Technology Purgatory

We are in an interesting and tumultuous time in the AEC and CAD industry. There is change happening all around us, and it is happening very fast, faster than any transformative transition in the past. Organization structure, processes, contract styles, legal framework, client demands, sustainability demands and technology, it is all changing. No matter what your specific role is in this game, chances are you are changing the way you do your day-to-day work of designing, constructing, operating, or managing buildings, assets, and projects. Some have made the move at their own free will, some have been pushed by management, and so

me have been forced by owner/client requirements. There is no doubt in my mind that the integrated, collaborative methods that are now emerging, aided and enhanced by new forms of technology and management are not only the way of the future, but very positive as a whole for most everybody involved (when planned and executed correctly). These changes cause a lot of anxiety and headaches. These issues arise from many things, making drastic changes to the way people work, the tools people use, software that is not developed enough of the job, hardware restrictions and the expectations of the end user and a general fear of doing something new and stepping out of your comfort zone.

For the most part in the present time we are required to delivery 2D .DWG files as a submission standard. There are times when certain clients, projects, or companies that require BIM as a deliverable. In some cases there are projects, or requirements that keep you stuck in the middle, between CAD and BIM, which is what we are dealing with on one of our current projects. We, as an engineering consultant hired by a large Design-Build general contractor, are using BIM as a tool, and a process to provide a higher quality deliverable in a streamlined fashion. We are also using these tools because it is a project requirement set out by the client in a very weak specification. We also have a responsibility to deliver the tradition 2D .DWGs as part of the deliverable, which must be follow very stringent CAD standards. The CAD manual is well developed and clear in what it requires, which is expected after 20+ years of time to define and document what it is we want out of our CAD. From my understanding the need for compliance with the CAD standards is for the sub-contractors downstream who will receive the CAD drawings to build from who do not have BIM capabilities. I would say this is a ‘medium’ sized project, but again we are in the Middle East so options may vary.

The BIM specification, in summary, states something along the lines of, “you must use and submit BIM, but you must also follow strict CAD standards for submission.” This is great that we get to use BIM, and it is also great that there are developed BIM and CAD manuals for the project (which most of the time we don’t event get) that for the most part spell out how the project and files should be structured. Beyond file naming and folder structure there is not much guidance on what, how or why there is a requirement for BIM. You do not need to sell me on why they want BIM, but what they missed out on, and the detail that will bring problems to the project and teams is how they will use the BIM and the process used to deliver the project. The main problem arises when extracting the 2D CAD from the BIM which does not, and cannot match the CAD standards required for the project. This creates a parallel universe in both BIM and CAD to attain the required output, as well as a lot of extra work to get your BIM exports to suitable CAD standards for submission. This is what I have termed Technology Purgatory. You are in this state when you are stuck between the old 2D CAD days and the new BIM world. In most cases I would venture to say that it is causes more problems than the benefits it could potentially bring to the project. We cannot use one tool and process to complete the task, we are stuck in between the two. What to do? There are many workarounds that we could use to get by, some less evil than the others, but none are efficient, or even necessary, and all require a lot of rework. This rework also adds a layer of uncertainty in the output and quality of the drawings and project. Creating multiple views, for exporting, layer settings coming from the model file, layer matching in CAD etc, all painful experiences. For those of you familiar with Revit MEP 2011 you know that you cannot define Layer export settings lower than the Category level, which unless you only have one type of duct, pipe or other elements in your project, you are stuck with all of these in one layer in the CAD export. This is far from the plethora of layers and settings that are required by the CAD standards. FYI Revit 2012 addresses these layer issues.

Getting from point A to point B exporting to CAD

One of the reasons to use these new technologies and process and technology is to make things simpler and more efficient. In this case it is making things more complicated, time consuming and wasteful without bringing tangible benefits to the project or stakeholders involved. Until there are clearly defined procedures and processes we are going to face this on our projects. All we need is a little proper planning in the early stages, or a full commitment to BIM.

Have you experienced, or are currently experiencing similar problems?

Charles Blaschke, LEED AP

MEP BIM ManageriTechCharles@itechholding.com

Thoughts on the 2011 Middle East BIM Conference

Written by our MEP BIM Manager, Charles:

Last week I attended the ‘First Annual Conference in Middle East Building Information Modeling (BIM) (Vision, Strategy and Implementation)’ at the CERT Technology Park in Abu Dhabi. The event was under the patronage and presence of His Excellency Sheikh Nahayan Mabarak al Nahayan, theMinister of Higher Education and Scientific Research, United Arab Emirates Chancellor, Higher College of Technology, and organized by the Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE) from Stanford University, Consolidated Contractors Company (CCC), Projacs International, and the Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT).

