BIM in beta - BIM Task Group

www.bimtaskgroup.org

p26

23rd

BIM

in beta

Edition

@BIMgcs

p12

p40

Interview

with Rob Manning

WE E K LY NEWSLET TER

What is

the cost of BIM?

Week ending 23rd June 2013

V i e w t h i s w e e k ’s Round the parish news

BIM in beta

an overview of BIM Task Group Labs

BIM in beta Read more T h i s w e e k ’s f e a t u r e s t o r y


Newsletter, 23rd edition | Week ending 23rd June 2013

DEPARTMENTAL ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT OFFICER ACTIVITIES (1) Nuclear Philip Isgar

Training Development

• Updates to the BIM Overview presentation progressed • Work commenced on BIM Commercial, Process and Technical modules • Richard Lane attended meetings with CITB and CIC to discuss supply-side training needs and accreditation.

{ Adam Matthews }

{ Philip Isgar }

{ Anne Kemp }

{ Richard Lane }

Departmental Engagement and Support Officers

Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO)

• Richard met with DIO BIM Lead to prepare for workshops. • Graeme developed draft process charts based on the Digital Plan of Works and DIO processes, in preparation for the first Process Workshop • Initial list of candidate early adopter projects shared by DIO

• Philip had a meeting with Nuclear Decommissioning Authority - Magnox and the National Project Manager involved in Information Management. • NDA are developing an Information Governance Strategy, the Programme will be launched through the Knowledge Hub on the NDA Website. • The first BIM4Nuclear Working Group took place at Risley concentrating mainly on the NDA Estate. • Representation and support from NDA Magnox, Programmes, West Cumbria and RWMD together with Sellafield Limited, National Nuclear Laboratories and the Nuclear Skills Academy was fantastic. • Next week, Philip is meeting the Nuclear Industry Association, the MD of NNL and the Head of Design for Sellafield Limited. Sellafield Limited.

{ John Lorimer }

{ Nick Shaw }

{ Graeme Tappenden }

3



DEPARTMENTAL ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT OFFICER ACTIVITIES (2)

Environment Agency

Highways Agency (HA)

• Phil Jackson met with HA to continue development plan.

{ Adam Matthews }

{ Philip Isgar }

• Environment Agency is progressing its collection to inform the COBie for Infrastructure investigation. EA’s presentation is ready for BIM4I conference on Monday 24th. • Progressed discussions with the Early Adopter candidate projects. • Next week we are finalising process mapping and Plain Language Questions.

{ Anne Kemp }

{ Richard Lane }

Departmental Engagement and Support Officers Ministry of Justice (MoJ) Nick Shaw & Richard Lane • Nick attended another early adopter project review and BIM workshop at HMP Durham, with supply partners Kier, Aedas and Turner and Townsend. The team are producing a BIM benefits analysis, to capture benefits as the programme begins the fit out stage.

{ John Lorimer }

{ Nick Shaw }

{ Graeme Tappenden }

• The MoJ BIM Implementation Team meeting discussed development of the Client Information Requirement document (working with the SAA BIM Special Interest Group) and development to enable data transfer to the Asset Management systems.

5



CORE TEAM MEMBER ACTIVITIES (1) Mark Bew

Task Group – Chair

• Presented Level 3 strategy to the Arup – Salford Summer School • Worked on the Level 3 strategy • HS2 Process workshop was very successful • BSi meeting to discuss BS8541:5 • Reviewed MoJ Data server procurement process • Reviewed COBie for infrastructure requirements

David Philp Cabinet Office

• Catch up discussion with various BIM4 community members • Chaired the CIOB Members day BIM workshop in Leeds (thanks also to John Eynon and Steve Lockley)

