The steady growth of the design-build industry over the past 10 years is an indication to architects and engineers that building owners are looking for better methods of project delivery. Three areas in particular are in obvious need of improvement: system conflicts and collisions management; continuous schedule, cost, and value management; and integrating shop drawings with construction documents.
Building Information Modeling (BIM) tools have a role in improving those processes, but they alone will not fix the underlying problem. The larger solution is better information sharing processes between architects, engineers, and builders. BIM tools are the means for automating and streamlining those processes, but it will take better processes and policies to break each discipline out of its own realm and into a common information-sharing infrastructure that delivers the efficiencies clients expect.
In addition to better serving clients, better information sharing will have a side effect of particular interest to architects. It will help restore their roles as the “master builders,” which has eroded as construction managers have taken control of cost estimates. Architects can assume that role again if they understand the interdependent roles that information sharing and BIM tools play in this new scenario.
At a minimum, BIM tools will allow for better coordinated plans, sections, elevations, and details, because all of these 2D drawings can come from the same 3D model. However, coordinating mechanical, electrical, plumbing, civil, and structural systems with architectural elements requires cross-discipline cooperation, as much as it requires integrated modeling coordination. The first step is not to make sure everyone is using the same software, but to find out what 3D skills each discipline can bring to the table and when each discipline should contribute their 3D information to a common model. By taking 3D geometry from previous projects, each discipline member can establish quickly how well the parts will work together in a common environment. From this baseline, the team can determine how often they must import each system into the shared model, or reference them for coordination. Generally, weekly or biweekly synchronization of building systems is adequate.
Most BIM tools today allow for quantity take offs in some form, yet few architects coordinate these automatic inventories with the contractors’ estimates. For the most part, architects provide 2D plans at each phase for the contractor to use in a manual cost estimating process. Architects seem to fear that if the quantities in the model are wrong, then they will be blamed for inaccurate cost estimates. Consequently, an important check and balance is lost as builders and designers retreat to their respective silos of responsibility. At the most basic level, designers can automatically calculate square footage, cubic yard of concrete, and other materials space-by-space.
In addition to quantity take offs, architects can use BIM models for energy calculations and lifecycle analysis, as well as site analysis. Again, few firms regularly take advantage of these capabilities. In fact, the use of real BIM modeling in design firms is still quite low. A report from the the American Institute of Architects (AIA) last year indicates that fewer than 10 percent of U.S. firms are using any form of BIM for billable work. Also, firms using BIM may not be using it on all of their projects. Again, the tools are not the issue. The talent available to use the tools is the challenge, and architects, engineers, and builders are not yet willing to exchange information. Value is the issue here. Architects need to show owners the lifecycle impact of decisions and quantify why one decision is a better value than another decision. If they do not, then the owner will generally seek the lowest-cost solution. Likewise, architects need to invest in relationships, staff, and education that make it easier to present value based choices.
Shop drawings and construction documents currently are developed separately from each other, also as a form of checks and balances. This process creates redundancy and errors. Firms using BIM are able to extract construction documents from 3D models. They can exchange files with steel detailing packages and mechanical detailing packages, if they choose to do so. Many subcontractors and manufacturers are using automated cutting equipment, but the information driving this equipment is independent of the construction documents. With proper coordination, subcomponent design, and adequate lead time, subcontractors should be able to deliver better fitting parts at a lower cost. Supply chain integration is common in the manufacturing world, but not in the construction industry.
The current state of the market should not be taken as a negative sign. On the contrary, there is a huge opportunity for the industry and architects in particular. There are three key starting points for those interested in changing this struggling supply chain. First, subcontractors need to be at the table earlier in the process, just as general contractors are today for preconstruction services. Second, architects and engineers need to agree to exchange 3D geometry and test their process before the design work starts. Third, architects and engineers need to develop agreements with subcontractors and general contractors that remove the risk in sharing 3D models.
None of this is really new. There are a number of firms that have taken one or all of these steps. The challenge is for the industry as a whole to accept these approaches as standard procedure. So many companies today think their big decision is what software to buy, but that is not what is holding them back. Actually, software buying decisions are best made after an improved process is in place, not before. Even using 2D drawing files today, architects could collect subcontractor input, share unique backgrounds instead of showing the same information in each discipline’s files, and provide the electronic documents with quantities to builders. Obviously this process is much more effective when 3D information is being shared.
When a firm has better processes in place what questions should be asked to select a BIM tool? BIM is about changing anything in any view, so you should have full control over where and how you can reshape an element. And as your design develops, you should be able to modify, reshape, and rearrange parts or the whole of your model at any point in time. Transitioning from 2D to 3D is a big step. Your BIM software should help you in that process by offering you an equally powerful 2D and 3D environment where you can select just how much you want to model in 3D. Working habits are different. Your software should offer alternative ways, so you can adjust the software to your needs instead of adjusting yourself to the software. The complexity of a 3D BIM model is greater than conventional 2D drawings. Therefore it is of paramount importance that your BIM software effectively handles large models with full sets of documents as well. Finally, to complete large projects on time, you need to work on the same project file in teams. Your BIM software should give a large group of designers easy access to the same project file. You should also be able to break up a project into small modules and effectively cross-link them as necessary.
Architects can become master builders again if they share information more broadly and sooner. Contractors are generally leading the charge in design-build because they are willing to take risks, but those creating the design information can lead if they can collaborate more effectively. Architects lost an important role in project delivery 30 years ago to construction managers. Today they have an opportunity to regain their leadership position if they are willing to take the lead in this process change.
INFO: Graphisoft (www.graphisoft.com)