CIFE (http://cife.stanford.edu/) is one of top resources of leading research and application of BIM related technologies, processes and theories, so to have them and some of their partners here in the UAE to present, discuss and share their knowledge with the local market was great. The cutting-edge concepts they develop at CIFE, and test with their partner members is at the forefront of the industry and can bring huge positive change and impact to the AEC industry when implemented successfully.

It will be some time before these ideas are successfully implemented by the majority of companies at all levels of design, documentation, construction, operation and management. Organizations like CIFE will be strong influences on the way the early adopters and innovators of the technologies in the industry carve out a niche in their market, leverage the skills and technology and really benefit from this before the everyday company, or user of BIM follows suit. This is where I see iTech having the greatest impact on serving the local MENA market. We want to be the link between the academia and high level research that is going on at places like CIFE, Penn State, SOMs Blackbox and integrate that into the practices that are willing to adopt change, so that the companies in the region, and around the world can benefit from these new and innovative technologies.

It was great to hear the wise and visionary words of His Excellency and how he sees the conference, the technology and the people in the industry and how they fit into the larger picture of smart, sustained, efficient and beneficial development in the country that he has devoted his life to here in the UAE.  You can tell that he is very knowledgeable about the aspects of the technology and industry, and he can see the benefit it can and does bring to the UAE and their rapid development. This shows that he truly believes in what we as an industry are doing. His insight gave a new perspective to the bigger picture of what BIM and our work can provide to those outside of our companies and how it affects everybody in the country. His knowledge and involvement is very motivating for a small, local based solutions provider in the UAE like iTech. It is people like him, along with other government officials, property owners, policy makers and private clients that need to understand the benefits of what we are doing and what we can provide to not only them, but to the country and world as a whole through our innovative and new technology and processes.

Overall the conference was great, but I feel like it was missing something. A purpose?  I did not feel a strong sell from the companies presenting, more of an awareness campaign if you will. From CIFE standpoint I see them as the vehicle to spread the word and latest ideas in the BIM world and generally raise awareness, and in this case organizing the event because of their involvement with the partner companies in the region. There was no real transfer of knowledge of their work to the local parties here that attended that could be applied to their practices. For the local partners of the event I could not tell if they were trying to teach the audience what BIM is, show the world what they have developed and used, to generate business and sell services, or to showcase how they have used the technology on local projects. For the outside companies that presented I am assuming they were just here to show the capabilities of BIM and how they have successfully used the technology to their benefit in their home countries on their projects. The presentations were very informative and a lot could be learned from them, but there was no formal knowledge transfer so it just left the crowd with an idea of what could be done, but no starting point on how to do it. If somebody was interested in doing the same things in the region are they supposed to work with the presenting company, figure it out on their own hire a local consultant?

It was the first time in the UAE that I have felt like there was a wealth of knowledge and experience directly related to BIM that I and those around me could benefit from. Most of the time at conferences, expos and meetings you are speaking to people who do not know much about BIM (if anything). A large part of our job for the foreseeable future will be education on the topic, but at this event you knew for the most part the people around you either knew BIM extremely well and you wanted to pick their brain, or were interested in learning more because they understand the basics of the technology and know they can benefit. Call me a nerd, but I get excited when I can have an intelligent conversation with somebody about the technology and its potential, especially applied to the region. So to have two days of meeting and discussing the real benefits of BIM and how we use it was great. As a sponsor we had a small booth setup to speak with people in the region in need of technology consulting and

BIM solutions, so it was good for us to speak with the people here locally that are interested and need guidance.

I feel like the structure of the event should be changed to target specific needs of those coming to present, as well as those attending. It could be broken into two session (one per day), with one day covering a more introductory, ‘What is BIM and how is it used, what are the latest applications’, and the second day could be case studies and examples, ones the relate directly to those in attendance. This way the people who are not familiar with the technology and industry could target a learning session day one, get the base knowledge, and then the second day see how it could directly benefit them through learning about projects in the region, or applicable to them.

I have wanted to organize a BIM event here locally for some time now, and I was too slow acting on my plan and got beat to it. The event was a great foundation to build on in the future, and I do hope CIFE and those involved plan on making it a regular event. For those of us here in the Middle East working in the industry it is hard to stay up-to-date with the latest and greatest ideas and innovations coming from the US where the technology is being used more frequently and the envelope is being pushed. It can create a great synergy that we can feed off of and get direct contact and exposure to those in the US doing the new things, while we are on the ground here creating our own new processes and innovations that we need to deliver the projects of the scale that we have here.

The Psychological BIM Block

I've been thinking a lot lately about many people's reaction to the BIM movement within the AEC industry.  I've found that the word 'BIM' usually evokes one of three very different reactions.