{ Mark Bew @ HS2 BIM workshop and process mapping }

• Keynote at the Crystal BIM Event (lots of great discussion on operational lifecycle) • Chaired the RIBA/NBS: BIM for Manufacturers Event - great panel discussion including: Simon Rawlinson, Mervyn Richards, Stephen Hamil, BIM2050, Crossrail and Great Portland Estates…..). John Tebbit, Construction Products Association (CPA) announced that they will be forming a BIM4M2 Group for the manufacturing sector. • CPA launched their guide “BIM for the terrified” { LINK } • BIM update with Australian and New Zealand BIM communities – future knowledge share • Keynote at the Mott Macdonald BIM Forum • Discussion with various vendors about Technology Vendor Alliance and Level 3 development • Presented BIM to the Electrical Contractors Association (ECA) conference – Electric Event • Prep for GCS Summit. Many thanks to Soluis for pulling this together and NBS/Crossrail and URS for the content.

7



CORE TEAM MEMBER ACTIVITIES (2)

Adam Matthews

Departmental Delivery Lead

{ Adam @ Nordic BIM Community in Stockholm }

• Programme development with Richard and Anne • Preparations for Departmental update at the Government Construction Summit (2nd July) • Adam met with Nordic public owner BIM Community in Stockholm on 17th June to discuss EU /Nordic collaboration on public BIM programmes and standards and preparations for the EU BIM Conference programme and aims. The BIM Task Group thanks Norway’s Statsbygg and Sweden’s Specialfastigheter for arranging and hosting the meeting. Great prospects ahead for EU & Nordic collaboration on BIM. • Adam went to Brussels to make arrangements for the BIM Task Group convened BIM Conference (October 2013)

9



GSL Events and Conferences. A keynote speech about Government Soft Landings(GSL) was delivered to about one hundred and fifty attendees at the Crystal Clear BIM conference. This highlighted that GSL is not just about handover from construction to operation and building services engineering performancealthough that is very important. Discussions and presentations took place on the relationship between GSL and BIM. There was a great deal of interest in the GSL and BIM relationship from software providers, construction companies and statutory authorities.

{ Rob Manning }

Planning is well underway for the BIM/GSL Knowledge Hubs to be run at the Government Construction Summit on the 2nd July 2013. The BSRIA “Soft Landings User Group” meeting took place this week. The group are collating examples of “hard landings’’ and conducted an update on Government Soft Landings and the RIBA Plan of Work 2013.

GSL and the Government Departments

Tools associated with GSL

We have mapped GSL processes with the Ministry of Justice and they have progressed withembedding GSL. We worked with Ministry of Justice to develop a refined version of the GSL progress self-assessment tool for their projects. We continued to work with Ministry of Justice so that we can provide case studies of the lessons learned to date.

A learning outcomes framework is about to be produced to enable the development of training for the Government Soft Landings Champions. This will be discussed with the civil service training provider to ask how they advise that training provision can be delivered.

We are planning to hold the first Stewardship meeting of the Central Government GSL Leads in late July. The purpose will be to confirm the GSL policy, identify how GSL is progressing and seek feedback on the future shape of the guidance and policy. We believe that this a very important meeting to really engage the Department GSL Leads and enable them to share experience.

The focus on tools now shifts to development of government client requirements for transferring data from construction to operation and to decisions about how we might be able to standardise our requirements for performance evaluation. These are the technical tools associated with GSL and will require considerable input to establish government client requirements.

We are holding a number of meetings with local authorities and private clients who are embracing some elements of the GSL approach on current projects and we are hoping that they will provide early case studies identifying benefits achieved.

{ Deborah Rowland }

{ Roy Evans }

11



INTERVIEW

BIM: PEOPLE MATTERS 14 QUESTIONS WITH ROB MANNING In this week’s interview Rob Manning, Government Soft Landings (GSL) Implementation Lead explains how GSL is being pragmatically applied and the importance of operational life-cycle, especially when it is enabled by BIM.

