Whenever I hear someone promise that a new product, or procedure, or concept is going to “change forever the way you do business,” I wince. Whenever I hear someone promise a “revolution,” I wince.
Whenever I hear someone promise that a new product, or procedure, or concept is going to “change forever the way you do business,” I wince. Whenever I hear someone promise a “revolution,” I wince.
Most business people don’t want to change the way they do business, nor do they want a revolution. They want predictability, stability, low risk, reasonable profits.
The computer wizards have made inflated promises during the last couple of decades, and people have been stung as a result. Many of those wizards have failed to realize that building a building isn’t the same as building a car.
Set out to build just one car and the price would be astronomical. But build thousands, and there are economies of scale that make it easier to pay for such things as sophisticated digital modelling.
But we don’t build museums, or hospitals or office buildings by the thousands, so the economies of scale just aren’t there.
Still, we have to do better. Two years ago, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) did a study of the U.S. capital facilities industry in which it found that inadequate interoperability of information systems costs the industry $15.8 billion a year.
Put it another way. A bunch of us are putting up an office building. But if there is no smooth communication between the design software, the engineering software, or the estimating or scheduling or financial software, then extra time and labour is expended and the building will cost more than it had to.
Enter BIM — building information modelling. The idea has been around in one form or another for a generation. But at its heart is the notion that all the software used during the conceptualization, design, construction and post-construction operation of a building work together.
But it’s more than that. There is an element of what a psychologist would call gestalt — an organized whole that is perceived as more than the sum of its parts. And from that greater whole, advantages accrue.
So BIM is about the use, reuse and exchange of information, and electronic documents are merely one component of that. Integrate the model-based technology that gives us 2D and 3D renderings with all the other information generated during the design and construction process, and the designers have a faster, better, richer design process. There is less risk, the intent of the design is maintained, quality control is improved, more and better analysis is possible and communication between all parties involved in the project is faster and clearer. Such tasks as drafting, generation of documents and schedules are automated. Drawings showing different views of the same object are all updated automatically when modified.
That’s the promise of BIM. It’s a promise that is so alluring that despite a number of false starts, the idea of BIM hasn’t gone away. In fact, as construction professionals look at what has been possible in other industries, the yearning for BIM systems that actually deliver on the promise has become stronger.
That’s why the American National Institute of Building Sciences has formed a committee to create a BIM standard. I mentioned this committee a few weeks ago. Since it was announced, I’ve seen a flood of articles about BIM and its advantages.
When the first version of the standard is ready at about the end of this year, it is hoped the common language developed will significantly reduce building costs, insurance liability, construction schedules and operating costs, while improving building performance, safety, building life and occupant efficiency.
True, using BIM to achieve all that would change things for just about every player involved with building construction, and that would mean some confusion and dislocation. But isn’t the idea exciting?
I find it exciting enough — and important enough — that I’ll come back to it next week.
Korky Koroluk is an Ottawa-based freelance writer. Send comments to editor@dailycommercialnews.com
Recent Comments
comments for this post are closed