An official publication of the National BIM Standard (NBIMS) and the NationalInstitute of Building Sciences (NIBS)
Journal of Building Information ModelingJBIMFall 2007
PRSRT STDU.S. Postage
PAIDPembina, NDPermit No. 14
Your Parents’ WayNot
of Doing Business
Approaches to Transforming the Construction Industry
Approaches to Transforming the Construction Industry
PROBLEMAlong with the keys, facility managers
typically receive many “bankers’ boxes”full of information about their facilities atconstruction handover. This information isprovided in paper documents that de-scribe equipment warranties, replacementparts lists, building system operating in-structions, maintenance job plans, andfixed asset lists. Today those who use theinformation provided must, at best, pay tohave the data keyed into the relevant datasystems. At worst, facility maintenancecontractors are paid to survey the existingbuilding to capture as-built conditions. Inthese cases, owners pay twice—once forthe construction contractor to completethe documents at the end of constructionand again for the maintenance contractorsurvey.
There are several problems with thecurrent procedure for construction han-dover documents. First, construction con-tractors are required, at the end of a job,to recreate and collate information thathas been created by others. Since theconstruction contractor is not the authorof the majority of the information provid-ed, requiring the contractor to recreatethe information introduces errors. Sec-ond, waiting until the end of the construc-tion contract to receive the informationoften results in less than satisfactory deliv-erables, many of which are available earli-er in the project, but are not captured.
Next, the format of the information ex-change is inadequate to allow others to ef-fectively use the information provided.Paper-based documents are often lost,cannot be easily updated and take up alarge amount of space. Finally, the infor-mation provided is often insufficient to en-sure that replaced equipment can bespecified to ensure compliance with de-sign intent.
BACKGROUNDIn the1990s, the National Institute of
Building Sciences, Facility Maintenanceand Operations Committee startedwork to def ine a standard throughwhich construction handover docu-ments could be captured electronicallybased upon concepts developed withinthe Federal Facilities Council [Brodt1993]. The data structure followed theformat defined in the Unified FacilityGuide Specifications, Operations andMaintenance Support In format ion(OMSI) [UFGS 2006].
The typical submittal process requiresthe construction contractor to provide allcut sheets, shop drawings, etc...as part ofthe quality control contract requirements.Later the contractor provides the installa-tion information that accompanies in-stalled equipment. Finally systems infor-mation is created by the contractor toprovide instructions to facility mainte-nance personnel. The contractor mustprovide a complete set of all this informa-tion as part of handover documents.
In the OMSI approach, images ofcontract documents already required instandard federal specifications werecompiled and indexed, first in hardcopyvolumes and later in Portable DocumentFormat (PDF) files. While having all theinformation electronically available in asingle location proved helpful, seriousproblems existed with this method ofdelivery. First, scanning existing papercontract documents submitted duringthe course of public construction is ex-pensive. Commercial contractors pro-viding OMSI creation services typicallycharge $40K per capital project. OMSIhandover documents typically result in asingle compact disk with all constructionhandover data. The cost of OMSI data isan additional cost incurred by the ownerto reformat data that already is providedby the construction contractor. Failureof facility management organizations to
28 Journal of Building Information Modeling
BIM for Construction HandoverBy E. William East, PE, Ph.D., Engineering Research and Development Center, AND William Brodt, NASA
Feature
Figure 1 - AEX project entities.
“Failure of facility
management
organizations to create
standardized, centralized
data repositories
typically results in
information being stored
on multiple servers with
incomplete access. In the
worst case, the data
remains in the desk
drawer of the individual
who ultimately received
the disk.”
create standardized, centralized datarepositories typically results in informationbeing stored on multiple servers with in-complete access. In the worst case, thedata remains in the desk drawer of the in-dividual who ultimately received the disk.
While the author’s experience hasbeen associated with large public sectorcontracts, private owners are certain tohave similar problems. An example pro-vided to the authors in November 2006confirms that private sector projects arenot currently capturing information duringthe process of construction but are alsoconducting post-construction surveys.The cost of these surveys, according to in-terviews conducted by the authors, incommercial build-operate configuration isan internal, unburdened cost of $25K. Forsmall projects, it is no wonder that morethan one contractor has left the job, andforfeited retainage, rather than completethe as-built survey.
