Scott Beazley (Digital Technologies Manager at Mitchell Brandtman) talks
through what true collaboration is to deliver successful 5D on a
construction project. Watch below:

Whilst Australia continues to debate the merits of whether we should have a whole of government or whole of industry taskforce and whether to mandate or not to mandate for BIM, the UK has quietly launched the Level 3 BIM Strategic Plan 12 months prior to the end date for the Level 2 Plan which has netted the UK government an estimated ú840m in savings. Where the bloody-hell are we Australia?

Leading the charge globally:

The Level 2 BIM program launched back in 2011 was considered very ambitious for its time but has allowed the UK to deliver major projects and infrastructure including the 2012 Olympics and Cookham Wood Prison with quantifiable savings. The innovative strategy has been touted as key to the development of their new rail projects, Cross Rail and HS2. Their recognition of the drive of the digital age provides the UK with the opportunity to lead globally in the value of its built assets and the data preserved to create a digital economy for all.

Digital Built Britain (DBB) brings together a number of key government initiatives driving the high performing UK digital economy û The Industrial Strategy û Construction 2025, the Business and Professional Services Strategy 22, the Smart Cities Strategy 23 and the Information Economy Strategy 24.

It will transform infrastructure development and construction and, according to the recent launch and accompanying DBB report, ôit will consolidate the UK’s position as a world leader in these sectors.ö Given the estimated share of the world market for construction is forecast to be in the region of $15 trillion globally by 2025, this strategy goes a long way to positioning the UK as an innovator of the digital age, something that Australia, given its decline in manufacturing, should be aggressively addressing to catch up.

The Digital Evolution Index (DEI)

In September 2014, the Institute for Business in the Global Context (IBGC) released a report ôDigital Planet: Readying for the Rise of the e-consumer.ö The report is a culmination of 6 years of research relating to 50 nations’ digital evolution trajectories.

The IBGC is the hub for international business at The Fletcher School, the oldest graduate school of international affairs in the United States. The purpose of the research undertaken is to create a Digital Evolution Index (DEI) that ranks these 50 nations in relation to their progress or decline in their own journey and evolution into the digital economy.

Australia, quite unsurprisingly sits within the category of ôStall Outö – a nation that has previously advanced rapidly only to recently stall or decline in its digital evolution.

The UK, again quite unsurprisingly, is trajecting itself towards the ôStandoutö category and ranks 4###sup/sup### after Singapore, Sweden and Hong Kong in relation to the 2013 Composite DEI score which accounts for four drivers: Demand, Supply, Institutional Environment and Innovation. Australia’s composite DEI score ranks us 12###sup/sup### out of the 50 countries. The report acknowledges that the UK is at risk due to the stalled performance of neighbouring Europe given its economic stagnation and austerity policies currently in place.

Where is Australia’s Construction Strategy at?

More concerning a question is ôWhere is Australia’s construction strategy let alone its digital and BIM strategies?ö

There are many active and progressive industry groups taking up the charge, but without significant government voices at the table to discuss how we can nation build through BIM, any strategy developed by industry is going to fall short.

The government funding for the UK’s Level 3 BIM Strategy will be used for a series of key measures identified as follows:

• ôThe creation of a set of new, international æOpen Data’ standards which would pave the way for easy sharing of data across the entire market.
• The establishment of a new contractual framework for projects which have been procured with BIM to ensure consistency, avoid confusion and encourage, open, collaborative working.
• The creation of a cultural environment which is co-operative, seeks to learn and share.
• Training the public sector client in the use of BIM techniques such as, data requirements, operational methods and contractual processes.
• Driving domestic and international growth and jobs in technology and construction.ö
  

Whilst none of this is necessarily ground breaking on the face of it, having it planned, funded and nationalised is imperative to its success. The whole industry benefits from the upskilling, technological advancements and productivities created through standards and protocols holding the entire industry to account. All parties buy in because it is in their direct interest to do so to be sustainable as a company. It has a wider flow on impact to educational sectors, wealth and wellbeing of citizens and direct contribution to the UK’s GDP.

The success of the strategy is underpinned by a ôskilled digitally enabled workforceö; ôdigital infrastructure û both physically and regulatoryö; ôa rich data set describing the existing user and asset baseö; ôsharing technology across sectorsö and ôan effective education and change management programmeö – a very compelling plan.

Australia’s BIM strategy by comparison is admirably led by passionate and visionary people who come together through groups like APCC, ACIF, Consult Australia, Collaborate, BrisBIM, MelBIM, WABIM, Lean Construction Institute and buildingSMART – a worldwide industry funded organisation for BIM.

Australia’s strategy, ôThe National Building Information Modelling Initiative (NBI)ö Report was set down in 2012. It was commissioned by BEIIC (the Built Environment Industry Innovation Council), authored by buildingSMART Australasia and co-funded by the Commonwealth Government. This report outlines the strategy to support ôthe focused adoption of BIM and related digital technologies and process for the Australian built environment sector.ö

The Australasian Chapter of buildingSMART advocates that ôThe Australian economy could be better off by as much as $7.6 billion over the next decade by adopting the NBI recommendationsö

In 2014 the Productivity Commission Infrastructure Inquiry called for submissions from industry and buildingSMART Australasia made its case to reiterate the benefits for all of industry and most obviously for Government.

