Dissertation BIM

Building Information Modelling (BIM) The implications of using Building

Information Modelling (BIM) for public sector projects

Tahir Caratella

P08181595 ADTP3002

December 2011

The implications of using Building Information Modelling (BIM) for public sector projects

Tahir Caratella 2 P08181595

Abstract In recent years Building Information Modelling (BIM) is becoming more mainstream

in the Architectural, Engineering and Construction industry. Although not a statutory

requirement, the Government is trying to push BIM adoption through its construction

strategy on all public sector projects. This investigation looks at the potential benefits

and challenges posed by BIM, in particular within the public sector. The investigation

looks at research already carried out on BIM adoption by means of a background

study, as well as analysing a case study within the public sector. It goes on to

incorporate an element of primary research which tries to indentify the views of some

public sector authorities on BIM adoption. These views are then summarised to try

and indentify the implications of using BIM for public sector projects.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank everyone who has supported me during the course of this

investigation, in particular my wife, children and parents. I would also like to thank

the academic staff at De Montfort University, especially Chris Watts and John

Stanley who have been supporting me throughout my course, even with their busy

schedules. Finally I would like to thank David Cragg, Building Design Manager at

Leicestershire County Council, without whom I would never have had the opportunity

to embark upon this course.



Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 5

1.1. Building Information Modelling (BIM) and the public sector .......................... 5

1.2. Scope of the investigation ............................................................................. 6

1.3. Methodology .................................................................................................. 6

2. Background ........................................................................................................ 7

2.1. What is BIM? ................................................................................................. 7

2.2. The move to BIM ........................................................................................... 9

2.3. BIM adoption by the AEC industry .............................................................. 12

2.4. Benefits of BIM ............................................................................................ 16

2.5. Barriers of BIM ............................................................................................ 29

2.6. Conclusion of the background study ........................................................... 36

3. Case Study ....................................................................................................... 37

3.1. Introduction to the case study ..................................................................... 37

3.2. Why was BIM deployed on this project? ..................................................... 38

3.3. How does BIM work on this project? ........................................................... 38

3.4. Conclusion of the case study ...................................................................... 45

4. Primary Research ............................................................................................ 46

4.1. Target audience .......................................................................................... 46

4.2. Method of research ..................................................................................... 46

4.3. Responses to the research ......................................................................... 49

5. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 59

Bibliography ........................................................................................................... 63

Appendix A ............................................................................................................. 65

Appendix B ............................................................................................................. 66

Appendix C ............................................................................................................. 69



Table of Figures Figure 1 - Views of What BIM is (NBS, 2010) ............................................................ 8

Figure 2 - BIM Knowledge (Demian and Yan, 2008) ................................................ 13

Figure 3 - Importance of BIM in 5 years (Bernstein, 2010) ....................................... 15

Figure 4 - BIM use on projects (Bernstein, 2010) ..................................................... 16

Figure 5 - Perceived ROI (Bernstein, 2010) ............................................................. 17

Figure 6 - Views on adopting BIM (NBS, 2011) ........................................................ 18

Figure 7 - MacLeamy Curve (BSI, 2010) .................................................................. 20

Figure 8 - Key stakeholders in the BIM process (http://www.revitportal.com/, 2012) 23

Figure 9 - The benefits of BIM (Demian and Yan, 2008) .......................................... 26

Figure 10 - Level of business value of BIM (Bernstein, 2010) .................................. 27

Figure 11 - Relative importance of internal benefits of BIM (Bernstein, 2010) ......... 28

Figure 12 - Barriers to implement BIM (Demian and Yan, 2008) .............................. 32

Figure 13 - Views on adopting BIM (NBS, 2011) ...................................................... 33

Figure 14 - Challenges of using BIM (Gould, 2010) ................................................. 35

Figure 15 - Manchester Central Library (Building.co.uk, 2011) ................................ 37

Figure 16 - 3D model of Manchester Central Library (Building.co.uk, 2011) ............ 41

Figure 17 - BIM use among County Councils ........................................................... 50

Figure 18 - BIM use by project type.......................................................................... 51

Figure 19 - Future BIM use by project type .............................................................. 51

Figure 20 - Perceived / realised benefits of BIM ....................................................... 52

Figure 21 - Perceived / realised barriers of BIM ....................................................... 53



1. Introduction

1.1. Building Information Modelling (BIM) and the public sector

“Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset

information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016.

A staged plan will be published with mandated milestones showing

measurable progress at the end of each year.”

(Government Construction Strategy, 2011, p.14)

The above statement reflects the UK Government’s commitment to drive

forward the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM) within the

Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry in the UK.

According to Paul Morrell, the Government’s Chief Construction Advisor, in

relation to public sector projects, there will be a phased rollout over five-years

beginning next summer, 2012, with a view to getting all appropriate projects

into a 3D collaborative environment by 2016. (Architects’ Journal, 2011)

The Government’s commitment on the use of BIM has been the main driving

factor and inspiration for the research question. It gives thought to what the

future can hold in terms of opportunities and challenges that this new method

of design procurement can bring to the AEC industry in the UK and especially

for those in the public sector. This investigation attempts to find out and

address the possible implications of using (BIM) for public sector projects.



1.2. Scope of the investigation

The public sector covers a vast array of organisations ranging from the police

and local councils to the fire brigade and the National Health Service. For the

purpose of this assignment, the primary research element of this investigation

has been confined to county councils in England. This is due to time

constraints and the shear vastness of the public sector in the UK. Many

county councils in England undertake large scale construction projects,

especially when commissioning new schools or refurbishing older buildings

that deliver services such as libraries, museums or community centres. This

makes them a suitable target for the research element of this investigation

which looks at the impact of BIM on public sector projects.

1.3. Methodology

Before carrying out any investigations in relation to BIM in the public sector, it

is vital to try and establish what BIM is and how it has come about. BIM

adoption in the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry is

investigated, as well as the data already gathered with regards to the benefits

and shortfalls of adopting BIM. Firstly a background study using various

sources is carried out to understand BIM in more depth. Secondly, a case

study, based on a public sector authority, is examined. The case study looks

at BIM in practice. The background study and case study will help to inform

the research element of this investigation, which is carried out through the

means of a questionnaire, which in turn provides a basis for debate on the

impact that BIM may have on public sector construction projects.



2. Background

2.1. What is BIM?

There is often a misconception that BIM is about a piece of software, however

this is not the case. According to Demian and Yan (2008) Building Information

Modelling is a powerful set of design management tools that have been

highlighted by the AEC industry. It allows buildings to be modelled virtually

and stores information about the building in a central coordinated model

(Davidson, 2009). This view is confirmed by the BIM Working Party Strategy

Paper (2011, p.91) which defines BIM as a managed approach to the

collection and exploitation of information across a project. Other sources

define BIM on similar lines as a rich information model, consisting of

potentially multiple data sources, elements of which can be shared across all

stakeholders and be maintained across the life of a building from inception to

recycling. It is a technology that digitally represents a built asset and allows

extraction of data from it (National Building Specification (NBS), 2011;

Autodesk, 2011; British Standards Institute, 2010; Gould, 2010). A survey by

NBS (2010) asked participants to describe BIM. As a result the picture in

Figure 1 on the next page shows the type of words people chose to use when

describing BIM. The larger the word, the more often it was used.



Figure 1 - Views of What BIM is (NBS, 2010)

Some sources go further to try and emphasise that BIM is not just a piece of

software, but rather it is an activity and process. Snook (2011, p.24) says that

BIM is about the intelligent interactions of data and not about drawings,

façade, interior renderings and visualisations which are only derivatives of the

process. Snook quotes Sir Edwin Lutyens, a famous British Architect, over 80

years ago as saying “A working drawing is a letter to a builder telling precisely

what to build and not a picture to charm” This seems very appropriate in the

message that Snook (2011) wants to convey. It is about BIM being more than

just about buying a piece of software which says “BIM” on the box. Another

source, Eastman et al. (2011, p. xi), also emphasises that BIM is an activity in

terms of Building Information Modelling rather than an object in terms of a

Model. The text goes on to say that it is not a thing or a type of software but a

human activity that ultimately involves broad process changes in design,

construction and facility management. Awareness of BIM across the public

sector will be varied, however the research element of this investigation tries



to address the level of awareness amongst a selection of public sector

authorities through the use of a carefully constructed questionnaire.

