May 2018 BIM and the rail industry supply chain · There is a significant difference between the...
27
Insight May 2018 BIM and the rail industry supply chain rics.org/insight
Transcript of May 2018 BIM and the rail industry supply chain · There is a significant difference between the...
Insight
May 2018
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
rics.org/insight
rics.org/insights
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
Author and panel chair Simon Longstaffe
Regional Director, Faithful+Gould
Panel membersPaul Burrows
Solutions Architect, RICS
Raj Chawla
Non-executive director, Coxio
Peter Sell
Director, Gardiner and Theobald
Ilias Krystallis
Research Fellow, UCL
Project Leadership TeamRichard Graham
Oval Konsult
Chris Williams Lilley
Leadership Champions
Special thanks to
Dr Robert Mallett
Published by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)
RICS, Parliament Square, London SW1P 3AD
www.rics.org
The views expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of RICS nor any body connected with RICS. Neither the authors, nor RICS accept any liability arising from the use of this publication.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Typeset using Typefi
ii May 2018RICS insight
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
Contents
Glossary ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
1.0 Introduction ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3
1.1 Research methodology ................................................................ 3
2.0 The rail industry and BIM �������������������������������������������������������������������� 4
3.0 The benefits of change ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 5
3.1 5D BIM ......................................................................................... 6
4.0 Understanding the industry barriers to collaboration ���������������������� 7
4.1 Collaborative working ................................................................... 7
4.2 Fragmentation .............................................................................. 8
5.0 BIM ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
5.1 BIM skills development .............................................................. 10
6.0 Project findings ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11
6.1 Data standardisation .................................................................. 11
6.2 Process ...................................................................................... 13
6.3 Software .................................................................................... 16
6.4 Procurement within the infrastructure sector ............................. 17
7.0 Conclusions �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 20
8.0 Recommendations ��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21
rics.org/insights
iiiRICS insightMay 2018
iv May 2018RICS insight
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
Glossary
ACostE Association of Cost Engineers
AIM Asset information model
AIR Asset information requirement
API Application programming interface
BCIS Building Cost Information Service
BDS Building Description System
BEP BIM Execution Plan
BIM Building information modelling
BoQ Bill of quantities
BPIC Building Project Information Committee
BS British Standard
BSI British Standards Institution
CAD Computer-aided design
CCPI Coordinating Committee for Project Information
CERIF Common European Research Information Format
CIBSE Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers
CIC Construction Industry Council
CIOB Chartered Institute of Building
CoBie Construction Operations Building Information Exchange
CPA Construction Products Association
CPIC Construction Project Information Committee
CSV Comma-separated values
dPoW Digital plan of work
DfT Department for Transport
EDI Equality, diversity and inclusion
EIR Employers information requirements
GRIP Governance for Railway Investment Projects
ICE Institution of Civil Engineers
ICMSC International Construction Measurement Standards Coalition
IFC Industry Foundation Classes
IPA Infrastructure and Projects Authority
ISO International Organisation for Standardisation
NBS National Building Specification
NEC New Engineering Contract
NRM New rules of measurement
rics.org/insights
1May 2018 RICS insight
O&M Operations and maintenance
ORBIS Offering Rail Better Information Services
PAS Publicly Available Specification
PII Professional indemnity insurance
PQQ Pre-qualification questionnaire
QS Quantity surveyor
RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects
SaaS Software as a Service
SFG Service and Facilities Group
SME Small and medium-sized enterprises
UN/CEFACT United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business
USP Unique selling point
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
2 May 2018RICS insight
1.0 Introduction
This paper is the result of a research and engagement project conducted by RICS and the rail industry. It aims to assess the future nature of the supply chain process within rail infrastructure and is a direct response to the UK government’s Construction 2025 report, which calls for the industry to become:
‘dramatically more sustainable through its efficient approach to delivering low carbon assets more quickly and at a lower cost, underpinned by strong, integrated supply chains and productive long-term relationships.’
The rail industry is fragmented, and suffers from a poor alignment of systems, data and processes, poor knowledge sharing and limited data management. Moreover, rail industry working methods have generally been ad hoc, largely making use of ‘local’ processes developed by individual organisations and regions.
Technology is rapidly altering this position, and certainly there have been advances in data acquisition and the presentation of data in a digital format. However, it remains clear that there is often no common data environment between rail organisations or companies within the rail industry itself, which gives rise to data compatibility problems.
This paper looks at how building information modelling (BIM) could help to overcome these data barriers through the supply chain and across the rail industry.
1.1 Research methodologyThe project leadership team invited a specially convened expert panel, representing a broad cross-section of the rail infrastructure supply chain, to engage in discussions that examined the issues inhibiting better integration of data and more sustainable practices. The expert panellists all held diverse views on this topic, and brought with them different perspectives and experience. Each session was organised around a series of questions, and the resulting discussion was recorded and transcribed to create a body of evidence. The panel discussed the following:
• What is the correct way to achieve collaboration across the supply chain?
• What is the role of BIM in improving supply chain practices?
• How do clients engage with the market to get the best out of procurement and delivery?
• What do we want supply chains to do?
rics.org/insights
3May 2018 RICS insight
2.0 The rail industry and BIM
The rail industry runs on and makes constant use of BIM data, be it throughout the life cycle of a project or the day to day running of the network. Examples of the types of data used daily by infrastructure commercial managers (quantity surveyors) across the rail supply chains include:
• drawings
• measurements
• payments systems
• material ordering
• management information reports
• cost plans
• risk registers
• operations and maintenance (O&M) and
• decision points.
This data is shared through the rail supply chain, from manufacturer to subcontractor, to contractor to client, and back again. Often this process is ineffective, disrupted and largely manual, to the detriment of the efficiency of the industry.
There is a significant difference between the traditional quantity surveyor’s (QS) skills and BIM data expertise. Traditionally, the QS operates in a very transactional way, passing and receiving information at certain points. As technology systems have developed and measurement has been computerised, these processes have become smoother but the steps remain. We have not seen a total transformation of these systems like the changes seen in the architectural process, where drawings have moved from paper on easels to CAD drawings.