The official Productivity Commission Infrastructure Inquiry Report released in July 2014 most controversially advocated that ôimpediments to adoptionö for BIM could be overcome by the market. buildingSMART and indeed many of the BIM advocates in Australia, strongly disagree. Australia is certainly being ôoutflanked by other nationsö as described by buildingSMART and seek to change the Commission’s recommendation regarding BIM and that the Commission should explicitly recommend that the Australian Government actively work with industry to accelerate BIM adoption in Australia to not only benefit industry but achieve significant savings for Government as well.

This is a far cry from the UK’s vision of ôbringing together expertise in design, planning, construction, operations, funding, technology and risk management will enable the UK to capitalise on the essential need to provide infrastructure and its services to our citizens and across the world.ö

Given the evidence and warnings coming out of the Digital Built Britain Report Level 3 Building Information Modelling – Strategic Plan û can Australia afford to as it were, ôfall back in the BIM arms raceö. This is the challenge stated in the British report.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

Build Only Contracts continue to be the construction industry’s biggest deterrent to delivery of better and leaner buildings with greater certainty.

Owners expect that construction will cost more and take longer than promised because of design discrepancies and latent conditions. If this is true, then there is an opportunity for builders to offer a higher price for a Warranted Lump Sum as an alternative to a hard dollar build only contract.

For builders this is a huge leap because they sit in a highly price competitive market and experience says – build only contracts are always decided on price.

Tradition dictates that resolution of design inconsistencies is not a reasonable risk for a builder to carry without novation of the designers, but the establishment of BIM as a robust virtual design and construction (VDC) process means under-pricing of risk should be a thing of the past.

Fast and reliable tools now exist for interrogation, validation and review of extensive design information. BIM provides the greatest level of certainty the industry has ever known and at all levels of design and construction. If adopted early and the entire supply chain is engaged, it becomes the critical tool in managing risk and cost overruns during construction.

Yet, builders continue to offer the same marginalised product. As if it were an excuse – a recent Australian Construction Industry Forum (ACIF) framework document stated ôIndustry is but a servant of those who commission new assets or decide to refurbish existing ones. It will adopt new technology and systems when its clients demand themàö.

Warranted Lump Sum û Head Contractor Risk and Return:

Just over a year ago, KPMG released its global survey on the construction industry and of the 165 senior executives personally interviewed for the survey, 77% reported under-performing projects due to delays, poor estimating processes and failed risk management as the key challenge for the sector.

We know that typically 83% of a contractor’s price is made up of the subcontracts. We also know that controlling time and cost will generate significant savings. Our goal as an industry must be to bring decisions forward and identify issues and clashes early in the process when the ability to change elements is high and the risk to the programme and to budgets is low.

BIM and the technology supporting every member in the supply chain have a direct impact on creating cost, design and time certainty. Poor risk estimation and management should be a thing of the past. Builders have a unique opportunity to take on known risk and push the project programme to ensure that visualisation technologies can create a virtual build and identify clashes and design changes much earlier and for much less than dealing with problems during construction where rework, delay and disruption explode costs.

From the development industry perspective this will generate significant project savings because a more certain industry means that the total funding required for any form of a development is reduced. Banks require a contingency for every development loan. A $100M apartment building typically requires an extra $8M in contingency and this translates into a need for an extra $1.6M û $2.4M in equity, depending on the risk profile, to make the project happen.

The Builder that masters VDC can turn this expectation into an opportunity by offering a higher alternative price (perhaps half or more of the expected contingency ie 5% to 8%) for a Warranted Lump Sum in lieu of a traditional lump sum. The alternative could be as simple as altering the standard clauses that appear in most hard dollar contracts and entitle the Builder to additional payments for:

• an inconsistency, ambiguity or discrepancy in a contract document; and
• a material difference in a physical condition to that which could be anticipated by a reasonably competent contractor.

What about Subcontractors and the Supply Chain:

In Australia, most of our construction contracts are hard dollar (either traditional or D&C). With traditional design + bid + build procurement there is no ability to engage with subcontractors during design other than some limited interactions driven by progressive designers.

To engage the supply chain one obvious approach is to go back to the old school nominated subcontractor (NSC) clauses which were common in the 1980’s in Australia. With the advent of BIM those NSC clauses are likely to have far more upside than downside.

With design + construct there is a far greater ability to engage with subcontractors during design but there is no contractual obligation to do this. The issue here is more about culture.

Often the behaviour is to avoid letting a subcontract early because there is a perception a better financial outcome will be achieved by maintaining competition for as long as possible. The cultural problem means that any head start and lead time is lost because subcontractors are unlikely to handover information and expertise without a guarantee that the subcontract will be won. For example, there is no incentive for a mechanical subcontractor to have racks designed prior to commencement of construction and where construction has started it is impossible to place blue banger hangers in a formwork deck where the concrete has already been poured.

Knowledge and understanding of the certainty offered through early collaboration is the missing ingredient here, not so much the contractual frameworks. There are plenty of design & construct (D&C), construction management (CM), early contractor involvement (ECI) and alliance contracts that can accommodate early involvement of subcontractors. The problem lies in the appropriate level of risk taken on by the head contractor. Traditionally, risk has been shifted down the chain of supply. This has always resulted in tight margins for head contractors and less incentive to become immersed in the virtual build.

