One of the prime expectations of UK BIM
mandate was, through improved communication and collaboration; it will bring
greater clarity to projects. It would also enable better decisions and reduce risks,
resulting in greater certainty of successful delivery. It will standardize
procedures and the way information is provided and shared. But, holding it back
is the very fact that every design practice and contractor has a diverse setup.
Expectations from BIM
mandate was that it would drive increased collaboration and initiate a
different set of behavior within building construction projects. Along with
this anticipated change, a suite of standard documents - PAS was also designed
to unify the approach across the industry. PAS 1192-2:2013 is a set of specifications
for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction
projects using building information modelling. This was to ensure that almost everyone
nearly speaks the same language when it comes to BIM.
So what needs to be
assessed is, has PAS suite and some of those beliefs, helped the building
construction industry to collaborate more effectively and efficiently or is
complicating the situation furthermore?
As a matter of fact, architects,
contractors, surveyors and several other stakeholders are still struggling to
interpret the documents and the protocols. Some of them are experiencing BIM level
2 anxieties. They also fear, if they are appropriately positioned to implement BIM level 2.
LOD is sometimes
interpreted as Level of Detail instead of Level of Development. This
Specification uses the concept of Levels of Development. Level of Detail is
essentially how much detail is included in the model element, whereas Level of
Development is the degree to which the element’s geometry and attached
information has been thought through. It is the degree to which project team
members may rely on the information when using the model. In essence, Level of
Detail can be thought of as input to the element, while Level of Development is
reliable output.
Level 2 BIM has been presented more technically
challenging than what it actually is, says Bhushan
Avsatthi, Director (AEC - Division) - Hi Tech iSolutions LLP.
The challenge is that none
of our clients have the time to sit and read all the government standards and
documents to ensure they tick every single box as it is massively complicated.
We, as BIM service provider firm, are sent across papers on BIM or are invited for
seminars and conferences, to navigate professionals from the industry. We are
confident of achieving all the principles of Level 2, and it is our constant
endeavor to stay complaint to the minutest detail written in government
documents.
We aim to engage at the client’s
executive board level and work towards a holistic approach to define business
case and strategy to embrace the value that BIM can provide and maximize
benefits, yours occupants, and ours.
Though we believe and
follow the standard driven approach, we strongly feel that these standards
could be better coordinated. Several PAS and BS 1192
documents are greatly articulated, but they are missing on the fines in terms
of a progression path that can link together all the RIBA stages. Is it
advisable, leaving it out for the project teams to work it out on their own, is
something which I am not very sure of.
What industry needs right
now is a guide or a navigation tool that can link all the five key documents
from BS 1192 to PAS 1192:5, each of
which are referring to other BS
standards, or are referring to different set of information that you will
have to look out for, on you own.
i.
BIM is just a tick
box activity and lesser or no changes underneath
ii.
BIM will add to complexities,
instead of showing any real improvements
iii.
BIM project
benefits are likely to materialize only for experienced patrons
iv.
BIM’s effectiveness
in the design stage proved successfully
v.
BIM is completely
leveraged by almost every contractor in the construction stage
vi.
Efficiencies from
BIM in the operational phase are clearly visible
vii.
BIM will prove to
be a facilitator for enhanced and effective collaboration
viii.
BIM will help
achieve better margins and/or productivity
I am afraid that the standards
have not had the desired effect of unifying suppliers approach to BIM. The
reason is that everyone’s level of understanding is different, and until that
is resolved, BIM level 2 is not going to happen as expected.
While discussing this with
one of a colleague architect from the industry, he said they get affected at
the time of handover. They as an architectural firm, receive different models
from different BIM modelers, engineers and contractors. All these
models come in with different levels of graphical detail and level of component
information. The models that we receive are not standardized, however; we are
compelled to utilize the information it holds to carry out post-handover editing
to attain standardization, he added.
Would it be wrong to say
that BIM has achieved the success in spite of the standards, not because of
them? There still are firms who work with their teams, not to follow the PAS
1192 documents, but to decide practically as to what they are going to do, what
worked in their favor and what did not. None of the PAS documents can make
people understand practically what they are supposed to do, in order to execute
a BIM project, or does it?
Some building construction
industry experts have all together a different counter-BIM argument to this
episode. They are of the opinion that the benefits of BIM seem quite minimal if
you look at them with a mindset, that most of the key design processes would be
already in place.
Why should we be dependent on BIM for our already set
processes including need for consultants to collaborate? Our contracts are all
equipped to create that environment to provide 3D models and run clash
detection.
Our CAFM systems are already populated with asset data. And not to
forget that we have mastered these, with decades of experience. BIM walks in
just to bring in all these disciplines and process under one umbrella. Client’s
point of view says no benefit from BIM, however; BIM consultants are
experiencing benefits out of it - big time.
Conclusion
Improved collaboration is what BIM is for. Why do we
need software to help us do that? How beneficial and advisable it would be to
bring teams together, who aren’t working together towards solutions?