The role of the QS could change. Naturally, the core skills will still be required but they can, and should, be used in a different way. The use of technology can take the weight off estimating, measurement, quantification, checking and reporting.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
4 May 2018RICS insight
Image supplied by Matthew Joseph
3.0 The benefits of change
In 2014, the RICS Construction journal published HS2: collaborative working is crucial for success. It stated that:
‘the rail industry needs to move toward a more intelligent and interactive approach that uses software to extract data directly from design information, allowing clients and their suppliers a more comprehensive overview of the total whole life costs of the project. This, therefore, will allow industry professionals to track the cost of an asset through design, construction and into its operational life.’
The article also pointed out the issues involved in making sure the same source of data is used by everyone:
‘The challenge comes with scale. The size and duration of large rail and other infrastructure schemes means they will be employing most of the cost consultants in the UK, and these will all have a different approach to cost estimating and the use of BIM. To maintain the required level of transparency, productivity and accuracy, suppliers will need to be capable and, most importantly, willing to work in a more streamlined way within agreed methodologies, guiding principles, processes and procedures. This will create a consistent approach and end product.’
Therefore, to ensure there are minimal data errors, and to permit the conditions for more effective communication between all parties, we will also need to establish a common position toward data structure, vocabulary and technology. This could be a federated model that means everyone is working in the same ‘space’, or individual companies having their own systems that use the same data structure to allow consistency of application. This common position is immensely important. Infrastructure schemes are often in their construction phase for at least 10 years, so the rail sector clearly needs commonality and understanding running through the entire supply chain.
The 2014 article discussed the concept of creating a position akin to alliancing for data. In general terms, this is a relationship between two or more participants with aligned commercial interests, with the aim of working together to deliver a project in a collaborative and constructive way.
To create the conditions for data alliancing, the rail industry has no option but to change. The expert panel discussions agreed with the argument that we need to be engaged in a considerable amount of preparatory work to identify the right processes, systems and data structure, because if we miss the opportunity to do this, we will struggle to deliver the next level of BIM. In line with the Digital Built Britain strategy, this will mean that most of the tasks will be automated and autonomous between the supply chains. For that premise to come true, processes, systems and data structures must align and be embedded in the supply chain.
As discussed in section 4.2 of this paper, working in a truly collaborative way in the estimating/cost management industry has been inhibited by the existing estimating process of passing data from stage to stage and discipline to discipline. It has also been prohibited by companies whose business model remains unsuitable to collaborative practise.
Better use of BIM will enable everyone involved to work on the same set of data. Technology and processes will finally begin to match the long-term vision of through project life consistency.
rics.org/insights
5May 2018 RICS insight
3.1 5D BIMThe term ‘5D BIM’ refers to the intelligent linking of individual 3D CAD components or assemblies, with the addition of scheduling (a fourth dimension) and estimating or cost (a fifth dimension) to the model. Currently, a 5D BIM software solution extracts quantities from 3D models and stores the data within its own system. This extracted data can then be used for creating BoQs, reporting and change control via model comparisons.
The rail industry should aim to create a cost information model that forms an important part of the project information model, throughout all stages of the project life cycle, from 3D to 7D. From inception and feasibility, design, through the tendering process, construction and eventual operation of the asset itself, it will grow and evolve with the project, merging into the asset information model (AIM). By pinning the cost and schedule data to the AIM, where every asset is uniquely identifiable, every cost element can be queried, analysed and benchmarked.
Cost data requirements change throughout the life cycle of a scheme, from estimates to O&M via actual cost, etc., which is why pinning the cost to assets is important. During construction, a dynamic link with the project financial system will be required.
Having this level of detail will mean being able to extract cost, schedule and eventually risk information for individual assets at a known location. This would allow industry-wide benchmarking against similar asset types. Benchmarking is something UK government bodies are very keen on: they want to ensure they are not paying over the odds and are receiving value for money. This would lead to more informed benchmarking.
Network Rail is focused, through its ORBIS programme, on the creation of a digital map of its asset base and processes that link this asset information with its customer services and requirements.
ORBIS is a ‘data to intelligence’ programme, looking to improve the capture of asset data, to rationalize and consolidate the systems used to store this data and develop new ways to exploit it to support better decision making. To improve the data capture, ORBIS is using data governance to ensure policies are being adhered to by collecting the right information and maintaining it to a high-quality level.
The International Construction Measurement Standards Coalition (ICMSC), is currently working to develop and implement international standards for benchmarking, measuring and reporting construction project costs. They published the International Construction Measurement Standards in July 2017 and produced a series of templates to ensure data is captured at a consistent level from country to country.
Moreover, the recent transport infrastructure efficiency strategy describes seven challenges that the Department for Transport (DfT) will need to address to improve efficiency in infrastructure. Two of these challenges look at benchmarking, and a common approach to estimating and cost management.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
6 May 2018RICS insight
Figure 1: BIM modules
4.0 Understanding the industry barriers to collaboration
Barriers exist where parties do not plan ahead, or do not wish to collaborate due to a misaligned procurement process, for example, which creates misaligned objectives. Failure to collaborate drives up transaction costs and leads to waste and unnecessary additional work.
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are embracing the digital transformation, and base their business models on projects leading the investment rather than investing in the business for organic growth. Barriers are created where there is a demand from the client/employer to use specific systems that are not affordable, or are not a Software as a Service (SaaS).
Within the rail industry, lack of standardisation is a real problem, and smaller suppliers are required to work across multiple platforms with different clients to provide their services. This problem can only be overcome if standards are common and all systems comply with them. Once systems comply, which system a participant makes use of becomes irrelevant.
SMEs also see problems where the risk in specification is passed down to them rather than being mitigated. This may force them to accept risk that is disproportionate.
Most infrastructure projects are complex, involving coordination between large numbers of stakeholders throughout the life cycle. Rail schemes are generally unique and have become larger and more complex, while the associated legislation has multiplied, bringing more involvement from a greater number of people. To improve collaboration between participants, the industry needs appropriate processes that work well, the tools to implement them and the right approach from the people involved. Section 4.1 considers some of the options.
4.1 Collaborative workingISO 44001:2017, Collaborative business relationship management systems - Requirements and framework, provides a structure for collaborative business relationships to help companies develop and manage their interactions with other organisations for maximum benefit to all.