The first builder to own the risk and become famous as Australia’s ôBIM Builderö stands to gain significantly, not only in the successful delivery of their projects but in the increase in profit margins in correctly identifying the level of risk and certainty available in the design information and prior to allocating any risk to sub-contractors.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

The construction industry in Australia is on the cusp of this great change. It’s time to collaborate and embrace the technologies of the 21^st century to create meaningful and lasting productive thinking in the way we build. It is critical that we prepare our businesses for a more connected, intelligent and demanding customer.

Becoming Fearless Digital Leaders

The UK Government in collaboration with industry has released a structured plan that paves the way for the UK construction industry to radically transform by 2025 û jointly aspiring to ôan industry that drives and sustains growth across the entire economy by designing, manufacturing, building and maintaining assets which deliver genuine whole life value for customersàö

Australia needs an integrated approach to collaboration of data collection and the knowledge that flows from this in order to innovate and compete effectively in the future.

The design table is about to get crowdedùlike really crowded. We’re talking hundreds, even thousands of voices, all providing input on your next project. For the first time, the masses can have a real say in how the built environment around them is formed.

Computational methods which balance the reciprocities of form, material, structural and environment, and integrate technological advancement in manufacturing are delivering brand new performative material and construction systems, which could change the design and construction world imminently.

The ôInternet of Thingsö – the linking of physical objects with embedded sensors – is being developed at a breakneck speed. Companies and consumers are now using technology daily to track movements, improve collaboration and customer service to increase productivity at an organisational and personal level. This simultaneously creates massive network effects and opportunities for global industries to shape our lives.

The age of the quantified self is here, shifting the boundary between humans and technology. Currently, this data management and æsocial analytics’ mostly benefits organisations, but soon people will demand a share of their ôdata valueö.

æBig Data’ Will Drive Wisdom in Construction

There is a direct correlation between the input (data) and output (knowledge and wisdom). The more data that is created, the more knowledge and wisdom people can obtain from it. Individual data by itself is not very useful, but volumes of it can identify trends and patterns to make informed decisions.

Knowledge is also evolving. Knowledge stocks are no longer valuable because knowledge is so easy to come by. There is a movement toward ôknowledge flowsö resulting from collaboration to replenish knowledge and leverage the collective knowledge to gain greater productivity through the process.

Building teams will benefit from Big Data for data-driven design by:

• Enhancing iterative design through capture and analysis of building performance metrics.
• Using project data on future work to eliminate rework and apply best practices on future projects.
• Understanding how people interact with spaces.
• Automating the planning process by applying algorithm-based approaches to improve the traditional project planning process.

As the Big Data movement takes hold clients will be looking to us for more than just well-informed opinions and industry benchmarks. Analytics will soon drive many planning and design strategies, and detailed occupancy evaluationsùboth pre- and post-occupancy evaluations (POE)ùwill play a larger role on projects.

Building-occupant research has long played a critical role in planning for some projects. What’s changing is the immediacy and sheer amount of data, and the ease by which it can be collected and analysed. The Retail Supermarket sector is emblematic of living, breathing and using data to track customer behavior and applying these metrics to benefit the future design and fit out of stores.

Additionally, the rise of mobile devices and social media, coupled with the use of advanced survey tools and interactive mapping apps, has created a powerful conduit through which building teams can capture real-time data on the publicùwhat spaces they like most and least in a given building, where they prefer to hang out on campus, whether they take public transportation or drive to work.

With advanced traffic flow simulation programs that allow users to program thousands of avatars with unique behavioral characteristics, building teams can predictùwith a much higher degree of certaintyùhow people will interact with a space layout. Arup, Perkins+Will, and Sasaki Associates are among the firms now developing custom digital tools for polling building occupants and end users and using analytics that apply advanced data-driven design techniques.

The Next Big Shift

Once data has been collected it is obsolete by the time that it is put in practice. So anything based on this in the future is out of date. We obtain knowledge from our experiences of doing something and then apply this knowledge the next time we do something that requires it û but what if in the future it didn’t have to be like this?

æDeep Learning’ is the concept of computers continuously learning and improving their algorithms, and therefore functionality, so that their output in current time is up to date û turning a concept of reactive user input into proactive and personalised output for the user.

Deep Learning for construction is something that is yet to be explored and it is hard to imagine how it fits into the scope of construction since buildings are very hard to change once built. But that’s as we know them right now. Perhaps this is the first step towards a building that can change its shape, form and structure based on data it mines from its users in current time over its whole life cycle û connecting its internal infrastructure to the ôInternet of Thingsö, users’ Smart Devices that ætalk’ to the building and infrared scanners.

The most notable commercial example of an advanced, automated faþade is PNC Tower in Pittsburgh, designed by Gensler, slated for completion in 2015. Focused on delivering a ôbreathable building,ö according to the design team, the enclosure features sensor-controlled air gates in the outer skin. Integrated with a solar chimney and heat sink, the gates bring cool air in as warm air is drawn out above. Stakeholders anticipate the gates will be open up to 42% of the time, achieving a 50% reduction in power loads.