In interviews with public agencies asrecently as March 2007 the first authorconfirmed that at least one public build-ing owner paid three times for con-struction handover information. First,the information is included in the costof completing the design and construc-tion of the project. Second, the infor-mation is re-collected at the end of theconstruction phase and provided inpaper boxes along with the keys to thenew facility. Since the information in thepaper boxes cannot be directly loadedinto maintenance management soft-ware, the agency pays for the opera-tions contractor to survey the buildingagain to identify existing equipment lo-cations, serial numbers, etc... at thestart of their operations contract. Thefailure of existing handover require-ments cannot be more clearly seen thanin the case where the construction con-tractor provided information is, essen-tially, discarded twice.
While the focus of the informationexchanges identified above has been re-lated to the data required by those re-sponsible to maintain facilities, addition-al problems have been encounteredrelated to the lack of operational andasset management information.
Replacement of specific equipmentis made more difficult when the prod-uct data is not readily available to public
works department or building manager.Rather than retrieving the electronic in-formation and starting a procurementactivity, the manager must track downthe information on the existing equip-ment to determine what needs to bepurchased. A minimum of one site visitto capture nameplate data, and severalhours on the phone is required for eachpiece of equipment that does not haveits own electronic description.
Replacement or repair of equipmentthat is no longer manufactured is a muchmore difficult task. Even if the original
equipment information was provided,without the design loads associated withthe equipment, the building managerdoesn’t know how close the installedequipment matched the design require-ments. Failure to consider the requireddesign loads will result in safety problems,shortened product life, or higher than re-quired cost of replacement part.
PATHS FORWARDIn 2000 the Facility Maintenance and
Operations Committee (FMOC), Na-tional Institute of Building Sciences
Fall 2007 29
30 Journal of Building Information Modeling
(NIBS) was awarded a grant from theNational Performance Review (a com-ponent of Vice President Al Gore’sReinvention of Government effort) andcommissioned a study to investigate theability of the OMSI data to be struc-tured to provide critical informationfrom within the OMSI files as separatedata elements. This effort created aneXtensible Markup Language (XML)schema that would organize thePortable Document Format (PDF) filesmerged into an OSMI data file [FFC2000]. The project was successful indemonstrating that product manufac-turers data could be directly providedto owners Computerized MaintenanceManagement Systems (CMMS) and thatsoftware companies could use the
Figure 2 - IFC -mBomb project.
Fall 2007 31
schema to extract relevant data fromtest files. The main difficultly with im-plementing this work was that the iden-t i f icat ion the information exchangepaths between owner and manufacturerwere not fully identified. The schemawas incorporated into the InternationalAlliance for Interoperability ’s IndustryFoundation Class model [IAI 2003].
Concurrent with the FMOC project,the National Institute of Science andTechnology (NIST) and FIATECH weredeveloping a data exchange format tosupport the life-cycle information needsfor industrial equipment construction.The Automating Equipment informationeXchange (AEX) project evaluated theshared information requirements to de-sign, procure, and install centrifugalpumps [Turton 2006]. FFiigguurree 11 identi-fies the entities created for the AEXproject [Teague 2004]. One of the bestresults of this project, from the point ofview of operability, was that only a verylimited subset of each individual stake-holder’s information needed to be ex-changed among all parties in the con-text of heavy industrial construction.
In 2002 an international project,named “IFC-mBomb,” demonstrated oneapproach to capturing data during designand construction, then handing over thedata to facility operators. The frameworkfor the project, completed in June 2004, isshown in FFiigguurree 22.
Within the last several years U.S.Army, Department of Public Works(DPW), Fort Lewis, WA began to consid-er the use of spreadsheets to capture aminimum subset of critical informationneeded by the DPW between the accept-ance of a project at beneficial occupancyand the full financial handover. By havingthe contractor fill in required spreadsheetfields, the DPW had planned to captureequipment lists and preventative mainte-nance activities that were required beforebeneficial occupancy.
Regardless of the approach taken,these groups searched for a no-cost, sus-tainable approach that would ultimatelycreate a single set of data that could be di-rectly loaded into Computerized Mainte-nance Management Systems (CMMS),Computer Aided Facility Management(CAFM), and Resource/Asset Manage-ment Systems (RAMS).
Figure 3 - COBIE data capture.