Using an eight-stage approach, the framework is designed to enable organisations of any size, and from any sector, to apply best practice principles to their own ways of working.
In line with the arguments set out in this paper, the framework identifies one of the core values of collaborative working as commonality of application between delivery partners, with better integration and integrity of supply chains. As has been proven by previous attempts, collaboration is not easy. Organisations need to look at their values/cultures. They need to work hard to embed collaboration in their way of working, which requires strong leadership and openness. If a company does not work collaboratively internally, it will struggle to do so externally.
Within the wider infrastructure industry there are processes, such as the RIBA Plan of Work 2013, that set out the tasks and deliverables for each step.
The Plan of Work:
• ‘acts across the full range of sectors and project sizes
• provides straightforward mapping for all forms of procurement
• integrates sustainable design processes
• maps Building Information Modelling (BIM) processes.’
Collaboration is not a new concept, and has been discussed since the publication in 1994 of Constructing the team – Final Report of the Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry (commonly referred to as the Latham report). The report called on the infrastructure and construction industries to change its ways, and embrace team working.
In the UK, there are few signs that collaboration is finally happening across the infrastructure industry, and existing projects are yet to fully embrace the collaborative ethic witnessed during the preparation phase of the London 2012 Olympics. The coordination of data is central to achieving better levels of collaboration and there have been organisations, like the Construction Project Information Committee (CPIC), working on this for almost three decades.
CPIC started as the Building Project Information Committee (BPIC), and was set up in February 1987 under the joint sponsorship of:
• the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA)
• RICS
• the Association of Cost Engineers (ACostE)
• the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) and
• the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE).
rics.org/insights
7May 2018 RICS insight
BPIC was the successor to the Coordinating Committee for Project Information (CCPI), which was set up by the above sponsors to provide guidance on the preparation of project specifications and production drawings. The overarching purpose was to overcome some of the inadequacies that have been found in practice, which were seriously impairing the efficiency and quality of building work.
The work of CPIC has been recognised by both the Latham and Egan (Rethinking Construction – The Report of the Construction Task Force) reports, and its members were key contributors to Uniclass and to BS1192, the standard covering the collaborative production of information.
Uniclass is a unified classification covering all sectors, and is cited in ISO 12006-2 Building construction – Organisation of information about construction works as the UK response to that international standard. CPIC ceded the copyright for Uniclass to the UK government in 2014 and its developed form, Uniclass 2015, is now part of the BIM Toolkit published by the National Building Specification (NBS).
4.2 FragmentationThe structure of the rail industry is fragmented: DfT as a central government body is effectively responsible for the infrastructure and the services are run by various franchises. The work within the industry covers a broad range of diverse activities and specialisms, from the construction of permanent way, signalling, civils infrastructure and buildings, to the manufacture and supply of rolling stock, as well as the maintenance, operation and disposal of assets.
As with the construction industry, the life cycle of an infrastructure project has many participants. The main stakeholders are usually the client, designers, contractors and manufacturers, and they are all involved from project inception. Along the way, depending on the scale of the
scheme, there will be numerous other parties involved, both internal (involved in the construction) and external (train operators, politicians, councils, land owners, etc.), which can be significant in large schemes.
Fragmentation in infrastructure is nothing new, and both the Latham and Egan reports were critical of the sequential nature of the industry’s processes. It could be argued that the fragmentation problem has worsened since the publication of those reports, as there are now more specialisms involved. The way work is generally procured means that consistency of skills, knowledge and information is absent throughout the different phases of any scheme.
The baton-passing nature of the industry, and the stop-start between phases through the life cycle of a project, as shown in Figure 2, creates further dysfunction:
• Early stage design is usually developed in isolation from delivery and construction specialists, which can result in inefficient redesign later in the process.
• Companies often introduce change if they inherit work through applying their unique selling points (USPs), or by redesigning to satisfy their professional indemnity insurance (PII).
• Industry professionals stay within their own specialism, which gives rise to a lack of early stage coordination between, for example, environmental, design, cost and schedule.
• The temporary nature of teams and weak supply chain relationships, allied with low incentives to stay together and develop high performing teams, generates additional uncertainty.
Different clients have differing requirements, which means that again there is no consistency. Currently, projects start from scratch each time, processes are written, best practice is sought and then implemented without any effective safeguards as to whether they are appropriate for the sector they are in.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
8 May 2018RICS insight
Figure 2: Typical passage of data and information
There is a further layer of fragmentation that comes with the governance of the rail industry itself. This issue is expanded upon in the RICS insight paper, Supply Chain Sustainability and Rail Infrastructure: Leadership. The paper focuses on industry leadership as a key factor in shaping positive industry change toward clear industrial policy objectives. As the paper argues, overall governance does not sit with one government department, and this only adds to the number of stakeholders and requirements/standards and so on. Each of the numerous stakeholders have different requirements and standards.
Ultimately, what the industry requires is illustrated in Figure 3. Clients should create certainty and consistency of data through the life of a building/piece of infrastructure. At the same time, this should drive consistency through the supply chain.
rics.org/insights
9May 2018 RICS insight
Figure 3: Consistency in industry
5.0 BIM
The rail industry needs BIM to work to enable it to deliver its projects more efficiently and understand its asset base. The regional organisational structure of the rail sector, alongside the fragmentation noted in section 4.2, means that currently there are different data standards and needs throughout. The different disciplines also have varying needs, which means that people only produce the data that suit their requirements.
Mapping the industry data requirements in a way that is detailed and accurate enough for each stage of the Governance for Railway Investment Projects (GRIP) life cycle will be a step in the right direction.
5.1 BIM skills developmentThe 2013 Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) audit and subsequent publication of A Report Exploring Skills in the Construction Industry found that almost 83% of the professional industry respondents believed there was a skills shortage. In fact, nearly 60% answered negatively to the question, ‘Do you believe that the construction workforce will have the required skills?’.
The report believes that the widespread use of BIM technology will:
‘demand and ensure that extra skills evolve, in addition to the more general, traditional skills inherent within the industry at present. Given that BIM is a key driver to efficiency, a natural implication will be that job evaluations and skill requirements also change over time. Undoubtedly, BIM will generate new jobs that are specifically and separately aimed at maximising the use of BIM.'