2.2. The move to BIM

Over the years there have been many changes in the way that AEC design

technology has evolved. Until the mid-nineteenth century, the general method

of design did not change a lot. Engineers used simple tools (such as pen,

paper and ruler) to describe their buildings. However, with advances in

mathematics and building materials, the process of design changed and

improved rapidly. (Rabun and Blackmore, 1996; Stephenson, 1996 as cited

by Demian and Yan, 2008)

With the invention of the computer, 2D CAD as a new drawing tool was

adopted completely in the AEC industry in the 1980s (Phiri, 1999 as cited by

Demian and Yan, 2008). With the popularisation of personal computers, the

renowned software company Autodesk developed AutoCAD. Suddenly, all the

architects in the world started to learn and use this type of software to design

their project. (Leondes, (2005) as cited by Demian and Yan, (2008)) This

really took off in the 1980’s. The familiar layer metaphor that originated with

pin-bar drafting was easily adapted to the layer-based CAD systems of the

day, and within a few years a large percentage of construction documents and

shop drawings were plotted from computers rather than being manually

drafted on drawing boards. (Autodesk, 2002, p.1). These documents,

electronic or paper based, were presented as an unstructured stream of text

or graphic entities. This can be understood and checked by human beings,



but the lack of structure and meaning in the presentation means that it is

inherently difficult to reuse or check. It cannot be used computer to computer

– in other words, it is not computable. In this traditional approach, computer-

aided drafting was used, but there was a complete absence of information-

sharing and collaborative working. Life before BIM was characterised by the

massive amount of documentation that had to be printed and stored (British

Standards Institute, 2010, p.4).

Slowly technology began to affect the process. Electronic file formats were

exchanged with consultants instead of physical underlay drawings. This

meant that information was directly conveyed about the building that would

not appear in the plotted version of the file. The use of CAD files was evolving

toward communicating information about a building in ways that a plotted

drawing could not. (Autodesk, 2002, p.1) According to Eastman et al. (2011,

p.15), these systems were further developed with the introduction of 3D

modelling bringing advanced definition and complex surfacing tools. As CAD

systems became more sophisticated and more users wanted to share data

associated with a given design, the focus shifted from drawings and 3D

images to the data itself. It can be said that this is now the ‘information’ part of

Building Information Modelling.

A detailed explanation of this new need for data is given by the British

Standards Institute (BSI) (2010, p.4) where BIM is described as introducing

the benefits of shared and structured information. ‘Structured’ information

includes databases, spread sheets and tables. Sharing involves bringing



together sets of information produced by different organisations into a

common form. Information contributed by one participant is immediately

available to the others. BSI (2010, p.5) goes on to say that common shared

information allows an integrated, responsive value chain to be created.

Demian and Yan (2008) agree with this adoption of an intelligent data model

by saying that whereas 3D CAD modelling was merely collections of points,

lines, 2D shapes and 3D volumes, in the BIM concept, such geometric entities

can also have symbolic or abstract “meaning”, as well as quantitative or

qualitative data. One such example is a 3D model created in Sketchup, which

is merely a surface modeller and there are no attributes connected to the

geometric data.

What differentiates BIM from traditional 3D surface modelling is the use of

parametric objects, which form part of the information contained within the

model. In order to try and understand what parametric objects are, Eastman

et al. (2011) describes these objects as follows:

• Consist of geometric definitions and associated data and rules

• Geometry is integrated non-redundantly and allows for no

inconsistencies, whether in the 3D or 2D view.

• Parametric rules for objects automatically modify associated

geometries when inserted into a building model or when changes are

made to associate objects. For example a wall will automatically resize

itself to butt to a ceiling or roof.

• Objects can be defined at different levels of aggregation. Objects can

be defined and managed at any number of hierarchy levels. For



example, if the weight of a wall subcomponent changes, then overall

weight of the wall should also change.

• Objects’ rules can identify when a particular change violates object

feasibility regarding size, manufacturability and so forth.

• Objects have the ability to link or receive, broadcast, or export sets of

attributes, for example, structural materials, acoustic data, energy data,

and the like, to other applications and models.

2.3. BIM adoption by the AEC industry

Bernstein (2010, p.4) observed that the versatility of BIM has only recently

been begun to be appreciated by the AEC industry in Western Europe. BIM

adoption levels are lower in Western Europe against North America. In 2010,

a little over a third (36%) of the Western European industry participants in this

research reported having adopted BIM. This can be compared to the 49%

adoption rate in North America during 2009. The same research revealed that

the adoption rate for BIM in the United Kingdom among construction

professionals surveyed is 35%. Adoption is led by architects (60%), followed

by engineers (39%) and contractors (23%). This research goes further to

suggest that within the UK, contractors have not fully embraced BIM. Only

23% of contractors have adopted BIM, and only 7% use it on 30% or more of

projects. Like in North America, there is an indication that BIM use will surge

among UK contractors with heavy use (>30% of projects) expected to

increase to over 50% by 2012 (Bernstein, 2010, p.11).



Demian and Yan (2008) conclude from their survey that around 30% of

respondents knew nothing about BIM, around 60% knew a little and 5% had

fair knowledge about BIM, but none were claiming to be experts in the area.

Figure 2 shows the comparison between the US and UK on the subject of BIM

knowledge.

Figure 2 - BIM Knowledge (Demian and Yan, 2008)

A similar survey into the UK construction industry’s attitude towards BIM

conducted by NBS (2010, p.10) revealed that 43% of respondents were

neither aware nor using BIM, while 43% were aware of it and only 13% were

aware of and currently using BIM.

When asked about their understanding of BIM, 64% of respondents don’t

agree that BIM is all about the software. Only 18% thought that ‘BIM’ is a

synonym for 3D CAD drawings (NBS, 2010, p.12). So, according to NBS

(2010) this shows that more recently there is a good overall understanding of

BIM among the respondents that were aware of it.



The research by Demian and Yan (2008) shows that most of the respondents

were confident that BIM will be more utilised in the future and many of the

design teams are planning to adopt BIM within 3 years. NBS (2010, p.12) also

conclude that there will be an increase in the use of BIM over the next 5 years

with 85 per cent of those who are aware of BIM seeing themselves adopting it

for at least some of their projects. The research carried out by Bernstein

(2010, p.10) shows that over a third of BIM adoption in Western Europe (34%)

occurred over 5 years ago. Since that time BIM adoption has been steady but

flat—averaging slightly more than 10% during each of the subsequent years.

However, in the past year there has been a slight surge, with nearly 20% of

adoption taking place since early 2009. This trend seems to support the

research carried out by NBS (2010) mentioned earlier with regards to the

increase in awareness of BIM over the last few years.

There appears to be a perceived increased in the take up of BIM for the future

according to research carried out. 26% of respondents said that they will most

probably take on BIM in the future, with 12% definitely taking on BIM and only

2% not considering BIM for future projects (Demian and Yan, 2008). The

survey by NBS (2010, p.12) reflects this increase. In the survey the number of

participants using BIM for all projects in 2010 was 4%, expected to increase to

36% in 5 years’ time. Similarly the number of participants using BIM for

majority of projects in 2010 is 6% rising to 27% in 5 years’ time. In the

research conducted by Bernstein (2010, p.13), about one quarter of non-users

(24%) believe that BIM will be highly or very highly important to the industry in

five years. However, more non-users (32%) actually believe that BIM will have



low or no importance. Most non-users (44%) believe that BIM will have

moderate importance in the next 5 years. This contrasts with North America

where 42% of non-users believe that BIM will have high or very high

importance in the next 5 years. These results are shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 - Importance of BIM in 5 years (Bernstein, 2010)

On the subject of future growth for BIM, Bernstein (2010, p.10) concludes that

there are differences in growth depending upon the users. Beginners are very

optimistic that they will expand BIM use quickly. While 54% use it on 15% or

less of projects today, only 20% expect to use it at that level in two years.

Expert users will continue to expand their use of BIM, with the percentage

using it on 60% or more of projects rising from 69% in 2010 to 84% in 2012.

Contractors expect the largest rise in BIM use, with 54% saying it will be used

on more than 30% of their projects in 2012, compared to 11% who used it at



that level in 2010. The overall percentage use on projects is shown in Figure

4.

