Hey Bilal nice videos! I would like to dispute your statement about BIM Stages, particularly your comments that teams require to move to stage 2 before moving to stage 3. In the case of a multi-disciplinary in house teams you can setup integrated authoring models on a single network and run a Pilot project from that point. For large integrated Design/Construction firms there is no need for Stage 2 to happen at all or can happen post event to Stage 3 first whilst starting to use static models for additional model checking for validations or frozen designs checkpoints at Milestones. In these scenarios do you see your BIM Stages model being mostly focused on disciplines under multiple companies?
Adam Sheather Thank you Adam for your comment. What you describe within large integrated Design/Construction firms falls squarely under Stage 2, not Stage 3 (bimexcellence.com/dictionary/bim-stage-3). If you wish to inspect the detailed differences between Stages, please refer to Table 2 within the BIM Maturity Matrix chapter (bit.ly/BIMPaperA3). To answer your question more directly, in principle, the BIM Stages model is applicable for all types of firms and in all markets. I'm happy to elaborate further on this if you wish. Bilal
Just to clarify from a technical perspective, if disciplines are working in the same files, In the case of Architecture/Structure there was only a single object which the team then shared various attributes with MEP live linked to each other and there is no file exchanges all done from the CDE is this stage 2 or 3? In addition BCF and Vico is actively integrated for RFI workflows and Cost/Production Control. In this scenario on a Pilot project with all new BIM users at what part is Stage 2 both achieved and surpassed?
Adam Sheather There are several answers to your excellent question: (1) Technical and non-technical aspects cannot be separated when applying the BIM Stages model. This goes back to the definition of BIM itself as a set of technologies, processes and policies (bit.ly/BIMdefinition - video). That is, even if all disciplines from multiple organizations use a Model Server (bimdictionary.com/model-server) but without the proper workflows and protocols, the company/project team cannot be considered to be at Stage 3. I actually know of a company many years back that used a Jotne EDM Model Server in the same way that it would use a file server! (2) A Common Data Environment (CDE) is a Stage 2 solution where project stakeholders exchange documents, models and metadata (this varies based on the feature set of the CDE solution deployed). To be considered at Stage 3, the environment deployed must be a Federated Data Environment (FDE - BIMdictionary.com/Federated-Data-Environment), a term I'll be further explaining in BIMThinkSpace Episode 24 (currently being peer-reviewed). (3) The interactions you describe are between designers, cost planners and possibly builders within one or two project lifecycle phases (a Design-Design, or Design-Construction exchange). These are typical Stage 2 interactions at Medium or Medium-High maturity levels (bit.ly/BIMmaturityIndex). At Stage 3, the exchanges are necessarily across all project lifecycle phases (Design-Construction-Operation). I hope the above makes sense....If not, I'll clarify further. Bilal
Hi Bilal as our Owners are also internal they have and use access to the model via Revizto and reports from Revizto also. In addition for checking current RFI lists, procurement management and change management. They have been heavily involved since the beginning of these projects as they own the company, and made the decision to bring BIM into their design, construction departments :) To create accurate as-built models and data for the ownership of these assets. The goal always has been to help each discipline benefit, including our internal manufacturing processes who already with work data outputs from the model. In this case is Construction-Manufacturing a lifecycle phase? Or is it part of Design-Construction phase? Obviously they do not engage in production of deliverable but actively review the mediums again from the single source of information. In order for information to even be usable in external products or post BIM, a number of automated systems from naming convention checks and modelling-data validation checks were implemented at the beginning of the project using a proven standard developed previously. In the example above there is not formal handwritten protocol, rather the user queries their model against the system and the system provides feedback in regards to CERTAIN discrepancies and non-conformance and how to solve these issues and what items are affected, does this satisfy/replace the need for heavy written documentation? In addition the documented mature workflows that enable teams to take ownership of model elements (For example Structure taking control of the Architects representation of the structural system then adding design and detail), as well as workflow for MEP inclusion and ownership of FFE in addition to multi-discipline live workflows were in place. As a system like Revizto can have versioning, issue tracking, data, sheets, linked references and the model, is cloud synchronised is that an example of a Federated Data Environment? If not is there a software out there today that is an example of an such a system under this classification? or is it like UK level 3 BIM something that is not meant to be achieved yet? My question flows back to if you have mature systems, technology, policies and protocols in place with a willing integrated (DBO) team with zero experience minus one or 2 key people who bring these mature systems, workflows and documentation, then what are the targets people should be setting to achieve Stage 2?