R

ob Manning -1-

Hi Rob, can you tell us a bit more about yourself and your background? As a building services engineer I have been fortunate to have worked mostly with leading design consultants in the UK and with some of the most exciting people in our industry. It seems odd but one of my most formative experiences, early in my career, was a year spent with a commissioning company because I learned so much about the real outcomes of design and the importance of controls engineering and commissioning. Five years with a contracting company in Zimbabwe and

Botswana then brought a very practical outlook to my engineering before I returned to higher level roles in the UK. You can imagine that these roles have taken me throughout the UK and around the world working on projects in the market sectors of health, data processing, hospitality, retail, exhibitions and commercial offices. Most recently my work in the private sector was focused upon best practice which was how I first became involved in 2003 with the group of companies and individuals who were sponsoring development of the soft landings principles.

13



INTERVIEW

BIM: PEOPLE MATTERS 14 QUESTIONS WITH ROB MANNING

Further to obtaining a degree in what was then called environmental engineering I became a Chartered Engineer and a Fellow of CIBSE. Never mind the work – I am immensely proud of my three grown up children, two of whom were born in Zimbabwe and all of whom seem to have itchy feet. Jennifer who is usually with her husband in Brunei but is currently here and about to deliver my first grandchild, Alastair who is working as a civil engineer in Qatar and Gillian who has taken a belated year out and is flying from Bangkok to Vietnam as I write.

-2As a past president of CIBSE were there any key learning experiences you would wish to share? Being president of an institution is full of learning experiences but I offer only one observation which leads to a question for the young members of our construction industry – perhaps for the 2050 Group. Institutions are charitable organisations with a duty to the public. They comprise of people, individual members who join to promote their discipline to the public and to obtain a chartered status that recognises their education and training. Perhaps institutions

evolved when most professional practices were comprised of only one or two people, I don’t know. The amount of voluntary work that is done by individual members to promote their discipline is and must always be recognised. Of course the institutions have a very important meeting place and collective voice through the Construction Industry Council. I believe that such a communications vehicle is essential, however it is provided, and I am impressed by the current willingness of institutions to work together under that forum.

There is no structured industry source of funding to pay for the development of best practice and guidance. The outcome is often an unbalanced response in terms of time and cost burden and it is at risk of giving an unbalanced outcome although I must say that the integrity of the volunteer authors is exceptional.

One of the key messages of the GSL approach is to demand that design and construction teams do consider and predict the economic, social and environmental factors for the asset in operation.

But institutions do not represent companies although to their credit a lot of companies do support their employees in contributing to the work of the institutions. When we turn to institutions to represent the supply chain in terms of guidance and best practice we actually turn to those individuals who voluntarily give their time or their companies time for the greater good of the industry.

My question - I would ask those starting out on their careers if there could be a better model to engage with the professional practices, manufacturers and construction companies who all benefit from best practice guidance so that they all contribute their intellectual property and share the burden of time and cost involved in promoting their discipline?

-3So Government Soft Landings (GSL), last week we interviewed Deborah Rowland on GSL from a policy perspective, how does your work compliment this? Because Government Soft Landings (GSL) is aimed at the government construction client my work is partly about

introducing the departmental construction and operation teams to the rationale for the approach and partly about developing the tools that will support the application of the approach. I would suggest that a lot of the principles are already adopted in departments and that the GSL guidance provides an overview and an enhanced focus on identifying required outcomes, setting targets, representing operational needs, monitoring development of the project and measuring the outcomes when the asset is being used. There is a programme of GSL work until March 2014 which addresses the implementation of GSL within government departments as well as publicity, development of training for client GSL Champions, development of performance evaluation measures, GSL for infrastructure and a number of associated tools to inform data transfer processes from construction to operation so that construction data can populate asset registers and asset management systems. Information and guidance about GSL is shared publicly on www.bimtaskgroup.org under the GSL pull-down menu. Weekly newsletters are published on the website and the Construction Industry Council further distributes a website link to all its members. The Government construction client is saying what it requires from the supply chain; it is engaging with a number of early adopter projects and is preparing government department people to say

15



INTERVIEW


what they want from both the construction and operation parts of the supply chain in order to obtain assets that perform as required by the client strategy.