It also noted that:
‘The momentum generated around BIM could lead to exciting new career opportunities for the next generation of engineering and construction talent. So far, the Government has had success in encouraging adoption of BIM through official standards and procurement plans. However, it is vital that industry and government work hand in hand to develop talent and education, and to prepare individuals with the skills to be fully operational with BIM now and in the future.’
As the CIOB report highlights, the use of BIM will create new jobs and skill sets. Therefore, in terms of the rail industry, we need to reach outside of our existing skill boundaries and look at different industries. If data is to be the common currency, we need to be recruiting people who understand data, who trust technology and to whom data manipulation is second nature.
It is not simply the professionals who use the technology related to BIM that require training/upskilling. All conversations around BIM cover the requirement for behavioural change. There is, therefore, a requirement for the whole workforce to understand how to work in a collaborative environment.
It is also true there are few systems that can present simple, relevant views of the data that can easily be consumed at the right level; for example, the information a carpenter needs on a tablet is very different from the information an engineer needs to design trusses. They both use the same data, but should navigate and present it in very different ways. Where is the software that addresses the needs of tradespeople and operatives?
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
10 May 2018RICS insight
6.0 Project findings
The supply chain on any rail project is not a simplistic, one to one relationship. Most rail sector supply chains are generally multi-faceted and complicated (see Figure 4), which means gaining consistency and transparency of data through them is a very difficult proposition.
The following sections discuss the expert panel findings and explore ways of navigating a route through the supply chain.
6.1 Data standardisationEach year considerable resources are expended making corrections to non-standard data, training people in new data creation techniques, coordinating the efforts of subcontractor teams and solving problems related to data production.
This occurs when each organisation has their own opinion on what works, and requests data organised in a way that is relevant to them. Issues arise when organisations impose their reporting requirements on others. Modern data systems mean this should not be the case, as multiple classifications can be applied to the data and it can be used in any order the data user requires.
For large schemes to be delivered efficiently, it is vital that data is in a consistent format that enables collaboration. Clients and industry should agree a standard for data collection. Clients should then mandate the use of a standard method of data collection within their requirements that defines down to a certain level, and below that clients could use their own project classification system. This would enable clients to carry out data
comparison on the cost of schemes and assets within schemes.
PAS 1192 -2, which is discussed in section 6.4.1, states that the data classification is Uniclass for design and construction, and new rules of measurement (NRM) 1 and 3 for cost estimating of buildings and maintenance.
For BIM to work most effectively we need to use the appropriate data structures for:
• design and construction (3D in Uniclass)
• cost (5D in NRM) and
• O&M (6D in SFG20 (Service and Facilities Group) or equivalent sector maintenance standards).
Confusion arises because QS practitioners and technology providers are simply focusing on Uniclass, and struggle to map the NRM and SFG20 to Uniclass.
A further standard method required would be to cover transaction. This should include, as a minimum, verification that the data has been received, followed by a validation of the accuracy and completeness of the data. These tests must exist in all transactions.
A good part of the expert panel discussions covered data and the standardisation of data. By this we mean what clients request, how this subsequently filters down the supply chain and how it maintains its usefulness throughout the life of an asset.
rics.org/insights
11May 2018 RICS insight
Figure 4: Supply chain relationships
The discussions concluded that the rail industry devotes excessive resources for the purposes of cleansing data, because it is not generally understood where data ends up and what its final use will be. Problems have occurred when improvisation has proved necessary because the existing software does not have a certain piece of required data. Invariably this means that the next user in the chain will not recognise it. A standard data field requires a meaning that other people are entitled to read, understand and use, but it can become corrupted as it moves through the project.
6.1.1 Across industryThe standardisation of data and its vocabulary across any industry is a very big task. If this is to be achieved in the rail industry, the common objects that exist in every business, such as an address, need to be agreed. It is only the information specific to an industry that should be defined solely within those areas. This would allow clients to use their own project classification system for management information purposes, although this would lie beneath the standard classification and would allow benchmarking against other projects. As the expert panel agreed, to enable this to flow through the supply chain, client bodies need to issue the classification structure to the supply chain and be willing to purchase it when procuring products and services.
Expert panel conclusions
‘I have always found it fascinating that every industry has developed some sort of common information protocol. There’s one for estate agents, there’s one for research institutes, there’s IFC in construction. And everybody likes to think that they’ve defined some sort of universal fixed data exchange format, and if you look in any of them they all have a different definition of what constitutes an address.
Work undertaken in this area by the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT) has focused on simplifying national and international transactions by harmonising processes, procedures and information flows related to these transactions. Subsequently, these are rendered more efficient and streamlined, with the goal of contributing to the growth of global commerce. The infrastructure industry could take a lead from this, and start mandating a tier of information that must be captured in a certain way.
Another example of where standardisation has been achieved is the Common European Research Information Format (CERIF), which allows for data to be exchanged between research institutions, and is used by up to 43 countries. The purpose of the architecture is that it allows for information to be exchanged between research institutions related to funded projects, mainly stem topics. The architecture is open, and the agreement is that research institutions will use that architecture to store information about their projects, who is involved in the projects, their duration, the level of funding and so on.
The Construction Products Association (CPA) are working on a plain language dictionary – LEXiCON – that will provide industry with the ability to share product data consistently. It is hoped LEXiCON will make collaboration across industry more straightforward, by increasing the accessibility of product information for both those requesting and providing it, e.g. designers and manufacturers. This should allow construction to be more efficient and operate with just-in-time delivery. This CPA product data standard will be adopted as the basis for the PAS 1192-6: Specification for collaborative sharing and use of structured Health and Safety information using BIM, as part of the national BIM family of standards.
One of the consequences of changing procurement practices and moving away from a traditional bill as data becomes less standard, is that the Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) is finding it increasingly difficult to obtain cost data from the industry in a meaningful and consistent way to help inform the calculation of tender price indices.
A project information protocol/process is required to define how the data will be delivered, and set out how it will be classified. The benefit of this will be that once the data is classified it migrates through the project life cycle under that classification. The process already exists via PAS 1192. This protocol/process requirement is generated at an asset information requirement (AIR) level. This then details the requirement through the employers information requirements (EIR), and collects the information through a BIM Execution Plan (BEP). The EIR and BEP then become part of the contract(s).
