MANUFACTURING BUILDING - Lean Construction · PDF fileWHY THIS APPROACH: • No Value...

PRESENTATION FOR:

ISPE & LCI June 19, 2013

BioScience Program Study ● LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

MANUFACTURING BUILDING TECHNOLOGY IN PROJECT EXECUTION

19 June 2013

PRESENTATION FOR:


INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW

19 June 2013

PRESENTATION FOR:


LEAN APPROACH

TECHNOLOGY TOOLS

SIMULATION

RESULTS

19 June 2013

PRESENTATION FOR:


LEAN Approach

Hybrid IPD TVD/TVE Co-Location Schedule Methodologies Risk Analysis BIM Utilization Benchmarks/Mock-ups Just In Time KanBan Systems

PRESENTATION FOR:


IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) DESIGN–BID–BUILD, NOT CONTRACTUALLY IPD BUT…

Integrated team, assembled early, open & collaborative Co-Located - Owner, Architect, Engineer and GC DPR involved in design / CRB involved in cost CRB 3D model transitioned to DPR BIM model Streamlined Communication Information sharing

All project info on ProjectWise BIM 360 Field & BIM 360 Glue PlanGrid (Cloud)

PRESENTATION FOR:


Target Value Design / Estimating

WHY THIS APPROACH: • No Value Engineering Loopbacks • No Surprises / High Level Certainty • Reduction in Waste (Time & Cost) • More Informed Decisions

TRADITIONAL APPROACH

CONCEPT AGENCY REVIEW

SCHEMATIC DESIGN

BUDGET VE

RE- WORK

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

BUDGET VE

RE- WORK

BUDGET VE

RE- WORK

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

PHASED LOOPBACKS

TARGET VALUE DESIGN

CONCEPT AGENCY REVIEW

SCHEMATIC DESIGN

TARGET VALUE

ESTIMATE

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

CONSTRUCTION DOCS DETAILED DESIGN

SAVED EFFORT

CONTINUED FEEDBACK LOOP

WHAT’S WANTED

EXPECTED COSTS

BUY-OUT / GMP

BUY-OUT / GMP

TARGET COSTS

PRESENTATION FOR:


Estimate Review APPROACH / TOOLS

• Timberline (Flexible, Detailed, Relevant) • Digital Tools – OST, BIM

IN-HOUSE EXPERTISE • MEP / Process Piping & Controls

» Mike Dugger, Bill Helfrich, Pete Zambon, Frank Beetson, John Lake, Brian Cantwell, Christy Corbin, Billy Stephens

• Sustainability Expertise

RISKS • Soils Conditions • Envelope Criteria • Interiors Standards/Program • Process Equipment / Systems Design • Utilities / Fire Water Storage • Procurement & Schedule Strategies • Sustainable Initiatives • Market Conditions

NEXT STEP • Refine & Align with Team • Verification with Subcontractors • Buy-In by Team

PRESENTATION FOR:


Schedule Methodologies

Pull Planning Short Term Interval Schedules Productivity Tracking /Verification Risk Analysis The End In Mind

PRESENTATION FOR:


Delivery Team (Category) Risk ID

Risk Label (brief description of the risk) Risk Description

Impact (Results of failure to contain risk) Likelihood

ScheduleConsequences

Schedule Activity Impacted %Criticality

EV Schedule Impact Days

U/S Construction 027 PL delay to shore crossing ops

Pipelines: Downstream schedule change delays shore crossing operations

-Delay in start of shore crossing-Lack of space and access to allocated areas -Schedule delay*-Cost increase

5. Remote 5. Minor Lay Export P/L From Shore 1% 4

U/S Construction 029 PL CRA flowline damage

Pipelines: Introduction of untreated seawater into CRA clad flowlines or wet buckle of CRA flowline during installation

-Loss of flowline-Production restricted*-Cost Increase-Significant revenue impact due to LNG export capability

4. Unlikely 4. Moderate Install Infield Lines 1% 14

U/S Construction 032 PL damage to 3rd party PL Pipelines: Damage to third party pipelines/infrastructure.

-Repair costs-Schedule delay-3rd party claims-Environmental impact*-Cost increase

5. Remote 3. Major Install 36" 3GLB 1% 16

U/S HSE 047 PL discovery of indigenous artifacts

Pipelines / Shore Crossing: Discovery of indigenous artifacts during beach excavation

*-Delay in schedule-Potential claims-Relocate pipeline-Increase cost

3. Seldom 5. Minor Excavate Shore Crossing 2% 14

Project Management 050 Lack of platform EPCI org

cap

Lack of platform EPCI contractor organizational capability (people, project management systems, interface management for internal or external interfaces, sub-contractor management)

-Poor quality-Rework-Increase owner's team cost*-Schedule delay

4. Unlikely 4. Moderate HUC CPP Topsides 3% 14

U/S Operations 066 Drilling installation failure Drilling: Complete loss of well during drilling *-Cost increase