-4Do you think clients are committed to optimised life-cycle solutions or are they still capital expenditure driven? This question always seems loaded as though clients are to be seen as villains. I admire clients, most of the clients I have worked for are more astute than me and I want more of them please, they take risks with their money in looking for a return on investment and they create work for me and the rest of the construction industry. Sure they worry about capital expenditure but their financial objectives are much broader than that. I like to link this discussion to the question of what is sustainable development. Everyone has their own definition of sustainable development but I am comfortable with the Zagreb Declaration for Healthy Cities. [click to view diagram]

I have tried to list the environmental, economic and social objectives for private and public sector projects. [click to view diagrams]

Of course the government client is spending our money to provide services for the public so although the financial objectives might be expressed differently I would hope that there is equal determination to obtain the best longterm value for the tax-payer’s money. There is also a time factor to be considered; failure to meet social objectives quickly manifests itself as an economic impact. I think it must be acknowledged that failure to meet environmental objectives often manifests itself over a longer period and the economic cost of “clean-up” and damage to corporate and social image may not rest with the perpetrator. For that reason I continue to believe that environmental objectives must be legislated. Nonetheless I have yet to meet a client who will ignore a well researched and structured case that certain design or construction options from the social or environmental arena will prejudice their economic objectives. The supply chain has to get smarter at developing the tools to address the prediction of social, environmental and economic

outcomes associated with particular design and construction options. If we can prove that long term costs of maintenance or energy or poor functionality will offset the value of the investment, then I am sure that clients will respond positively. For the government client one of the key messages of the GSL approach is to demand that design and construction teams do consider and predict the economic, social and environmental factors for the asset in operation.

-5Can you give an example of how GSL can liberate better business outcomes for a government department? I believe that I have just done that in the answer to the question about the client position on the whole life performance of an asset. It is often said that in order to know the savings from a “soft landing” we have to know the extra cost incurred by a “hard landing”. To test if anyone actually reads these ramblings I would ask for people to feedback to the BIM Task Group any examples (anonymous if need be) of hard landings and to say if and why they think that the GSL approach will not deliver better business outcomes? Isn’t this focus on long-term outcomes what a client should expect anyway?

The role of the client’s GSL Champion is to ask the right questions at the right time. Given indicative questions as one of the GSL Tools and given a specific departmental slant to those questions the task becomes one that the client should be carrying out anyway and can ask without any additional cost. Performance evaluation requires specialist skills particularly with regard to conducting surveys of people and energy use studies/prediction of carbon dioxide emissions. There is an associated cost whether the evaluation is procured by the client, operator or contractor but it can be procured in competitive tender and is usually a small fraction of the capital cost and generally delivers operating cost savings that pay for the evaluation. It is a service that the construction industry should have been pricing and delivering anyway.

-6How important is Post Occupancy Evaluation to the GSL process? I prefer to call it performance evaluation which can then apply to any asset and besides, the evaluation in a building is during occupancy, not after occupancy. From what has been said already, performance evaluation is clearly fundamental to GSL. We define outcomes required from the asset, we define specific performance targets, we constantly remind the design and construction

17



INTERVIEW


{

Sustainable Development Sustainable development: the necessity of working to ensure that economic development - and all its supportive infrastructural needs including transport systems – is environmentally and socially sustainable: meeting the needs of the present in ways that do not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. * Zagreb Declaration for Healthy Cities. WHO 2008

