1. CAD and Models If 4-D is good then, 5-D must be better
Construction Superconference San Francisco, CA December 2005

2. Agenda Traditional Drafting and Design Two Dimensional CAD
Modeling and Three Dimensional CAD
Visualization Models
Four Dimensional CAD (Time)
Five Dimensional CAD (Resources)
New Issues Resulting from 3D+ Tools
Resulting Contract Issues

3. New Issues Contract issues/roles and responsibilities
Owner, Designer & Constructor Perspectives
Means and Methods
Bid Packages and Schedules/Resources
Safety
Coordination
Shop Drawing Integration
Progress Input
Record Drawings

4. Drafting and Design What’s an “ortho(graphic)”?
aka “floor plan”; “layout”
End presentation over to Mitch on electronic data problems

5. Drafting and Design What’s a P&ID?
Process & Instrumentation Drawing (Diagram)
End presentation over to Mitch on electronic data problems

6. Drafting and Design What’s an “iso(metric)”? “spool” drawing.
End presentation over to Mitch on electronic data problems

7. 3D CAD – Project Benefits
Design
Multi-discipline design environment
Consistency of design data
Automatic deliverable production
Construction
Clash detection during design
Visualisation
Construction status
Operations and maintenance
Effective data handover
Online visualisation
Maintain design integrity

8. 3D, 4D, nD 3D facilitates Adding the 4th ‘D’ - time offers
Communication,
Collaboration,
Development of reusable data;
Faster decision making for every stakeholder
Adding the 4th ‘D’ - time offers
build-ability checking,
workflow planning,
creates process change
Planner talking to Designer
Adding costs, risk, etc (5+D?) brings in more stakeholders, more ‘points of view’ but lessens the chance for future conflicts.
Single building model

9. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
Building Information Modeling (“BIM”) technology promotes efficiency and schedule compression
Enables integrated planning, design, detailing, cost control
Eliminates inaccurate as-built documentation and inconsistent design quality
Ensure better communication, design delivery and coordination
Improves cost predictability
Shift in project delivery by eroding distinctions between planning, design, and construction.
Post-construction efficiencies (maintenance)

10. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
Considered the founder of the biotechnology industry, Genentech has been delivering on the promise of biotechnology for almost 30 years, using human genetic information to discover, develop, commercialize and manufacture biotherapeutics that address significant unmet medical needs. Today, Genentech is among the world's leading biotech companies, with multiple products on the market for serious or life-threatening medical conditions and over 30 projects in the pipeline.

11. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
Genentech’s ~$600MM plant expansion incorporated 3D modeling of primarily two buildings:
390,000 SF manufacturing facility (3 floors and a fourth floor pop-up)
110,000 SF support building
220,000 feet of piping (~60% utility/dirty, 40% process/clean)
155,000 feet modeled, 50,000 feet field routed (small diameter), 15,000 feet in pre-built modules
Hundreds of pieces of major equipment (modules, skids, tanks, pumps, etc.)

12. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
Project also includes
48,000 SF Warehouse expansion
3,000 SF Utility Plant expansion
Utility Yard expansion
Many equipment/module vendors providing 3D models for input into project model

15. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
GNE is using model as construction tool (3D only, not as scheduling tool)
Model is not updated for changes post-isometric issue
Owner concerns:
Level of detail in model may necessitate “manual” changes to isometrics generated from model
Not all equipment/module vendors use same 3D package; results are semi-compatible – no assembly details are available in model

18. Benefits from Owner’s Perspective
3D modeling is now standard on large projects and is a “proven” technology
Genentech would like to see results of a 4D or 5D pilot prior to implementation on upcoming projects

19. Potential Pitfalls Owner Acceleration
Deficiencies in Current Standard Contracts
Delay Claims
New Default/Termination Issues
Insurability

20. Owner Views Construction Users Round Table (CURT)
Owner-led collaborative project teams
Integrated project structure
Open, timely, and reliable information sharing
Requirement for use of BIM
Source: CURT WP 1202 – “Collaboration, Integrated Information, and the Project Lifecycle in Building Design, Construction and Operation” (August, 2004)

21. CURT’s VISION Owners fully engaged in the virtual design process
Owners empowered to make informed decisions early
Virtual design, fabrication, and construction become the standard approach for building.
Information flows quickly, effectively and freely amongst project participants
Project participants share a stake in the outcome and shares in the resulting rewards
Digital information flows throughout the life of project
Building infrastructure systems designed concurrently with architecture

22. Architect’s View AIA Response to CURT
Need for full information sharing among design professionals and contractors
Identify tools to facilitate transfer between disciplines
Contracts need to redefine roles and responsibilities of owner, design disciplines and contractors
Novel concept of complete and early integration to work impacts Design Professionals’ responsibilities
Traditional contracts necessarily create compartmentalization
Need for contractually specified “Integrated Project Delivery Team” with defined roles

23. Architect’s View AIA Response to CURT (cont’d)
Risk Management
Insurability of risks attenuated with new delivery models
Owner’s acceptance of greater risk of integrated project’s design
Owner’s sharing of rewards of a project more broadly among contributors.
Interoperability
Current tools do not provide complete translations of the useful data
Information lost in the exchange from one BIM program to another
No one application can handle all tasks required by a building project