Figure 4 - BIM use on projects (Bernstein, 2010)

All the research featured has shown that there is an increase in awareness

and usage of BIM across the AEC industry, with users increasing rapidly over

the next 5 years. There are various reasons why this is so. These are

discussed in the next section.

2.4. Benefits of BIM

The recent increase in BIM adoption has been due to various factors. The

most important being a reduction in costs and hence a better Return On

Investment (ROI) for the user. There are many publications which highlight

the benefits of BIM. For the purpose of this background study, a small number



of publications have been sourced which encompass the view of the majority

of BIM experts in the AEC industry.

Three-quarters of Western European BIM users (74%) report a positive

perceived return on their overall investment in BIM (Bernstein, 2010, p.11).

The perceived ROI for UK, France and Germany is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 - Perceived ROI (Bernstein, 2010)

Inevitably, when considering BIM adoption, ROI will be a key driving factor for

all public sector bodies.

In the UK users see the most value from BIM through reduced conflicts during

construction between Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing (MEP) and structural

elements (70%), improved collective understanding of design intent (69%)

and reduced changes during construction (60%) (Bernstein, 2010, p.11)



BIM technology can support and improve many business practices in the

AEC/FM (facility management) industry by responding to the increasing

pressures on a building over its lifecycle (Eastman et al. 2011, p.20) These

pressures include such areas as sustainability, energy efficiency and general

maintenance of the building. This is especially relevant to public sector

bodies, where they have to continually manage and maintain a large property

portfolio. At present, the greatest value from BIM is seen in design

development, construction and preparation of construction documents and

fabrication (BSI, 2010, p.13). The survey carried out by Demian and Yan

(2008) revealed that the main benefit which users stated was that BIM

changes the process of design and build and thus realising savings on the

cost of design. A similar view, as well as other benefits of BIM, can also be

drawn from the research carried out by NBS (2011, p.14) shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6 - Views on adopting BIM (NBS, 2011)



BIM brings preconstruction benefits to the owner through the concept,

feasibility and design stages. Before owners engage an architect, it is

necessary to determine whether a building of a given size, quality level and

desired program requirements can be built within a given cost and time

budget (Eastman et al. 2011, p.20). Building performance and quality can be

enhanced by developing a schematic model prior to generating a detailed

building model allowing for a more careful evaluation of the proposed scheme

to determine whether it meets the building’s functional and sustainable

requirements. (Eastman et al. 2011, p.21). This functionality of BIM can have

a great impact on public sector projects where sustainability is not only a key

factor relating to cost savings, but also ensuring that projects comply with

building regulations.

From the beginning of the design stage the project team can improve their

understanding of project requirements and extract cost estimates as the

design develops, while at the same time avoiding use of paper exchange and

its associated delays. At any stage of the design, BIM technology can extract

an accurate bill of quantities and schedule of spaces that can be used for cost

estimation (Eastman et al. 2011; Davidson 2009). Public sector bodies often

have run very tight budgets, and this aspect of BIM would help to evaluate

costs at every stage of the design. In construction, less time and money are

spent in process and administration because document quality is higher and

construction planning is better so more of the owner’s investment goes into

the building instead of administration and overhead in design and construction

(Autodesk, 2002, p.6) There is better understanding and control of costs and



schedules, as well as management of change and limit (or even eliminate)

unforeseen costs and delays. BIM users report that design effort increases at

an earlier phase in the project but decreases later on. Integrated working

(whatever contractual form it takes) will save money by taking design change

to an earlier, less costly phase of the project. This pattern was forecast by

Patrick MacLeamy, CEO of HOK (a firm that is a keen user of BIM) in 2004

when he compared historical workflow and integrated project delivery

workflow. This forecast is shown in the McLeamy Curve in Figure 7 (BSI,

2010, p.15).

Figure 7 - MacLeamy Curve (BSI, 2010)

The ability to produce designs at an early stage which will not require changes

further down the line will produce significant cost savings for public sector

organisations, as illustrated by Figure 7.



Automatic low-level corrections are carried out by the BIM software when

changes are made to the design. Parametric objects in the design ensure

proper alignment making the 3D model free of geometry, alignment and

spatial coordination errors. This reduces the users’ need to manage design

changes. The impact of a suggested design change can be entered into the

building model and changes to the other objects in the design will

automatically update. Some updates will be automatically based on the

established parametric rules, as defined by parametric objects which have

been explained earlier in section 2.2). Updating in this manner is extremely

error-prone in paper-based systems (Eastman et al. 2011).

Accurate and consistent drawings can be extracted for any set of objects or

specified view of the project. For example, if a door is moved in plan view,

then all sections and elevations will simultaneously be updated. This

significantly reduces the amount of time and number of errors associated with

generating construction drawings for all design disciplines. When changes to

the design are required, fully consistent drawings can be generated as soon

as the design modifications are entered (Eastman et al. 2011; Davidson

2009). The ability to extract consistent drawings from the building model

would help public sector bodies communicate with those outside the BIM

process such as the general public, media and other stakeholders who do not

use BIM.



BIM technology facilitates simultaneous work by multiple design disciplines.

Working with co-ordinated models can shorten the design time and

significantly reduces design errors, omissions and help realise problems, such

as clash detection. This is much more cost-effective than waiting until a

design is nearly complete and then applying value engineering, such as

selection of materials, only after the major design decisions have been made.

Because the virtual 3D building model is the source for all 2D and 3D

drawings, design errors caused by inconsistent 2D drawings are eliminated.

Conflicts and constructability problems can identified before they are detected

on site. This speeds the construction process, reduces costs, minimises the

likelihood of legal disputes and provides a smoother process for the entire

design team (Eastman et al. 2011). Demian and Yan (2008) agree with this

benefit of BIM when they say that in the operation phase, Building Information

Modelling creates obtainable concurrent information on performance of the

project as the model is constantly being updated; and the economic aspects

of the project. With BIM, cross-functional project teams share intelligent

models to better plan, design, build, and manage building and infrastructure

projects. (Autodesk, 2011) BSI (2010) also points out that a powerful and

popular use of BIM is for clash detection: to identify if any elements of the

design are vying to occupy the same space in the building. Spatial co-

ordination via the BIM can also dramatically reduces costs by ensuring that

problems are resolved early on and not once construction has started. With

tight budgets and timescales, clash detection would benefit public sector

organisations immensely in term of cost and time savings. The need for

collaboration within the AEC industry when using BIM strengthens and



deepens existing partnerships—and forges new ones—between architects,

engineers, contractors, and owners (Autodesk, 2011) Figure 8 shows the key

stakeholders in the BIM process.

Figure 8 - Key stakeholders in the BIM process (http://www.revitportal.com/,

2012)

Most public sector organisations currently work with many stakeholders

outside the organisation. BIM would help to strengthen these partnerships, as

well as create fresh relationships, hence leading to better project co-ordination

and better quality projects.

The BIM building model can be linked to energy analysis tools that allow

evaluation of energy use during the early design phases. This provides many

opportunities to improve building quality (Eastman et al. 2011). BIM allows

energy analyses to be produced more efficiently and hence is driving greener

designs (Davidson, 2009). Autodesk (2011) also states that project teams can



also use information contained in the models to perform a variety of

complementary tasks, including energy or environmental analysis,

visualization, construction simulation, and improving the accuracy of

documentation. This has many cost benefits for public sector organisations. It

allows them find the best method to tackle energy inefficiency, produce new

buildings that are energy efficient and also give them an idea of energy costs

and consumption across their property portfolio.

If the design model is transferred to a BIM fabrication tool and detailed to the

level of fabrication objects, for example a bespoke set of solar shading

louvers; it will contain an accurate representation of the building objects for

fabrication and construction. BIM reduces the need for large installation crews

and allows for faster installation times and less onsite storage space. This is

because the model already contains detailed information on the numbers of

components required and where they fit in with the construction process. BIM

contributes to the coordination between the general contractor and all

subcontractors to ensure that work can be performed when the appropriate

resources are available on site. It provides the basis for improved planning

and scheduling of subcontractors and helps to ensure just-in-time arrival of

people, equipment and materials which in turn reduces cost and allows for

better collaboration at the jobsite (Eastman et al. 2011).

