ThinkSpace

BIM and the Process Improvement Movement

It gives me pleasure to introduce a guest author to BIM ThinkSpace – Sohail Razvi. Through the wonders of web-based professional networking, I met Sohail and we started a discussion that continues to date. This is Sohail's first web contribution into the topic and I'm delighted he's chosen BIM ThinkSpace for his well-thought piece. The below article explores a new angle into BIM Framework generation as Sohail argues how it could develop around a set of well established, measurable and institutionalised framework, the CMMI…You can download this 8-page article as a PDF file (317KB) from here.

BIM and the Process Improvement Movement

Building a case for a combined BIM-CMMI Framework

Introduction

The Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Facilities Management (AEC/FM) industry is almost certainly the only functionally-critical (and highly regulated) industry that builds its prototypes live on the production line. This is mostly still done without the benefits of digital modeling, prototyping and simulations as many peer industries have done (think of the car and aerospace industries for example). The consequences of working without such models are apparent, at times painfully, to anyone who has financed, built, owned, designed or operated a piece of built environment of any size or function.

Other major industries have quickly recognized the immense power of constructing and testing a virtual prototype of their product designs through digital techniques before ‘going live’. This ‘prototyping behavior’ has required an immense amount of effort by these industries to get their act together yet allowed their services and products to be repeatedly delivered to clients with dependable quality, timing and cost. In so many industries, the ability to manage and control an increasingly complex ‘product’ throughout its lifecycle is dependent on highly systemized processes and efficiencies acquired through digital technology.

The BIM Episodes: Episode 8

Episode 8: Understanding BIM Stages

Many industry discussions affectionately expand on BIM’s far-reaching deliverables: seamless collaboration, construction sequencing, shareable databases and fully integrated project delivery. While all these possibilities are foreseen today and are becoming more readily accessible as we speak (type), it is important to understand the deployment road ahead. Such an understanding will help us focus on the task at hand, better allocate available resources and prepare for the BIM-flavoured future.

The previous episode has described the 1^st dimension of the BIM Framework – ‘horizontal axis’ representing AEC players and their deliverables. It is now time to introduce the 2^nd dimension – ‘vertical axis’ of BIM adoption. This episode intends to identify deployment milestones or ‘stages’ that AEC players pass through on their way to fully integrated practices. There are three stages/milestones:

·         BIM Stage 1: Object-based modelling

·         BIM Stage 2: Model-based collaboration

·         BIM Stage 3: Integrated Practice

Note that each of these stages is further subdivided into sequential steps. What separates ‘stages’ from ‘steps’ is that BIM Stages are transformational or radical¹ changes while BIM Steps are incremental² ones within them. In this post, we’ll focus our attention on identifying the transformational stages within BIM Nodes. We’ll do that after briefly describing the Pre-BIM status which insistently prevails within the AEC industry.

The BIM Episodes: Episode 7

Episode 7: Understanding BIM Nodes

The confusion in BIM discussions and implementations can be dramatically reduced by systematically analysing the larger-than-life concept. We’ll do that by subdividing Building Information Modelling into its basic components and then relate them back to each other in a – hopefully – meaningful and useful way.

As discussed in BIM Episode 6, there are three dimensions to every BIM discussion. The first dimension is what I term BIM Nodes – BIM circles if you wish – and it’s responsible for identifying industry’s stakeholders and their deliverables. The other two dimensions, BIM Stages and BIM Lenses, will be discussed in following posts.

So what do these BIM Nodes represent and why are they needed?

The BIM Episodes: Episode 6

Episode 6: A systematic understanding of BIM

Building information Modelling can be a very difficult topic to define. Just try to discuss it with a colleague and you end up going all over the place. For example, you start to discuss the effects of BIM on industry and you end up comparing software solutions. Or, the topic starts with how to collaborate around the Model and the discussion shifts to discussing risk-shedding vs. risk-sharing, insurance and design fees. It doesn’t stop there, you try to explain to someone how to migrate from 2D to 3D or implement a basic BIM tool and conversation shifts uncontrollably to discussing complex integrated practices.

SMARTcodes - the shape of things to come...

Building Information Modelling has promised a lot of added-value automation out of a well-constructed object model. After a few years of inflated expectations, it is good to start witnessing an increase in the availability of industrial-quality (as opposed to research-quality) tools targeting the rich data embedded within models. One of these 'tools' is SMARTcodes, an initiative by the International Code Council (a US-body). The ICC has produced a couple of demos intending to show how to "automate code compliance checking":

After registering here, you can participate in a couple of demos: one is labelled 'automatic' where the user theoretically uploads the BIM model (IFC format of course), inputs the location and decides on the code checking engine...The resultant deliverable can be a 'Solibri Model Checker Report' (a PDF document with images, summary table and element compliance list) or a Solibri Model (viewer required). The other demo is labelled 'manual' and relies on the user to input all relevant information into the tool...You can see the section reports being generated in real time and you end up with a printable collated one.

Of course, the automatic version is more BIM-like while the manual version caters for 'model-poor' consultants - an error prone double entry approach if you ask me. It is hard to understand why both approaches fall under the SMART banner - only the automatic approach fulfils the declared mission statement!

