In most architectural projects, budgets far exceed
projections. The eastern span of the San Francisco Bay Bridge notoriously cost
$5 billion more than projected and a new transit hub near the World Trade
Center in New York is similarly billions over budget. Those are just two
high-profile scenarios. While the sources of cost overruns vary from project to
project, technology can help alleviate some of the causes. In the case of the
recently completed Collaborative Life Sciences Building (CLSB) in Portland,
Oregon, Building Information Modeling (BIM) software and digital collaboration
tools saved an astounding $10 million in construction costs on the overall $295
million budget. The deft use of these programs helped the design nab an
honorable mention in the AIA TAP (Technology in Architectural Practice)
Innovation Awards.
The 650,000-square-foot CLSB is a joint project of the
Oregon Health & Science University, Oregon State University, and Portland
State University. The three institutions banded together to house their life
sciences programs under one roof to give students and researchers more
opportunities for collaboration. Located on OHSU’s new Schnitzer Campus, in
Portland’s South Waterfront District, the building consists of classrooms,
lecture halls, research laboratories, retail, and parking. CO Architects served
as the project's design architect and SERA served as executive architects.
"Think of BIM as computer-aided design on
steroids."
"There are many things that can cause a project to
go over budget, from a misalignment of the brief and design aspirations with
the available budget, to unforeseen site conditions," Alene Davis, an
associate principal at SERA Architects, says in an interview. "From a
software standpoint, complex geometric designs can be budget-risky if there is
not a simple way to communicate the required geometries to the subcontractors
that will be building them. BIM helps out tremendously in this respect."
BIM In A Nutshell
BIM software helps architects not only design and build
in three dimensions, but to also have a 3-D model with layers of information
about the individual elements that compose a structure and how they work
together in a system. Think of it as computer-aided design (CAD) on steroids.
For example, if the architects, engineers, or builders need to change an
element of the design, they can see the ripple effects instantly—how it would
impact overall cost, if something else in the design needs to change as a
result, and how this would affect overall building performance and construction
time. Additionally, all of this information is saved so that at any time during
the lifecycle of the building, someone can go in and identify what components
were used. If something breaks, the manufacturer, model number, and other
details are saved so there's no guesswork done in replacing it.
These programs have been around for decades, but now
they're more sophisticated and used more widely. Davis likens the rise in BIM
to the shift from hand drawings to CAD. Most large-scale architectural projects
involve some combination of BIM modeling and CAD, but both the design and
construction teams and all subcontractors for the CLSB used an all-BIM
process—a rarity. "While architects are early adopters of 3-D technology,
to demand that all of our contributing consultants use it, and for the
contractor to demand that all of their subcontractors use it is rare,"
Davis says, noting that her firm has been using BIM since 2006. "CLSB is
one of the few projects that has done that."
How To Save $10
Million
The CLSB involved 28 different design teams, which is
typical for a project of this scale. This included everything from civil
engineers, landscape architects, roofing consultants, building code
specialists, signage design—the list goes on. To make communication more
efficient, SERA Architects and JE Dunn Construction used an all-digital
documentation process. The firms credit this move alone for saving $10 million.
The nitty gritty of the cost savings boils down to how
3-D modeling with programs like Revit by AutoCAD, and Naviswork by Autodesk,
helped the different entities communicate better through the process. For
example, if the architecture firm designed a certain feature in 3-D, that file
could then be transferred to the structural engineer and then to the
fabricator. "This makes for higher-quality documents and reduces conflicts
during construction," Davis says.
For instance, BIM helped resolve potential construction
conflicts involving positioning of plumbing, electrical, and ventilation
systems. A separate team is responsible for designing each network. In the 3-D
model, the teams discovered that a pipe intersected with a vent [Editor's note:
see slide seven above]. That's something the clash-detection feature of the model
identified before construction began—when changes were relatively easy. The
plumbing folks were then able to design the pipe to wrap around the vent.
Problem solved.
The modification was then reflected in real time to every
design team involved. Instead of the plumbing design team posting their changed
document, and each of the 27 other teams needing to do the same to their own
copies of the plumbing layouts, everything updated simultaneously. That's just
one of many scenarios that technology mitigated.
Additionally, the design teams used Bluebeam—a
collaborative editing and file-sharing platform—to link all of the construction
documents so that one firm's changes would automatically be reflected in
everyone else's documents. Smartsheet, a cloud-based spreadsheet solution, also
helped the teams keep track of documents, allowed multiple users simultaneous
access and editing, and prevented version-control problems. Posting and drawing
documents manually, like construction drawings and requests for information, is
a laborious undertaking. JE Dunn estimated that it would have taken 127,000
hours to do. At a billable rate of $79 per hour, that's $10,058,017. In
paper-related costs alone.
Moreover, JE Dunn says that an individual subcontractor
who used Point Layout software, an Autodesk program, and Robotic Total Station,
an automated tool by Trimble, to layout and install 55,000 hangers for the
mechanical, engineering, and plumbing systems saved $1 million since the
company didn't have to to drill from a lift, insert the hangers, and then have
them individually inspected.
"The use of an all-digital [design and
documentation] process sped up both coordination and construction," Davis
says. "It's hard to determine just how much time would have been added to
the project if these processes hadn't been as streamlined, but it's safe to say
we saved many months."
Lesson learned: The machines have won.
Source: Fast
Company
No comments:
Post a Comment