} 19



INTERVIEW


Sustainable Development - Public Spending

Sustainable Development - Private Spending

SOCIETY

ENVIRONMENT

Customer needs

Resource

Staff needs

Waste

Process / Business needs

Pollution

Public needs

Bio-diversity

SOCIETY

ENVIRONMENT

Customer needs

Use of scarce resource

Staff needs

Waste

Process / Business needs

Pollution

Society needs

Bio-diversity

ECONOMY Construction cost Asset value Sale value

ECONOMY

Revenue Earnings

Construction cost

Revenue Costs

Asset value

Cost and value to the taxpayer

Sale value Revenue Earnings Revenue Costs Profit

21



INTERVIEW

BIM: PEOPLE MATTERS 14 QUESTIONS WITH ROB MANNING Some specific examples related to data definition; team of those objectives and when the asset is in operation we measure how it performs so that we can fine tune performance, feedback lessons learned to the whole project team, record performance in a departmental data repository and analyse the performance data to set new benchmarks for required outcomes and performance targets.

-7You have a feedback loop, how does this work and where does this in-use data actually go? Performance evaluation takes place for the first three years of asset operation. The design and construction team are called upon to take part in that evaluation to the extent that security requirements allow. The performance evaluation report which includes operator performance is shared with the whole team, again subject to security constraints – client, operator, designers, construction companies, suppliers, specialist contractors so that their successes and failures are known and are not repeated. We are still discussing where the data and reports should go but I believe that the data and reports should go to a central departmental repository which will allow interrogation and analysis

to enable benchmarking of required outcomes and performance targets. It is only at the departmental level that people will be able to understand and interpret the data. Data that has been processed and identified as benchmark information should probably then be provided to the Cabinet Office as information for the State of the Estate reports but again that still has to be decided.

-8How does BIM help support GSL? GSL and BIM are synonymous, they have the same objectives but they are articulated in different ways. Some specific examples related to the geometric model; If we look at the BIM model with a view to saving time and cost by considering the access and replacement strategy for engineering equipment are we applying BIM or GSL? If we look at the BIM model with a view to the functionality of architectural proposals for security screening and we decide to save time and cost by omitting unnecessary screening are we applying BIM or GSL?

If prior to Construction we can use data from the common data environment to run an analysis tool that will give us a better prediction of operational energy cost and enable us to make changes to reduce cost are we applying GSL or BIM? If during Handover and Close-out we can save time and cost by using the data from the common data environment to enable an automated transfer of the information required for an asset register and a planned preventative maintenance schedule are we applying BIM or GSL? If during Operation we can use data from embedded sensors to detect any increase in bearing temperatures and thereby save time and cost by applying condition based maintenance are we applying BIM or GSL?

-9Are manufacturers involved in the GSL process and how can they help? I refer firstly to the previous answer. We will need manufacturer’s data to enable those GSL/BIM activities. The following examples represent activities that are already carried out but are not necessarily automated through the common data environment. From my discipline we need manufacturer’s data on a product’s dynamic

performance eg boiler efficiencies at part load, pump performance curves to enable an enhanced analysis tool to automatically run the energy cost prediction of different options from the common data environment. We need information about mean time between failures to enable better predictions of whole life cost from the common data environment. We need cleaning and replacement frequencies for construction products to enable automated production of operating costs. We need data on operating temperature tolerances to enable condition based monitoring. Others (not the manufacturers I suspect) will have to decide how much of the data is required at each work stage because clearly not all the data is required at the Concept stage for example. Secondly we need product manufacturers to be engaged in the feedback process from the performance evaluation so that their products can evolve to give improved performance and so that they can develop new products to meet user requirements.

-10BSRIA has a Soft Landings framework, how does GSL fit with this? Government Soft Landings (GSL) is aimed at the government construction client and adopts the principles

23



INTERVIEW


of “soft landings” as published under the banners of UBT and BSRIA. The purpose of GSL is to obtain better constructed assets by bridging the gap between construction and operation. It is not intended to conflict in any way with “soft landings” which I would say was initially aimed at the construction industry and focuses in particular upon improving the measured performance of building services systems. Government Soft Landings needs adoption by the construction team of the principles and activities of “soft landings” and then looks beyond that to the role of the client and the operator. As well as looking at environmental measures it looks at the economic performance measures of capital cost and operating cost and begins to look at the social measures initially involving those associated with functionality and effectiveness. The GSL approach emphasises the role

of the client in defining the strategic outcomes they require from the constructed asset and in representing the views of the asset operator to inform the design and construction decisions. The operator is essential because they should help to deliver the required strategic outcomes over a part of the asset lifetime. We need the soft landings community to look at the GSL approach and identify if it offers opportunities that they can build upon?