In a nutshell, SMARTcodes is a very promising tool indeed and I think it can be extended quite significantly...I look forward to uploading my own model and sifting through the results.

To read a tad more about SMARTcodes, you can start here (PDF Presentation - 967KB) or read the Frequently Asked Questions on ICC's website.

From 2D to 3D – a sound advice

I have read this entry and found the advices provided in it sound and succinct – a good chance for me to ease into public blogging again.

Gary Lamit - a mechanical CAD consultant - helps companies migrate from 2D to 3D. Below is the most relevant part of what he had to say (emphasis added):

"I think the overall challenge for companies trying to adopt 3D is administrative," says Lamit. He says companies have to work with their employees to ensure they [are] going to able to work with whatever system the company chooses to employ. Lamit says the decision needs to made with input from the actual designers otherwise users can be mislead into purchasing systems that will not help them. He suggests creating an advisory board made up of both designers and executives to review the various options. "There have been many times I have seen a company choose one person to implement a system and they say 'I love [X],' except everyone in the company is already trained on [Y]. It has to be a group effort almost like a think tank."

Along with the challenges of implementing a system that is appropriate for one's organization is overcoming resistance from employees. "There is also the resistance you sometimes get from 'legacy workers.' Employees who don't want to learn a new package. There are people who still love 2D AutoCAD and if you look hard enough you can find people who love still love using the drafting board."

Lamit says the solution to dealing with these individual is to make sure they understand how the new system will benefit them and the company. "To be clear I don't mean bringing in a CAD representative who shows them a demo and claims the actual work of drafting doesn't have to be done anymore," says Lamit.

Another challenge Lamit sees is the need for training. He says a company cannot successfully integrate a 3D system without spending the time and money necessary to adequately train users on a new system. "I think there is a real need for training. Our feeling is that if companies aren't willing to put hundreds of hours of effort into training their employees there is no way to develop an effective staff." He goes on to say he feels software sellers often convince customers that their employees will only need a few hours of training on the new systems. Lamit says this is a sure prescription for failure. He adds employers should not only expect to invest time and money into educating employees but also they should expect employees to need to re-educate themselves regularly on the subject. "One thing that the administration has to understand is that continual education and support is the only thing that is going to make it work. I believe a work force that is trained and happy and using software that is more mainstream makes them a happier employee," he says.

Finally, Lamit points out there can be a challenge with hardware. He says most systems currently running 2D systems probably are not capable of running the more powerful 3D software out there. However, he says the cost should be weighed against the improvement in the reduction in production time. "I think the productivity increase is going to pay back the money spent on the upgrade."

The MCAD industry has been on object-oriented 3D for more than 15 years. The AEC industry can find a lot of guidance in what they have learned so far...In a nutshell, the above parallels - in more way than one - what individual AEC companies need to do in the next 2 years...Why two years? Well, that's another blog entry sometime soon.

Thank you John Myers (author of the original article – ConnectPress - Published 10/15/2007)

BIM standards...a reminder

The emergent National (US) BIM Standard is an excellent effort by NIBS and the IAI and serves as a reminder for reluctant industry players to accelerate their BIM investigations and implementation efforts. The existence of a standard, arguably incomplete, is a strong indication of the rapidly maturing nature of BIM processes and policies (refer to the press release below). Make sure you download both documents: the Overview, Principles, and Methodologies (PDF 13.3 MB) and the equally important Appendices and References (PDF 2.6 MB)…

"National BIM Standard™ Version 1.0—Part 1: Out for Industry Review

Washington, DC—The first version of the National Building Information Modeling Standard™ (NBIMS) was released for a two month industry review period today. The document titled "National Building Information Modeling Standard Version 1.0—Part 1: Overview, Principles, and Methodologies" provides the capital facilities industry with its first comprehensive look at the full scope of requirements for Building Information Modeling (BIM). The review period will span from March 12, 2007, until May 21, 2007. Those interested in reviewing the document can obtain it from the NIBS National BIM Standard™ web site. This document is the first to be issued under the new NIBS buildingSMART® Alliance initiative announced February 27, 2007.

The NBIMS will provide the diverse capital facilities industry with a vision of how to support and facilitate communications throughout the facility lifecycle, from project inception through design and construction, even past demolition for improved operations, maintenance, facility management, and long-term sustainability.

The document was assembled by over thirty subject matter experts from across the capital facilities industry. It provides both a snapshot of where this burgeoning capability exists today as well as identifies work still needing to be accomplished. This first part of Version 1.0, which is now out for review, will be followed by Part 2 at the end of the year. Part 2 will contain items to be standardized across the industry using the NIBS congressionally authorized consensus process.

The NBIMS has six goals: 1) Seek industry wide agreement, 2) Develop an open and shared standard, 3) Facilitate discovery and requirements for sharing information throughout the facility lifecycle, 4) Develop and distribute knowledge that helps share information that is machine readable, 5) Define a minimum BIM, and 6) Provide for information assurance for BIM throughout the facility lifecycle. As an initiative under the buildingSMART® Alliance, it is garnering support form the widest spectrum of associations, agencies, organizations, vendors, and individual practitioners ever assembled."