The first reaction is one of extreme enthusiasm and optimism.  We'll call them "The BIM Believers".  This group really sees BIM for its potential and wants to everyone else in the world to become "One with the BIM".  I find a lot of these people border on BIM fanaticism & what it can/will/should do.  This is great but it often doesn't come across to people in the other two groups in a good, or even rationally sane, way.  Not surprisingly, I find I usually fit into this category.

The second reaction is one of extreme pessimism and cynicism.  We'll call them "The Anti-BIMs".  This group of people get really irritated really fast when anyone mentions BIM.  I used to be an Anti-BIM, before I started to understand what all the BIM Believers were rattling on about.  The reason for this response is usually twofold.  First, they hold they "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" mindset.  They've been working in CAD for XX number of years and they've had no problems with it, thank you very much.  Secondly - and they often won't admit it, this group is actually quite scared of BIM.  I know I was.  BIM presents an entirely new way which projects are going to be run - legally, logistically, technically, etc, etc, etc.

The third reaction is one of complete ignorance.  Let's call these the "BIM Huh?" group.  These people have never heard of BIM and have no idea what you're talking about.  End of.

What I'm trying to brainstorm these days is this...  What's the best way to educate and train the 'Anti-BIMs' in a way which would be engaging and effective? How can this be done in an entire organization or project?  We'll leave the 'BIM Huh?'s out of it because I found it to be less of a problem to 'convert' people who haven't had a chance to form a negative opinion yet.  People that are turned off or threatened by an idea will revert back to their CAD comfort zone the moment no one is watching.  Many of us have struggled through organizations or management which aren't committed to jumping into a BIM transition with both feet.  From my experience, having one foot in and one foot out of BIM world for a project is bad news, and requires vigilance, air-tight QAQC controls, and substantially more hands-on management of information.

My father is an organizational psychologist with the US government's mining safety program.  You can probably guess who gave me the idea to start thinking about BIM implementation from an organizational psychology perspective.  He co-wrote this article on on-the-job training, which I think is very relevant.  I'm in the process of reading it now, and I will update with further comments/ideas once I've had a chance to give it a thorough reading.

What experiences have you had with BIM implementation within your organization?  Was it difficult (dumb question)?  What methods, techniques, tips or ideas did you come across which helped the process?

Linking BIM to Field: An Introduction to Artra

This week, my team and I attended an webinar which introduced Artra's BIM-to-Field software suite, arranged by Motion Computing.  At my first meeting with the Motion Computing sales rep, I was very impressed with the tablets and the software options available to the contractor to go paperless with many site-based CM functions.  However, I'm a BIM manager and not part of the contractor's commissioning team, so I was going to need another solution if these were going to be of any use to me and my client.

I was introduced to Artra through a conversation I'd had with my project's MEP BIM manager, who had heard great things from some of his colleagues in the UK (which is where Artra came from).  A little research quickly told me this might be exactly what I was looking for - a light program able to run on a tablet using a BIM-external database system to allow the contractor to input information relevant to the project as it's being built.  The premise is quite straightforward & creates a very logical extension of BIM's application.  After all, BIM is Building Information Modeling, which to me means not just the Revit/Tekla/Bently/Archicad/etc files themselves, but a digital conglomeration of all relevant building data linked in a dynamic environment.  Many people still think 'BIM' is just the authoring software, which is something I really feel is a misconception and have a responsibility to help change.

But anyhow, getting back to the subject at hand, my greatest challenge as a BIM manager is to make sure that the right people (1) are updating this digital conglomeration in the right way (2) at the right time (3) using the right tools (4).  Is Artra the right tool to get my contractor linked into my BIM?  Here are my thoughts...

Artra Pros

1. The Contractor would not require editable access to the native BIM file to input their data.
   
   
   This is huge.  Huge, huge, huge.  The task of ensuring and maintaining data integrity is something that could drive me to drink at times and is one of the most dangerous parts when dealing with BIM.  I have enough of a challenge making sure that my BIM modeling staff, trained and experienced using the various software authoring packages we use, are modeling accurately and then not accidentally messing it up afterwards.  The idea of granting anyone editing access to the native models in the field is just inconceivable, let alone completely impractical.  No tablet - regardless of how awesome - will run Revit in any practical way.  With no guarantee of 3G or wireless access on site, the models would   become frozen in the field.  And imagine trying to train someone up to edit native models?  The other solution could be Navisworks - which is substantially lighter, easily run on the tablets.  But it's not made for this purpose and would be difficult to use practically.  In fact, Artra is Navisworks-driven, meaning that it IS Navisworks (See point 3), framed nicely with custom made tools and a very useful external SQL database. Artra sidesteps all of my data integrity issues and allows me to maintain my current level of confidence in our models.
   