The RIBA Digital Plan of Work (DPoW) defines responsibilities for providing information, and for establishing a gateway process of what information needs to be provided and when:
• Task Bar 7 (Information Exchanges) ‘provides guidance on the information that would typically be delivered at the Information Exchanges at the end of each stage’. The key to success would be ensuring consistency of requirements.
• Task Bar 8 (Government Gateways) has been ‘introduced to encourage consideration of the stages that the UK Government requires information to be exchanged’. Currently, ‘this task bar is selectable, and can be switched on or off in a bespoke practice or project-specific Plan of Work’.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
12 May 2018RICS insight
6.1.2 GovernmentOne of the areas discussed by the panel was the UK government’s potential role in this process. Would the government be willing to create an environment that will help dialogue through the supply chain, and if so what would that look like? It has mandated BIM level 2 for any public sector, centrally procured construction project.
Even within the government there is no single oversight body for infrastructure delivery, the closest being the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA). The IPA is the central government body that manages and delivers major economic projects, with expertise in the financing, delivery and assurance of these projects. These range from large scale infrastructure programmes such as Crossrail, the Thames Tideway Tunnel and High Speed Two (HS2), to major transformation programmes such as Universal Credit. Crucially, what this government body does not do is mandate procurement methodologies across the major schemes.
6.1.3 Down the supply chainIt could be said that BIM was being used by the industry to shift legal liability for project failings down the supply chain, to those least able to handle it.
The expert panel discussions confirmed that for some SMEs this was the case, and risk was filtering down:
Expert panel discussions
‘The small company has to take up all the risk if they are to participate, which is a little bit unfair. So, my first piece of advice is if you’re absolutely dying for the business then you should consider taking up such kind of risk. But if you’re not then you should say, excuse me no thanks…
I think that the migration of risk needs to change … there needs to be a mechanism to mitigate the risk rather than migrate it.
The difficulty is in trying to put a collaborative tool into a non-collaborative structure. You can’t put BIM into the traditional construction hierarchies of designer, main contractor, subcontractor. And the BIM Protocol doesn’t really help that tension.’
The ‘tension’ being discussed in the box above is predominantly the lack of clarity that characterises obligations and requirements within these disciplines and groups. The Protocol works if everyone understands it and deploys it back-to-back.
In any activity, there is risk because there is a possibility something will go wrong. It is impossible to eliminate all risk, but it can be mitigated. An important mechanism for achieving this is through making use of a transparent framework by which risk can be transferred. To realise this, a good information plan for the project is required, and one that allows reward for taking risk to be properly assigned.
By doing this everybody is aware of the risk and they can understand and accept it. If the contractual relationships were to be framed around the information plan rather than the other way around, it would encourage the sharing of information.
For the market’s smaller players, not having the data for their products will exclude them from the market. Therefore, standardisation of data should help smaller companies participate within the industry, as there will be no confusion of how to represent the information. The information could exist in a format as simple as a comma-separated values (CSV) file, but if it is a static, consistent piece of information, smaller suppliers will be able to engage with major projects.
The British Standards Institution (BSI) PAS 1192 suite of documents goes some way toward preventing this wasted effort on reformatting data, by providing a best practice method for the development, organisation and management of production information for the construction industry. It makes use of a disciplined process for collaboration, and a specified naming policy. It also provides the template for common naming conventions and approaches to collaborative working for use in architecture, engineering and construction.
The PAS 1192 – 3 Specification for information management for the operational phase of construction projects using building information modelling details the AIR that is produced as part of a wider set of documentation for use during project procurement. Typically, it is issued as part of the employer’s requirements within the tender documentation. The key to success will be ensuring this makes its way down the supply chain.
6.2 ProcessA lot of the focus around BIM is on data and technology, whereas the real focus needs to be on the process that supports collaborative working (for example, a BIM process that aligns with ISO44001 would drive scheme benefits). If executed badly, BIM could add to the fragmentation of the industry, and it is the lack of a standard process that will make it inevitable as people move off into their own way of working.
Most clients have a good idea of what they want. Their concerns centre on how the industry goes about doing this, and what messages need to go to suppliers and the various supply chain tiers. This message can be generic and applied across all markets. However, given that each client will invariably have a different set of requirements, arriving at an agreed standard will prove problematic.
rics.org/insights
13May 2018 RICS insight
Figure 5: IPA Project Initiation Routemap (Source: HM Treasury, Infrastructure and Projects Authority)
The IPA’s Project Initiation Routemap, (Figure 5) aims to achieve more efficient outcomes, while addressing the problem of the high cost of delivering infrastructure in the UK. To do this, it is necessary for both public and private sector clients to ensure their capability aligns with the challenges they face, and that they optimise their approach to engaging their supply chains. As part of this exercise BIM readiness could be added to the ‘Align for Success’ section.
The Routemap uses capability to describe the ability of the sponsor, client, asset manager and market to organise for effective and efficient delivery of a project.
The Routemap notes that:
‘In addition to understanding the complexity of the delivery environment, it is important to understand the capability of the various parties involved, in order to check alignment (or misalignment) with the capabilities needed to deliver a project of the level of complexity being proposed. This includes taking a broader view of the market capability that might be needed to address identified capability gaps, and the degree to which the respective views of capability are consistent and aligned across the various parties’.
It concludes that BIM readiness, and the capability to perform this process, will ensure all participants in the scheme can work in the prescribed manner.
Full implementation of the BSI PAS 1192 suite of documents would be a positive step. Effectively, this helps prevent wasted effort on reformatting data by providing a best practice method for the development, organisation and management of production information for the construction industry. Their great strength is that they allow for a disciplined process for collaboration, and a specified naming policy.
PAS 1192-2 also covers the EIR, which are produced as part of a wider set of documentation for use during project procurement. Typically, they are issued as part of the employer’s requirements or tender documentation. Therefore, the key to success will be ensuring the process is applied across the supply chain.