We have reached 2015 û the age of the ôInternet of Thingsö and the target date for the UN Millennium Goals. By 2020 there will be 75B devices connected to the internet creating a powerful intelligence grid and millennials will comprise 75% of the global workforce by 2025. There is a new wave of positive change at hand, with new technologies and a connected world we did not have at the turn of the century. What we achieve in the next 10 years will depend on our level of collective consciousness and willingness to collaborate, change and adapt to the new world and at the heart of this is how we capture, mine, analyse, apply and preserve our data.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

With the recent release of the Australian Construction Industry Forum (ACIF) and Australian Procurement and Construction Council’s (APCC) ôFramework for the Adoption of PTI and BIMö are we still dancing around the inevitability of a BIM mandate?

Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) construction industry bodies and government must welcome the release of a focused framework for Project Team Integration and BIM which ôraises the flagö and progresses the debate on collaborative and productive design, construction and building life cycle management.

ACIF and APCC’s Framework document provides an in depth analysis of the landscape of BIM adoption in ANZ, including reaffirming the 7 work programs that buildingSMART Australasia recommended in 2012. What it lacks however are tangible solutions, clear ownership of commitments to change and a timeline.

Industry needs leadership on BIM. It is heartening to see a clear understanding of the benefits for both government and industry but stronger recommendations on BIM adoption and jurisdictional responsibilities are required. In the framework, there is a hint of powerlessness on the part of industry by saying ôàindustry is but a servant of those who commission new assets…ö It seems service providers are still in a reactive space waiting for their customers to demand the change that is available through new technologies and approaches.

UK Mandate 2016:

When Mark Bew, Chair of the UK Government BIM Working Group, Chairman of the UK Government BIM Task Group and buildingSMART UK, delivered the keynote speech at the buildingSMART Australasia conference in Sydney last year, three critical themes stood out for me:

1. A sense of urgency and a compelling reason for change was created via a deadline.
2. UK implementation would not have even started without the appointment of a Chief Constructor, currently Paul Morrell.
3. The concept that it’s okay for Government to tell industry what it wants as long as it stays away from telling industry how to do it.

What is interesting is that the latter point contrasts to how the Government here in Australia is approaching BIM û generally abstaining from the conversation for fear of interfering with the marketplace and creating red tape. What has been clear for some time and what the UK strategy demonstrates is a definitive need for leadership in order to achieve greater advancements and returns.

In Australia the latest statistics from the ABS tell us that the value of construction work within the Building and Engineering Construction Industry is $215 billion dollars[1], that construction (excluding its service industries) is 8.0% of GDP[2] and employs 1.1M workers or 9.1% of the labour force[3]. Given the comparative statistics that the UK knew at the time of creating the Government Construction Strategy[4] in 2011 û the UK construction sector was 7.0% of GDP, it expended ú110B and it employed 2.0M workers[5] û shouldn’t we be placing a larger emphasis on improving our industry considering it is as large a contributor to our economy and our workforce as the UK’s is to theirs?

Should Australia Make a Date or Continue Organically?

In late 2014 Mitchell Brandtman 5D Quantity Surveyors conducted a straw poll of 137 industry stakeholders with varying degrees of BIM, posing the simple question, ôShould the Australian Government mandate BIM?ö The results showed that over 66% of all respondents said ôYesö to a Government mandate.

Designers generally agree with a mandate (68%) and Contractors agree even more so (83%). Owners unsurprisingly are more reluctant (only 36% agreeing). A breakdown of the results can be viewed here.

Clients will always expect better design within a well-coordinated project that is on time and within budget. BIM simply assists in delivering these outcomes and facilitates the improvement in best practice. The project team should apply BIM because it makes business sense to do so.

The reality however seems to be that customers don’t want to dictate to the supply chain as it might create limited choice and less competition, ôbreakingö the circle of innovation. The supply chain is looking for a guarantee for their investment before they push an innovation that isn’t fully in demand. Australian and New Zealand’s skills and innovations in the field are well documented and respected internationally but if all the stakeholders in the ANZ construction industry are waiting for someone else to act on BIM – is ANZ going to miss one of the greatest opportunities for exporting design and construction services to Asia and the UK as the mandates in those countries take hold.

Missed opportunities are one thing but without a sense urgency will ANZ be exposing itself to more international competition from Denmark, Finland, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, UK and US as those countries innovate in response to their decisions to mandate?

Fixing the Broken Circle: Industry or Government?

Coupled with the recent release of the Framework, we are also anticipating the imminent release of the ôGuide to Procurement using BIM and PTIö. This document may prove more valuable to assisting industry stakeholders in their adoption and implementation investments and strategies. It will also add further rigour to the Framework’s promise of ôa step by step guideö to address the issues and challenges of BIM adoption and Project Team Integration.

Without clear leadership and ownership however, it is difficult to see how quickly and how extensively a guide will be adopted.

Given that we know that owners are reluctant, why not change the decision stream û say ôYesö to BIM for the benefit of public asset management and in turn the innovations derived from this Government decision will see private sector owners choose BIM and industry stakeholders innovate and evolve or disappear. After all, public sector construction work is only 9.8% of our industry as a whole û just $21B. The chance to improve productivity and output by influencing the other 90.2% of our industry is too big of a chance to pass up.