BIM provides post construction benefits too. During the construction process

the general contractor and MEP contractors collect information about installed

materials and maintenance information for the systems in the building. This



information can be linked to the object in the building model and thus be

available for handover to the owner for use in their facility management

systems. This information can be used to check that all systems work properly

after the building is complete (Eastman et al. 2011). Post construction benefits

are particularly significant to public sector authorities as they have to provide

facilities management across their property portfolios. The information

produced through the BIM process would also help public sector authorities

carry out better asset management of their properties, ensuring the property

portfolio is being put to its best use.

Demian and Yan (2008) state their research revealed that most BIM users

believe that BIM can reduce human resource during the entire operation

phase. This is because less people are required to extract information from

the model during construction. Autodesk (2002) already had this perception

when they say that using building information modelling, design teams get

more work done with fewer people. A smaller design team means lower costs

and less chance for miscommunication. This could fit in very well with the

large number of redundancies which the public sector currently has to make in

order to produce savings and increase productivity. Figure 9 is an extract from

Demian and Yan (2008) where BIM users were asked about what they

thought the benefits of BIM adoption were.



Figure 9 - The benefits of BIM (Demian and Yan, 2008)

The advantage of BIM technology is greater than the sum of its parts. By

looking at each individual benefit of BIM it can be seen that each element is a

means to reduce cost, either directly through better designs and reduced

material usage, or indirectly through efficiency gains. Consequently, BIM

technology has the potential to go a long way in addressing the inefficiency

issues that exist within the construction industry (Davidson, 2009)

A significant majority (90%) of Western European BIM users say they see

value in BIM today but the full potential of its benefits has not yet been

realized. On the extremes, very few BIM users say that they are getting

everything out of BIM or getting no value from BIM—6% and 4% respectively

(Bernstein, 2010). Figure 10 illustrates these results.



Figure 10 - Level of business value of BIM (Bernstein, 2010)

Bernstein (2010) reported on the subject of the internal business value of BIM

in Western Europe. Internal business meaning the way that processes and

procedures are carried out within the organisation. The report’s findings

showed that reduced errors and omissions in construction documents is the

top rated business value of BIM. As the level of expertise of BIM use

increases, so does the level of internal business benefits experienced. Better

multiparty communication and understanding from 3-D is seen as most

important to improving ROI on BIM. Other internal benefits are shown in

Figure 11



Figure 11 - Relative importance of internal benefits of BIM (Bernstein, 2010)

The project value of BIM in Western Europe was also reported my Bernstein

(2010). The key findings showed that phases that experience the most BIM

value during a project were at Design development, where initial designs are

produced, and Technical design, where issues such as energy efficiency,

structural loadings and acoustics are discussed. Benefits that generate the

highest returns were improved collective understanding of design intent and

improved overall project quality.

Managing building information using a building information model can lead to

substantial cost savings, from design and construction through to

maintenance. The model saves time, extra coordination checks are largely

unnecessary, and waste on site; the information generated from the model will



lead to fewer errors on site due to inaccurate and uncoordinated information

(Construction Information Service (CIS), 2011).

The British Standards Institute (BSI) (2010) also lists a number of benefits of

BIM adoption similar to those discussed by other sources. Project benefits

include entering data only once and reusing it throughout the lifecycle of the

project; blending geospatial and building information for planning; reducing

requests for information and change orders; reducing rework; improving

awareness of progress and current status; avoiding clashes; reducing cycle

times between reviews; creating a time-based simulation of construction

activities; reducing costs; ensuring lower whole-life costs for the asset through

sustainable design – tested out at the design stage.

So far the background study has highlighted that there are many potential

benefits to the adoption of BIM for everyone in the AEC industry including

public sector bodies. Many of the sources come to similar conclusions about

cost and time savings which are the key reasons for BIM adoption. As with all

new approaches in the AEC industry, BIM adoption will have its challenges.

These are discussed in the next section.

2.5. Barriers of BIM

There are a number of challenges which face users when adopting BIM. BIM

is “a disruptive technology”, unlike the adoption of 2D CAD which simply

automated a traditional process; BIM requires a whole paradigm shift and a

new way of working (Davidson, 2009).



One barrier arises when dealing with collaboration. Determining the method

that will be used to permit adequate sharing of model information by members

of the project team is a significant issue. If the members of the project team

use different modelling tools, then tools for moving the models from one

environment to another or combining these models are needed resulting in

potential errors and time consumption. Such problems can be reduced by

using Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) standards for exchanging data

(Eastman et al. 2011). The IFC format is registered by ISO as ISO/PAS 16739

and is in the process of becoming an official international standard ISO/IS

16739 (BuildingSmart, 2011). This issue is not much different from that posed

by the interchanging of 2D CAD files between stakeholders in a project.

Currently many public authorities use the BS1192 standard to overcome such

issues when sharing drawings. The IFC standard would simply be another

standard which the public sector would use.

Legal and contractual concerns are presenting challenges, with respect to

who owns the design, fabrication, analysis and construction datasets, who

pays for them and who is responsible for their accuracy. An immediate issue

about BIM concerns the copyright and ownership of contributed designs.

Authorship becomes blurred (Eastman et al. 2011; Davidson 2009; Olantunji,

2010; Klimnt, 2011). This is an area where public authorities will need to set

clear guidelines as to data ownership and content responsibility.



The most significant change that companies face when implementing BIM

technology is intensively using a shared building model during design phases

and a coordinated building model during construction and fabrication, as the

basis for all work processes and for collaboration. This transformation will

require time and education, as is true of all significant changes in technology

and work processes (Eastman et al. 2011). Research carried out by Demian

and Yan (2008) suggests that the greatest barrier to BIM adoption is people

barriers. According to the results of the questionnaire, about 40% of

respondents from USA and about 20% respondents from UK believe that their

companies have to allocate lots of time and human resource to the training

process. This could be a major barrier for the public sector at this time due the

vast number of cut-backs and redundancies that they are having to make in

order to achieve the savings set by Central Government.

An important point is made by Demian and Yan (2008) who say that one of

the barriers is social and habitual resistance to change, as lots of architects

are satisfied with traditional methods to design their projects and are

incredulous of the new functions and advantages of BIM. This could be a an

issue for public sector bodies, where it is well known that many people who

work for them have been working there for many years doing the same job, in

the same way for all those years. Figure 12 shows the respondent’s views in

Demian and Yan (2008) survey.



Figure 12 - Barriers to implement BIM (Demian and Yan, 2008)

The deployment of BIM requires the traditional design processes to be

changed to suit the workflows associated with BIM. For example the architect

will be working with the MEP contractors from the beginning of the design

process via the building model, rather than producing the design first and then

consulting the contractors. This disruption of workflows is an inevitable aspect

of BIM deployment; however, Davidson (2009) maintains that the benefits of

BIM will soon outweigh the initial drop in productivity that this will produce.

Replacing a 2D or 3D CAD environment with a building information modelling

system involves far more than acquiring software, training and upgrading

hardware. Effective use of BIM requires that changes be made to almost

every aspect of a firm’s business. It requires some understanding of BIM

technology and related processes and a plan for implementation before the

conversion can begin (Eastman et al. 2011, BSI 2010). More effort is required

upfront to create individual models and the integrated BIM system. BIM also

requires more active management than CAD. Information development,



integration, sharing and use may require the development of new information

management skills and policies. Creating new internal BIM procedures and

using BIM to achieve a worthwhile return on investment requires effort and

cost (BSI, 2010). These types of processes take time, and again the question

is whether the public sector can afford to spend time on changing processes

during this time of financial uncertainty.

Part of the research carried out by NBS (2011) tried to address the reasons

that are stopping organisations from adopting BIM. The recession has been

particularly hard for the construction industry and it is a reason. Almost half

say they need to get through the recession before considering BIM. Public

sector bodies will be in facing the same situation. Figure 13 shows

respondent’s views on why they may not be adopting BIM.

Figure 13 - Views on adopting BIM (NBS, 2011)

The primary reason that non-users give for not implementing BIM is the lack

of client demand. 55% of non-users surveyed indicated this was the number

one reason followed by the lack of sufficient time to evaluate it (49%) and



software being too expensive (41%). Non-users also believe that their clients

are not using BIM–with 87% believing that clients are using it on 15% or less

of projects (Bernstein, 2010) In many cases the client will be the public sector

itself, so it is up to them to demand it on any projects they commission.