-Schedule delay 5. Remote 4. Moderate First LNG 6% 7

Project Area Risk ID Risk Label (brief description of the risk) Likelihood CostConsequence Mitigation

000 000-05The contractor / Vendor may not be ready for Pre-Operational Checkout when Precommissioning wants to start

2 3 Planning and Management

000 000-10 Contractor personnel may not be available to support Pre-Commissioning 2 2 Planning and management

000 000-15 Vendor Availability to Support Precommissioning / Commissioning 3 3 Planning and management of

Vendors

000 000-20 Damage to equipment after turnover prior to commissioning 4 3 Security; Monitoring

000 000-25 Precalibration, Checking out of software; blows the instrument or software 2 3 Pre-checkouts; spares

availability

-0.13%

-0.19%

-0.43%

-0.51%

-0.65%

-0.86%

-1.00%

-1.26%

-1.53%

-2.40%

0.13%

0.22%

0.54%

0.58%

0.81%

1.01%

1.18%

1.52%

1.92%

2.97%

-4.0% -2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0%

110 - Piling

801 - Insulation Piping

803 - Fireproofing

200 - Structural Steel

100 - Earthwork and Civil

700 - Instrumentation and Controls

120 - Concrete

600 - Electrical

400 - Mechanical Equipment

500 - Piping

Project Name: Total Cost TornadoTop 10 Items with Greatest Uncertainity Range with Respect to the P50

2.0% threshold1.0% threshold

0.0% threshold

35,690 45,193

*Cost in $MMP10 P90

Risk Analysis Results

46,764 52,879

19,000 23,931

14,135 18,010

15,822 19,134

8,958 11,544

8,216 10,149

6,333 8,059

2,466 3,189

2,674 3,140

The percentages are calculated using simulation values as follows: ((P10-P40)/Total P40) and ((P90-P40)/Total P40)

* The P10 and P90 cost provides a reader with the potential cost impact of that line item* A P10 or P90 cost of $0 does not equate to 0% uncertainty. This is only true if the P40 cost is $0 as well

Risk Analysis Process & Methodology

ASSESSMENT

DATA GATHERING & MODEL DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT SCHEDULE

PROJECT RISK ISSUES & OPPORTUNITIES

PROJECT

UNCERTAINTY

DATA

Project Start 06JAN97Project Finish 02AUG03Data Date 06JAN97Run Date 08NOV97

© Primavera Systems, Inc.

Expected BarUn-Risked BarProgress BarCritical Activity

RSK3 Sheet 1 of 9

PETRO-CANADA - TERRA NOVA ALLIANCELEVEL 2 - RISK ANALYSIS SCHEDULE

Unrisked vs. Expected Dates

ActivityID

ActivityDescription

UnriskedStart

UnriskedFinish

FP50 Crit %

IMT-INTEGRATED MANAGEMENTIMTII - IMT

00001 Project Start 06JAN97* 84FPSO-Topsides EngineeringSHAWMOUNT BROWN & ROOTFP - PROCESS TOPSIDESProcess

2FPPR005 Issue P&IDs on IDC (incl. Vessel) 04MAR97* 05NOV97 28

2FPPR010 Issue P&IDs AFD (incl. Vessel) 17NOV97 12DEC97 28

2FPPR015 Develop P&IDs to AFC 15DEC97 29MAY98 2Piping

2FPPI064 Plot Plans for IDC 03MAR97* 26SEP97 14

2FPPI065 Plot Plans From IDC 29SEP97 10OCT97 4

2FPPI070 Plot Plans Layouts AFD 13OCT97 06FEB98 30

2FPPI085 Isometrics Supports 1st Issues 01JUN98 13JUL98 1

2FPPI090 Isometrics Supports Last Issues 14JUL98 15DEC98 1

2FPPI115 Final MTO 16DEC98 29DEC98 1

2FPPI120 Last Piping Bulks P.O. Top Ups 30DEC98 21JAN99 1

2FPPI125 Last Piping Bulks Manufacture & Deliver 22JAN99 16MAR99 1Structural

2FPST165 Module Design Loads - Preliminary for Vessel 29SEP97 30SEP97 7

2FPST135 Design Analysis Preliminary Modelling 09FEB98 10APR98 30

2FPST140 Preliminary Modelling & 2D Extract 13APR98 12JUN98 30

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

PROJECT ESTIMATE

REPORTING

MITIGATING & UPDATING

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

230 280 330 380 430 480

Perc

ent F

requ

ency

Cum

ulat

ive

Prob

abili

ty

Total Cost ($MM)

Project NameGraph Title

346

Estimate:

Minimum: 231

289

Maximum: 491

Expected:

50th Percentile:

10th Percentile: 257



HIGHLIGHTERS ($MM)