24. Issues in Implementation
Intra-team Platform Compatibility
Platforms imposed by…
Owner
Designer
Builder
‘Standards’ imposed by…
‘Platform’ Limitations – Software\Hardware
Insulation, clearances, tolerances, ancillary services
Speed, ‘viewer’ v. ‘interactive’ v. ‘collaborative’ tools
Operating systems (WINTEL, Unix, Linux, Open Source)

25. Issues in Implementation If the approach is directed by the…
Owner
Possible software, support and training investment ($$$)
Possible interoperability issues with designers or builders (flexibility)
On-going maintenance, upgrade and training (‘legacy’ issues)
Designer\Builder
Different ‘drivers’ than Owner (short view : long view)
Possible interoperability issues
Database management approach

26. Implementation Is there some standard?
Why develop standards? Don’t these already exist?
Organization specific – quality and efficiency
Project specific – communication and consistency
Industry specific – common language
What’s in a CAD Standard?
As little or as much information as necessary to make CAD work more productive!
Manipulating, editing and transferring drawings
Layers or levels
Symbols (Legend)
Special customization
Data Exchange Format
File and Project Organization

27. Industry Efforts at Standardization The National CAD Standard
The National CAD Standard Version 3.1: comprised of…
CAD Layer Guidelines by the American Institute of Architects (AIA)
Uniform Drawing System by the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI)
Tri-Service Plotting Guidelines by the US Department of Defense
Drawing Set Organization: Module 01 Sheet Organization: Module 02
Schedules: Module 03 Drafting Conventions: Module 04
Terms & Abbreviations: Module 05 Symbols: Module 06
Notations: UDS Module 07 Code Conventions: Module 08
Identifies types of general regulatory information that should appear on drawings, locates code-related information in a set of drawings, and provides standard graphic conventions. Can be a tool to expedite code review by designers and plan review authorities.

28. So who’s on board with this?
Adopted the National CAD Standard
A. Epstein & Sons International, Inc.
AMEC, Inc.
AMES A/E Architects & Engineers
Architects Hawaii Ltd.
Bhargava International, Inc.
Burgess & Niple
CBA Architects, PC
CH2M Hill, Inc.
Chicago Transit Authority
Clark Nexsen
Davis & Floyd, Inc.
Dean and Dean/Associates
Dietz & Company Architects, Inc.
Duke Energy Corporation
FedEx
Ford Motor Company
General Motors
HDR (Hennington, Durham & Richardson)
Helman Hurley Charvat Peacock/Architects, Inc.
HOK (Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum)
Intel
Jacobs Engineering Group
LEO A. DALY Company
Little and Associates Architects
Los Alamos National Laboratories
MTA Bridges and Tunnels
Murphy/Jahn Architects
Nextel Communications
National Institute of Health
Raytheon Engineers and Constructors, Inc.
Richard Meier and Partners
RTKL Associates
Sandia National Laboratories
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
Simon Property Group
Syska Hennessy Group, Inc.
TSP, Inc.
University at Buffalo
University of Indiana
UPS
U.S. General Services Administration
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilson & Company, Inc., Engineers & Architects

29. GSA Requirements – 2006
PBS Buildings and Real Estate Services: specialized information technologies to design, document, manage and monitor facilities.
Building Information Modeling (BIM)
3D parametric modeling software with an underlying database.
Computer Integrated Facility Management (CIFM)
Integrated technology and processes supporting facility management and real estate services.
Computer Aided Facility Management (CAFM)
calculation of building area and tracking of space classifications.
Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS)
Manages scheduled and on-request building maintenance.
Electronic Document Management System (EDMS)
manages the documents associated with facility design and management.
Geographic Information System (GIS)
Source: GSA Public Building Service CAD Standards (March 25, 2004);

30. GSA Requirements – 2006 Time is now Mandate: GSA pilot projects
GSA BIM requirement effective fiscal year 2006 (which began in October 2005)
Mandate:
Architects use IFC (Industry Foundation Classes)-based building models through final concept
All schematic design submittals must be in BIM format
GSA pilot projects
9 pilot projects through 2005
Indicated that discrete problems can be solved quickly in 3D
BIM automates space measurement
Not requiring complete BIM implementation
Using model to check designs against program requirements and cost estimates
Source: GSA Public Building Service CAD Standards (March 25, 2004);

31. Standard Contract Clauses - Caveat Emptor
Standardized forms protective of Owner and Engineer
Data/Electronic information historically originates with Design Professional
Risk of use is borne on the contractor unless otherwise specified
Example – Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee provision:
“A. Copies of data furnished by Owner or Engineer to Contractor or Contractor to Owner or Engineer that may be relied upon are limited to the printed copies (also known as hard copies). Files in electronic media format of text, data, graphics, or other types are furnished only for the convenience of the receiving party. Any conclusion or information obtained or derived from such electronic files will be at the user’s sole risk. If there is a discrepancy between the electronic files and the hard copies, the hard copies govern. ”
Source: EJCDC C-700 Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract, 2002 Edition, Subparagraph 3.06 – Electronic Data