Adam Sheather I probably need a couple of videos to answer these many questions properly :). I'll try to address them in short-form below: - Construction-Manufacturing or Pre-fabrication falls within the Construction Phase [C], sub-phase [C2] (please refer to www.bimframework.info/2013/12/project-lifecycle-phases.html, Fig.1). - An automated protocol-driven system is more mature (level c) than documented protocols (level b). Typically, if you are developing an automated system yourself, you'll need to first 'define' it through Use Cases, User Stories or similar, and then automate it these Use Cases. - A Federated Data Environment (FDE) can be best exemplified in the mature networking platforms currently used in the manufacturing and aerospace industries. These are (very) slowly moving into the construction space. - Based on what you've mentioned, the organizational unit you work in - not the whole company - is already at Stage 2 (Model-based Collaboration), Maturity Level b (Defined) or Level c (Managed). In principle, BIM Stages refer to the 'minimum-capability' and thus have no targets to aspire to (you can only aspire to a higher Stage and start taking steps towards it). This is different when discussing BIM Maturity Levels which define a series of performance milestones to reach, and continuously exceed. I'll be covering BIM Maturity Levels in the next video but it may be useful to read the 'Difference between BIM Capability and BIM Maturity' -bit.ly/BIMEpisode11 I hope the above provided answers to most of the questions...Bilal
Dear Bilar, Mohamed, It is not fair from your side to set "by definition" equality between preBIM and low performance, anf high performance = postBIM. Yes, most modern complex projects are doing with the many expensive software application. However, your materials are far NOT the reason for serious budget investment. Regards, Pavel
Dear Pavel. I'm not sure I understand your comment. The BIM Stages are capability milestones applicable only when adopting BIM. They do not reflect 'general performance improvement' on their own. The notions of pre-BIM and post-BIM are intended to indicate the lifespan of the term itself. That is, before the term 'BIM' was coined, there were other approaches to designing, constructing, and operating facilities. We can safely expect the term 'BIM' has a shelf life after which new terms/concepts - e.g. XYZ - will emerge to take its place. When that happens, we will be able to define pre-XYZ, XYZ Stages, and post-XYZ. Please let me know if I misunderstood your comments.
Dear @@BilalSuccar-AU, I understand your arguments. Nevertheless, when you associate "Performance" axis with pre-XYZ and post-XYZ, you state, that XYZ implementation increase this "Performance". In real life things happened in opposite way: if you add ANYTHING to the process, which is already working, most probably, you not only spend extra resources, but also money and time to adopt them, meant overall performance get decreased! Indeed, innovative products could be motor for more complicated project. However, ANY innovation is first of all an INVESTMENT. Thanks for understanding, Pavel
Dear Succar,
I am a BIM-student and I would like to thank you for the educational vids!
Thank you Kubi!
Interesting Explanation Dr. Bilal
Grateful for his contributions on the BIM.
Greetings from Peru.
Thank you! I heard BIM adoption is progressing well in Peru. Wishing you all the best.
Hey Bilal nice videos! I would like to dispute your statement about BIM Stages, particularly your comments that teams require to move to stage 2 before moving to stage 3. In the case of a multi-disciplinary in house teams you can setup integrated authoring models on a single network and run a Pilot project from that point. For large integrated Design/Construction firms there is no need for Stage 2 to happen at all or can happen post event to Stage 3 first whilst starting to use static models for additional model checking for validations or frozen designs checkpoints at Milestones. In these scenarios do you see your BIM Stages model being mostly focused on disciplines under multiple companies?
Adam Sheather Thank you Adam for your comment. What you describe within large integrated Design/Construction firms falls squarely under Stage 2, not Stage 3 (bimexcellence.com/dictionary/bim-stage-3). If you wish to inspect the detailed differences between Stages, please refer to Table 2 within the BIM Maturity Matrix chapter (bit.ly/BIMPaperA3). To answer your question more directly, in principle, the BIM Stages model is applicable for all types of firms and in all markets. I'm happy to elaborate further on this if you wish. Bilal
Just to clarify from a technical perspective, if disciplines are working in the same files, In the case of Architecture/Structure there was only a single object which the team then shared various attributes with MEP live linked to each other and there is no file exchanges all done from the CDE is this stage 2 or 3? In addition BCF and Vico is actively integrated for RFI workflows and Cost/Production Control. In this scenario on a Pilot project with all new BIM users at what part is Stage 2 both achieved and surpassed?
Adam Sheather There are several answers to your excellent question:
(1) Technical and non-technical aspects cannot be separated when applying the BIM Stages model. This goes back to the definition of BIM itself as a set of technologies, processes and policies (bit.ly/BIMdefinition - video). That is, even if all disciplines from multiple organizations use a Model Server (bimdictionary.com/model-server) but without the proper workflows and protocols, the company/project team cannot be considered to be at Stage 3. I actually know of a company many years back that used a Jotne EDM Model Server in the same way that it would use a file server!
(2) A Common Data Environment (CDE) is a Stage 2 solution where project stakeholders exchange documents, models and metadata (this varies based on the feature set of the CDE solution deployed). To be considered at Stage 3, the environment deployed must be a Federated Data Environment (FDE - BIMdictionary.com/Federated-Data-Environment), a term I'll be further explaining in BIMThinkSpace Episode 24 (currently being peer-reviewed).
