Guillermo Aranda-Mena

National Guidelines for Digital Modelling

DR GUILLERMO ARANDA-MENA THE PPP CLUB - LECTURE SERIES 2012

15 MARCH 2012

Na

tion

al G

uid

elin

es fo

r Dig

ital M

od

ellin

g

ix

The project participants

Industry

Government

Research

Our thanks go to all those who attended and contributed to the success of this publication through their participation in the workshops held in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth.

Construction Innovation also wishes to thank and acknowledge Colleen Foelz (Construction Innovation and edenink) for managing the production of this publication, as well as Sue Ferguson (itzdesign) and Gail Cartwright (wordwright) for their design and editing respectively.

DR GUILLERMO ARANDA-MENA THE PPP CLUB - LECTURE SERIES 2012

15 MARCH 2012

Foreword

These National Guidelines and Case Studies for Digital Modelling are the outcomes from one of a number of Building Information Modelling (BIM)-related projects undertaken by the CRC for Construction Innovation. Since the CRC opened its doors in 2001, the industry has seen a rapid increase in interest in BIM, and widening adoption.

These guidelines and case studies are thus very timely, as the industry moves to model-based working and starts to share models in a new context called integrated practice. Governments, both federal and state, and in New Zealand are starting to outline the role they might take, so that in contrast to the adoption of 2D CAD in the early 90s, we ensure that a national, industry-wide benefit results from this new paradigm of working.

Section 1 of the guidelines give us an overview of BIM: how it affects our current mode of working, what we need to do to move to fully collaborative model-based facility development. The role of open standards such as IFC is described as a mechanism to support new processes, and make the extensive design and construction information available to asset operators and managers. Digital collaboration modes, types of models, levels of detail, object properties and model management complete this section. It will be relevant for owners, managers and project leaders as well as direct users of BIM.

Section 2 provides recommendations and guides for key areas of model creation and development, and the move to simulation and performance measurement. These are the more practical parts of the guidelines developed for design professionals, BIM managers, technical staff and ‘in the field’ workers.

The guidelines are supported by six case studies including a summary of lessons learnt about implementing BIM in Australian building projects.

A key aspect of these publications is the identification of a number of important industry actions: the need for BIM-compatible product information and a national context for classifying product data; the need for an industry agreement and setting process-for-process definition; and finally, the need to ensure a national standard for sharing data between all of the participants in the facility-development process.

John Mitchell David ParkenChairman, CEO,buildingSMART Australian Institute of Australasia Architects

Na

tion

al G

uid

elin

es fo

r Dig

ital M

od

ellin

g

iii

buildingSMARTInternational Alliance for Interoperability

Na

tio

na

l G

uid

elin

es f

or

Dig

ita

l M

od

elli

ng

viii

Acknowledgments

The CRC for Construction Innovation provided the major funding, industry research leadership and coordinated the development of National Guidelines for Digital Modelling and accompanying Case Studies.

The Construction Innovation project team members are:

Project Leader Tom Fussell (Project Services Queensland Department of Housing and Works)

Project Manager National Digital Modelling Guidelines — Scott Beazley (QUT)

Project Manager Case Studies — Guillermo Aranda-Mena (RMIT University)

Researchers: Guillermo Aranda-Mena, Agustin Chevez, John Crawford, Bilal Succar (RMIT University)

John Hainsworth —Arup Australasia Simon Hardy — Bovis Lend Lease Shane McAtee, Garry McCann, Richard Rizzalli — Mirvac Paul Akhurst , Chris Linning — Sydney Opera House David Marchant — Woods Bagot

Joyce Law, Phillip Lord, Dean Morse — Brisbane City Council Paul Crapper — Building Commission John Spathonis — Qld Dept of Main Roads

Scott Beazley, Robin Drogemuller, Stephan Gard, David Nielsen — Queensland University of Technology Guillermo Aranda-Mena, Ron Wakefield — RMIT

Integrated Digital Modelling Taskforce

Chair: Andrew Gutteridge (AIA)

Representatives from the following organisations served on the taskforce.

