The BIM generation
Building Information Modelling cuts across the entirety of the construction process, from design and design development, and value engineering through to take-offs, facilities management and whole-life costing. It is the depository of as-built data to the building process. Within Fenwick Elliott, we are increasingly finding ourselves being asked to deal with issues relating to BIM and this reflects the general increased knowledge of, take-up and use of BIM. The latest NBS National BIM Report,1 released in April 2014, noted that awareness of BIM has risen from 58% of participants in 2010 to 95% today. More importantly, in the last year, 54% have used BIM on at least one project –15% more than in 2012. Developments continue apace within BIM itself.
Everyone should be aware by now that in the UK, the government’s construction strategy requires all centrally procured government projects to utilise BIM in the form of a fully collaborative 3D computer model (Level 2) by 2016, with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic. It is, indeed, three years since that strategy was first published. The government believes that the wide implementation of BIM technologies, both domestically and abroad could improve sector productivity and lower costs due to improved information flow and greater collaboration. This is why BIM has been placed at the forefront of the government’s ambitions to achieve:2
(i) 33% reduction in the initial cost of construction and the whole-life costs of built assets;
(ii) 50% reduction in the overall time, from inception to completion, for new build and refurbished assets;
(iii) 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the built environment; and
(iv) 50% reduction in the trade gap between total exports and total imports for construction products and materials.
The seven components of Level 2 BIM
During 2014, the government’s BIM Task Group set out the following key components of Level 2 BIM:
(i) PAS 1192-2:2013 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of assets using building information modelling;
(ii) PAS 1192-3:2014 Specification for information management for the operational phase of assets using building information modelling;
(iii) BS 1192-4 Collaborative production of information. Part 4: Fulfilling employers information exchange requirements using COBie-code of practice;
(iv) Building Information Model (BIM) Protocol;
(v) GSL (Government Soft Landings);
(vi) Digital Plan of Work (in preparation); and
(vii) BIM Classification System (in preparation).
Two of the items on the list, PAS 1192-2:2013 and the CIC BIM Protocol, came out last year. Two more, as we discuss, came out in September 2014, whilst to date there seem to be no plans for a formal GSL policy document. As can be seen, two are works in progress.
One of the key issues that has taken on an increased importance over the past year is what happens when the building is finished. How does BIM fit in with facilities management? In theory it should do so rather well.
PAS 1192-3:2014
March 2014 saw the introduction of PAS 1192-3: Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling. PAS 1192-3 introduces three key concepts:
(i) organisational information requirements (OIR): the data and information required to achieve the organisation’s objectives;
(ii) asset information requirements (AIR): the data and information requirements of the organisation in relation to the asset it is responsible for; and
(iii) the asset information model (AIM): the data and information that relate to assets to a level required to support an organisation’s asset management system.
The idea is to try and ensure that the OIR and the AIR will be linked to the Employer’s Information Requirement under the construction process and that the construction BIM model (the Project Information Model) will seamlessly link into or contribute to the AIM. One of the key ways to do that is to encourage, if not ensure, greater engagement at the outset of a project. This is closely linked to the GSL policy.
Government Soft Landings (GSL)
The essential principle behind the government’s GSL philosophy is that the ongoing maintenance and operational cost of a building during its lifecycle far outweighs the original capital cost. If this is recognised through early engagement in the design process, then there is greater scope to achieve both savings and increased functionality. The simple premise is to use BIM to ensure that the finished building matches the client’s expectations or to put it another way, to align the design and construction of a building with its operation and management. Further, the BIM process will leave a lot of information behind; potentially this will be a valuable resource for those actually using the building. The four key areas are:
(i) functionality and effectiveness;
(ii) environmental;
(iii) facilities management; and
(iv) commissioning, training and hand over.
There are already signs of industry collaboration and cross over. Stage 7 of the RIBA Plan of Work 2013 includes post-handover monitoring and feedback. Indeed, it is important to be able to measure progress and performance. With the government’s scheme, there is a considerable focus on the setting of targets and on measuring progress against those targets. Outcomes are defined at the beginning of a project and incentives are set to achieve those outcomes. One potential result of this need for some form of monitoring might be a changed approach to handover, with the project team not finishing and leaving on practical completion but extending their contract to provide support and a Post-Occupancy Evaluation (“POE”) in relation to the operation systems for up to three years post-completion (the time-scale that is usually put forward). That said, it would seem to make practical sense to carry out the POE to coincide with the end of the defects liability period.