Maximum

Earli

est

Minimum

Late

st

CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY

CUM

ULA

TIVE

PRO

BABI

LITY

CO

ST IN

$ M

ILLI

ON

S

0 % 20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

20 %40 %60 %80 %

100 %

0 %

Cost/ScheduleRisk Envelope

$2,088.4

$1,978.4

$1,897.9

50th Percentile

21 S

EP 0

0

7 M

AY 0

1

50th

Per

cent

ile

TIME

Tota

l Cos

t

Product Available

27 D

EC 0

0

31 J

UL 0

0Ta

rget

Forecast$1,775.2

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

3%

4%

4%

5%

5%

5%

6%

6%6%7%

7%10%

11%

11%

12%

13%

14%

20%A1030 - Fabricate WHP Foundation (15,000 Tonnes) - S.E Asia

A1800 - First Gas to LNG Plant (Onshore For Commissioning)

A1160 - 4 Months Engineering prior to Fabrication Start -WHP Jacket

UPEPCMB000 - EPCI & Pipeline Contractor Mobilisation

A1630 - Drill and Complete Well WP_BR_1(6.5Km)

A1550 - First LNG - (6 Wells)

UPEPCCO005 - Hook Up & Commission WHP (Pre Drill Rig Installation)

A1040 - Install WHP - Raft Foundation

UPEPCIN020 - Install WHP Topsides Modules

A1590 - Drill and Complete Well WP_AAD_1(4.0Km) - Includes 3 days TAD Disconnect

A1580 - Drill and Complete Well WP_AAF_4 (4.0Km)

A1600 - Drill and Complete Well WP_AAD-2 (4.0Km)

UPEPCFB010 - Fabricate WHP Topsides Modules - S.E Asia




UPEPCCO105 - Hook Up & Commission CPP Platform

A1810 - Ramp Up of Production for RFSU

UPEPCEN015 - Mechanical Detailed Design - Bid & Aw ard Major LLI Mechanical Equipment - ...

A1050 - Mobilise and Install TAD - Ready for Drilling

A1170 - 12 Months Engineering prior to Fabrication Start - CPP Topsides

A1410 - Fabricate & Install Duplex Spools -CPP Topsides - Korea

UPEPCPO025 - Procure/ Deliver/Customs Clear - Fire Water Pump - WHP Topsides

A1830 - HUC Available Wells for f irst LNG (6 Wells required , 7 w il be available)

UPEPCPO130 - Procure/Deliver/Customs Clear - Duplex Piping & Valves - CPP Topsides

Project NameSchedule Sensitivity Index

PROCUREMENT

M/C Mill

P50 BarP50 Bar

Planned BarPlanned Bar

30JUL04

D M AJ F J AM J N DS O M AJ F J AM J N DS O M AJ F J AM J N DS O

2003 2004 2005

M AJ F J AM J N DS O

2006

CRITICAL ENG. ENGINEERING

FAB. / DELIVERY

25MAY045JUN03

5JUN03

8NOV04

15JUN04

PROCUREMENT FAB. / DELIVERY

13APR0413JUN03

11JUL03 1JUN04

MODULES ASSEMBLY

20JUL0523APR04

17MAR04 14SEP04

MODULES ASSEMBLY 20JUL0515MAR0423FEB04 15NOV04

21MAY06

19AUG05

31AUG05

21APR06

17AUG05

3MAY06

31AUG0514-600 4MAY06

31AUG053JUN06

14-300

14-200

BLDG

COMMISSIONING

13SEP06

2JAN06 1ST ORE

Total To date Total 2002 Total 2003 Total Phase 2Structure

Total Cost \ Labor $246.4 $456.0 $842.0 $1,298.0Expenses $25.0 $100.0 $30.0 $130.0

Total Structure $271.4 $556.0 $872.0 $1,428.0

FacilitiesTotal Cost Labor $291.5 $1,129.2 $2,710.6 $3,839.7

Expenses $32.0 $105.0 $170.0 $275.0

Total Facilities $323.5 $1,234.2 $2,880.6 $4,114.7

Total CVX $594.9 $1,790.2 $3,752.6 $5,542.7

Third Party Charges $580.0 $1,768.1 $6,690.0 $8,458.1

TOTAL PROJECT $1,174.9 $3,558.3 $10,442.6 $14,000.9

Contingency 10% $199.0 $980.9 $1,179.9

TOTAL $1,174.9 $3,757.3 $11,423.4 $15,180.8

PROJECT RISK MODEL

5 4 3 2 1

Very Low Low Medium High Very High0% 5% 20% 50% 75%to to to to to5% 20% 50% 75% 95%

Unlikely probability, uncertainty has

happened on other projects

Small probability, uncertainty not likely to occur

Probability uncertainty may or

may not occur

Probability uncertainty likely to

occur

Probability uncertainty will occur, possibly several times

Likelihood Indices

Description

Percent5 4 3 2 1

Very Low Low Medium High Very High

$0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $25,000,000 $50,000,000 to to to to to

$5,000,000 $10,000,000 $25,000,000 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 0m 2m 4m 8m 12mto to to to to2m 4m 8m 12m 24m

Extremely small impact to CAPEX & OPEX. Extremely small impact on principal targets

Small increase to CAPEX & OPEX. Slippage to some elements of the

program. Principal targets unlikely to

be missed.