Association of Consulting Engineers AustraliaAustralian Institute of ArchitectsAustralian Institute of BuildingAustralian Institute of Quantity SurveyorsBuildingSMART Australasia Facility Management Association of Australia

e59928

Rectangle

e59928

Rectangle

THE BUSINESS VALUE OF BIMGetting Building Information Modeling to the Bottom Line

Premier Corporate PartnerGovernment PremierPartner

Corporate Contributor Sponsors

Association Premier Partners

3

Table of Contents

ImagescourtesyofMortensonConstruction

IntroductionSmartMarket Report Executive Summary .........................4

Overall Value of BIM .....................................................................6Case Study: Research 2........................................................................10Industry Issue: Impact of BIM on Productivity ..................................12

Industry Issue: Return on Investment in BIM ....................................13

Internal Business Value of BIM............................................14

Industry Issue: Impact of BIM on Marketing.....................................18

Case Study: Texas A&M Health Science Center.............................19

Project Value of BIM...................................................................20Case Study: Sutter Health Medical Center ......................................24

Industry Issue: BIM and Green Building............................................26

Case Study: Virtual Mock-Ups .............................................................27

Player Value of BIM.....................................................................28Software Industry Perspective .............................................................35

Adoption of BIM............................................................................36Case Study: Department of Energy....................................................43

Industry Issue: Opportunities and Obstacles for Engineers .........44Case Study: BIM on Heavy Civil Projects.........................................46

Conclusions.....................................................................................48

Resources ........................................................................................50

Methodology ...................................................................................50

Cover images provided byBryan Christie Design

4

Do Not Measure Measure

Negative

Break even

Less than 10%

10-25%

25-50%

50-100%

Over 100%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perceived ROI Versus Formally Measured ROI

21%

26%

17%

17%

10%3%6%

14%

14%

15%

25%

13%

10%

9%

SmartMarket ReportExecutive Summary

Better Than Expected ValueReturn on investment can be calcu-lated in various ways, but those whotake a data-driven approach see moreupside to BIM. Users who formallymeasure their ROI report better re-turns than those who estimate ROIbased on perception.

� Seven in ten BIM users whomeasure ROI see positive returns,compared to half of those who onlygo by their perception of value.

� One in five BIM users who meas-ure ROI see returns greater than50%—double the perceived value.

Competitive AdvantageBIM is seen as a way to get a leg upon the competition. This is particularlytrue among less experienced userswho are promoting a new service.

� Marketing new business to newclients is the top rated businessbenefit of BIM.

� Half of users say offering newservices with BIM is a significantbusiness benefit.

� Two-thirds of users say BIM’s abilityto help a companymaintain repeatbusiness with past clients bringsat least a moderate level of value.

Improved ProductivityBIM creates efficiencies. Users realizesome of the greatest value of BIMthrough its potential to cut down onrework, such as rekeying informationinto models or making changes in thefield. As users become more proficient,the opportunities to improve productiv-ity are more pronounced.

� Reducing rework is the highest-rated business benefit amongexperts. Four in five experts sayit brings high to very high value,compared to 23% of beginners.

� The potential of BIM to improveproductivity is ranked by architectsas the top way to improve their returnon investment in the technology.

� Reduced conflicts and changesduring construction are amongthe top rated ways engineers sayBIM adds value to a project.

� Clash detection and avoidingrework are the top rated ways own-ers say BIM saves time and money.

BIM DefinedFor purposes of this report, McGraw-Hill Construction defines BIM as: Theprocess of creating and using digi-tal models for design, constructionand/or operations of projects.

Reaping Higher Returns During Lean TimesEven as the design and construction industry confronts a down economy, most BIM users are seeing positive payback fromtheir use of the technology, according to McGraw-Hill Construction research. Users gain bankable benefits that enhanceproductivity, improve their ability to integrate teams and give them an edge on the competition. The value from BIM growsas users gain experience, offering them an opportunity to reap greater returns even during an economic recession.

