Feature Article: Shovel Ready Building Information Models?

by Nick Ballard

Some months ago, Cambashi  discussed the impact of US government stimulus money being spent on “shovel ready” construction projects (see CADCAMNet).  We tried to provide a rational view of which types of technical application software were likely to see sales growth as a result of this expenditure. 

We felt that individual productivity applications were likely to benefit more than applications designed to provide a multi-disciplinary, whole-project view.  The primary reason was that if a project is shovel-ready, it is probably too late to get the various players to co-operate around a more complete dataset defining the project.  Yet it is also true that construction applications can also promote efficiencies once projects are initiated, to better-coordinate the construction plan and on-site activities, as well as check against design and buildings standards as projects progress.

A contributory factor to this is the fragmented nature of the industry, with only a few participants in a position to see the benefits of whole project optimization.   And yet most of the industry buzz relates to the more sophisticated applications – the systems that offer some level of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and the vision of transformation of fractured industry processes into a cost-efficient, error-free supply chain in which everyone wins.

Having followed developments in this sector over a number of years and looking at the old and new BIM tools on offer, I reflected on these things over the Christmas period.  How ready is the construction industry?  Just what is on offer from vendors to the AEC industry? How is it all supposed to help?  BIM has become a buzz-word, just like PLM a few years ago, for everything that is new and shiny in the construction software universe.  “You’re either on the BIM or off the BIM,” with apologies to Kerouac, so far as the race to garner dollars is concerned, so suddenly everyone is talking BIM. 

BIM can be as straightforward as developing a link with document management to deliver standard and up-to-date revisions of the drawings linked to the model.  Or it can involve creating and maintaining a 3D model of a design from various CAD packages, assigning rules to design elements as well as cost and time parameters, and importing project planning data, to end up with a building and construction simulation model (4D) that goes into estimating and costing (5D) and links to enterprise purchasing and payment systems.  Such integrated systems usually only exist in plans and pilot projects; however, there are examples of companies embracing BIM beyond traditional 3D design, albeit on a small scale at the moment, that may show the way forward.  And this is good news for the construction software industry; something that is growing, like a rose in a snowfield - a rare sight indeed.

Speaking to a Construction Director in a construction management company recently, he extolled the abilities of BIM to produce models and simulations from different systems for use in bid preparation and presentations to clients and planning authorities.  When I asked about use of that model down-stream, he replied that a simple model with a small number of objects, such as integrating the architectural design with the structural design to resolve clashes and provide a timeline for construction and simulations, was relatively cheap to create.  

“If I were to build a full MEP model for a simple project, it would cost me over $100K; and the MEP contractors would gain the most, not me.”   An engineering manager of a large pump manufacturer told me that the on-site alignment of walls, pipes and fixtures usually bore no relation to the design they were working to.  So it appears my construction director was right.  Anything that eliminates waste, rework, lost-time and materials would be worthwhile having in the context of the whole project; the issue really is “who gains” and “who pays?”  

Of course, if you are a manufacturer or specialist constructor, making use of off-site construction techniques and pre-fabricated modules, linking your processes to an accurate model for estimating and timing of manufacture and installation on-site, then the benefits of a BIM approach are more tangible as the rewards stay within your contractual obligations.  Similarly if you are operating in a design-build-operate environment or as a construction or facilities manager, a full BIM model can be of enormous benefit.  So it is within small niches or within specific disciplines that we see elements of the innovative use of BIM.  

Old habits die hard, and there is resistance to some aspects of wider BIM from old practitioners, tending not to trust the quantities they are given, for instance.   Practice has told them they always need more; the idea of relying on a computer model and simulation to price, procure and pay for value-added in a project causes professionals great discomfort.  Yet to deliver the vision of a smoothly running BIM project, these prejudices must be addressed by the industry and old practices must be put aside.  And change on this scale is perhaps the most difficult thing of all to achieve - as Mark Twain said, “I’m all for progress; it’s change I hate!”