Significant increase to CAPEX & OPEX.

Intermediate targets may be missed causing some

slippage to principal targets.

Serious potentially causing large

impact to CAPEX & OPEX. Large, unrecoverable

delays to principal targets.

Catastrophic unrecoverable cost impact on CAPEX &

OPEX. Major unrecoverable

delays to principal targets

Description

Schedule Impact

Cost Impact

Issue Indices

5 4 3 2 1Opportunity Indices

PRESENTATION FOR:


Risk Analysis Process Review & validation of project schedule

Conduct risk identification workshop (including owner) Collaboratively identify potential risks & opportunities

Consensus on likelihood of occurrence (5-95%)

Consensus of severity of impact (1 week – 3 months)

Schedule duration ranging (optimistic, pessimistic)

Development and simulation of probabilistic risk model

Preliminary results review Evaluate probability of achieving milestones

Identify and review critical risk drivers

Develop mitigation plans for evaluation

Run “sensitivity” analysis to test mitigation scenarios

Review mitigated results; develop final action plan

PRESENTATION FOR:


Tech Tools & BIM (Building Information Model)

Design to Construction 3D Utility Coordination 3D Model Based Installation Communication

PRESENTATION FOR:


Design to Construction

PRESENTATION FOR:


Coordination -Laser Scan

PRESENTATION FOR:


Coordination

PRESENTATION FOR:


Coordination - Clash Detection

PRESENTATION FOR:


Installation - Trimble Robot

PRESENTATION FOR:


Fabrication & Installation Model to Shop to Field

PRESENTATION FOR:


Benchmarks & Mock-ups

PRESENTATION FOR:


Just In Time & Modules

PRESENTATION FOR:


Process Module Considerations

PRESENTATION FOR:


KANBAN Systems Process & Manufacturing Equipment Control & Start-Up

PRESENTATION FOR:


Paperless Jobsite

Software Hardware Connectivity

PRESENTATION FOR:


Communication - ProjectWise

PRESENTATION FOR:


Communication – BIM 360 / Vela

PRESENTATION FOR:


Communication - Hardware

PRESENTATION FOR:


LEAN Design

Simulation

PRESENTATION FOR:


Process Simulation Model Drivers Optimize equipment selections Verify product through-put Confirm manpower requirements Confirm utility consumption (WFI, Clean Steam, CIP).

PRESENTATION FOR:


Occupancy and Utilization Results

PRESENTATION FOR:


Utilities and Waste Results

PRESENTATION FOR:


Proven Production Schedule Clean & Dirty Hold times established Product A:

• Reduced Process tanks from 16 to 12. • Buffer Hold tanks unchanged. • Reduced Buffer Prep tanks from 4 to 3.

Product B: • Reduced Process tanks from 14 to 11. • Reduced Buffer Hold tanks from 21 to 7 (single-use technologies) • Reduced Buffer Prep tanks from 5 to 1.

CIP Skids: • Reduced from 10 to 9.

13 PIECES OF PROCESS EQPT REMOVED!

Summary of Simulation Results

PRESENTATION FOR:


LEAN Design

LEED

PRESENTATION FOR:


Energy Modeling

EnergyPro Used for Permitting (T-24 Compliance) Design Considerations Equipment Selection Process Energy Inputs LEED Submission

PRESENTATION FOR:


Energy Modeling – Equipment Selection

Utilize 10% load performance energy inputs Compare ROI based on initial investment vs.

operational savings.

PRESENTATION FOR:


Energy Modeling – Process Energy

PRESENTATION FOR:


Fight for your Points! • IEQc5 Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control • EAc4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management

Don’t mess with 50/50 Gender Ratio • Water Efficiency Credits (WEp1, WEc1, WEc2, WEc3)

LEED Lessons Learned

PRESENTATION FOR:


Results

Pushing the Tech Envelope

Reduced Cost On-Time Delivery Efficient Execution Limited Rework High Quality

PRESENTATION FOR:


BioScience Program Study ● LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

QUESTIONS ?

TECHNOLOGY IN PROJECT EXECUTION 19 June 2013

MANUFACTURING BUILDING - Lean Construction · PDF fileWHY THIS APPROACH: • No Value...

Documents

Transcript of MANUFACTURING BUILDING - Lean Construction · PDF fileWHY THIS APPROACH: • No Value...