Key Findings

� Two-thirds of BIM users say they see positive ROI on their overall investment in BIM.

� 87% of expert users are experiencing positive ROI with BIM.

� 93% of BIM users believe there is potential to gain more value from BIM in the future.

Source: McGraw-Hill Construction, 2009

41

Challenges to AdoptionBeyond client demand, non-users see challenges that are of moderate to lesser con-cern when considering whether to adopt BIM. As a new technology, dealing withcosts and training issues have been the greatest hurdles on the path toadoption.

� Haven’t had sufficient time to evaluate BIM:With construction running atrecord highs in recent years, many firms had been too focused on their existingprojects to consider testing new methods. In light of the recent slowdown in newconstruction, firms may find this is not a significant issue moving forward.

� Software/hardware upgrades too expensive. Architects and engineers aremost likely to believe this, which could reflect the fact that they generally bring inlower revenues than contractors.

� Functionality doesn’t apply well enough to what we do. Engineers are mostlikely to believe this, which illustrates a belief that BIM is not addressing theirpractice-related needs.

� Insufficient BIM-compatible content available for my needs. Owners rankthis among their top reasons for not implementing BIM, which could indicate thatthey see BIM as more relevant to the work of other team members.

Most Important Obstacles to BIM Adoption

67%

49%

41%

35%

33%

Not enough demand from clientsand/or other firms on projects

Haven’t had sufficient timeto evaluate it

Software too expensive

Functionality doesn’t apply wellenough to what we do

Required hardware upgradestoo expensive

Very High/High

Issues With Little Impact on AdoptionSome issues that have been identified by users as challenging are not seen as signif-icant barriers to adoption by non-users. At least half of non-users say these factorshave little to no influence on their decision not to adopt BIM:

� Concerns about insurance/liability: 64%

� Current methods we use are better: 62%

� Poor interoperability with CAD applications: 54%

� Software too difficult to use: 51%

� Insufficient training available: 50%


Importance of BIMin 5 Years

0

20

40

60

80

100

No importance

Low importance

Moderate importance

High importance

Very high importance

3%16%

39%

31%

11%


Upbeat Future OutlookAbout two in five non-users (42%)believe that BIM will be highly or veryhighly important to the industry infive years. Only a small group of them(13%) say they either have no interest inusing it, or have tried it and decided notto use it again. The vast majority areopen to exploring it.

Evaluating factors that would promptnon-users to adopt, client requirementranks as the most important. Two-thirdssay they don’t see enough demand fromclients yet. However, 55% of ownerssay that BIM will be highly or very highlyimportant to the industry in five years –more than any of the other team mem-bers surveyed. If owners see BIM asimportant and can push it as a require-ment, more adoption will follow. (SeeClient Demand for BIM on page 39).

Believing in the cost effectiveness ofBIM ranked as the second most impor-tant factor that would encourage adop-tion. And when asked about reasons fordelaying adoption, concerns about BIM’scost and it’s effectiveness on smallerprojects are the top two reasons given.Six in ten (59%) non-users believe thatBIM seems less efficient for smallerprojects, while 54% list cost required asa limiting factor. Firms that focus onsmaller jobs need to understand BIM’svalue in that context in order to makethe investment.

National Guidelines for Digital Modelling

IBEA LONDON 7-9 October 2011 Dr Guillermo Aranda-Mena RMIT MELBOURNE

Dis

cip

line

mo

de

lling

, an

aly

sis

an

d s

imu

latio

n

41

- Electrical engineer: electrical pits in slabs, electrical cable ducts and conduits in slabs

- Civil engineer: retaining wall layout, set-out from architectural model, extra properties added to structural objects, structural connection rules and relationships: beam to beam, beam to column, wall to column, beam to wall, slab to wall, columns, beams, slabs, braces, walls, footings, piers, piles, trusses, loading for functions, autocheck for member support. Structural analysis model is not normally exchanged but used for investigation of structural options

Data exported to architectural model of adjusted sizes for:

- interference checking of 3D geometry

- revisions tracked

- auto connection of analytical and physical models.