-11So Rob, any interesting hobbies that you can tell us about? No, I’m afraid not. I play golf off an eighteen handicap. I walk hills and less frequently nowadays I walk mountains.

I have a strong affinity for everything to do with the natural world and realised recently that I have been a member of the RSPB for over forty years. It might seem a contradiction to that affinity that I love to fish in rivers for game or coarse fish. In the locker of things still to do, I played violin in my pre-teen years and I won art prizes during my teen years. Those pursuits are long since abandoned but I hope to re-visit them.

-12Has Debi offered to take you scuba diving yet? No.

-13What’s your favourite saying or quote? I can think of two;

to the GSL message and is used quite frequently in soft landings circles. “The English will spare no expense to get something on the cheap” Attributed to Nikolaus Pevsner The second I just like personally. “And unextinguish’d laughter shakes the skies” - Homer

-14Any piece of advice you would offer young professionals who have just entered our industry? Decide what sustainable development means to you and then work out how you can help to deliver it by innovative thinking and by developing a real understanding of practical design, construction and operation. One does not work without the other.

The first seems to lend itself particularly

Rob Manning works with the Cabinet Office BIM Core Group, particularly in terms of developing the tools required for the implementation of Government Soft Landings. He continues to lead the Construction Industry Council work on the integration of professional services in relation to BIM and chairs the CIC BIM Forum. Rob was President of CIBSE in 2010 and has a background of working with design consultancy, commissioning and contracting companies

25


BIM i n b e t a

an Overview of BIM Task Group

LABS

E

arlier in the year the ’labs‘ area of the BIM Task Group website went live. Within this private area it is possible to see a glimpse of the UK Government’s BIM


a disclaimer. In this short article, Stephen looks at some of the various developments that can be found here.

of work to align with this new digital process and this, and associated guides, are now live at { ribaplanofwork.com }.

1. Digital plan of work

2. Plain language questions and information requirements

As a client, it is best if you know what information you require and then, as the project develops, you can check that the required information has been received. In terms of information requirements this may be just enough information for space planning at an early stage, but later in the project this will be all of the information required to manage the asset to its optimal performance. The new Construction Industry Council (CIC) digital plan of work has eight clear project stages from (0 to 7) and has been developed by all of the construction industry institutions working in collaboration. A guidance document and set of frequently asked questions are also provided and the image below shows one of its illustrations.

Objects within BIM can be as large as the complex (e.g. secondary school) or as small as a single product (a heat detector). A set of plain language questions have been developed to represent the client’s minimum information requirements. These questions relate to each stage in the digital plan of work. In response to these questions, around 20 objects have been developed in terms of their property-sets. Each object is classified by Uniclass 2 and the property sets have been authored by NBS to represent UK construction practice. Each property has a short definition and there is an indicator to which stage this information relates back to the plain language question. Detailing property-sets to this level allows construction manufacturers to provide information in a consistent format – it also allows software vendors to work with consistent information to improve interoperability.

by Stephen Hamil

vision beyond what is already public. This work is ’beta‘ (work in progress) and feedback is required from industry. To access this private area visitors must register for an account and sign

[click to view diagram]

The work of the various institutes collaborating together must be credited. It is also worth noting that the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) have already updated their plan


27


3. Uniclass 2 Another example of the construction industry institutes working in collaboration is the Construction Project Information Committee’s (CPIC) new Uniclass 2 classification system. This contains a number of unified tables that are logical and consistent, integrates buildings with infrastructure and supports object decomposition. Within the labs area there is an interactive browse and search tool as developed by the RIBA and the University of the Arts London. This allows users to interrogate and better understand Uniclass 2.

heating at early stage, through to the specification of the vision panel within the door at a later stage.