Only after there is a ôYesö can industry turn its mind to the ôhowö, like engaging with educational institutions to pave the way for our future technology disruptors to emerge and improve the processes and lead Australia in the advancement of BIM and PTI.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

The release of ACIF and APCC’s document æA Framework for the Adoption of Project Team Integration & BIM‘ in early December last year gave us a solid background of the BIM landscape in Australia and New Zealand, pointing out the problems and challenges within industry, ie. government agenda versus supplier agenda. However what it lacked were solutions for whole of industry to progress BIM take up and a meaningful commitment to change the way we work on a large scale in Australia.

On the 26th June 2015, the ACIF and APCC jointly released their most recent companion document to the Framework, entitled ôBuilding and Construction Procurement Guide: Project Team Integration and Building Information Modelling (BIM)ö. The aim of the guide is to assist industry stakeholders in their adoption and implementation of PTI and BIM through comprehensive instructions and guiding principles for each procurement model, how to tender and select the right BIM team and how to manage the project using BIM at the outset.

Where’s the Industry Incentive?

The Procurement Guide addresses many of the standard questions that clients and project teams, with limited BIM knowledge, are looking for, via a step by step and encyclopaedia-like format.

The guide provides some considerations for project team collaboration and how BIM impacts this process across the different delivery models. What’s needed however, particularly in relation to scheduling of contributions is a change in the methodology, where construction can be rehearsed over and over i.e brief, act, debrief, brief, act, debrief etc. The current process undervalues this opportunity and briefing documents continue to involve maps, models and explaining the plan rather than opportunities to test virtually and revisit and re-brief prior to physical construction.

Leadership is also a key component that is missing in the BIM campaign to improve building projects in Australia.

Peter Barda, Executive Director for ACIF, who facilitated the accompanying webinar that launched the guide, highlighted the fact that governments have been slow to adopt BIM as a tool and the reluctance may stem from a need to see some completed BIM projects to demonstrate the benefits. Teresa Scott, Executive Director for APCC concurred that governments are reluctant to push BIM onto contractors and are looking for the industry to demonstrate its BIM readiness.

Peter Barda advised that ACIF will shortly be approaching all jurisdictions around Australia with a plan to phase in BIM as part of a longer term opportunity to mandate BIM for projects over a given value. ACIF is keen to work with University and the Vocational Education and Training sectors to ôturn outö people who are appropriately skilled to use BIM and who understand how to use the integration process.

The guide doesn’t focus enough on the true benefits of BIM in terms of relationship management throughout a project. Peter Barda did however close the webinar by focusing on BIM success not being about 3D design but being very much about harnessing project team integration and around all consultants, trade contractors and project sponsors having a role in ôdeciding if BIM is useful or not and deciding how well the team is put together and managed.ö

Until, as an industry, we get this depth of understanding across all jurisdictions and the training to support it we cannot achieve better team work through BIM. A project based industry must do things that benefit the project.

Champions of BIM:

The guide alone will not make the impact on industry that is needed to push Australia towards a BIM ready environment. What is clear from this most recent guide release is that until companies can see the immediate personal benefit for committing to BIM as a technology resource û take up here will continue to be slow unless mandated. And this is the problem û the vicious cycle. Industry is busy, there is a lot of work going on, and approvals are at an all-time high.

Countries that are mandating BIM are upskilling their workforce at a significant rate û a workforce that is now eyeing up overseas opportunities. Competition in this space will become fierce and local Australian companies will not be ready or capable to react because of a lack of action today that leverages our high labour costs. Perhaps this is where the Government needs to take the lead to recognise that the industry is BIM ready and capable and to provide that stimulus for Australian companies to invest in the technology to sustain our local industry in 10, 20 and 30 years. This will at the very least put us on an equal footing with those shaping global construction.

We look forward to ACIF’s round of consultations with industry in late July and early August on the development of their Education & Training Skills Sets. This will be a good next step and welcome addition to BIM readiness in Australia.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

Over the last decade we have been involved significantly in the development of BIM and how the 5D QS contributes to that process. We have invested heavily in industry collaboration and, at a firm level, in the enabling technology and upskilling our team to 5D QS.

Out of all of this investment and research the single most important element in relation to the 5D QS contribution to BIM is revisioning because it enables living cost planning – the ability to estimate something that is based on current design.

In Real Time:

The biggest problem with creating and managing a bill of quantities (BoQ) or any form of quantities is that the day that the quantities are finished they are out of date. For a BoQ this could be by one to two months on average and sometimes a lot more. This is because the design documents are frozen for a period to allow preparation of the quantities. In the case of a detailed set of quantities like a BoQ it is not cost or time effective to redo the BoQ at regular intervals and on large projects, plans to remeasure the BoQ often fail because it is not possible to complete the task within a timeframe that is useful. Historically it has always been expected that a BoQ has a life equal to the project but the reality is that the BoQ was out of date the day it was released and it was never going to be accurate at any point in the build. Without revisioning a BoQ’s main purpose is to provide a consistent tender at that point in time and not an accurate cost estimate that could be relied upon throughout.

This is no longer an acceptable parameter.

5D and BIM make it entirely possible to revision a model at any stage and across any element of a design û before (for cost planning, Quantity take off (QTO) and BoQ), during (for end cost forecasting and valuation of variations) and after completion (for maintenance and replacement cost estimating) if the cost data has been dynamically linked to the model information as part of the BIM Execution Plan.

