buildingSMART alliance Conference Integrating BIM: Moving the Industry Forward – LINK
FEDCon® – The Annual Market Outlook on Federal Construction – LINK
Sustainable Buildings Industry Council Symposium – Fostering Innovation to go Beyond GreenTM – LINK
Innovative Technology Demonstrations — Including the buildingSMART Challenge, Construction Operations Building information exchange (COBie) Calculator and Specifiers Properties information exchange (SPie) Catalog, and introducing information exchanges for Building Programming (BPie), HVAC (HVACie), Electrical Systems (SPARKie), Building Automation Modeling (BAMie) and Water Systems (WSie). – LINK
BIM Academic Education Symposium Setting the Course for a BIM Educational Strategy – LINK
Via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier Cost Estimating and Efficient Project Delivery Software and Services for JOC, SABER, IPD, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, POCA, BOA …
Is the trend analysis of the Business Value of BIM in North America from 2007 through 2012 reality, or are many of us walking around with rose colored glasses?
I ask you, do you really believe the following statement ” Now in 2012, 71% of architects, engineers, contractors, and owners report they have become engaged with BIM on their projects …”. If you define BIM as the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology, I can tell you that either the survey is flawed… a lot of people don’t know what BIM is… or we have a lot of folks inflating the truth. There is NO WAY 71% of ANY of the groups are “engaged with BIM on their projects”…period, end of story.
Playing with Statistics? The 71% average appears to have been calculated by taking a simple average of the “adoption rate” from architects, engineers, and contractors” from three size classes of firms “small, medium, and large”. If I am correct, this is just plan WRONG. Most firms in the U.S. are small business, thus a weighted average must be applied. The “adoption rate” for small firms 50%… a number I also believe to be inaccurate.
I just came back from the NIBS Conference. This is without question, the most valuable, authoritative meeting relative to BIM in the United States. How many people were there you might ask? A few hundred at most.
So, what does any of this matter? Simple really. Until our industry stops the hype and focus on important issues relative to BIM, we will continue to be mired in inaction. The AECOO is the most unproductive business sector and also has the lowest rate of technology adoption. These are facts…. if one wishes to be interested in facts that is.
Here some thoughts as to where emphasis must be placed:
Greater adoption and use of collaborative construction delivery methods: IPD – Integrated Project Delivery, and JOC – Job Order Contracting. The later is a form of IPD specifically targeting renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction projects. Let’s face it, 80% or more of all funding for the built environment will be going in renovation, repair, and sustainability.
Emphasis on business process, strategy, and standardized terms, metrics, and data architecture vs. technology. Technology is NOT the problem, is the lack of clear, robust business strategy and processes, and domain knowledge… largely on the part of Owners that is the primary obstacle to progressive change. Owners write the checks, they are “where the buck stops”.
Focus upon life-cycle costs / total cost of ownership, vs. first costs.
A bit more on data standards…. OMNICLASS, UNIFORMAT, MASTERFORMAT, COie, IFC, et al… all have there roll. Some will survive, some may not. The point is that unless we have standardized terms, definitions, detailed reference and actual cost information (localized materials, equipment, and labors), physical and functional condition metrics, etc. etc. etc. … we can’t collaborate or improve productivity!
Participation by all stakeholders – Owners, AE’s, Contractors, SubContractors, Building Users, Oversight Groups, Regulatory Bodies, Building Product Manufacturers, Communities, ….
I am writing this from Washington, D.C. while participating in the NIBS Building Innovation 2013 Conference. The buildingSMART alliance conference is part of this gathering under the title “Integrating BIM: Moving the Industry Forward.”
BIM education and practice requires focus upon process and associated return-on-investment. Robust communication and adoption of standard and/or “best practice” construction planning and delivery methods specific to efficient life-cycle management of the built environment are sorely needed.
It is amazing that Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, and “IPD-lite”… the latter being Job Order Contracting and SABER which are forms of IPD specifically for renovation, repair, sustainability and minor new construction… are not being brought to the forefront as critical aspects of BIM. It is the construction planning and project delivery method that sets the tone of any project and ultimately dictate relationships and associated successes or failures.
Collaboration, transparency, and performance-based win-win relationships are necessary components of a BIM-based philosophy. Yet, these and other critical aspects; including defensible, accurate, and transparent cost estimating and standardized construction cost data architectures, are neither in forefront of current thinking nor receiving an adequate allocation of resources.
Far too much emphasis continues to be place on the 3d visualization component aspect of BIM, IFC format pros and cons, and other “technology” areas.
Technology is NOT what is holding back BIM, it is the apparent lack of understanding of … and associated failure to adopt … facility life-cycle management processes… combined and what can only be described as a pervasive “not invented here” attitude.
Many of of our peers are reinventing the wheel over and over again at tremendous cost to all stakeholders…Owners, AEs, Contractors, Subs, Oversight Groups, Building Users, Building Product Manufacturers, …not to mention our Economy and our Environment, vs. sharing information and working toward common goals.
In the long history of humankind, those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.