Figure 3.5 Structural model of 8 Chifley Square

(Image courtesy of Arup)

Phases 4 and 5 – Contract documents and construction

- Fabrication and construction model is used for material procurement; fabrication design and details; quantity take-off and estimating; scheduling of construction sequence; tracking of elements, with use of RFID and barcoding; transportation, site handling; finishing/QA, inspections and approvals


Dis

cip

line

mo

de

lling

, an

aly

sis

an

d s

imu

latio

n

39

Figure 3.3 Visualisation model of 8 Chifley Square

(Image courtesy of Mirvac)

3.2.4 Phases 3 and 4 – Developed design and contract document BIM

- Material information linked to spaces through space number and name, also room painting, and other specifications

- Building elements with type information as per building specification may have specific supplier

- Each storey modelled separately, thus multi-storey walls and spaces modelled separately on each storey

Required information content:

- Elements of the building: ground gloor, ground floor slabs, structural frame, load-bearing walls, columns, beams, floor slabs, attic floor slabs, structure frame stairs, facades, external walls, windows, external doors, external decks, balconies, canopies, roofs, roof sub-

structures, roofing, glass roofs, skylights, hatches

- Elements of internal space: space dividers, partitions, glass partitions, balustrades, internal doors, specific doors, space stairs, suspended ceilings, standard fittings, specific fittings, standard machine and devices

Modelling of building objects

- Walls to be modelled using wall tool from slab to slab to storey heights, with internal and external walls distinguished. Walls and spaces to be related. Walls of multiple storey height modelled separately for each storey

- Doors and windows to be modelled using door or window tool, with type and fittings information, connected to walls. Consistent and stated dimensioning to either frames or openings. Doors and windows associated to spaces and changed when either edited

- Glass and curtain walls. Solid wall that hosts glass or curtain walls or facades must be modelled first, then doors and windows added. There should be no gaps between host wall and openings. Multiple storey height curtain walls modelled by storey with appropriate openings each storey

- Slabs (ground floor, floor and attic floor) to be modelled using slab tool. The joining of slabs to walls modelled so that slab ends on surface of load-bearing wall for consistent data for quantity take-off and cost calculation. Floors modelled to extend to the inner surface of the external wall

- Roofs, beams, stairs and columns to be modelled using correct tools

- Columns modelled by outer dimensions including surface structure

Information required by architect from other disciplines:

- Civil engineer: platforms, roadways, parking, ground levels, cut and fill, site drainage

- Mechanical engineer: plant layout outlines, vents, exhausts, plant, ductwork, air ducts, air returns, intakes, penetrations

- Electrical, fire and data engineers: cables, penetrations, external lighting, distribution points on site plan, distribution point on floor plan, electrical symbols on floor and ceiling


Dr. Guillermo Aranda-Mena. RMIT Melbourne. Innovation in the Built Environment Academy - LONDON - 2011

CIFECENTER FOR INTEGRATED FACILITY ENGINEERING

Relationships Between Project Complexity and Communication

By

Reid Senescu, Guillermo Aranda-Mena, and John Haymaker

CIFE Technical Report #TR196 January 2011

STANFORD UNIVERSITY


The Relationship Between Product Organization Process Complexity

and Communication Challenges Reid R. Senescu, Guillermo Aranda-Mena, John R. Haymaker

217

Figure!65:!Moving!between!a!parametric!model!to!structural!analysis!and!the!comparison!

of!!performative!aspects!from!multiple!design!options,!Source:!Author!and!Arup!!

5.1.3. Optioneering across disciplines

My research in building practice with Arup specialists suggests that processes

guided though optioneering do not necessarily need to consider design-criteria

across multiple disciplines. Optioneering is well suited to address multi-criteria

optimisation within the boundaries of a single, or a selected few discipline. At the

same time, I contend that the benefits offered through optioneering in the context

of building design are particularly relevant when applied across several disciplines.