The case study on the next page highlights an American process built on the premise of a lack of barriers throughout the life cycle of a scheme. It supposes that, among other things, end users, contractors and suppliers are involved from the beginning, and that designers understand the impact of their design. It hopes that this can be used as a behavioural change by breaking down silos.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
14 May 2018RICS insight
rics.org/insights
15May 2018 RICS insight
Case study: Integrated Project delivery
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has produced a procedure called Integrated Project Delivery (IPD). This approach aims to integrate people, systems, business structures and practices into a collaborative process. This harnesses the talents and insights of all participants to optimise project results, increase value to the client, reduce waste and maximise efficiency through all phases of design, fabrication and construction.
The IPD principles can be applied to a variety of contractual arrangements, and IPD teams can include members well beyond the central bodies of client, architect and contractor. In all cases, integrated projects are uniquely distinguished by highly effective collaboration among the client, the prime designer and the prime constructor, commencing at early design and continuing through to project handover.
At the core of an integrated project are collaborative, integrated and productive teams composed of key project participants. Building on early contributions of individual expertise, these teams are guided by principles of:
∫ trust
∫ transparent processes
∫ effective collaboration
∫ open information sharing
∫ team success tied to project success
∫ shared risk and reward
∫ value-based decision making and
∫ use of full technological capabilities and support.
The outcome is the opportunity to design, build and operate as efficiently as possible.
As with the UK construction industry, the AIA have recognised that the American construction industry works in silos. It hopes the IPD represents a behavioural change in the industry by breaking down the silos of responsibility, requiring close cooperation among all major participants and aligning participant success to project success.
Owners
Early and open sharing of project knowledge streamlines project communications and allows owners to effectively balance project options to meet their business enterprise goals. Integrated delivery strengthens the project team’s understanding of the owner’s desired outcomes, improving the team’s ability to control costs and manage the budget. This increases the likelihood that project goals, including schedule, life cycle costs, quality and sustainability, will be achieved.
Constructors
The integrated delivery process allows constructors to contribute their expertise in construction techniques early in the design process, resulting in improved project quality and financial performance during the construction phase. The constructor’s participation during the design phase provides the opportunity for strong pre-construction planning, more timely and informed understanding of the design, anticipating and resolving design-related issues, visualising construction sequencing prior to construction start, and improving cost control and budget management. This will all increase the likelihood that project goals, including schedule, life cycle costs, quality and sustainability, will be achieved.
Designers
The integrated delivery process allows the designer to benefit from the early contribution of constructors’ expertise during the design phase, such as accurate budget estimates to inform design decisions and the pre-construction resolution of design-related issues, resulting in improved project quality and financial performance. The IPD process increases the level of effort during early design phases, resulting in reduced documentation time, and improved cost control and budget management, all of which increase the likelihood that project goals, including schedule, life cycle costs, quality and sustainability, will be achieved.
6.3 SoftwareIndustry professionals recognise that BIM cannot work without software but, at the same time, that it does not constitute software in its own right. In Digital Built Britain: Level 3 Building Information Modelling – Strategic Plan, the government defines it as:
‘a collaborative way of working, underpinned by the digital technologies which unlock more efficient methods of designing, delivering and maintaining physical built assets’.
It is important that SMEs have access to data software packages, and have the training to be able to use them at an affordable price. This investment will most likely work best when SMEs are part of an integrated supply chain that is willing and able to share expertise between the various parties involved.
Expert panel conclusions
‘If we are able to make widespread use of “ORAC”, that is a definition of good quality data based on “On Time, [Relevant, Accurate] and Complete”, this will be a major step going forward.’
The software must be able to support a consistent data to flow through, and be accessible throughout, the life cycle of a project. This will then ensure data transfer can travel between all the necessary software packages and stay complete. Our expert panel discussions clearly demonstrated that the rail industry must reach a point where the only function of a piece of software is to facilitate the customer’s business. It should provide them with a privileged key to the data:
Expert panel conclusions
‘Software needs to carry the data from one end of the process to the other, without losing any integrity on the way. In other words, it needs to be a good custodian of the data.’
If the industry was to agree that all software applications, regardless of what they are, must comply with those rules of custodianship and have the fidelity of transmission and reception of message, a lot of the issues that we have with BIM technology would be resolved.
The definition of completeness will come from the RIBA Plan of Work, which establishes the point at which a certain level of detail needs to be achieved. Accordingly, the completeness and quality of the data can be judged very strictly against that.
Application programming interface (API)
Oxford Dictionaries describes API as:
‘a set of functions and procedures allowing the creation of applications that access the features or data of an operating system, application, or other service.’
A good API makes it easier to develop a program providing all the building blocks. A programmer then puts the blocks together.
Making data available to the supply chain is the critical element here. In other words, the smaller enterprises must be able to access and participate in the data conversation. This brings the conversation back to the standardisation of data, which will allow anyone to access the process while keeping it platform agnostic.
There are many software solutions from the basic (CSV files) to the comprehensive ‘ecosystem’. Different sized enterprises have differing needs to support their business model. There will not be just one piece of software involved in the information transfer.
One solution would be not to mandate any software whatsoever, but rather to mandate the data hub and the application programming interface (API), and allow the software developers either to implement it or step out of the way. But it must be clients who drive this. Software developers cannot be allowed to drive construction industry requirements.
The way to solve a lot of these issues is by using BIM model servers and sharing information via a central server platform. This eliminates many of the problems with information transmission, because all parties will have the same data. Furthermore, it would require all software houses to implement the same API. The software houses will still be able to do what they like, and to present whatever features or abilities they need to their customers, but it would compel them to implement the same API. Once again, this is a strong mechanism for creating consistency of information.
Within any process there needs to be a test/validation mechanism that ensures the data being received has accuracy and quality. There is little point in producing data when it is not accurate or is incomplete. The testing mechanism could be implemented at the end of each stage, reflecting that level of detail with a go/no go scenario before moving to the next stage.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
16 May 2018RICS insight
6.4 Procurement within the infrastructure sector One of the principal themes that emerged from the expert panel discussions was the absence of a commonly used, clear procurement mechanism for defining data requirements and knowledge sharing through the life cycle of a scheme.
The discussion established a need for back-to-back requirements through the supply chain, starting with the pre-qualification questionnaires (PQQ). This PQQ could be standard across the supply chain tiers (1, 2 and 3), should not ask for extraneous information and can thus easily migrate down the supply chain.