A survey into the challenges of using BIM was produced by Gould (2010)

which featured in the Construction Research and Innovation (CRI) publication

created by the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) in 2010. Figure 14

shows the results of this survey, with the main challenges being training staff

on new processes and implementing these new processes. Once again the

issues of costs and training revealed in the survey can be applied to public

sector organisations.



Figure 14 - Challenges of using BIM (Gould, 2010)

BIM software may have to be bought, presenting a barrier to smaller firms. At

the start of a project, unless the client sets out the platform to be used,

participants will need to establish how compatible their applications are. Using

software that complies with open standard formats such as the IFC standard

is fairest to all and does not impose costs on others. (BSI, 2010) Although

there are still other issues to overcome such as translation requirements,

exporting a BIM model from package and importing it into another. Ensuring

that all stakeholders are using the same software, same versions and even

protocols can be challenging.



2.6. Conclusion of the background study

The background study has revealed that the rate of BIM adoption is only

recently increasing in Western Europe, including the UK. There are many

driving factors for BIM adoption and it brings with it many advantages to the

AEC industry. The primary benefit being a potential for cost and time saving

with considerable Return on Investment. But BIM also comes with its’ many

challenges. Initial costs relating to hardware and software procurement are a

major issue, as is the costs of training staff not only to use the software, but

also to adapt to the BIM process of working. This new way of design

management seems to be the future of the building design process. As NBS

(2011) says “BIM is the future. Those who are aware of it can see the

advantages of adopting it. It looks like it might pay to get on board sooner

rather than later.” Paul Morrell, the Governments Chief Construction Advisor,

seems to have adopted this view. As stated earlier, he has implied that BIM is

to be used on all public sector projects by 2016 (Architects Journal, 2011) so

it is not a case of whether or not to adopt BIM, but rather looking at what BIM

will bring to the public sector, especially if it will be worthy in terms of Return

on Investment.



3. Case Study

3.1. Introduction to the case study

Thomas Lane, Assistant Editor (Technical), at Building.co.uk, a construction

industry magazine, has produced a case study, in October 2011, which

highlights the use of BIM by a public sector body. Manchester City Council

deployed BIM on the remodelling of Manchester’s Central Library (Figure 15).

The case study looks at why the client went for BIM, how BIM is used on the

project and also asks stakeholders on their views of BIM adoption on the

project. The study is a good source of information that examines the use of

BIM on a public sector project. According to the case study, John Lorimer,

capital programme director for Manchester City Council, said “We are using

BIM on a very complex grade II-listed building, so if it can work for us it can

work for the whole industry,” This is a very encouraging statement for those

who will be utilising BIM in the public sector, but the case study goes on to

identify the challenges faced by Manchester City Council.

Figure 15 - Manchester Central Library (Building.co.uk, 2011)



3.2. Why was BIM deployed on this project?

The case study reveals that Manchester City Council have already used BIM

on a school and housing project, investing £100,000 on BIM on the latter

project with the expectation of savings. John Lorimer points out that these

savings were achieved. He says “We already have a gross return of £260,000

on the investment in the form of programme benefits, less waste and an

improved product,” As mentioned in the background study, the Return on

Investment was a vital factor in the decision process on adopting BIM.

Manchester City Council certainly got a good return on investment in on their

housing project.

With relation to BIM use on the library project, John Lorimer says “We are

using it because we believe once the building is finished and we take over the

model we can better manage it throughout its life. For us that is the real gain.”

This another benefit of BIM adoption, in its real form, which was highlighted by

the background study where the BIM model can passed on to the client and

used for facility management and maintenance over the life of the building.

3.3. How does BIM work on this project?

Thomas Lane’s case study explains how BIM is used on the Manchester

Central Library project. The existing library had to be surveyed, not in the

conventional 2D method, but a 3D survey was carried out which was then

imported into BIM software, in this case Revit from Autodesk, by the architects

Ryder. Although the survey cost £4,000 more than a 2D survey, much more

detailed information was captured by the 3D survey.



Collaboration across the project is achieved by giving each member of the

team ownership of their model and using the other models as an external

reference. The models are updated against each other regularly and in order

to cover the hurdle of compatibility between teams, everyone was required to

produce their part of the model with the same drawing conventions. This was

something that is suggested in the background study, where IFC standards

are proposed for use across teams, in order to eliminate issues of

compatibility when sharing the model.

Thomas Lane goes on to ask stakeholders about their view on BIM use on the

library project, what advantages and disadvantages they came across and the

costs which were incurred.

Paul Mulcahey, the associate director for Mace, the Project Managers,

highlighted advantages of BIM “BIM use has promoted more efficient team

working and having easily understandable 3D visualisations has helped for

planning consultations.” He goes on to say that “BIM also makes it easy to

audit changes to the design.” With regards to disadvantages of BIM use on

this project, Mulcahey says “I’ve had the luxury of a really well drilled team

and I am not aware of any problems.” This shows a very positive attitude

towards the use BIM on this project. In relation to costs he says “The team

works out of a council-owned building that didn’t have enough bandwidth to

handle the BIM models. Making the office BIM-ready cost about £10,000.”

This type of cost is clearly one of the major impacts of adopting BIM



Architects for the project, Ryder, based its architectural design on the 3D laser

survey of the library and were asked about the advantages they saw in BIM

use on the project. The case study reveals that Ryder regularly use BIM for

integrating architectural design with M&E, structure, clash detection,

programming, pedestrian flows and solar and thermal modelling. Ian

Kennedy, Ryder director, said “Another fringe benefit of having a single,

integrated model is design meetings are hosted around it, so everyone has a

clear understanding of what people are talking about,” This enforces the

benefits of collaborative working which were identified as an advantage,

brought by BIM use, in the background study. Ryder sees one disadvantage

of BIM use on this project “There isn’t one set way of using BIM. Everyone is

at different stages, so you have find a way of working that is beneficial for all”.

Again, this is one of the issues which can be overcome through close working

practices between stakeholders. In relation to costs the case study states it

took 18 months for all the people in the practice to undergo Revit training. The

costs of training, licences and PCs are £25,000 per person over a six year

period. Once again, this is clearly another cost involved in BIM adoption. Even

though many public sector organisations will outsource the architectural

element of a project, some in-house staff will nevertheless need be trained, as

well as the requirement to purchase new hardware and software.



Figure 16 - 3D model of Manchester Central Library (Building.co.uk, 2011)

URS Scott Wilson, structural engineers, used Ryder’s 3D model (Figure 16) to

add their elements into the project. The case study discloses that Jim

McNally, technical director of buildings and infrastructure at URS Scott

Wilson, said “The benefits (of BIM use) will be fewer surprises on site. We will

get a much better fit of the structural members as everyone is forced to think

about the detail and the design is more fully developed. With 2D there is a

tendency to fudge things and then sort it out on site, which isn’t great if the

contractor has got 200 men standing around because something doesn’t fit.”

This ties in well with the background study which revealed that one of the big

“unique selling points” of BIM adoption is the ability to carry out clash

detection at an early stage in the design.



Thomas Lane’s case study goes on to say that McNally is concerned about

copyright. Firms spend a lot of time building up libraries of elements that can

be quickly incorporated into drawings. When a model is shared, other

companies have access to this information. McNally says this issue has not

been resolved on this job. This is a major issue with BIM and is highlighted as

one of the barriers of BIM adoption in the background study. In relation to

cost, just like Ryder, URS Scott Wilson had to invest in training, hardware and

software. McNally says “It cost about £30,000 to get the team up to speed, but

it’s worth it. We would like all our engineers to get used to Revit as it is the

design tool of choice rather than AutoCAD. It is quite an expensive process,

though.”