Work on the Rectangular Pitch Stadium project at Arup revealed that optioneering

can facilitate lateral thinking between design professions. In doing so, a network

of connections can be established across disciplines that is based on the specific

requirements of design performance. The configuration of the network can vary

depending on the required evaluation between a number of participants at a given

point in the collaborative effort. The scenario described in Figure 66 is an example

showing a network of collaborating professions who are laterally interconnected.


198

Table!1:!Summary!of!

topics!describing!

characteristics!of!

acoustic!engineering!!

topic ACOUSTIC

Primary concern in the early design stages

room sizing adjacencies noise levels type of interior finishes types of room volumes

Type of performance indicators in early design stages

reverberation times noise cancellation room acoustic targets

Measurements and units

sound intensity (W/m2) reverberation (RT60) frequency (hertz) sound pressure (dB)

Awareness of cost implications for design changes

More information desired

Feedback mostly required from others

architectural: building shape and volume façades: cladding material interior: finishes, material usage

Type of geometrical entity used for performance analysis and representation

Modeling tolerance Approximately 400mm, depending on frequency level that is investigated

Types of (geometric) modeling required

auralisation acoustic response reverberation

Ratio between group decision-making sole investigation Preferred media to pass on information to others

Auralisation reports combining text-based and visual means

Preferred media for receiving information from others

2D plans and sections charts, maps, graphs reports combining text- based and visual means verbal explanation


199


topics!describing!

characteristics!of!

architectural!design!!

topic ARCHITECTURE


fulfilling the program design aesthetics functionality spatial synthesis cultural relevance ........


depending on local -building-codes net to gross ratio massing budget compliance


Area (m2) cost per m2 ($/m2) height/length (m)




all/QS: basic costing structures: grid, sizing environmental: daylight mechanical: service zone requirements


Modeling tolerance Building: approx. 50 -100 mm Urban: 1000-2000 mm


2D/3D visualisation massing, overshading surface interior/exterior

Ratio between group decision-making sole investigation Preferred media to pass on information to others

3D digital models 3D physical models hand-sketches

Preferred media for receiving information from others

charts, maps, graphs 3D digital model section with analysis results exemplary photographs 3D digital models (ideally shared)


200


topics!describing!

characteristics!of!

environmental!

sustainable!design!!

topic ENVIRONMENTAL


sustainability initiatives carbon footprint / CO2 resourcefulness, lifecycle cost Green Star/LEED/BREEAM


Energy use, Water use Carbon output Thermal transmittance, Lighting demand


Daylight (lx) skylight glare (% - index) emission (CO2) .......




mechanical: energy efficiency façades: glazing type fire: zoning requirements architect: massing


Modeling tolerance Walls: 500mm Small scale elements: 200mm


life-cycle analysis lighting analysis fluid dynamics

Ratio between group decision-making sole investigation

Preferred media to pass on information to others

charts, maps, tables, 3D digital model section with analysis results mapped on graphically hand-sketches

Preferred media for

receiving information

from others:

3D digital models, 2D plans and

sections, hand-sketches, charts, maps,

graphs, reports combining text- based

and visual means


Dominik Holzer, PhD

A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK TO INVESTIGATE BUILDING INFORMATION MODELLING THROUGH KNOWLEDGE ELICITATION AND VISUAL MODELS Bilal Succar, Willy Sher, University of Newcastle and Guillermo Aranda-Mena, RMIT AUBEA 2007

Dr. Guillermo Aranda-Mena. RMIT Melbourne. Presentation to the Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft, NL 9.Dec.2010

YARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERS BUILDING

SOUTHERN CROSS STATION AUTHORITY

project 227 YARDMASTERS

date 31.03.2006Sketch Design

BRACED (TIED) IN ROOF PLANE

30 Panels : 3200 x 10500

Standardised fast erection sequence

Structure / Enclosure

YARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERS BUILDING

SOUTHERN CROSS STATION AUTHORITY

project 227 YARDMASTERS

date 31.03.2006Sketch Design

YARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERSYARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERSYARDMASTERS


YARDMASTERS


Thoroughly Unscientific Diagram Representing Building Costs

Budget$ Overrun

Material Labour / Process Risk / Contingency

YARDMASTERS


THE BREWERYTHE BREWERY


THE BREWERYTHE BREWERYTHE BREWERY


Carlton Brewery UNITED - Consultant Brief Summary

Basement 5+

Basement 5+ Plant

Basement 4

Basement 4 Plant

Basement 3

Basement 3 Plant

Basement 2

Basement 2 Plant

Basement 1

Basement 1 Plant

Basement 1 Loading

Basement 1 Pub. Circ.

Lower Ground (Below

Ground)

Lower Ground Plant

Lower Gnd Pub. Circ.

Lower Ground (Above

Ground GFA)

Ground (GFA)

Ground (Non-GFA)

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

Level 6

Level 7

Level 8

Level 9

Level 10

Level 11

Level 12

Level 13

Level 14

Level 15

Level 16

Level 17

Level 18

Level 19

Level 20

Level 21

Level 22

Level 22 Plant

Level 23

Level 24

Level 25

Level 26

Level 27

Level 28

Level 29

Level 30

Level 31

Level 32

TOTALS

Level

Apartments m2/No. 85 m2 171

Car Spaces 0

GFA % Efficiency NLA/NSA

7,234

521

542

32

85

85

85

169

177

85

85

85

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

1,903 85% 1,617

26,309 55% 14,556

Castlemaine (Building 1)

UNITED - Consultant Brief - Levels 9:29 AM 11/12/2008



17

Construction SegmentationKey Customers

13“MacLeamy Curve” Patrick MacLeamy CEO

Home About RMIT Contact All contacts Staff by name A

Dr Guillermo Aranda-Mena

Dr Guillermo Aranda-Mena Guillermo is currently a Senior Lecturer in Property, Construction and Project Management at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. He holds a PhD in Construction Management and Engineering from The University of Reading and a Masters of Science in European Construction Engineering from Loughborough University of Technology, both in the United Kingdom. In 2003 Guillermo was appointed Post Doctoral Research Fellow at the University of Newcastle, Australia, working on a Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation (CRC-CI) research project in Building Information Modelling (BIM) in collaboration with the Common Wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Ove Arup and Woods Bagot Architects. He has been principal investigator of four CRC-CI research projects including ‘Business Drivers for BIM’, ‘Mobilising Construction’, ‘eBusiness Adoption in Construction’ and ‘Automated BIM Estimator’. He is currently RMIT Project Leader for the CRC-CI BIM National Guidelines and Case Studies.

He is currently supervising various Masters Theses and two PhDs. Guillermo is a Conjoint Academic to the Singapore Institute of Management, Singapore and the University of Newcastle, Australia.

[Next: Publications]

Position Senior Lecturer

School / Work Unit

Property Const & Project Mgt

Contact Details +(61 3) 9925 9512

[email protected]

Location Building: 8 Level: 8 Room: 68

City Campus

College/Portfolio Design & Social Context

EXPLORE

Programs & courses

Future students International students How to apply Entrance requirements Fees Scholarships

Students

Login to myRMIT Study resources Administration Student services Get involved

Research

Focus areas Research Institutes Postgraduate programs Partnerships Fellowships Publications

Industry

Workforce development Work placements R & D consultancy Employing graduates

Alumni

News Events Special offers Giving to RMIT

About RMIT

Learning & teaching Colleges & schools Campuses & maps Employment News

Copyright © 2012 RMIT University Disclaimer Privacy Accessibility Website feedback ABN 49 781 030 034 CRICOS provider number: 00122A Print version Open Universities Australia

INTERACT WITH RMIT

Page 1 of 1RMIT - Aranda-Mena, Dr. Guillermo

15/03/2012http://www.rmit.edu.au/staff/guillermo

Guillermo Aranda-Mena

Documents

Transcript of Guillermo Aranda-Mena