The full NBIMS press release can be found here

Digital Project® – first impressions

I have decided to undertake the advanced training necessary to understand Digital Project – Frank O. Gehry's digital platform for design and construction. So over the past few weeks, I submitted myself to an intensive training regime which turned out to be very challenging yet highly rewarding.

FIRST let me share with you that I am more than impressed from the shear potential and raw power of this technology.  Of course, Digital Project (DP) is not a stand alone application and you can feel the enormous torque generated by Dassault's CATIA engine. But DP is slowly coming of age and it will help shape the Building Information Modelling discussion as it slowly gets adopted by industry's leading players.

SECOND: among many attributes that can be assigned to this technology, three things in DP impressed me the most: its scalability, flexibility and interoperability.

The scalability of its Master Model principle is ingenious. Literally hundreds of staff can be working on the same model without the need for a dedicated model server. In fact, it works within the principles of flat-file data management. Even low-cost Document Management applications can act as a permissions/versioning gateway for the shared model parts. This is definitely not the case for ArchiCAD and Revit although Autodesk is slowly  making headway on this issue with more 'intelligent model linking.  DP can subdivide the model into tens, hundreds or even thousands of interdependent 'products' and 'parts'. ..I have even seen a project in Hong Kong with 4000 individual parts ranging from the Building grid to the sprinkler's head.

Another thing that impressed me was its renowned flexibility of form. Throughout the training sessions and as it unfolded in front of my eyes, I regretted not taking too much notice of the math teacher during high school. DP is a math-magician! If you know the math, you can have your cake and eat it too. Any form can be created and recreated! Also, I am still to find a form that cannot be parameterised and controlled to the nth degree. An ability so critical for design morphologies and investigations. The new version will even include a workbench (a set of tools) named Imagine and Shape which does exactly that; a fluidity of form that can turn with a click of a button into a set of buildable/fabricable geometry…

Now, the other attribute should be very interesting to IAI members. The new V1R3(Version 1, Release 3…still in Beta2) has another new 'workbench' called Functional Architecture which is totally built on top of the IFC schema…That is, DP rather than creating its own schema of objects and relationships has opted to use the one developed by the IAI…Though potentially limiting in scope, it is a very smart approach indeed! DP uses the schema to generate Walls, Doors, Spaces, etc…This makes V1R3 (when it gets released) the first commercial IFC modeller! Other software like Nemetschek, Nemetschek/Graphisoft, Autodesk and Bentley translate their in-house schema into an IFC file (with all the loss caused by translation). While it is still too early to judge the limitations of DP's approach, it is definitely brave, commendable and highly interesting.

THIRD and in case you're wondering, Digital Project can be very intimidating as well. I can summarise it in three words…Usability, Workflow and Role-Reversal

The formative and parametric abilities of DP are quite amazing although I dare say that its usability is pretty low and the learning curve is pretty steep. Deploying it within a corporate environment is definitely a strategy-level decision. You cannot slip it within the operational strata as other BIM allows you to. DP's implementation should be very rewarding if ample care is given to the change-process this technology unashamedly generates. When it comes to workflow, DP does NOT compromise. A user MUST follow it; it doesn't subdue itself to current AEC processes as Revit® does for example. At the process level, you are always haunted with the principles of Process Integration and Supply Chain Management; concepts not yet well understood within our industry. DP will probably FORCE itself into the market; osmosis is not an option. In many respects, DP is a very mature product and this maturity is that of the so-well-proven CATIA®. On the other hand, you feel that the Architectural, Structural and MEP workbenches are in their infancy but are growing – growing really fast. The strength of its kernel will no doubt allow it to tackle the most complex of projects at data, visualisation, documentation, specification and scheduling levels. On the human/operator level, DP will need a super user, an end-developer and a model manager…Without the highly skilled professionals, its flexibility and power may turn against it….

I left the Role Reversal till the end because DP can be highly transformative and even threatening. You can feel the enormous potential of this software as it renders itself to Architects, Engineers and - more so - to owners and developers. I can't really discuss this topic in an already inflated blog entry, but – if Architects should embrace anything or fear anything – it would be the supply chain management that DP's master model forces upon them…

The BIM Episodes: Episode 5

Episode 5: BIM Data Sharing Methodologies

BIModellers can share little or much information available across desperate industry domains. The optimal BIModeller would have the ability to display, calculate and share all data necessary between disciplines without loss or workflow conflicts  This ability, or lack of, is a function of the technology used, the process deployed and the parties (knowledge workers) involved.

The BIM Episodes: Episode 4

Episode 4: BIM vs. Partial BIM

Adopting the graphical language of Figure 3.1 (Episode 3), a Building Information Model is sprung into digital existence whenever the object-based model includes different data colours; inter-disciplinary information generated in two or more disciplines or domains. That lacking, the model can only be labelled as a partial BIM.

The BIM Episodes: Episode 3

Episode 3: Focus on Information

"Architecture does not create buildings but creates information that creates buildings"
An elaboration on a quote by Robert Sheil, Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London [1]