This new approach is inevitably going to lead to new legal questions. The building contract may need to make reference to the extended involvement on site. How will this extended involvement cut across practical completion, the warranty period and insurance? How do you judge whether or not the building is living up to expectations and/or is meeting the required standards? What might the consequences be? And if there are standards or expectations that must be met, that is presumably edging towards a fitness for purpose obligation.
BS 1192-4 Collaborative production of information
The BS 1192-4, which was released in September 2014, defines the UK usage of COBie (or Construction Operations Building information exchange). COBie is an internationally agreed information exchange schema for exchanging facility information between the employer and the supply chain. The idea is that COBie can help by providing a common structure for the exchange of information about new and existing facilities, including both buildings and infrastructure. The intention behind the BS 1192-4 and COBie is that information can be prepared and used without the need for knowledge of the sending and receiving applications or databases thereby ensuring that the information exchange can be reviewed and validated for compliance, continuity and completeness.
The missing components
The two remaining components needed to complete the suite of standards, protocols and guidance that will deliver the government’s definition of Level 2 BIM and satisfy forthcoming public sector requirements are the Digital Plan of Work and the new BIM classification system. The NBS has secured the contract to develop a free-to-use Digital Toolkit that will serve as an online checking and validation system for BIM projects. Use of the toolkit will be compulsory for all public sector projects when the requirement to meet Level 2 BIM comes into effect in 2016. The plan is for the BIM toolkit to make available a Digital Plan of Work alongside a BIM classification system that will incorporate definitions for over 5,000 construction objects at each delivery stage of a project.
The European Union and BIM
Europe is catching on too.3 The new European Union Public Procurement Directive (EUPPD) which came into force on 17 April 2014 aims to encourage the use of BIM in public works. The EUPPD states:
“For public works contracts and design contests, Member States may require the use of specific electronic tools, such as of building information electronic modelling tools or similar.”
Whilst clearly the use of BIM will not be mandatory, the EUPPD does go some way in encouraging or pushing member states to recommend or specify the use of BIM. One particular point that those issuing UK tenders need to take into consideration is that when implementing the EUPPD, member states and contracting authorities must take care not to fall foul of the non-discriminatory requirement. The EUPPD is clear that the tools and devices to be used either in electronic communication or BIM must be non-discriminatory, generally available and interoperable with the ICT products in general use. The tools and devices must not restrict access to public procurement. If the tools and devices proposed are not generally available, the contracting authorities must offer an alternative means of access. Furthermore, public contracts must comply with the principles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: equal treatment, non-discrimination, proportionality and transparency.
Therefore, contracting authorities in each member state must consider the technical platforms/standards which they intend to use and ensure that they do not restrict access or competition between potential tenderers. Using an open and neutral data format (IFC), of course, assists with interoperability and should therefore limit issues of discrimination.
LODs (levels of detail or development): what the client expects
We have always maintained that the adoption of Level 2 BIM should not mean any radical change to contracts. We still hold to that view. Traditional design responsibilities should not change. As we have discussed, the GSL policy might lead to changes in how we deal with completion. However there is one issue that perhaps an eye does need to be kept on, and that is the level of information that an employer wants. And the opportunities offered by BIM might mean that an employer considers that they want to see a higher level of detail at an earlier stage in the construction process than is traditional. The formal LOD system is a rating system of five levels, from LOD 100 to LOD 500. It is often described in the following way: LOD 100 simply means a chair; at LOD 500, information must be provided about the manufacturer, supplier, colour, model number and date of supply. The BIM Protocol is likely to provide details of the LOD that is expected. If, as is recommended, the BIM Protocol is a contractual document which takes precedence over existing arrangements relating to BIM, then what happens if the Protocol talks about the early provision of a high level of LOD, which conflicts with the information set out in the employer’s requirements? A simple building maintenance strategy might unexpectedly become a whole lot more onerous. This is not necessarily a problem, but it is an example of the care parties should take when agreeing their contracts.
Conclusions
BIM will continue to evolve and present new technical, practical and maybe legal challenges. However, they are challenges which, it is clear, everyone is more than willing to overcome, because they recognise the potential benefits. Watch this space!
- 1. www.thenbs.com
- 2. Construction 2025 – Industrial Strategy: government and industry in partnership (HM Government)
- 3. That is, Europe in the European Union sense – certain countries such as Finland and the Netherlands have been at the forefront of BIM development, encouragement and innovation.