32. New Contract Requirements
Express “Data Exchange” Addendum to general contract
Clear definitions of ownership, management and security responsibilities of the information transfer
Responsibilities for software & system compliance
Promote, not impede collaboration
One party tapped to manage the exchange process, responsible solely to coordinate notifications
Define specific documents to be accepted electronically (drawings, models, shop drawings, change orders, RFIs, etc.)
Methods of maintaining version control and a depository of all versions, during and after project
Reciprocal indemnity obligations for failures and violations
Determination of insurance and bonding requirements

33. The model in the context of the project
As a part of the contract…
The model becomes a deliverable with a due date and a ‘completion’ date.
Model’s ‘construction’ must meet the Standard of Care ‘normally practiced’ within the profession – perfection is not expected.
As a source point for other drawings, the model’s quality ripple’s through other documents.
When used in asset management, the impact of an error reaches further and lives beyond a single project.
End presentation over to Mitch on electronic data problems

34. Industry Acceptance and Application of Technology
Industrial, Process and Infrastructure Projects with…
Complex systems and components;
Multiple participants;
specialized, critical and sometimes hazardous uses
have fostered the growth of 3D+ CAD applications.
The cost of failure can be tremendous and potentially dangerous.
Commercial, Residential and Retail Projects…
Greater pressure on ‘cost of delivery’ and its impact on ROI;
less complex systems;
more ‘standardized’ construction and components.
The value of the job is in the cost of the job and ‘typical’ built components make for easier execution.

35. Working in the Third Dimension
Time is Money – Money is Time
The NIST report (USA) of August 2004 gave a figure of $15.8 Billion wasted by US construction industry through poor collaboration and coordination on project.

36. Impact on Traditional Roles
CMs and Contractors Migrate into Designing
Opportunity to offer “constructability” services (CDs) to owners and designers
Design Professionals used as “design intent” consultants during the constructability phase
Narrows role of designer to aesthetic and programming piece
Increased CM Responsibilities
Contracted by Owners to collect information from all consultants & designers
Construct Owner’s BIM to minimizing errors and omissions in the field
Minimizing impact on traditional design firms who can submit 2D drawings as they always have
Or Design Professionals Take control
assume responsibility for being building information managers
leveraging BIM as a way of consolidating the information into a comprehensive database
Deliver database to Owner after project for building operation and maintenance

37. Cultural Changes for Widespread Implementation
Collaborative design process is novel
Change in the traditional notion that control of design is in the hands of the design professional
Information provided by design professionals was traditionally limited to design intent only
BIM adds new electronic construction data provided by design professionals in their models
New information involves architects in means & methods, quantities and construction execution
Blurs traditional lines of responsibility

38. Consistency of Design Data
Data exchange with other systems
IP&ID data transfer to 3D CAD model
Pipe stress analysis
Material management system
Sub contractor interfaces
Specification and parametric driven design
Enforces standards & methodology
Utilizes standard specs and catalogues

39. Automatic deliverable production
Orthographics (Plans & Sections)
Isometric and Field Fabrication drawings
Equipment Arrangements (Layouts)
Bill of Materials (Material Take-Off’s)
Reports
(Clash Check, Line Lists, I/O, Valves, Devices, etc)

40. Operations and Maintenance
More effective data transfer
(turnover packages)
Interface to operation systems
Electronic Data Management Systems - EDMS
ERPs (SAP, Oracle), ‘Smart’ Drawings (PDS database, INTools)/EDMS
Ongoing modifications
See CA/IFM, CMMS, EAM
On-line visualization
Communicate Design Intent
Maintain design integrity – consistency of approach thru life of the project.

41. New Issues on the horizon… Things grow curioser and curioser
Performance-based Delivery
Modular construction
Superskids
New ‘ownership’ models
Lease? Rent? Outsource?
Sustainable Design (Green Buildings)
LEED (USGBC); BREEAM (UK)
Could it lead to DBOT/DBOM at the commercial scale?
‘brownfield’ development
Carbon Trading
ISO 14000
Integrated Delivery Process

42. Code Anxiety
ENR, July 18th – Mysteries of Building Codes; “Designers fear future collapse from misinterpretation or miscalculation”
ENR, July 11th – “Maturing Visualization Tools Make Ideas Look Real”

43. Thanks for Coming! Our Speakers: Gary A. Wilson, Esquire
John W. Dornberger, Esquire
E. Mitchell Swann, P.E.
Robert C. McCue, P.E.
Kim Bullock
Slides available for download at

44. Contact Us! MDCSystems® Robert C. McCue, P.E.
E. Mitchell Swann, P.E., LEED AP
300 Berwyn Park, Suite 115
Berwyn PA 19312 T

45. Contact Us! Post & Schell PC Gary Wilson, Esquire
John Dornberger, Esquire Four Penn Center
1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19103 T

46. Contact Us! Genentech, Inc. Kim Bullock Process Engineer 1 DNA Way
South San Francisco, CA 94080 T