I’d encourage everyone interested in BIM to register for the ’labs‘ area and spend time reviewing the great content there. The vision of where the UK Government intends to go with its BIM Strategy is clear and it is around open standards and well-structured information.


5. Sample software tools


There are also some free software tools that may be used to automatically check the COBie datasets. If checking data manually it is both time consuming and prone to error. With robust software tools this process can be greatly improved. These tools check for compliance (e.g. Unique records, referential integrity), continuity (differences between datasets) and completeness (have the minimum data requirements been provided).

USEFUL LINKS:

4. Sample models To support the theory, a number of IFC and COBie models are included. These show a simple school classroom and its information development throughout a project. IFC can be viewed using software that can be downloaded for free. The COBie data is available in Microsoft Excel form. It is interesting to see how this information develops from the performance of the space in terms accessibility, lighting and

{ Stephen speaking alongside the BIM Task Group Core Team }

• BIM Task Group - http://www.bimtaskgroup.org • NBS BIM - www.thenbs.com/bim • National BIM Library http://www.nationalbimlibrary.com


• Stephen’s blog http://constructioncode.blogspot.co.uk

29



DIGITAL PLAN OF WORK A guidance document and set of frequently asked questions are also provided and the image shows one of its illustrations. The information required is on the y-axis, the project timeline is on the x-axis and then the various actors have different views on this data along the z-axis.

31



33



35



37



39


What is t h e c o s t of BIM? CIC East Midlands Regional Hub Event 1 R e p o r t - June 2013

O

n the 12th June the East Midlands hub held its first even at Nottingham Trent University. Called ‘The Cost of BIM’, the event set out to consider the

by Sarah Davidson

processes aligned with BIM and the potential BIM offers to consultants, contractors and clients. Speakers were Richard Flisher and Ady

Wren of architects CPMG, Chris Kinman and Scott Davey of contractor Willmott Dixon, Michael Hiscock of solicitor Freeth Cartwright, Professor Benachir Medjoup of Nottingham Trent University and Sarah Davidson, EM Hub Champion and Gleeds Head of R&D.

Chris and Scott presented a case study based on Phase 1 at Birmingham City University, demonstrating 4D functionality and also modelling software which will be used to support the facility in operation. It was recognised that this first project had offered a learning experience and taking a managed and modelled information approach generated some challengers that were ultimately far outweighed by the benefits. Client support for BIM, with clear Employers Requirements and an on-going interface with stakeholders was considered to be absolutely essential. Richard followed this with his experience in setting up design processes using BIM software over the last two years. Having been a practice proficient in CAD, investment in terms of both training and software/hardware had been required to support the BIM environment. Does he think it was worth it? Yes definitely. Again, there was a learning process but staff work more efficiently and are better able to communicate design intent to project teams. He’s also found this better communication drives more confidence/predictability around project outcomes.


properly incorporate protocols into contracts, the role of the information manager and obligations around ‘good faith’. He also considered the potential impact of BIM on insurance requirements and the operation of integrated project insurance. Professor Medjoup considered changes in learning methodology needed to support working in increasingly collaborative teams. He talked about current challenges in educating for interdisciplinary collaboration, touching on requirements for increased knowledge about BIM amongst academics and an integrated approach to curriculum development. He also covered project based learning techniques and the benefits these can offer to undergraduates. The introduction and close was delivered by Sarah. She set out the objectives of the BIM Hub, plus requirements for information management/transition and the need for collaboration, explaining what maturity level 2 means according to PAS 1192-2:2013. Resources published by the CIC were highlighted along with the BIM Task Group’s website, their learning materials and the roadmap for BIM. The event was well attended by people operating within client bodies and the design, construction and operation supply chain. Discussion extended well beyond the formal presentation with interesting questions posed around file formats, exchange of data and the process of federating models.