M & E engineers, BDP, did not use any BIM software on this project directly,

although they were involved in the BIM process. The case study states that

BDP used the architect’s and structural engineer’s models but also relied on

original drawings and surveys, as the laser survey can’t see inside service

voids. These drawings interfaced seamlessly with the BIM model. Robert

Ferry, the environmental engineer director for BDP says “The benefits (of BIM

use) are pretty clear, you can visualise the 3D environment, which means it

aids co-ordination and clash detection. The biggest thing that comes back to

bite you are the clashes on site. Frankly, BIM has made problems at site level

disappear”. This is a further indication of the pros of BIM adoption which were

identified in the background study. Another advantage of BIM use on the

project, as realised by BDP, was the production of schedules with a press of a

button which helped with ordering equipment. This is one of the uses of the



intelligent data in the model. One disadvantage which Ferry points out was

“Because not everyone in the firm is up to speed with BIM, some of the team

took a while to get used to the system, slowing the job down.” This was

another barrier to BIM adoption which was identified in the background study

where there is a need to change work processes and practices which takes

time. As BDP have been investing in BIM for the the last two years, there was

no extra costs for them on this project.

The main contractor on the library project is Laing O’Rourke who has used

BIM on many other projects, including Heathrow Terminal 5. Simon Lane,

Laing O’Rourke’s design manager, says BIM adoption will save contractors

money. He says “It’s given people a better understanding of the job and the

more they understand, the more detailed the package that can be sent out for

pricing,” he explains. “This means less risk is attached, which means less risk

pricing.” Lane goes on to say “Building the project virtually means most of the

problems that could crop up on site are ironed out and the job is less likely to

lead to cost and programme overruns.” Lane’s comments suggest that BIM

can produce cost savings as well as reduce construction time. According to

the case study, Lane says the disadvantages are more to do with perception

than reality. “There is a trust issue with the model. At every conference

someone raises the issue of who owns the model. It’s simple, everyone owns

their own model, you bring these together and overlay the information so this

isn’t an issue.” This view seems to be contrary to those which suggest there

are issues with copyright and data ownership, like the views of URS Scott

Wilson on the same project and those reviewed in the background study in



section 2.5. This is perhaps something that certain stakeholders in the BIM

circle will have problems with, whereas others will not. One disadvantage that

Laing O’Rourke does see is the issue of compatibility of different software.

This is a known issue and the technicalities need to be investigated by those

providing the BIM software. The case study says that although Laing

O’Rourke do not carry out most of the modelling, which is done by the design

teams, they still invested in two workstations, training and support for the

team.

Specialist M & E Contractor, NG Bailey, already worked in 3D before being

involved in the library project, as they say 3D is perfect for co-ordinating

complex services. Tony O’Connell, NG Bailey’s design manager, says in the

case study “3D modelling’s ability to “see” how the building fits together is the

best way to ensure prefabricated modules can be fitted into buildings and is

handy for making sure there are clear routes through service corridors for

maintenance staff. Instead of drawing up exploded diagrams of how the

services fit together, the firm (NG Bailey) can walk clients through the services

using the 3D model.” Again, this shows how BIM is used for clash detection

before any construction takes place on site. One of the disadvantages seen

by NG Bailey is the need to produce 2D drawings for those in the supply chain

who have not adopted BIM. O’Connell explains in the case study “You can

spend a long time on the BIM model then spend a lot more time on the

production information in the 2D drawing,”. From this it seems that there

needs to be better way to extract 2D drawings from the 3D without having to

manipulate them once extracted. According to the case study because NG



Bailey is further down the supply chain, it needs a lot of computing power to

work in 3D. This is because it has to work with the architectural, structural and

M&E consultants models at the same time. O’Connell says “If the graphics

card is more than a year old you’ve got a real problem.” Hardware

replacement seems the primary cost for NG Bailey.

3.4. Conclusion of the case study

The case study by Thomas Lane of Building.co.uk, has revealed that there

are many advantages with BIM adoption. These include early clash detection,

collaborative working, time and cost savings. However the case study has

also highlighted that there are various disadvantages too, especially around

copyright, training and initial high costs associated with ongoing hardware and

software upgrades. The main question was why BIM was used on this project

and it seems that the bottom line was the good return on investment as

expressed by John Lorimer.



4. Primary Research

4.1. Target audience

As outlined in section 1.2, the primary research element of this investigation

has been confined to county councils in England. County Councils are

responsible for services across the whole of a county, like education,

transport, planning, fire and public safety, social care, libraries, waste

management and trading standards (Directgov, 2012) Construction projects

undertaken by or on behalf of the county councils include schools, libraries,

museums, offices and community centres. 35 Councils across England were

selected to take part in the primary research which is detailed in section 4.2

below. All these were County Councils, with the exception of Manchester City

Council, which was selected as part of the research due to the fact that the

authority was the subject of the case study in chapter 3. Due to time restraints

and the sheer extent of the public sector in the UK, it was felt that County

Councils would be an appropriate part of the public sector to sample in the

primary research. Appendix A shows the list of Councils, a total of 36, which

were sent the questionnaire.

4.2. Method of research

Drawing upon the background study and taking into consideration the time

limits of the investigation, it was decided that an appropriately constructed

questionnaire would be a suitable research tool in order to gather quantitative,

as well as qualitative data. The questionnaire was designed to address issues

of awareness of BIM, whether the authority has used it or looking to use it in

the future, the type of project BIM has or will be used on and also to gather



the views of the authority in terms of BIM adoption. This would help to give at

least some views on what implications BIM use would have on public sector

projects.

In order to ensure that a response was received in a timely manner, the

questionnaire was sent out requesting information under the Freedom of

Information Act 2000. “The Freedom of Information Act gives you the right to

ask any public body for all the information they have on any subject you

choose. Unless there’s a good reason, the organisation must provide the

information within 20 working days” (Directgov, 2012) The Freedom of

Information request would also ensure a higher probability of returned

questionnaires. A copy of the questionnaire which was sent out is shown in

Appendix B.

The first question asks if the authority is aware of what BIM is. This is an

important question, as it would show the level of awareness of BIM across the

selected authorities.

The second question also relates to awareness, but this time the question

focuses on the Government Construction Strategy 2011, which states under

section 2.32 that “Government will require fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all

project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a

minimum by 2016”.



Question 3 asks: “Has your authority, or any contractors or sub-contractors

working on your behalf, used BIM for any construction projects for your

authority?” As many local authorities outsource their construction projects, it

was important to mention any contractors or sub-contractors who may have

used BIM on any projects carried out for the authority. This question helps to

put into perspective the use of BIM across the selected authorities.

Questions 4 and 5 aim to provide an insight on the type of project which the

authority has either used or using BIM, as well establishing the type of project

on which they may adopt BIM in the future. This gives an idea of the type of

project that BIM will / is being used on.

Question 6 gives the authority a list of benefits of BIM adoption which they

may have experienced if already using BIM, or envisage upon adoption of

BIM for future projects. The list was produced from a combination of criteria

used in the surveys carried out by Demian and Yan, 2008 and NBS, 2011

mentioned in section 2.4. They would have to select all that applied to them,

as well as giving them the option to add their own benefit if not listed.

Question 7 draws upon the barriers of BIM adoption which were revealed

during the background study. Again, the authority is given an option to select

all that apply and also add their own view of any other barriers which they

may have come across or envisage with BIM adoption.



It was expected that some authorities will not be considering BIM adoption for

the time being. Question 8 tries to establish why this is. It draws upon the

same barriers of BIM adoption used in the previous question with two more

options, these being “High training costs” and “Lack of funding”. These are

key factors which need to be considered, especially in the current financial

climate were government spending is continually and significantly being

reduced.

The final question attempts to provide some qualitative data. The authority is

asked how they feel they will be affected by the requirement to use BIM on all

public sector projects by 2016. This is an open ended question and gives the

authority a section where they can comment on BIM adoption.

4.3. Responses to the research

Out of the 36 authorities that were sent the questionnaire, 29 responded. One

authority said that they did not hold any information which the questionnaire

was asking for, leaving 28 authorities who completed the questionnaire.

Appendix C shows the collated responses from the primary research.

All 28 authorities were aware of what Building Information Modelling is. 89%

of respondents were aware that that according to the Government

Construction Strategy 2011, all public sector construction projects will require

fully collaborative 3D Building Information Modelling (BIM) as a minimum by

2016. This shows that there is a high awareness of BIM and its requirement

as outlined in the Government Construction Strategy 2011.



When asked about current, past and future BIM use, 42% or respondents

have not used BIM in the past, whereas 5 % have used it in the past. 16% are

currently using it on construction projects and 37% are looking to use it in the

future (Figure 17). The reasons for lower past use and higher future use may

be addressed by the questions regarding benefits and barriers of BIM use.

