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.