Confusingly, the construction design industry likes to use the word “building” to mean any built asset, such as houses, libraries, hospitals, bridges, ports, roads and railway lines – like London’s Crossrail, for example.  In order to dig two 6m wide, 26 mile long tunnels across London, Transport for London needed to map the locations of all the other utilities, tunnels and other gubbins making their way under London – there was no comprehensive map of where everything was, so TfL had to make one.  Crossrail also decided to design the new railway in a BIM environment, meaning they had detailed information about each item used to build the system and information about the holes they were digging (how many tonnes of soil, for example or even where the tunnel boring machine was at any given time using Ordnance Survey coordinates).  To date, TfL estimates that over one million files have been created, each containing huge amounts of data and metadata and integrated into the centralised model[1].

Crossrail/ Elizabeth line station at Liverpool Street

The result is what you can see in the image above.  Granted it looks a bit messy at first glance, but if you know what all the different colours mean you’re able to find the electrical and telecoms cabling, as well as gas and water pipes, see where old and abandoned tunnels are located and how the new station and tunnel complex has taken shape in and around everything that’s already there.  And if it looks messy there, imagine how difficult it would have been to insert a new underground station entrance without these sorts of tools.

And it doesn’t stop there.  Even the bits of each station from the new platform edge doors to signage, escalators and each of the concrete panels lining the stations and tunnels have been tagged so they can be monitored.  It might sound like overkill, but it means TfL knows everything about their new railway system meaning they can check what’s going on at any given time – and as with the example of the carpets and flooring mentioned earlier, they’ll be able to plan future maintenance from the word go[2].

One of Crossrail’s programme directors referred to the construction process as being akin to performing open heart surgery while the patient’s running a marathon.  At Tottenham Court Road, for example, the two tunnel boring machines passed through a space where 30cm above it was the footings of an escalator and 80cm below it was the top of the Northern line – both of which were in constant use while the new tunnels were being dug.  That’s a total clearance of a little over a metre (or just under four feet) around a 900 tonne, six metre (20 foot) wide, 140 metre (400 foot) long tunnel boring machine[3].  Again, the thought of doing that really makes you wonder how they’d do it without all those piles of data and information.

The construction industry undoubtedly has a long way to go.  However, it’s also worth looking at where the construction industry was as recently as the 1950s, with the design of the Cumbernauld New Town ‘megastructure’ just outside Glasgow.  One of the most remarkable innovations in the design process was not technical; it was a new way of working…  Architect George Kenneth (Ken) Davie told of “the strong desire to mix all of the professions.  So you didn’t have an engineers’ office, an architects’ office, a planning office; we were all mixed in teams with all of these disciplines”[4].

Cumbernauld Town Centre megastructure

I’m just going to leave that with you for a few moments: getting different design disciplines to collaborate on one project was considered revolutionary in 1912 (with Buckingham Palace’s façade), again in the 1930s (with New York’s Empire State Building) as identified in Part One of this series of posts.  The most astonishing thing to me is that this approach was still considered revolutionary 20-odd years later with the design of the Cumbernauld megastructure.

Embracing BIM might be a big step, but the industry’s taken big steps before; and it can do so again.

previously: Part One — When, What and Why and Part Two – Families, Budgets, Instructions and Models

[1] www.crossrail.co.uk/construction/building-information-modelling
[2] www.crossrail.co.uk/construction/building-information-modelling
[3] BBC/ Crossrail Ltd., 2014. The Fifteen Billion Pound Railway. London: BBC
[4] Grindrod, J., 2014. Concretopia. London: Old Street Publishing

One of the main benefits of designing in a BIM environment is the use of object libraries, which allow for standard items to be re-used and repeated across the building.  As with a ‘traditional’ library, each item in an object library must be easy to identify, so everything’s coded and classified into “families” and “sub-families” (such as “furniture” leading to “bedroom furniture” and “lounge furniture” or “doors” leading to “external doors” and “internal doors”) to further improve selection.  This also covers items like the electrical cabling, mechanical ducting, windows and so on – it doesn’t have to just be stuff which can be taken with you when you move!  These items can then be selected by the architects and engineers when they’re designing the building.  Each item’s embedded information will also stay with it, containing details such as item size, material make-up, whether each bit is recyclable and/ or potentially hazardous to health and, of course, cost.