Figure 17 - BIM use among County Councils

With regards to the type of project where the authority is currently using or

used BIM in the past, school construction projects were the most popular with

37% of BIM use, followed by offices and then libraries (Figure 18). One

authority also used it on other types of construction projects such as fire

stations.



Figure 18 - BIM use by project type

When asked about the types of projects where the authorities look to use BIM

in the future, school construction projects are clearly the favourite (Figure 19).

One authority said it would also be using BIM on a construction project for an

elderly persons home.

Figure 19 - Future BIM use by project type



Question 6, which related to perceived / realised benefits of BIM revealed that

the majority of authorities agreed that BIM would help to identify clashes

before construction and improve visualisation. They also agreed that changes

in workflow would be / were needed when adopting BIM, however more

disagreed that human resources would be reduced, as opposed to those who

agreed (Figure 20).

Figure 20 - Perceived / realised benefits of BIM

Some authorities have realised or perceive other benefits too. These include

improved Facilities Management, programme certainty, greater integration of

project team and better information for future works to the building. It is

interesting to see that the majority of authorities are not sure about a cost

efficiency, perhaps this is something that still needs to be realised.

When asked “what barriers do you see/have seen from adopting BIM?” most

of the respondents agreed that high costs or software / hardware and training

were a major barrier towards BIM adoption. The majority also disagreed that



there would be problems with collaborating between stakeholders on projects

(Figure 21). This is a good sign, as they do not see a problem with

collaborative working, which is a key aspect of BIM adoption.

Figure 21 - Perceived / realised barriers of BIM

A few authorities commented about the barriers facing them with regards to

BIM adoption. Buckinghamshire County Council’s response was “Personally I

cannot see that the investment required (assuming funding can be found in

the first instance) will ever be recouped on ‘smaller’ projects of the type we

generally get involved with. I can, however, see that on larger (say £20million

+) schemes there is scope for efficiencies. Also, I’m not clear what Public

Sector actually means in this context, we know that Central Government

projects are often wasteful in terms of resources and costs but in my

experience of Local Government we have to run a pretty tight ship as finance

is so scarce”. It seems the issue here is that BIM adoption may not be suitable

for small scale projects, and also the council is critical of Central Government,

especially in the current economic climate where councils have to produce



significant savings through vast cut-backs. Another comment, this time by

Derbyshire County Council, said that there is “fragmentation of the industry

due to education and culture”. This is something that needs to be addressed

across the industry. In some way this is similar to the transition from hand

drawings to 2D CAD in the 1980’s as revealed by the background study in

Chapter 2. Two comments addressed the issues of training. Norfolk County

Council said “Training phase is time consuming but shows benefits later” and

Staffordshire County Council said “The main barrier is the time required to

train current staff whilst still maintaining service delivery (projects are not put

on hold whilst staff are trained)”. Somerset County Council commented that

“There is a problem with clients understanding that more work needs to be

done upfront of a project which means more risk of wasted funds if a project

ends up not going ahead.” Although one of the main benefits of BIM is to

assess feasibility of the project before construction, clearly there is an issue of

high initial costs.

Rutland County Council was one of the few authorities who were not aware

that according to the Government Construction Strategy 2011, all public

sector construction projects will require fully collaborative 3D Building

Information Modelling (BIM) as a minimum by 2016. They were also not

considering on using BIM for any future projects. Their primary reason was

the lack of awareness of BIM and lack of funding.

Question 9, which was an open ended question, asking about the authority’s

general views on the impact of BIM received many responses.



Buckinghamshire County Council was not so optimistic about the future due to

the vast spending cuts. They commented “Who knows what the future will

bring? Will we even have a capital programme? “. Derbyshire County Council

responded on similar lines by saying “We will not be able to afford to install it

due to reduction in funding to Local Authorities and reductions in likely

number of large Capital Projects”.

Costs were a major impact of BIM adoption as commented by the authorities

in the research. Some of the comments received are shown below:

“Investment of time and money is required now to achieve this”

(Norfolk County Council)

“It will improve visualisation but could increase time and cost”

(Surrey County Council)

“This may have an impact on cost but the expectation that there are

improved efficiencies to be gained may offset this”

(West Sussex County Council)

“…overhead costs may be significant related to the amount of larger

projects the authority procures”

(Gloucestershire County Council)

Another issue which stood out from the responses received was that of

project scale. Some of the authorities think that BIM will only be viable on

larger projects. Their responses were as follows:

“The value of our schemes between £1m and £5m are low to ensure

efficient use of BIM with existing resources” (Devon County Council)



“Scale of projects is the crucial matter. We are currently involving

ourselves in awareness raising & knowledge acquisition from the larger

construction companies with whom we have contact and who are

already adopting BIM on major projects in the private sector”

(Essex County Council)

“Hopefully, it won’t (have an impact) as BIM is only applicable to

projects of £5M + and it is unlikely there will be any. If it does, then it

may have a significant effect on the supply chain used and a potential

to increase costs.” (Leicestershire County Council)

In spite of the comments above, there were some positive comments about

BIM adoption too. Manchester City Council, who have already adopted BIM,

as outlined in the case study in Chapter 3, commented that the statements in

the Government Construction Strategy “Will speed up adoption in the

industry”. Nottinghamshire County Council who has just started implementing

BIM says “the requirement for its (BIM) use on all public sector projects

should not have a negative impact. Rather, the use of BIM should yield

positive benefits”. Staffordshire County Council also has a positive insight on

BIM adoption. They say “There are many advantages to the use of BIM. Not

just for production stage, but for construction and FM, however use of the

software requires a major step change for designers and significant resource

deployment and investment in training. This cannot happen overnight and can

only be introduced on an incremental basis”. Worcestershire County Council

is another authority who has already implemented BIM on its construction

projects and will be using it for future projects. They commented by saying



“Using BIM on all our future projects will ensure that our assets can be more

efficiently managed and looked after in the future, as well as all the other

benefits that it brings to the design and construction process”.

Somerset County Council, which is already implementing BIM on construction

projects, gave the most detailed comment with regards to the impact of BIM

adoption on their authority. They said “BIM software (ArchiCAD) is in use at

the Authority by the Architectural Team and is used for 3D modelling and very

basic BIM but there is no-one insisting every discipline to use it, i.e. M&E

Engineers, SEngs, QS’s etc. The way Government Construction Strategy

2011 is worded, it isn’t going to be “all public sector projects” that will be

forced down the BIM route but only directly funded Government projects.

Local Authorities have been strongly urged to use it. With the LA cutbacks in

spending there is little forcing the LA’s into using BIM Software, both with the

cost of improving software and hardware and no training budgets. At this time

of Local Authority cut-backs there is no incentive to put the training into using

BIM to its full capacity. Unless it is legally binding then nothing will be done

about using BIM”. Again, from this comment, costs are seen as the major

barrier towards BIM adoption by public sector authorities. A very important

point is raised by Somerset County Council in that it is not legally binding to

use BIM. With the contraction of public sector authorities, it seems everything

is being cut back to a point where authorities can only afford to carry out

statutory duties, and BIM could be something that is sidelined for the time

being.



A few of the authorities were either unaware of BIM, or were unsure what

impacts its adoption would have on their authority. Some of the comments

received included “Do not know enough about BIM to comment” (Cornwall

Council), “Authority not geared up for BIM” (Durham County Council), “Don't

know” (East Riding of Yorkshire Council), “Until NYCC have assessed BIM we

cannot comment on this question” (North Yorkshire County Council).



5. Conclusion

This investigation set out to address the possible implications of the use of

(BIM) on public sector projects. The background study revealed that adopting

BIM presented many challenges that included issues of copyright,

collaborative working, high training costs and suitability for projects to name

just a few. In spite of these challenges, BIM adoption has presented many

benefits too. These include better visualisation, identification of clashes before

construction, better quality information and the ability to use BIM to manage

the building over its lifecycle.

The BIM case study, which was based on Manchester City Councils

remodelling of the Central Library, reflected some of the benefits and barriers

addressed in the background study. The case study revealed that there was a

largely positive attitude from the stakeholders interviewed towards BIM use on

the project. John Lorimer, capital programme director for Manchester City

Council, showed a very positive attitude towards the use of BIM on the library

project, which was reflected by the comments made my Manchester City

Council during the primary research element of the investigation.