32 Journal of Building Information Modeling
THE COBIE PROJECTWith the completion of the Interna-
tional Alliance for Interoperability, Indus-try Foundation Class (IFC) model (version2x3), the stage was set for the develop-ment of exchange standards based on in-ternational standards. In 2005, the FacilityInformation Council of the National Insti-tute of Building Sciences (NIBS) formedthe National Building Information ModelStandard (NBIMS) effort [NBIMS 2006].One of the objectives of this group was tospeed the adoption of an open-standardBIM, through the definition of information
exchange standards based upon the IFCmodel.
Given the work that precededNBIMS related to facility operations andmaintenance, a project was startedunder NBIMS to support the handoff ofprojects between builders and opera-tors. The Construct ion Operat ionsBuilding Information Exchange (COBIE)project was initiated in December 2006.The objective of this project is to identi-fy the information exchange needs of fa-cility maintainers, operators, and assetmanagers of data available upstream in
the facility life-cycle (for example, duringdesign and construction).
The COBIE project acknowledges thepractical constraint that much of today’sinformation content is locked within doc-uments or images of paper documents.An example of the type of informationcurrently locked in e-paper documentsthat are of critical importance to facilitymaintenance personnel are replacementparts list. If the data was available in an in-teroperable format, Information Technol-ogy (IT) integration efforts would allowthe maintenance worker to directly order
Fall 2007 33
parts during the triage of malfunctioningequipment. COBIE is designed to allowthe current e-paper documents to betransmitted, but when manufacturer pro-vided data is available, COBIE may also di-rectly accept that information.
Several critical individual data elementswere, however, identified by facility main-tainers, operators, based and asset man-agers. The COBIE team concluded thatthe minimum critical set of data neededby O&M staff is the location, warranty du-ration, and parts suppliers for installedequipment. For asset managers theCOBIE team indicated that area measure-ment and property replacement valueswere of critical concern. Other informa-tion needed may, for the time being, becaptured through the association of docu-ments to specific BIM entities.
The COBIE Pilot implementation stan-dard was published as Appendix B of theNational Building Information Model Stan-dard [NBIMS 2007]. The underlying IFCmodel description of the COBIE Pilotstandard was also published for interna-tional evaluation [IDM 2007].
COBIE EARLY ADOPTERSWhile the COBIE format has not been
fully evaluated by all members of the de-sign, construction, operations, mainte-nance, and asset management communi-ties, some organizations are taking thesteps to implement the current pilot stan-dard. For example, several federal agen-cies have, or are in the process of, includ-ing COBIE requirements in theircontracts: the General Services Adminis-tration, Corps of Engineers, Departmentof State, and National Aeronautics andSpace Administration. The need forCOBIE data is so critical that the U.S.Army is working to adopt COBIE as therequired import mechanism to translateasset data and maintenance managementrequirements into their financial system.
Of critical concern to this project, andother NBIMS development projects, is thatthe information required for the exchangeis already captured, or can easily be cap-tured, within the context of existing IT andcontract practice. While a future practiceof shared BIM’s for all project teams is acommendable goal, near-term projects
must be executed within the context of ex-isting contract documents that include op-tions for COBIE data. The capture ofCOBIE data currently takes place at theconclusion of construction. The clearest im-plementation of COBIE is to simply replacethe requirement to provide banker’s boxeswith the COBIE data disk. Of course, this isnot very efficient given that the majority ofthe data required at building handover iscreated by designers or manufacturers.
Some project teams and owners areconsidering the adoption of IT that wouldallow the capture of COBIE data duringthe design and construction life cycle. De-sign-build firms may use BIM software andcapture COBIE data as the project pro-gresses from inception to completion.Owners may require the submission ofpartial COBIE data sets based on the tim-ing of when the data is created as shownin FFiigguurree 33. Designers load COBIE datasets with room function and layout,named equipment and specifications re-quirements. During construction, manu-facturers’ data captured from the contrac-tors’ procurement processes is captured
34 Journal of Building Information Modeling
along with as-built changes to building lay-out and equipment position. Capturingthe data as it is created will increase theaccuracy of the “data commissioning”process and reduce contractor’s costsince design and manufacturer data will nolonger have to be transcribed during post-construction surveys.
Today there are two NIBS-sponsoredefforts underway to support COBIE. Thefirst is the post-project creation of aCOBIE data set for a completed project.The objective of this project is twofold:(1) to provide an example of a COBIE
data set and (2) to create a COBIE guidebook to assist contractors to completethe COBIE spreadsheet. The objective ofthe second project is to (1) provide anIFC to COBIE spreadsheet translatorusing the IFC 2x3 coordination view as thebaseline, (2) provide two sample COBIEspreadsheets, and (3) provide tools thatwould allow the comparison of incremen-tal submissions of COBIE data. At this timethere are three firms who can assist in thecreation of COBIE data for specific proj-ects Burns&McDonnell, Peripheral Sys-tems Inc., and AEC3. TMA Systems a
CMMS vendor has also been working to-ward importing COBIE data sets.