While this is all very interesting to those of us who like that kind of thing, this means that those interested in the price of windows, for example, will have a better idea how much glass will be used and roughly how that compares to the budget.  Similarly, the architect can easily work out how much bricks would cost instead of a plastered frontage, wood cladding or pebble dash for our little block of flats.  It also means that the architect can work out if the high-end self-cleaning glass in that massive feature atrium is within budget (it probably isn’t) or if some standard windows would do the job just as well for a fraction of the price (they probably will)

Using the data in the virtual model, the designers are able to work out how much carpet or how many floor tiles were needed for each room.  Not only that, they could work out how long it would take to clean each type (so it could take 10 minutes to mop a floor or five minutes to hoover a carpet) which would help them work out how much the flooring would cost to maintain.  So far, so good.  But there’s more…

• If a carpet has an expected life of say five years and costs about £15 per square metre, the building owner will know that in five years they’ll need to budget about £240 to replace a carpet for a room that’s four square metres
• Similarly floor tiles might have an expected life of say ten years and cost £20 per square metre so our building owner will know that in ten years they’ll need to budget about £320 to replace the floor tiles in the same size room
• Taking these two prices (or more if you think about other options such as carpet tiles, wood floorboards, a more expensive carpet, vinyl or laminate, for example) will help the building’s owner work out the best lifecycle cost of the flooring
• And as if that wasn’t enough, the guarantee and even the receipt can be embedded in the virtual model, along with the all-important instructions on how to clean it properly and remove grass or ink stains. And if it’s guaranteed to last for five years and only lasts three, it’s easier for the owner to go back to the carpet supplier and tell them there’s something wrong

And it’s not just flooring. Think of the fan units in the kitchen and bathrooms, the oven, the fridge, the boiler, the TV…  even how much the paint costs on the walls.  And speaking as someone who’s just moved house, blinds and curtains, I wish I had this information (and that I knew why none of the windows in my house seem to be standard sizes!).

Creating the virtual model isn’t just about making sure all the pipes, wires, windows, walls and floors are all in the right places or to track costs and check whether things are recyclable or how to replace them; these models allow the designers to embed documents to items inside the model, which can then be accessed by those using (and crucially, maintaining) the building in the future.

This also means the building’s end-user can open the virtual model and the instructions for the fridge or the cooker will be embedded in the model and associated with the item, alongside the installation information, the guarantee and all those other important things that are in a ring binder in the loft, or stuffed into “that drawer” in the kitchen (or under the sofa).  And of course this doesn’t just cover the fridge and the oven.  It’s the same for the central heating system, the extractor fan, the hot water cylinder, the microwave, the television and any other things which need instructions.

Designing in a BIM environment also allows the designers, builders and end-users to capture and analyse performance data to drive more efficient operations and feed back into future designs.  Yes, this might sound like overkill for a house, but think of managing all this information for equipment and other gubbins somewhere like a school.  Or a hospital.  Or a library.  Or…  again, the list is endless.

Of course there’s more to these models.  They’re not just intended for the designers and the end-users or owners.  They can also help the construction teams to work out if everything’s in the right place.  The model can be input into an augmented reality model, meaning those on site can check that what they’ve built complies with what the designers intended – this can not only reduce errors on site, but can also help ensure compliance with building regulations and the like.  For example, on some building sites today it’s not unusual to see construction workers wandering around carrying tablets rather than drawings.  It’s also possible to put data from these models into virtual reality models, meaning those using the building in the future would be able to have a full virtual tour before any work has even started on site – in February last year, for example, Network Rail launched a ‘virtual’ version of Waterloo station showing how it will look once the old Eurostar platforms are converted to use by domestic train services[1].  And just a few weeks ago, a virtual version of this year’s Serpentine Pavilion, designed by Mexican architect Frida Escobedo, was released by the structural engineers working on the project[2] so the public can walk around it without leaving home.  One of my team pointed out that it’s a bit like a Kindle, but for buildings.

last time: Part One — When, What and Why
next time: Part Three — Not Just Buildings

[1] www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/virtual-station-commuters-get-a-glimpse-of-the-new-waterloo-station-before-its-even-built
[2] www.bimplus.co.uk/technology/aecom-vr-team-engineering-years-serpentine-pavilio

The construction industry is commonly characterised as ‘backward’ and in particular as one that fails to innovate when compared to other sectors.  The charge against construction is that from symbolic achievements such as the Crystal Palace and the Suez Canal in the 1800s, the industry failed to transform itself for the 20th Century and beyond (Winch, 2003, p. 651).  Dubois & Gadde (2002, p. 621) state that numerous studies have identified that the construction industry is inefficient, and that its short-term perspective hampers both innovation and technical development.