The primary research element focused on County Councils across England

who were sent a BIM based questionnaire under the Freedom of Information

Act 2000. The questionnaire was designed to obtain the views of the

authorities in terms of the barriers and benefits brought about by BIM

adoption. The questionnaire also tried to establish the level of awareness

amongst authorities in relation to the Government Construction Strategy 2011.



The results showed that overall there was a good awareness of BIM and its

relevance in the Government Construction Strategy 2011. The research also

revealed that some authorities who had already adopted BIM exhibited very

positive attitudes towards its use on construction projects. Many of the

councils were looking to use BIM on future projects, with the majority being

school buildings.

The viability of BIM use on smaller projects was a main issue, while the major

barrier identified through the research was that of the initial cost of BIM

adoption in terms of hardware, software, training and time. At a stage when

government spending cuts are high and authorities have to make huge

savings, costs are a vital element for public sector authorities to consider

when looking at BIM for their construction projects. It seems that those who

have adopted it, like Manchester City Council, have realised considerable

savings with a good return on investment, while those who have not adopted

it are not so sure of the potential return on investment, that is if they have the

funds to begin with. The issues of project scale and cost were discussed with

Paul Morrell, the government’s chief construction advisor, in an interview by

the Architects’ Journal in June 2011. When asked “Will it affect every sort of

public project or will some be exempt?” his reply was “There are no

preconceptions about setting a limit in value or size below which the use of

BIM is inappropriate. Although it will eventually be the industry’s normal way

of doing business, the objective for the time being is to realise its value in

public procurement. If the imposition of BIM has a negative effect, there will

need to be a sensible approach to address that.” (Architects’ Journal, 2011)



This statement indicates that BIM use may be appropriate for all project

values / size. When Mr Morrell was asked about costs he replied “I would be

far more worried about the cost to practices that do not adopt BIM. Every

study conducted shows that there is a rapid return on investment in BIM. I’m

sure there will be niche practices that can stay out of the swim, and of course

genius can always write its own rules, but any practice that can’t operate in

this environment will quickly feel as disconnected as one without email.”

(Architects’ Journal, 2011) This highlights the importance of BIM adoption,

where Mr Morrell sees higher costs of not adopting BIM, perhaps in terms of

loss of business to those who offer BIM compatibility in their design teams.

Although the statement regarding BIM in the Government Construction

Strategy 2011 is not legally binding, the implications of BIM use on

construction projects in the public sector are immense. In Paul Morrell’s

words, ‘There will be spectacular change – we are only just beginning to

understand the scale of what can be achieved and the amount of waste that

can be eliminated from the system.’(Architects Journal, 2012) BIM adoption

by the public sector would have significant effects on the private sector too.

By demanding BIM on public sector projects, private sector architects,

contractors and engineers would need to be BIM ready in order to gain a

competitive advantage. The scope of this investigation was restricted to

County Councils, however there is potential for extended research which

could cover other areas of the public sector such as the NHS, Fire Service

and district councils. Only time will tell how BIM will impact the whole of the

AEC industry, but one thing is for sure that Building Information Modelling is



here to stay and Central Government is trying to drive it forward in the public

sector.



Bibliography ARCHITECTS’ JOURNAL (2011) Paul Morrell: BIM to be rolled out to all projects by 2016. Architects’ Journal 23 June, 2011. ARCHITECTS’ JOURNAL (2012) Paul Morrell: BIM is 'unstoppable'. Architects’ Journal 23 January, 2012. AUTODESK (2011) Realizing the Benefits of BIM. Available from: http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/2011_realizing_bim_final.pdf [Accessed 01/12/2011] AUTODESK (2002) White Paper: Building Information Modelling. Available from: http://www.laiserin.com/features/bim/autodesk_bim.pdf [Accessed 01/12/2011] BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTE (BSI) (2010) Thinking about BIM: executive guide to building information modelling. Available from: http://shop.bsigroup.com/Browse-by-Sector/Building--Construction/Building-Information-Modelling/ [Accessed 01/12/2011] BERNSTEIN, H M (2010) SmartMarket Report: The Business Value of BIM in Europe. 2010. Bedford, McGraw-Hill Construction BUILDING.CO.UK (2011) BIM – The Inside Story. Building.co.uk 29 July, 2011. CIS (Construction Information Service) (2011) Briefing: UK – January 2011 Available from: http://products.ihs.com/cis/Doc.aspx?AuthCode=&DocNum=296162 [Accessed 01/12/2011] DAVIDSON, A. R. (2009) A Study of the Deployment and Impact of Building Information Modelling Software in the Construction Industry. Available from: http://www.engineering.leeds.ac.uk/e-engineering/documents/AndrewDavidson.pdf [Accessed 01/12//2011] DEMIAN, P. and YAN, H. (2008) Benefits and Barriers of Building Information Modelling. In: 12th International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering. Beijing 2008. DIRECTGOV (2012) How your council works Available from: http://www.Directgov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/YourlocalcouncilandCouncilTax/YourCommunity/DG_4001648 [Accessed 12/01/2012] EASTMAN, C. et al. (2011) BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modelling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers & Contractors. 2nd ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. EXCITECH (2011) Excitech Experience: Making Construction Products Suitable for Building Information Modelling. Available from: http://www.excitech.co.uk/dpj/issues/excitech_experience_issue_1_online.pdf [Accessed 01/12/2011]

http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/2011_realizing_bim_final.pdf

http://www.laiserin.com/features/bim/autodesk_bim.pdf

http://shop.bsigroup.com/Browse-by-Sector/Building--Construction/Building-Information-Modelling/

http://shop.bsigroup.com/Browse-by-Sector/Building--Construction/Building-Information-Modelling/

http://products.ihs.com/cis/Doc.aspx?AuthCode=&DocNum=296162

http://www.engineering.leeds.ac.uk/e-engineering/documents/AndrewDavidson.pdf

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/YourlocalcouncilandCouncilTax/YourCommunity/DG_4001648

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/YourlocalcouncilandCouncilTax/YourCommunity/DG_4001648

http://www.excitech.co.uk/dpj/issues/excitech_experience_issue_1_online.pdf



GOULD, L. (2010) What is BIM… and should we care? Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB): Construction Research and Innovation. Volume 1, Issue 2, 2010. GREAT BRITAIN. CABINET OFFICE (2011) Government Construction Strategy, May 2011. Available from: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Government-Construction-Strategy.pdf [Accessed 01/12/2011] KLIMT, M. (2011) Legalese: The problem with BIM. Architects’ Journal. July 2011. NBS (National Building Specification) (2011) Building Information Modelling Report: March 2011. Available from: http://www.thenbs.com/pdfs/bimResearchReport_2011-03.pdf [Accessed 01/12/2011] OLATUNJI, O. A. (2010) A preliminary review on the legal implications of BIM and model ownership. Journal of Information Technology in Construction. Volume 16, 2011. SNOOK, K. (2011) What BIM really is...and isn’t. Architectural Technology, Issue 97, September/October 2011.pp 24-25

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Government-Construction-Strategy.pdf

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/Government-Construction-Strategy.pdf

http://www.thenbs.com/pdfs/bimResearchReport_2011-03.pdf

http://www.thenbs.com/pdfs/bimResearchReport_2011-03.pdf



Appendix A List of Councils sampled in the primary research. Buckinghamshire County Council Cambridgeshire County Council Cornwall Council Cumbria County Council Derbyshire County Council Devon County Council Dorset County Council Durham County Council East Riding of Yorkshire Council East Sussex County Council Essex County Council Gloucestershire County Council Hampshire County Council Herefordshire Council Hertfordshire County Council Isle of Wight Council Kent County Council Lancashire County Council Leicestershire County Council Lincolnshire County Council Manchester City Council Norfolk County Council North Yorkshire County Council Northamptonshire County Council Northumberland County Council Nottinghamshire County Council Oxfordshire County Council Rutland County Council Shropshire Council Somerset County Council Staffordshire County Council Suffolk County Council Surrey County Council Warwickshire County Council West Sussex County Council Wiltshire Council Worcestershire County Council



Appendix B Sample questionnaire



Appendix C Responses to primary research

Dissertation BIM

Documents

Transcript of Dissertation BIM