This requires a change in current practice, where each tier has its own methodology, and lead to far greater clarity throughout the supply chain tiers. The ideal situation would be to track all supply chain acquisitions from their origin through to end use, highlighting all additions made via the different tiers within their journey. This would enable the client to better understand what they are purchasing, and what the real cost is.
6.4.1 PAS 91As discussed in section 6.1, fragmentation creates wastage in terms of time and cost, and this is as true within the pre-qualification process for construction as it is elsewhere. A standardised set of questions would help to reduce the administrative burden placed on suppliers in terms of completing the paperwork, and on buyers assessing the supplier’s response.
PAS 91 has been created to streamline the pre-qualification process through the standardisation of the questions and to reduce the need for suppliers to complete a variety of different PQQs for different and, in some cases, the same clients. It was developed by the BSI, and the questions have been commissioned by government. It is a recommended minimum standard for construction procurement.
By delivering a standardised PQQ format, PAS 91 aims to streamline processes by:
• ‘reducing the need for unproductive, repetitive completion of multiple prequalification processes;
• facilitating the identification of suitably qualified and experienced suppliers;
• increasing consistency between various prequalification databases.’
Unfortunately, there has not been a substantial uptake of the document. Most clients have their own PQQs and, because they have been used and amended over the years, they are rarely fit for purpose.
Greater adoption of the standard, particularly by government bodies, could be one of the first steps in achieving greater standardisation across the supply chain. Clients should agree to review and align their own standard forms with PAS 91.
6.4.2 Contract documentsProcurement departments, from clients all the way down the supply chain, need to be able to define their project requirements. At present, most contractual relationships stop at each tier, the client contracts with tier 1, who then contracts with tier 2 and no further. So clearly a conduit is required through the supply chain to enable data to flow uninterrupted to the bottom and back.
As part of the BIM toolkit, a Protocol has been developed by the CIC. It is a supplementary legal agreement that is incorporated into professional services appointments, and construction contracts by means of a simple amendment.
The CIC BIM Protocol is designed for use by contractor clients. A version of the Protocol to manage the work of subconsultants and subcontractors could be used by consultants and contractors.
The Protocol has been drafted with the following general principles:
• ‘The Protocol makes the minimum changes necessary to the pre-existing contractual arrangements on construction projects;
• The Protocol ensures that there is an obligation on parties to provide defined elements of their works/services using models;
• The Protocol is a contractual document which takes precedence over existing agreements; and;
• The Protocol is flexible and should be suitable for use on all Level 2 BIM projects.’
It states that:
‘All parties involved in the use, production or delivery of Models on the Project (the ‘Project Team Members’) are required to have a BIM Protocol appended to their contracts’.
The intention behind this is to ensure every party adopts a common way of working. This is done by making sure:
• The Protocol defines the models that are to be produced at a certain stage and at what level of detail.
• The appendices (detailed below) should be available from pre-appointment documentation, such as the employer’s information requirements (EIR).
• Changes to the Protocol or appendices will be treated as variations to the contract.
rics.org/insights
17May 2018 RICS insight
The appendices are the only documents that need to be completed with specific project details:
• Appendix 1 – Specimen Model Production and Delivery Table. This must include references to all building information models that are required by the employer at each project stage.
• Appendix 2 – Information Requirements. This details the information management standards that will be adopted on a project.
The intelligent element of the protocol is where it aligns with the RIBA Plan of Work, so that a piece of information can be requested at a given time. At the beginning of the process it is a two-page document, but by the time this is populated and the relevant data requested, it is going to be substantially larger.
Clients should request data sensibly and smartly and define data that is going to be relevant. While data is used throughout the process, it is eventually purged because it becomes effectively useless later on. Some data is used during the design cycle, for example, for calculations or tagging, and is not as useful when it gets delivered to the client. Most of it is purged and reduced to information that is key. Projects need to take this approach right from the start.
In this way, clients will have confidence that what they have asked for has been procured, and the supply chain understands what the client is looking for. In other words, suppliers will be clear about what they are required to supply, the way they are required to supply it and that they will get paid appropriately for supplying it.
This section was written based on the first edition of the CIC Protocol, published in 2013; a second edition was published in April 2018, which readers are encouraged to consult for up to date information.
6.4.3 Engaging with the supply chainFrom the panel discussions, it became obvious that below tier 1 the supply chain is often unsure as to what the client is expecting. Therefore, early engagement with the supply chain in its entirety is a key requirement.
Analysis of a cost plan demonstrates that when you remove a client’s costs (depending on the size of the project), products and services provided by companies in an infrastructure project supply chain typically account for around 70-80% of the cost of the project. Therefore, the way in which they are procured and managed has a profound effect on the outcome of the project – not only in terms of profitability for all parties, but also the way the completed facility meets the client’s justifiable expectations of cost, quality and functionality. The same is true for data, although it is rather less straightforward to put a cost against it.
Expert panel conclusions
‘I think it comes down to what the contractual relationships are, and how that works. Who’s going to change that … We’re all talking about softening the edge … but there’s still got to be a contractual framework there that says that we as clients want the supplier to supply what we want, when we want, for the price that they said they were going to supply it for.’
The successful management of the supply chain requires the identification of the various members and a clarification of their relationships. The complexity of the supply chains (as shown in Figure 4 in section 6.0), the numbers of participants and the transitory nature of those relationships within the construction industry makes this a very difficult task.
The CERIF mentioned in section 6.1.1 could be used to represent the relationships between different organisations within the supply chain. This would enable visibility of the supply chain network, the identification of the key players and what their contract size might be. Basic metadata that defines the relationship between one key party and others could be requested and used. Once that has been formed, a BIM overlay could be created that relates to specific products being used within that relationship.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
18 May 2018RICS insight
rics.org/insights
19May 2018 RICS insight
Case study: HS2
HS2 will be the UK’s new high-speed railway, providing fast, frequent and reliable services, connecting eight of our largest cities. It will be a catalyst for growth across the country and is the biggest and most ambitious infrastructure project in Europe.
HS2 have engaged with the supply chain early in the process.
They have held nationwide Supply Chain roadshows that involve presentations, face-to-face time with HS2 experts and networking. Participants are able to hear from and meet with the HS2 teams and industry partners responsible for:
∫ the supply chain
∫ health and safety
∫ community relations
∫ BIM
∫ equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI)
∫ skills
∫ employment and education and
∫ environment.