The ability to revision something and make it current is happening now on a whole range of projects. This same technique is used not just for quantity takeoff but for living cost planning and to reconcile each cost plan or value variations or even value progress payments.

This one technique of revisioning benefits the entire downstream project team and is changing the role of the QS dramatically, which is bizarre, when you consider that the most significant change (in the QS profession as a whole) that I have seen during my 32 year career was the industry wide adoption of excel.

Technology is the Enabler û 5D QS the Driver

Technology is the tool that supports the BIM and is available now. It is the 5D QS committed to the technology and how it benefits BIM that drives revisioning and what it can bring to a project at any stage. CostX is one of the tools that revisions well and allows the 5D QS to look through a model and compare it to one that we had previously measured. It doesn’t matter whether we measured it yesterday or whether we measured it a year ago, we can still compare it.

Being able to recalculate something quickly and over and over and over is a very powerful resource in saving the project time and money. It is however, still misunderstood across industry because historically quantities and estimates are only called for at the project sign-off times. It is something that is known to be done once not over and over.

Upon compiling the quantities of a project through CostX any form of quantification or estimate can be created quickly and reconciled via a report that describes each quantity change.

That one simple task can be applied the whole way through a project. This notion of ôI want quantities I can rely uponö û becomes very apparent and achievable. It’s the single point of change in a QS tool kit today.

Mapping

So what is it that enables us to do this? In relation to CostX, mapping is king. Our industry talks a lot about the need for a standard classification system. CostX doesn’t rely on classifications.

All the parameters within an element in the design can be mapped almost like a Google search – ôspideredö through the design. This allows us to query a model for the information that we need rather than having someone classify it for us and tell us where it should be. It puts the control in the hands of the user, allowing us to interrogate the model data and establish clear parameters for that data in preparation for design changes to come.

This also means that mapping of the model data can begin at any stage û it’s never too late although there are significant benefits in applying mapping at the start of a project so that the data can build throughout the design stages. The design team can make decisions on current information at key points in the design development without compromising the integrity of the design.

Mapping effectively develops layers of information at each design change. Too much information at the beginning of the process and it would actually prohibit the design from developing. This is a technique that a 5D QS brings to the design team early on, knowing the key parameters in the data that will build the map most effectively and benefit everyone downstream.

Without revisioning it’s just not 5D

Appointing a QS needs to move away from whether you need a 2D or 5D estimate and start thinking in terms of what information is needed at the current stage of the design and how it can help as the design develops. Ideally the 5D QS should be involved at concept design. Whilst not much information is needed within this stage it provides the opportunity to set the master map and build the layers from there for fast and efficient revisioning at any time later in the design and build.

To be successful, projects must have a BIM Execution Plan which defines what the 5D QS requirements are. Designers need to model the way projects are built and bring all consultants into the design early. This is where decisions are made and efficiencies and cost savings are most likely identified and achieved. It’s important to work with people who know what they are doing and can demonstrate their value.

Early project team collaboration means fewer variations, delays and disruptions during the construction. The BIM Execution Plan delivers on collaboration and allows for the full power of revisioning downstream. It you’re not revisioning then you are missing the biggest opportunity that 5D brings to building leaner whilst maintaining design integrity and delivering the project’s vision intact.

For more information please email me direct at dmitchell@mitbrand.com

Creating certainty in the construction process is now directly impacting on the roles of the contractor and sub-contractor within a build. Technology is focusing the mind of the trades and services from doing something efficiently to creating greater productivity and thus positioning themselves to be involved in the design process much earlier. As a result we appear to be on the cusp of a shift in the status of who drives the design û should it be the services contractor?

Path to Prefabrication

The initial formal signs of change in the services sector of construction in the US date back to early 2002 and are defined by the research conducted by the Mechanical Contracting Education and Research Foundation. Their industry analysis of the opportunities and threats to members culminated in the publication of the report entitled ôFive Key Trends for the Future of the Mechanical Contracting Industryö, published in March 2005.

It was within this research that the question was asked of the mechanical contractors industry ôwhy does it seem like I am doing the work of the General Contractor without the pay?ö. The research focused clearly on the emerging technologies and the opportunities they presented to the trades in relation to developing closer relationships with the design process in order to improve productivity and reduce costs.

The report establishes a timeline of industry change where the mechanical and electrical contractors have a real opportunity to lead project design by 2020. It may however be much earlier than predicted given the current pace of prefabrication and the development of the ôframeö of services that are built off site, something which is changing the entire nature of subcontracting services.

The report also clearly advocates a move towards reverse tendering, something that Mitchell Brandtman canvasses as an innovative procurement technique and a direct outcome of setting the cost strategy at the concept and design phases. The result is an executable file that becomes the project’s living cost plan and provides all the elements to set a firm pricing schedule for the project. In non-competitive markets, reverse tendering reduces risk, expedites and simplifies the tender process by placing the focus on rates rather than the uncertainty that can manifest through tender or auction.

Future Form – Permanent Modular Construction

Much more recently industry organisations are focusing attention on how quickly prefabrication is changing and we are already moving towards permanent modular construction as a viable build option in large scale commercial projects.