(3) The interactions you describe are between designers, cost planners and possibly builders within one or two project lifecycle phases (a Design-Design, or Design-Construction exchange). These are typical Stage 2 interactions at Medium or Medium-High maturity levels (bit.ly/BIMmaturityIndex). At Stage 3, the exchanges are necessarily across all project lifecycle phases (Design-Construction-Operation).
I hope the above makes sense....If not, I'll clarify further. Bilal
Hi Bilal as our Owners are also internal they have and use access to the model via Revizto and reports from Revizto also. In addition for checking current RFI lists, procurement management and change management. They have been heavily involved since the beginning of these projects as they own the company, and made the decision to bring BIM into their design, construction departments :) To create accurate as-built models and data for the ownership of these assets.
The goal always has been to help each discipline benefit, including our internal manufacturing processes who already with work data outputs from the model. In this case is Construction-Manufacturing a lifecycle phase? Or is it part of Design-Construction phase?
Obviously they do not engage in production of deliverable but actively review the mediums again from the single source of information. In order for information to even be usable in external products or post BIM, a number of automated systems from naming convention checks and modelling-data validation checks were implemented at the beginning of the project using a proven standard developed previously.
In the example above there is not formal handwritten protocol, rather the user queries their model against the system and the system provides feedback in regards to CERTAIN discrepancies and non-conformance and how to solve these issues and what items are affected, does this satisfy/replace the need for heavy written documentation?
In addition the documented mature workflows that enable teams to take ownership of model elements (For example Structure taking control of the Architects representation of the structural system then adding design and detail), as well as workflow for MEP inclusion and ownership of FFE in addition to multi-discipline live workflows were in place.
As a system like Revizto can have versioning, issue tracking, data, sheets, linked references and the model, is cloud synchronised is that an example of a Federated Data Environment?
If not is there a software out there today that is an example of an such a system under this classification? or is it like UK level 3 BIM something that is not meant to be achieved yet?
My question flows back to if you have mature systems, technology, policies and protocols in place with a willing integrated (DBO) team with zero experience minus one or 2 key people who bring these mature systems, workflows and documentation, then
what are the targets people should be setting to achieve Stage 2?
Adam Sheather I probably need a couple of videos to answer these many questions properly :). I'll try to address them in short-form below:
- Construction-Manufacturing or Pre-fabrication falls within the Construction Phase [C], sub-phase [C2] (please refer to www.bimframework.info/2013/12/project-lifecycle-phases.html, Fig.1).
- An automated protocol-driven system is more mature (level c) than documented protocols (level b). Typically, if you are developing an automated system yourself, you'll need to first 'define' it through Use Cases, User Stories or similar, and then automate it these Use Cases.
- A Federated Data Environment (FDE) can be best exemplified in the mature networking platforms currently used in the manufacturing and aerospace industries. These are (very) slowly moving into the construction space.
- Based on what you've mentioned, the organizational unit you work in - not the whole company - is already at Stage 2 (Model-based Collaboration), Maturity Level b (Defined) or Level c (Managed). In principle, BIM Stages refer to the 'minimum-capability' and thus have no targets to aspire to (you can only aspire to a higher Stage and start taking steps towards it). This is different when discussing BIM Maturity Levels which define a series of performance milestones to reach, and continuously exceed. I'll be covering BIM Maturity Levels in the next video but it may be useful to read the 'Difference between BIM Capability and BIM Maturity' -bit.ly/BIMEpisode11
I hope the above provided answers to most of the questions...Bilal
Dear Bilar, Mohamed,
It is not fair from your side to set "by definition" equality between preBIM and low performance, anf high performance = postBIM.
Yes, most modern complex projects are doing with the many expensive software application. However, your materials are far NOT the reason for serious budget investment.
Regards,
Pavel
Dear Pavel. I'm not sure I understand your comment. The BIM Stages are capability milestones applicable only when adopting BIM. They do not reflect 'general performance improvement' on their own. The notions of pre-BIM and post-BIM are intended to indicate the lifespan of the term itself. That is, before the term 'BIM' was coined, there were other approaches to designing, constructing, and operating facilities. We can safely expect the term 'BIM' has a shelf life after which new terms/concepts - e.g. XYZ - will emerge to take its place. When that happens, we will be able to define pre-XYZ, XYZ Stages, and post-XYZ. Please let me know if I misunderstood your comments.
Dear @@BilalSuccar-AU,
I understand your arguments. Nevertheless, when you associate "Performance" axis with pre-XYZ and post-XYZ, you state, that XYZ implementation increase this "Performance". In real life things happened in opposite way: if you add ANYTHING to the process, which is already working, most probably, you not only spend extra resources, but also money and time to adopt them, meant overall performance get decreased!
Indeed, innovative products could be motor for more complicated project. However, ANY innovation is first of all an INVESTMENT.
Thanks for understanding,
Pavel