   
2. The software seamlessly transitions from a construction management to facilities management tool.
   
   
   The contractor will actually be creating - with no additional effort, time or cost on their part - the information database the FM team will need to have the BIM be at all useful to them.  One of the many problems in BIM specs I see is that owners have been sold the idea that BIM - along with a bunch of really cool looking screenshots, fly-throughs, and renderings - will solve all of the FM needs.  Owners then buy this from the contractor, but have no actual plan of how the FM will use the BIM their provided.  It's like buying a lightbulb, but having no lamp.  What's the point of buying it if you don't have a tool in mind to actually put it to use?  Effectively, Artra is the 'lamp' and it seems like a bright idea (yes, pun intended).  The FM will have the BIM delivered to them with all O&M documentation, commissioning information, MSDS, original IFC drawings, sketches, RFI's - you name it - at their fingertips in this interface.  And the contractor would have already done this because it's useful for them as well.  Very cool.
   
   
3. Navisworks-Driven BIM link
   
   
   I've really come to like Navisworks, though I had my frustrations with it at first.  It's a great platform to bring together all kinds of BIM in their native authoring formats, which is the best way, in my humble opinion.  It can fall back to the IFC if required, but usually it is not.  Building Artra around Navisworks is a huge plus, in my mind, because you can have a good level of confidence that all of the information in your BIM will find its way to the 'other side' in Artra.  On top of that, there's no new complicated viewing software to struggle with learn.

Artra Cons

1. The Interface
   
   
   This is pretty much the only con I can think of right now.  The Artra data entry and access interface is a bit too techy for the average field guy to ever be comfortable with.   This problem would be compounded exponentially for me, as language barriers and less-than-cutting-edge construction mindsets in the Middle East would make this just... difficult. If I was in the US or Eurozone, I would perhaps suspend my doubt and try to train up some of the more computer-comfortable field staff on this.  But in the Middle East?  Hmmm...
   
   
   
   Snagging and tagging go well together.  No?
   
   
   This could be best solved by actually allowing the field guys to input the required tagging data by doing what they're used to already doing - filling out forms.  Create a report sheets on the tablet identical to the ones they'd need to print out when they got back to the office anyhow, similar to snagging tools already developed for the tablets.  Let them check, tick, write and snag away.  Then, create a little piece of programming which allows a more tech-savvy CM to map the field entries on the digital sheets to the Artra SQL database.  Perfect, yeah?  And I'd create an interface which removes about 90% of the buttons on the screen.  All they'd need is a list of their forms to fill out and the librarian, which allows (again) a more tech-savvy CM to link all digital documentation to the BIM elements for quick reference.  Bingo presto.
   
   
   To give Artra the benefit of the doubt, though, they do seem very keen and able to write programs to allow Artra to interface with other software.  Maybe they could whip something up to do this.

So, thoughts?  Have you used Artra in the field?  How did it go?  Is there any other packages which do this same thing which you would recommend?  I'm all ears.

Statement of Purpose

Well, here I go again starting another blog. This is the first professional blog I have ever attempted, and as I have a clear purpose for doing so, I think this one will work out a bit better than my last attempts at writing one.

The purpose of this blog is to provide a forum to explore everything* that is out there in BIM world. I am the structural BIM department head/de-facto project director at a small (but quickly growing) BIM consulting firm called iTech, headquartered in Abu Dhabi, UAE. I worked as a structural design engineer out of NYC for several years before relocating abroad to the Middle East to find something a bit different and to escape the depressing aftermath of the 2008 recession in the NYC AEC industry.

Joining me will be several of my colleagues, who are BIM managers of their own respective disciplines.  I'll let them introduce themselves once they are up and running here.

I have learned oodles about what's going on in BIM world through my professional experiences. One of the things I've learned is that the learning never stops in a field where the technology is ever changing & some of the brightest minds in the AEC industry, academia, software & computing worlds are quickly developing many tools to improve how we all get things built. In fact, there are so many things going on that I can't wrap my head around them, and I don't know where to start. So, with this blog, I am going to be exploring what I can in terms of what is out there, whether what's out there works, and whether what works is out there. I'm sure I'll slip a few anecdotes along the way (or anecdon'ts, if you will).

By writing about this, I hope to encourage myself to continue in this pursuit of BIM understanding and make myself a more knowledgeable BIM professional. I hope that I can also help a few other people out along the way, and hopefully also have those same people help me out where they can. I'm sure to have a lot of questions.

Cheers!

(*everything = as much as I possibly can)