In the US the Modular Building Institute, who represent more than 250 companies operating in 15 countries, are championing the development of permanent structures offsite in a safe environment that are being delivered to site, integrated with less waste and greater quality control. Some industry commentators are citing that building lifespans of more than 50 years are achievable.

Whilst prefabrication is clearly not a new concept, product improvement and increased demand have brought it back into the spotlight. Currently the key saving is time; however improvements in technology and large scale manufacturing will also lead to cost reductions.

When McGraw Hill released its ôSmartMarket Report: Prefabrication and Modularizationö in 2011, it specifically recognised the re-emergence of prefabrication and modularized components and how BIM technology was enabling their greater integration. Of the 800 architecture, engineering and contracting (AEC) professionals surveyed, more than two thirds reported significant productivity gains, including:

• 66% reporting that project schedules are decreased – 35% by four weeks or more
• 65% reporting that project budgets are decreased – 41% by 6% or more
• 77% reporting that construction site waste is decreased – 44% by 5% or more

Prefabrication and modularization not only has the ability to enable trends, such as BIM, but it also becomes more prominent because of these technologies. By bringing multiple innovative technologies and processes together it improves productivity in the industry by implementing different systems to achieve the desired outcomes, rather than simply speeding up the same myopic process which will not achieve true productivity gains in the long term.

The highly acclaimed T30 Hotel in China is an example of this and continues to steal headlines for its success in modular construction. The building was erected in just 15 days with over 90% of construction taking place in manufacturing sites, streamlining processes that removed impractical and tedious tasks and resulted in impressive eco-credentials. Whilst it may be some time before Australia embraces this level of engineering in prefabrication , Mitchell Brandtman is working closely with a number of the key players in the modular and prefabricated industry to develop new products.

Expanding the Scope and Blurring the Boundaries for Subcontracts

The trend toward prefabrication of building components has the potential to blur or change the traditional subcontract boundaries entirely here in Australia. BIM is already enabling prefabrication of services racks in corridors and risers. These racks are being fabricated by the mechanical services subcontractor who is allowing the space for electrical, hydraulic and fire services to be installed by those subcontractors in the mechanical subcontractor’s workshop. The other services subcontractors are then charged for the benefit that has been created for them.

In the US it’s a slightly different experience where the mechanical subcontractor is using his own plumbing and electrical staff to complete the work that was traditionally done by other subcontractors. In effect US mechanical subcontractors have expanded their traditional scope to include multi services within building trunk zones and this trend has reduced the scope of the electrical, fire and hydraulic packages.

It will be interesting to see if the US approach becomes the norm in Australia. At a time when our balance of trade figures are already heavily skewed by imported consumer goods in Australia, utilizing local innovation and technology can produce a highly valued product that will be more cost-effective and adaptive to our needs than one mass produced off-shore and sent by ship.

For more information please email me direct and follow Mitchell Brandtman and myself on Twitter:

For more than six months, the Productivity Commission has been charged with reviewing how major public infrastructure can be financed and managed given significant and measurable issues of high costs and long lead times surrounding these types of Government projects. It is hoped that with the large number of stakeholders with a vested interest in the outcome, the final report, due to be presented to the Federal Government on 27th May, is likely to feature collaboration as the centrepiece for reform and technology as the catalyst.

Being productive is not just about being efficient

Doing something more efficiently is not as effective as innovating a process or technique that results in doing something in a completely different way. The invention of the blue banger hangers is a classic example of innovative thinking changing an entire process and creating increased productivity opportunities industry wide. The current onset of prefabrication across construction sites of a number of building elements, materials and wholesale mechanical and electrical sections of a build are also increasing evidence of the productivity gains available on a project.

Governments can be particularly successful in developing wide spread efficiencies in processes and workflows during times of cost cutting and calls for greater accountability of the public purse. This often manifests as a squeezing of labour costs where someone is willing to do something faster so that there are less people involved in the process. However the process itself may remain unchanged and may continue to be unproductive.

In its draft report released in March, the Productivity Commission clearly outlines the opportunity to improve public infrastructure tender processes, recognising that for large and complex projects bidding costs can be as much as 1% of the project’s value.

Making the procurement process more efficient (i.e. formal consultation, stringent tender guidelines, uniform documentation and policies designed to award the lowest price) does not necessarily equate to productivity gains. The process may be more efficient but the outcome may still translate to higher turn-out costs at the end of the project.

Often within a rigid and efficiently applied tendering process it is innovative concepts that are annexed or removed from the bidding process altogether under the policy of ônon-conforming tenderö. This also removes any opportunity to generate productivity which is often the outcome of innovation. The Commission points directly to the need for change in the bid process and for it to recognise and remunerate innovation even where the tenderer is not the preferred bidder. It also points to a need to distinguish between an initial tender process focussed on cost and working with preferred tenders at a much more developed level.

It is this level of innovation that the Productivity Commission report should focus on in developing bid processes that bring about a high level of innovative change from industry providers.

Official call for coordinated approach

The Commission’s draft report galvanises global calls for certainty in construction. Much of the discussion continues to focus on creating certainty of the information and the data through collaboration.

The March report cites evidence of poor project management that results in unacceptably high project variations. Poor scoping and initial cost estimates directly contribute to cost overruns and variations.