Michael looked at BIM from the legal angle – the balance of risk in contract arrangements, the ownership of design models, the need to

41


In addition, a ‘BIM awareness and understanding’ questionnaire was distributed among the attendees, the results of which are appended overleaf. Feedback through the questionnaire identified differing levels of BIM awareness and activity within the region and the vast majority of attendees noted that their BIM knowledge had been raised as a result of attending the event.

3. BIM Knowledge and Understanding

The EM Hub is directed by a steering group who will meet again shortly to consider the timing and format of the next event. This will be published through the CIC website along which also holds the presentation delivered on 12 June, 2013.

c. The level of understanding of PAS 1192:2.

Feedback

Three questions were asked to understand: a. The level of overall knowledge and understanding of BIM; b. The level of understanding of various new BIM roles (e.g. BIM manager, BIM coordinator, information manager, project delivery manager etc); and

[click to view diagrams]

Sarah Davidson

2. BIM Status Sarah is a Director at Gleeds, heading up their R&D department and leading a number of programmes supporting information management and developing service delivery. Her work also extends to training and knowledge transfer within both Gleeds and the RICS

Attendees were asked to identify a statement which best described their current ‘BIM status’. Respondents were given multi-choice options and results are as follows

Questionnaire Analysis Background Attendees were asked to complete a BIM feedback questionnaire in order to gauge BIM understanding and progress. Most attendees were East Midlands based with many operating on a national scale. The analysis below indicates responses/feedback to questions put to the group.


1. BIM Awareness (prior to event) Attendees were asked to comment on their level of BIM awareness prior to the event. Responses are indicated as follows



Of those who responded with ‘BIM active’ it was difficult to determine whether this meant they were operating in ‘big /collaborative BIM’ or ‘little/lonely BIM’ environments.

She has in excess of 20 years project experience working with a variety of clients on many different build projects in both quantity surveying and project management roles. Latterly her work has focussed on matters surrounding inflation, information modelling and value management both in the UK and overseas. Sarah is active within the RICS: she is lead author for the black book guidance considering cost analyses and benchmarking, an Associate Assessor and she also contributes to a number of steering groups active in the organisation. Her work leading BIM development within Gleeds has led to appointment by the CIC to be the chair for the East Midlands Regional BIM Hub.

43



BIM Status

Attendees were asked to comment on their level of BIM awareness prior to the event. Responses are indicated as follows (percentages indicate level of responses from attendees):

Attendees were asked to identify a statement which best described their current ‘BIM status’. Respondents were given multi-choice options and results are as follows (percentages indicate level of responses from attendees):

45



BIM Knowledge and Understanding

Three questions were asked to understand: a. The level of overall knowledge and understanding of BIM; b. The level of understanding of various new BIM roles (e.g. BIM manager, BIM coordinator, information manager, project delivery manager etc) c. The level of understanding of PAS 1192:2.

47



CIC EAST MIDLANDS

REGIONAL BIM HUB EVENT JUNE 2013

49



Contact us We would love to hear from you

Events THE ASSET MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Do you have any comments on the Labs Portal, your upcoming events or general comments? Then contact us at: [email protected]

Call for papers conference 27 - 28 November 2013 | Etc. Venues: St Paul’s, London, UK Abstract submission deadline: Friday 28 June 2013 The IET/ IAM Asset Management conference is the must attend event for asset management professionals. Delegates come together to learn and exchange the latest technical knowledge, and to meet and network with other like-minded individuals. The conference covers all aspects of asset management including both principles and processes, technical and managerial aspects focusing on tools, standards and data and the application of business processes. Submitted papers are welcomed on the projects, case studies and theories that focus on the establishment, implementation, maintenance, and improvement of an asset management system. {Click on circles for PDF and website links }

51