– Charles Darwin
BIM, the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology, requires a fundamental change in how the construction (Architects, Contractors, Engineers) and facility management (Owners, Service Providers, Building Product Manufactures, Oversight Groups, Building Users) sectors operate on a day-to-day basis.
BIM, combined and Cloud Computing are game changers. They are disruptive technologies with integral business processes/practices that demand collaboration, transparency, and accurate/current information displayed via common terminology.
There is no escaping the change. Standardized data architectures (Ominclass, COBie, Uniformat, Masterformat) and cost databases (i.e. RSMeans), accesses an localized via cloud computing are even now beginning to be available. While historically, the construction and facility management sectors have lagged their counterparts (automotive, aerospace, medical, …) relative to technology and LEAN business practices, environmental and economic market drivers and government mandates are closing the gap.
The construction and life-cycle management of the built environment requires the integration off several knowledge domains, business “best-practices”, and technologies as portrayed below. The efficient use of this BIG DATA is enabled by the BIM, Cloud Computing, and Integrated Project Delivery methods.
The greatest challenges to these positive changes are the CULTURE of the Construction and the Facility Management Sectors. Also, an embedded first-cost vs. life-cycle or total cost of ownership perspective. An the unfortunate marketing spotlight upon the technology of 3D visualization vs. BIM. Emphasis MUST be place upon the methods of how we work on a daily basis…locally and globally − strategic planning, capitial reinvestment planning, designing collaborating, procuring, constructing, managing and operating. All of these business processes have different impacts upon the “facility” infrastructure and construction supply chain, building Owners, Stakeholders, etc., yet communication terms, definitions, must be transparent and consistently applied in order to gain greater efficiencies.
Some facility life-cycle management are already in place for the federal government facility portfolio and its only a matter of time before these are expanded and extended into all other sectors.
BIM, not 3D visualization, but true BIM or Big BIM, and Cloud Computing will connect information from every discipline together. It will not necessarily be a single combined model. In fact the latter has significant drawbacks. Each knowledge domain has independent areas of expertise and requisite process that would be diluted and marginalized if managed within one model. That said, appropriate “roll-up” information will be available to a higher level model. (The issue of capability and productivity marginalization can be proven by looking a ERP and IWMS systems. Integration of best-in-class technology and business practices is always support to systems that attempt to do everything, yet do not single thing well.)
Fundamental Changes to Project Delivery for Repair, Renovation, Sustainability, and New Construction Projects MUST include:
Qualifications Based or Best Value Selection
Some form of pricing transparency and standardization
Early and ongoing information-sharing among project stakeholders
Appropriate distribution of risk
Some form of financial incentive to drive performance / performance-based relationships
BIM is not about software or technology but about CULTURE CHANGE and CHANGE MANAGEMENT.
BIM is about simplifying and adding visibility to the life-cycle management of the built environment. You are either “on-board” or “not”. It’s up to you.
BIM and FM are synonymous. Unfortunately there are very few instances of BIM.
The biggest mistake made by most people new to BIM is to assume that BIM is all about technology, and so focus all their efforts on mastering the technology rather than considering the impact that the application of this technology will have on the processes among Owners, AEs, Contractors, Subs, Business Product and Service Providers.
IFMA BIM Lifecycle Operations Community of Practice (BIMLO COP) Kickoff Meeting Video – http://www.gosee.tv/bimlco/
Standards (OMNICLASS, COBie, IFC), Common Terms, Definitions, Metrics, Cost Data (Standardized Cost Data, example-RSMeans)
Life-cycle Information
Open digital technology supporting the above
Continuous Training and Improvement
via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software and services for construction cost estimating and efficient project delivery – IPD, JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA…featuring the best representation of RSMeans Cost Data, exclusively enhanced 400,000 line item database.
BIG DATA, BIM, Life-cycle Management of the Built Environment
National Institute of Building Sciences buildingSMART alliance™ has released The National BIM Standard-United States™(NBIMS-US™) Version 2 (V2). The document is intended to cover the full life cycle of buildings—from planning, design and construction to operations and sustainment.
via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software – JOC, IPD, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA – exclusively enhanced 400, 000 line item electronic RSMeans Cost Data.
Let’s face it, the virtually singularly low rate of productivity of the AECOO (architecture, engineering, construction, operations, owner) sector for the past several decades is due to our CULTURE.
As a group, we are kings of the “not invented here” syndrome… or the “my way is the better way” syndrome. Also, the “let’s keep the Owner in the dark” or the “let’s not work together”, and the “bid low and make it up in change orders” , or “let’s accept the lowest bid and hope for the best” approaches to ruin.
As I’ve previously noted, the altered world economic and environmental landscapes will force CULTURAL change in our industry. Architects, Engineers, and Contractors new motto will be “our best customer is a smart customer”. Why? It’s simple, collaboration and improved “cradle to cradle” facility life-cycle management approaches will be required for survival. Furthermore, cloud computing and proven collaborative construction delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and “IPD-lite”, also known as Job Order Contracting, the latter for facility repair, renovation, sustainability and minor new construction, will converge to enable knowledge sharing among all facility stakeholders.