At each event, participants will discover the scale and timing of contracts and what their business needs to do to get ready to bid.
Supplier guide
HS2 have developed a guide to help suppliers find out more about the project. It highlights what is important to HS2 and what will be required from the supply chain.
BIM upskilling
As part of their engagement with the supply chain, HS2 have developed a website as a reference point for their supply chain and delivery partners and to support the wider industry in the implementation of BIM.
It provides easy access to interactive learning materials that clearly set out what is required from our supply chain when working on projects, as well as a resource section that includes industry guidance and access to relevant BIM standards. It also has a range of short and engaging videos that bring BIM to life.
7.0 Conclusions
Based on the views of industry experts, this paper has discussed the ways in which the rail industry can make more effective use of BIM technology across the supply chain:
1 The rail infrastructure sector runs on data throughout the life cycle of a project, and should aim to move towards a more intelligent, interactive approach that uses software to extract data directly from design information. This will allow clients and suppliers a more comprehensive overview of the total costs of the project.
2 As an industry, we need to be engaged in a considerable amount of preparatory work to identify the right processes, systems and data structures. If we miss the opportunity to do this, we will struggle to deliver the next level of BIM.
3 Smaller SMEs struggle with BIM due to initial set-up costs, lack of training or software costs, or difficulties in adapting the way they work to an onerous set of BIM requirements determined for larger suppliers. Lack of standardisation is a problem when smaller suppliers need to work across multiple platforms, and with different clients, to provide their services.
4 To improve collaboration between participants, the rail industry needs appropriate processes that work well, the tools to implement them and the correct approach from the people involved.
5 Different clients have different requirements, which suggests there is no consistency across the rail industry. Currently, projects start from scratch each time, processes are written and best practice is sought and implemented without being checked for its appropriateness for a particular sector.
6 Ultimately, what the rail industry requires is greater certainty and consistency of data throughout the life cycle of a building/piece of infrastructure. At the same time, this should drive consistency throughout the supply chain.
7 Our expert panel discussions identified one of the reasons we, and other industries, expend so much time cleansing data is that people fail to fully understand where data ends up and what its final use will be.
8 Having a unified common data classification that demonstrates how to use Uniclass for design and construction (3D), costs (5D) and O&M (6D) will provide the answer, and overcome data inconsistency.
9 Standardising data across the rail industry is a very big task. If we are to achieve standardisation, the common objects that will exist in every business, such as an address, need to be agreed.
10 A lot of the focus around BIM is on data and the related technology, whereas the real focus needs to be on the process that supports collaborative working. We need technology to support consistent data to flow through, and be accessible throughout the life cycle of a project. The rail industry also needs to ensure any data transfer can travel between all the necessary software packages and stay complete.
BIM and the rail industry supply chain
20 May 2018RICS insight
8.0 Recommendations
The Project Initiation Route Map
As noted in section 6.2, the Independent Projects Authority’s Project Initiation Routemap aims to achieve more efficient outcomes and, consequently, address the high cost of delivering infrastructure in the UK. To do this, it is necessary for both public and private sector clients to ensure their capability aligns with the challenges they face, and subsequently to optimise their approach to engaging their supply chains.
We recommend that BIM readiness be added to the ‘Align for Success’ section.
Greater use of PAS documents
There are two PAS documents that could enable a better way of working with data through the supply chain:
• BSI PAS 1192 provides a best practice method for the development, organisation and management of production information for the construction industry, using a disciplined process for collaboration and a specified naming policy. It provides the template for common naming conventions and approaches to collaborative working for use in architecture, engineering and construction. Unless you are compliant with these documents you are not using BIM.
• BSI PAS 91 has been created with the aim of streamlining the pre-qualification process through standardisation of the questions. Using it will reduce the need for suppliers to complete a variety of different PQQs for different, and in some cases, the same clients.
We recommend these are promoted as best practice led by clients specifying BIM requirements and supplier competencies across supply base.
BIM
RICS should take the lead in helping to give guidance on costing BIM, and explore greater choice of formats for NRM.
Standardisation of data
The panel concluded that there is palpably a need for an industry-wide, project information protocol/process that defines how data will be captured and delivered, and set out how the data will be classified. The benefits of this will be that once the data is classified, it will migrate through the project life cycle under that classification.
An industry-wide document, that builds on the current PAS suite of documents and maps the information delivery cycle in PAS1192:2 on to the GRIP stages, would be of enormous benefit.
Furthermore, it would help the rail industry if professional bodies released standardised mapping to unify the common data classifications - this is possible by focusing on the common asset descriptor, e.g. boiler - and then link the Uniclass codes and O&M.
All standards and guidance need to be industry-endorsed by RICS, NBS and other bodies such as CIBSE and the Building Engineers Services Association (BESA), etc.
Back-to-back contract conditions
Our discussion established a need for back-to-back requirements through the supply chain, starting with the PQQ. This PQQ could be standard across the tiers (1, 2 and 3), should not ask for extraneous information and should easily be able to migrate down the supply chain. We need the development of a new contract that will put the client at the heart of the process and get the best out of BIM.
API
To enable uninhibited dataflow, one solution would be not to mandate any software whatsoever, but mandate the data hub and the API, thus permitting software developers to implement it. But it must be clients who drive this. Software developers cannot be allowed to drive the construction industry requirements.
rics.org/insights
21May 2018 RICS insight
MAY2018/RICS/UK
rics.org
Confidence through professional standardsRICS promotes and enforces the highest professional qualifications and standards in the valuation, development and management of land, real estate, construction and infrastructure. Our name promises the consistent delivery of standards – bringing confidence to markets and effecting positive change in the built and natural environments.
Americas
Latin America [email protected]
North America [email protected]
Asia Pacific
ASEAN [email protected]
Greater China (Hong Kong) [email protected]
Greater China (Shanghai) [email protected]
Japan [email protected]
Oceania [email protected]
South Asia [email protected]
EMEA
Africa [email protected]
Europe [email protected]
Ireland [email protected]
Middle East [email protected]
United Kingdom RICS HQ [email protected]