We, as informed and engaged BIM advocates, know this and preach to the unconverted one project at a time. Very recently Mitchell Brandtman was involved in a residential project where we applied the 5D process to reverse tender and obtain a builders price with just one builder that was within 2.0% of our initial estimate. This is the level of certainty that can now be attained with the application of the 5D technology and collaboration that is a foundation for successful BIM.

There is a clear understanding within the Commission’s draft report that certainty reduces risk and in turn reduces costs. Certainty is recognised as being created through model data validation and collaboration but the report only references the BIM benefits for projects of a ôsufficient complexityö. It needs to go much further in its assessment as it doesn’t seem to recognise the ability to achieve certainty for any size project at any stage in the design process. The public consultation process which included (3) public hearings and resulted in the receipt of 205 submissions from industry and interested parties, may see a better and more informed recognition of the process improvements BIM brings across an entire project life cycle for a $1M build or a $180M build and anywhere in between.

BIM mandate inevitable for productivity goals

BIM is an innovation that changes both the process and the technique of the way we do things. It means that we can reduce the steps in the process and make the model certain earlier through collaboration to bring about innovative opportunities for the construction which produces better buildings for a lower cost.

So, is the report to Government on 27th May going to tell us anything new? It is unlikely that the report will shine a light on anything surprising for those at a more developed stage of BIM implementation. However it may be that the report provides the official collection of all the research and the data analysis in order to make far reaching and progressive steps in Australia to bring about a change to project management to improve productivity through BIM and mandate this change for Government projects nationally.

The draft report makes it very clear that reforms can begin immediately and can realise economic benefits in the short term. This says that if we do anything rather than what we are doing now we are most likely to be better off. The call for a national approach will add an even greater weight to the opportunities for productivity gains across the supply chain for construction in Australia and for BIM to take the lead role.

In 2012, Exemplar Health (comprising Lend Lease, Spotless Group, Capella Capital and Siemens) was successful in their bid to design, build, finance and maintain the new Sunshine Coast Public University Hospital – a $1.8 billion public tertiary teaching hospital.

In early 2013 a group of our 5D Quantity Surveyors at Mitchell Brandtman were engaged by Lend Lease to advise the benefits Building Information Modeling (BIM) could provide to the procurement and construction of the hospital project. The 5DQS team collaborated with the Lend Lease Cost Planning and Procurement team working alongside them for an initial period of four weeks.

For the first time in Australia on a project of this scale, the project team achieved efficient and effective real-time quantification and costing of revisions to deliver the final Trade Bill of Quantities that incorporated all design changes.

Real Time Revisioning

The Sunshine Coast Public University Hospital is Queensland’s first health Public Private Partnership (PPP) project and will be built to a 4 star green star rating. The first stage will be completed in 2016.

In a time frame of four weeks, the small collaborative team undertook a process of model validation, mapping, and revisioning on Stage One. This included measuring over 60,000m│ concrete, 800t post tensioning, 4,500t steel reinforcement and 200,000m▓ of formwork for a 150,000 m▓ hospital and a 95,000m▓ carpark.

Mobilising the 5DQS team within the Lend Lease offices has produced a fast track training programme with specialists working alongside and one on one with the in-house team and significantly accelerating their learning curve.

During the four weeks of the cost planning process the hospital’s 3D models were continually revised by the designers. The 5DQS team’s technology that interfaces with 3D models was able to accurately calculate quantities and create dynamic links between Revit« and IFC model information, rate libraries and estimate/trade bill of quantity templates. The dynamic links meant that the quantities and estimates were able to be calculated and recalculated every time the model information was revised.

By working with incomplete models throughout the design phase the model reliance increases and the 5DQS can be confident of the completeness and correctness of each model as the design develops. For designers this means there are no bad models and we can continually improve the BIM. For clients and project partners it creates even more efficiencies and reliability within the contract documents.

Tendering on the latest documents

The benefits of this approach have allowed Lend Lease to solve one of the industry’s pressing issues, the desire to tender on the latest documents still being worked on while Bills of Quantities are prepared. By creating reliable links between the Bills of Quantities and the model, tenderers can quickly understand the scope of a trade package, derisking the package and allowing for more competitive pricing. The effectiveness of applying a 5D methodology meant that the team were able to revision within days and sometimes hours to produce updated visualised documentation which clearly identified the changes within the 3D model and quickly include them in the contract.

When tender packages were released, subcontractors were provided with a free CostX« viewer containing the most recent Bill of Quantities and 3D model. The subcontractors could view each trade package quantity, where it is located in the model and how the quantity is measured. This technology reduces the reliance on 2D paper drawings and gives subcontractors an opportunity to better understand their tender requirements, easily visualise their components of the project and quickly respond to any revisioning.

Model Hospital

The progression of technology in the industry means companies need to quickly adapt the more traditional approach to design and construction.

What is clear from the approach taken at the first stage of the Sunshine Coast Public University Hospital project is that a collaborative project team which applies the BIM methodology at the outset can be assured of better coordination of documents, increasing the reliability and value of the information and the savings able to be generated. It can provide significant reductions in time and cost, and access to real time information for decision making. Indirect benefits come from increased knowledge, identification of clashes in the design phase and the ability to engage with contractors and subcontractors to provide certainty.

To read more about our work on this project please read this case study article: ‘Mitchell Brandtman and Lend Lease finalists at UDIA Consultant Excellence Awards’