site, the deliverable, and the deadline — we'll tell you the tier and turnaround that fits.

Get a Quote →