I agree with the comment by Anne. This problem is especially difficult for consultants that are not sophisticated in specification issues, who may not understand the architects system, and who may not have a good idea of how the information will be used.
Anne, all the more reason to embed the information in the model. Leaving the model to the inexperienced isn’t the answer. Having the spec writer or experienced architect control keynoting is a great start. If the inexperienced want to tag an item, they need to be guided and learning how to interact with specifiers from an early ‘age’ isn’t a bad bit of training. I have much more interaction with my architectural teams now than I used to have. I used to only have access to the PA, now everyone knows that they can come to me and ask questions. It gives me a chance to learn more about the projects than I will ever be able to cull from unifinished or poorly thought out drawings. It also helps to make sure that our details have a better chance of working. Oddly, it seems to take me less time at work, though I do use more billable hours. Part of this is teaching the PMs that our time isn’t just for spec production; we need to be part of the architectural team as well and budgetted accordingly.
Ken
How much information do you embed in the model (in the model file) versus how much information is in separate files linked to model objects?
Honestly I can’t say at my current office. Still getting a feel for it, but in my last firm there was not much information embedded. There were too many concerns about legal obligations if we attached product info. For example if we had HM Doors and Frames and embedded a generic product but showed a different profile, what would we be able to enforce? My argument was that the CDs would still govern but there was concern that it would open a reasonable doubt.
The model can gain intelligence to an extent, such as when embedding manufacturer generated families for brick, block, etc., but I don’t know that many people are using them. Again, part of the concern comes from basing the BIM on specific manufacturers when we have no way of knowing what will be built.
My thought is that we should go for it, embed the information based on what we want, and let the Constructor modify the BIM as construction progresses. In fact, embedding information from shop drawings and product data would be a great way of producing a final package for delivery to the Owner. By the time the building is done, the Owner could have a BIM that includes O&M data, warranty information at the touch of a button, and a truer representation of actual conditions than is currently available in Record Documents.
I think that’s the hope but it’s not where the industry is, at least not that I can see anyway.
This is where I feel that Basis of Design specs deal real well. If you build your companies families, symbols, or whatever the software you are using calls the objects into the base template, you have the companies standard of care and quality built right in. Same with general specifications like plaster.
The advantages are that if the company has their specifiers inside the company, they are getting the drafts of the spec early on when the model is being built. The advantage for the independent specifier is that he is getting the information of what the company uses as a standard of care/quality. It can also help educate the young interns with knowledge that they otherwise would not gain through exposure to the information.
A cautionary note is that the users can screw it up by not using office SOC. So processes must be set up.
I think Ken has a great way to track substitutions by the contractor by setting the model with what is specified and the have the contractor but into the model what they change.
Thanks Alan.
Actually I’ve been wondering why we don’t have the Constructor build a BIM while building the building. It would be as close as we could come to a true record of what is in place at the time of Applications for Payment making our lives very easy each month.
Ready for Substantial Completion? Well that means your Record Documents are completed, with all relevant information embedded in the BIM.
Am I missing something here?
Actually Ken you are close. We are under construction with our first BIM project of major size (200k sf hospital). It was not a level 5 BIM model and is actually 6 BIM models (2 existing structural, 1 new structural, architectural, MEP, medical equipment). The contractor has taken all our models and using them as a base. Each major sub contractor is modeling their work, slowing replacing the design models with the construction models. I think the only model that will not be replaced that way is the architectural.
We ran into the wall several times on file size without any product/spec information. All our team received new faster, better machines. Our next step was to chunk up the architectural model into seperate models.
Frankly, I am sold and wish we did more projects with BIM, but management still needs to be convinced that it helps the bottom line, so AutoCad is still the tool of choice.
To me incorporating spec information is still a great goal, but down the road a bit.
Well, 25 years ago 10 MB seemed like a lot of memory. Now we’re into terabytes and only scifi writers seem to consider mega-terabytes of information as being viable. Who knows, maybe they’ll develop a new organic synapse that will allow processing to speed up and models will become more manageable. I guess then we’ll have to worry about our servers developing Alzheimers instead of just being concerned with viruses.
Many people I’ve spoken with won’t go back to using AutoCAD now that they’ve experienced BIM. Another big challenge seems to be in identifying what should be modeled and what can just be shown graphically (2D modeling?). Many CAD savvy operators convert to BIM operators while kicking and screaming but the ones who have made the transition really seem happy with the new technology. Still, as this forum has shown, there’s a long way to go and embedding product and spec information is still far from mainstream.
I’m curious whether requiring Level 5 BIM as an ongoing, updated submittal is helping the A/E assess progress. Are you given full access to the contractor’s BIM? Are you able to use the information to assess percent completion and compare take-off of completed work against overall project estimates?