The signing of an agreement between The American Institute of Architects and the
National Institute of Building Sciences to Work Together on Promoting Building Industry Research and Knowledge is just one indication of the our “changing AECOO landscape”. It demonstrates the two organizations’ mutual interest in the design, construction, operations and maintenance of high-performance buildings and the desire… no better yet the recognized NEED TO COLLABORATE on issues surrounding these topics.
A primary initial goal of the “partnership” is the joint development of an on-line portal for building industry research and knowledge. It’s amazing how many in our industry are not even aware of NIBS or Smart Building Alliance. The march toward BIM, and recognizing its true potential as “efficient building life-cycle management support by technology and standardized processes, taxonomy, etc.” vs. “pretty 3D pictures” will know hopefully gain traction and momentum.
Building Information Management Framework - BIMF
via http://www.4Clicks.com – premier software for cost estimating and efficient project delivery – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, IDIQ, POCA, MACC, BOA ….
In many ways BIM, Life-cycle facility management, sustainability, and high performance buildings are interchangeable terms… some of us just don’t know it yet.
BIM is the life-cycle management of facilities (vertical and horizontal built environment), support by digital technology. Thus BIM is part process and part software. Life-cycle management includes all physical and functional conditions of a structure (physical condition of major systems, sub-systems, components, functional conditions-suitability for current mission, life/safety/security, access/ADA, utilization, ….) and all associated strategic, capital, and tactical planning. High performance building management and sustainability also includes these factors, with a focus upon environmental impacts-Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality.
The benefits of BIM, Life-cycle management, sustainability, and high performance building strategies go well beyond financial considerations, though productivity and improved performance is sorely lacking within the AEC communities.
The following are just a few of the benefits of Sustainability and High Performance Buildings:
– Improved building occupant productivity ( studies indicate that approximatley $260B Billion lost annually due to poor indoor air quality-Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory). Productivity gains have also been linked to factors such as day lighting (7-8%), temperature, ventilation,
To put facility costs into perspective, here’s an example from the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). Annual costs in the private office building sector average $200 per square foot for salaries, $20 per square foot for building costs, and $2 per square foot for energy use – a 100:10:1 ratio. It is therefore relatively easy to calculate direct cost savings relative to productivity and energy improvements.
via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for efficient construction project delivery – visual cost estimating and project management – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA, and exclusive enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database.
Fram,ework for High Performanc Building Managment, BIM, and Sustainability
References:
Source: Quantifying the Hidden Benefits of High-Performance Building, TAMU Mays Business School Cooperative Study, December 2011
Bryson York, Emily. (2010, August 28). Goodwill, better business grow from going green. ChicagoTribune.com.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2010). LEED for New Construction.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Gregory.(2006). Greening America’s Schools Costs and Benefits.
Beko, Gabriel, Geo Clausen, & Charles J. Weschler. (2008, October). Is the use of particle air filtration justified? Costs
and benefits of filtration with regard to health effects, building cleaning and occupant productivity. Building and
Environment, 43(10), 1647-1657.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2009). LEED® for Retail.
Gardner, Ken. (2010). Overcoming Barriers to Green Building.
Miller, Norm & Dave Pogue. (2009). Do Green Buildings Make Dollars and Sense?
WBDG Sustainable Committee. (2010). Sustainable.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Issa, M.H., J.H. Rankin, & A.J. Christian. (2010, January). Canadian practitioners’ perception of
research work investigating the cost premiums, long-term costs and health and productivity benefits
of green buildings. Building and Environment, 45(2010), 1698-1711. Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 2(3), 193-208.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
Hoffman, Andrew & Rebecca Henn. (2008). Overcoming the Social and Psychological Barriers to Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their
Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building
Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Lipow, Gar W. Cooling It: No Hair Shirt Solutions to Global Warming.
Cascio, Wayne and John Boudreau. (2008). Investing in People. (p. 195-215). Pearson Education, Inc.
The National Building Information Modeling Standard-United States™ (NBIMS-US™) Project Committee has approved 18 submissions to be included in Version 2 of the standard. Areas addressed include – reference standards, information exchange standards, and best practices.
Approved reference standards:
Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) 2×3
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) XML
OmniClass Tables 13, 21, 22, 23, 32 and 36
International Framework Dictionary (IFD) Library Update
Approved information exchange standards:
Construction Operations Building information exchange (COBie)
Information Delivery Manual/Model View Definition (IDM/MVD) Design to Spatial Program Validation
IDM MVD Design to Building Energy Analysis
IDM MVD Design to Quantity Takeoff
Approved best practices, guidelines and applications:
BIM Project Execution Planning Guide – V2.1
BIM Project Execution Plan Content – V2.1
Minimum BIM
Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) Coordination Requirements
Planning, Executing and Managing Information Handovers
via http://www.4Clicks.com – Leading Software for Efficient Project Delivery Methods, Cost Estimating, and Project Management – JOC, SABER, IPD, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA – All in one application.
(NBIMS-US™) Version 2 (V2).
LEAN Construction Project Delivery Methods - Job Order Contracting, IPD, 5D BIM 