The industry’s performance is undeniably low when compared to other industries (Koskela & Vrijhoef, 2001, p. 198), with Winch (1998, p. 269) and Farmer (2016, p. 7) both arguing that the low rate of innovation is to blame.  Koskela & Vrijhoef argue that an inflated level of variability and “myopic modes of management” also hinder innovation.

Change is Afoot
The UK Government’s Infrastructure & Projects Authority (2016) says the sector employs around three million people (almost 10% of the working population) and contributes £90 billion to the economy – about 7% of the UK’s GDP.  It is estimated that worldwide construction output will reach £9.5 trillion (US$12 trillion) by 2025, with global BIM market revenue forecast to reach £14.32 billion (US$18.8 billion) by 2024 (Esticast, 2017).

Collaborative Working & Information Sharing
Weippert and Kajewski (2004) state that the construction industry continues to prefer traditional methods of communication and information processing, and resists efforts to modernise or embrace new ways of working.  In an interview with The Economist, Dutch architect Ben van Berkel says that while we are all using iPhones, construction is still in the Walkman phase with many construction design professionals using hand-drawn plans often “riddled with errors” (The Economist, 2017, p. 56).  There are often misconceptions around the implementation of new working methods which in turn hinder the adoption of improved processes: particularly in the construction design industry.  According to Mahmood (2016, p. 30), the adoption of BIM, information sharing and collaborative working differs across organisations and within disciplines.

while we are all using iPhones, construction is still in the Walkman phase… and hand-drawn plans are often riddled with errors

The publication of three major reports into the UK construction sector led to a consensus that clients and suppliers need to work collaboratively and share information formally and more widely.  The 2009 report, Never Waste A Good Crisis, highlighted that government-procured projects represent around 40% of the UK construction industry’s output: a significant portion of the sector’s output.  The UK Government’s Construction Strategy mandated that all publicly-funded projects must operate in “a fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016”  (Cabinet Office, 2011, p. 14) which became known as the 2017 BIM Mandate.  The Government Construction Client Group (GCCG) was set up to “drive the adoption of BIM across government” and its initial Strategy Paper was published in March 2011 with a stated aim to utilise information sharing and BIM strategies as “part of a joined up plan to improve the performance of the government estate” (GCCG, 2011, p. 3).

Formal information sharing across construction industry projects is happening, but there’s still some way to go.

—

• Cabinet Office, 2011. Government Construction Strategy, London: HMSO
• Dubois, A. & Gadde, L. E., 2002. The construction industry as a loosely coupled system: implications for productivity and innovation. Construction Management & Economics, 20(7), pp. 621-631
• The Economist, 2017. Least Improved. The Economist, 424(9054), pp. 55-56
• Esticast, 2017. Building Information Modeling Market By Solution (Software, Services), Deployment Model (On-premises, Cloud) & By Application Areas (Commercial, Residential, Industrial, Infrastructure, Institutional), Industry trends, Estimation & Forecast, 2015 – 2024, Elizabeth, NJ: Esticast Research & Consulting
• GCCG, 2011. A Report for the Government Construction Client Group: Building Information Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy Paper, London: HMSO
• Infrastructure & Projects Authority, 2016. Government Construction Strategy 2016-20, London: HMSO
• Koskela, L. & Vrijhoef, R., 2001. Is the current theory of construction a hindrance to innovation?. Building Research & Innovation, 29(3), pp. 197-207
• Mahmoud, S., 2016. The effect BIM has on Motivation and Leadership: BIM, Design Management, Motivation & Leadership. London: Lambert Academic Publishing
• Farmer, M., 2016. Modernise or Die: The Farmer Review Of the UK Construction Labour Model, London: Construction Leadership Council (CLC)
• Weippert, A. & Kajewski, S. L., 2004. AEC Industry Culture: A Need for Change. Toronto, CIB World Building Congress 2004: Building for the Future
• Wolstenholme, A., Latham, M., Egan, J. & Raynsford, N., 2009. Never Waste A Good Crisis: a review of progress since Rethinking Construction and thoughts for our future, London: Constructing Excellence
• Winch, G. M., 1998. Zephyrs of creative destruction: understanding the management of innovation in construction. Building Research & Information, 26(5 [Innovation]), pp. 268-279
• Winch, G. M., 2003. How innovative is construction? Comparing aggregated data on construction innovation and other sectors – a case of apples and pears. Construction Management & Economics , 21 [special issue on Innovation in the Built Environment](6), pp. 651-654