BROADER SIGNIFICANCEThere has been much “philosophical”
discussion of open-standard BIM and itsimpact in the NBIMS Version 1.0, Part 1,the FIC-BIM list server, and general publicand trade publications. From the authors’point of view, these discussions havebegun to whet the appetite of users whoneed open-standards based BIM informa-tion exchanges. The inclusion of theCOBIE Pilot standard in the multipleagencies’ federal government constructioncontracts is the first result that begins topractically address the life-cycle informa-tion exchange needs of our capital facili-ties industry. As the construction of theseprojects near completion a follow-onpaper will document the results of theseefforts.
The potential for capture and trans-mission of COBIE data through design andconstruction, with the inclusion of infor-mation provided by product manufactur-ers provides a compelling business casefor the adoption of life-cycle BIM thatgoes beyond the discussion of 3-DCADD.
The development of COBIE demon-strates the benefits that can be achievedusing a requirements-driven approach.Through a requirements-drive approachdifferent groups of constituents that existnaturally in our industry today are able totheir information needs. These needs areconsistently translated into the IFC modelthrough NBIMS and IAI with appropriateimplementation standards that facilitatethe capture and transmission of the data.By the consistent definition of each ofthese groups the answer to the question“What is a BIM?” can be answered at thelevel of specificity that allows open-stan-dard interoperability.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTThe authors would like to thank the
National Institute of Building Sciences forits support of the National Building Infor-mation Model Standard activities. Some ofthe organizations making a direct signifi-cant contribution to the COBIE project in-clude (in alphabetical order): AEC3, Burns& McDonnell, National Aeronautics andSpace Administration; Peripheral Systems
Fall 2007 35
Want an eye-catchingmagazine likethis one?
Call (866) 999-1299 for more information.
Inc., National Institute of Science andTechnology, TMA Systems, Engineer Re-search and Development Center, and theU.S. Department of State, OverseasBuildings Operations. ■
E. William East, PE, Ph.D., is a ResearchCivil Engineer for the Engineering Researchand Development Center. William Brodt isan Experimental Facilities Engineer, Facili-ties Engineering and Real Property Divisionat NASA.
REFERENCES[Brodt 1993] Brodt, William and Fardig,
Paul, “Electronic Maintenance Data InputStandards - Level One”, in “Developing Data-Input Standards for Computerized Mainte-nance Management Systems,” Federal Con-struction Council Consulting Committee onComputer Applications, National AcademyPress, Washington, DC, 1993
[FFC 2000] Linking the Construction In-dustry: Electronic Operations and Mainte-nance Manuals - Workshop Summary, Feder-al Facilities Council Technical Report #140,National Academy Press, Washington, DC,2000
[IAI 2003] International Alliance for Inter-operability, “IFC Model: 2x3,”
http://www.iai-international.org/Model/R2x3_final/index.htm
[IDM 2007] Information Delivery Manual,http://www.iai.no/idm/index.html
[NBIMS 2006] National Building Informa-tion Model Standard, http://www.facilityinfor-mationcouncil.org/bim/
[IFC 2002] IFC Model Based Operationand Maintenance of Buildings (IFC-mBomb)http://cig.bre.co.uk/iai_uk/iai_projects/ifc-mbomb/
[NBIMS 2007] National Building Informa-tion Model Standard, Version 1, Part 1.http://www.facilityinformationcouncil.org/bim/pdfs/NBIMSv1_ConsolidatedAppendixRefer-ences_11Mar07_1.pdf
[Teague 2004] Teagure, Tom “cfiXMLSchema Architecture,” FIATECH AEX Pro-ject, June 2004, presentation.
[Turton 2006] Turton, Mary, Palmer, Mark“Summary of AEX Schema update and Sup-porting Rationale,” National Institutes of Stan-dards and Technologies, Public Release 2.0
[UFGS 2006] Unified Facility Guide Speci-fications, “Submittal Procedures,” UFGS 0133 00 Submittal Procedures, October 2006.(formerly NAVFAC 01781)
