How Much Does Your Building Weigh?

This paper proposes the transformational steps required to improve the end-to-end performance of the AEC sector. We address the problems presented by the growth of digital technology, focusing on the lack of interoperability and data bottlenecks (resulting in the loss of fidelity and over-contingency). We will first illustrate the issues faced by the industry and its application of technology, before providing cogent examples of how these can be addressed and resolved.

‍

This paper covers: BIM, Common Data Environments, Standards and Compliance, Golden Thread, Digital Twins, and Blockchain.

‍
The AEC sector has only increased productivity by 1% per annum over the last 20 years.

‍

The Goal

‍
We believe that the ultimate goal is a Sustainable Waste-Free Future and a Custom-Made World.

‍

By intelligently connecting all parties in any architectural and construction process, we can ensure smooth handovers, mutual goals and united conversations. Time, resources and money are optimised and that the entire chain is underpinned by efficiency and transparency. Commercial and environmental goals will then operate in support of one another and what would have been waste, becomes profit.

‍
The end result is a world in which any built environment is precisely CUT TO FIT - FIT FOR PURPOSE - and - FIT TO LAST. Our intention is to make such waste-free working a sector-wide norm.

‍

Outlining the Problem

‍
The built environment and the AC (Architecture, Engineering and Construction) Industry is responsible for almost 40% of the world's CO2 emissions, and produces trillions of tons in waste each year.Communication and relationships between A C disciplines are fragmented, ineffective and often adversarial. Delivery of information for construction still relies on 2D (paper) format, is low-fidelity and uncoordinated. Procurement of construction goods and services is wasteful, costly, time-consuming and prone to error. The A C sector has only increased in productivity by 1% over the last 20 years. During the same period we have seen the rise in the use of BIM.

‍

The chart above indicates that onlv 1% of architects are neither aware nor using BIM. However in reality it would be fair to say that of those using BIM, the vast majority use it in an ad-hoc, simplistic manner with little knowledge of its true potential or application of ISO 19650 (the international standard developed for BIM). This may explain why the gains in productivity have not followed on from the uptake BIM.

‍

‍

How did we get here?
A very brief history of BIM software

‍

‍

Architecture and engineering were amongst the earliest professions to engage with digital technology and were expected to be the first to use technology to modernise their industry.
Widely recognised as the first BIM software, Graphisoft's ArchiCad was developed in 1982 following the end of communism in Hungary, by software developer Gabor Bajor. They went on to partner with Apple Inc, which allowed them to create ArchiCad for Macintosh, released in 1987 for the Apple LISA, making it the first implementation of their Virtual Building concept, which is now commonly referred to as BIM.
‍

Autodesk was founded in 1982 by software developer John Walker and its product AutoCad quickly became the standard 2D digital drafting application used by the AEC industry. By 1994 sales of AutoCad accounted for 85% of the company's sales, with 58% of the sales being generated outside the US making AutoCad a globally recognised brand, producing an annual revenue of over $400m, placing it as one of the most successful software companies and an authoritative voice in AEC. In 2002 Autodesk released Revit, a BIM software and initially bundled it with AutoCad; it was exclusively available for Windows OS.

ArchiCad had a near monopoly on BIM until the release of Revit in 2002. As a result of AutoCad's large existing customer base (exclusive to Windows OS) it only took 6 to 7 years for Revit to become the market leader - a position it has dominated ever since.

‍
The fortunes of both BIM authoring software were closely aligned to success of the OS that they were tied to. As Apple's rise was curbed in the early nineties, so was Archicads'. Revit, which was considered by many to be the weaker of the two products, rose to prominence alongside the meteoric rise and dominance of Microsoft's Windows Operating System. In an attempt to remain competitive, a Windows version of Archicad was eventually released.

‍
Being market dominant, Revit never developed an Apple OS version and today its core functionality is still limited to using a single processor on Microsoft Windows OS. Revit is currently facing a significant backlash from its user base because of the lack of development and its rising cost.

‍

Identifying the Causes_1 Method of work 2D CAD and 3D BIM

‍

Building Information Modelling (BIM), a 3D digital solution for AEC, has been commercially available for over three decades. It was designed to supersede 2D Computer Aided Design CAD. Has it helped or hindered outcomes?
‍

We must remember that BIM is a nebulous acronym, not a particular software. It explains what the software does, which is to merge both graphic and non-graphic information. Therefore BIM is the pathway that can lead to digital transformation. It can be used in many ways, and by multiple disciplines, with impressive results for massing studies, structural analysis, daylight studies, and MEP design to name but a few.

‍
Significantly, neither of the two major BIM authoring or CAD software products were initially designed to be interoperable, thereby limiting their potential. In 1994 an international organisation led by AutoDesk, initially known as International Alliance for Interoperability - later rebranded as buildingSMART was formed, and they introduced Industry Foundation Class (a schema) as an open, international-standard, to facilitate interoperability between BIM software. It has only partially succeeded. Downstream software that does not threaten the dominant BIM authoring platforms,Tekla for example, a software used for structural design, have shown that it is possible to work with both via IFC. However, interoperability between the authoring software still does not work effectively. The process is complex to use and suffers an unacceptable level of data loss. As the technical issues do not appear to be insurmountable, it may instead be due to commercial considerations.

‍

The production of construction information is central to the AEC sector, and simple 2D dissemination remains the norm. The working process for 2D is a hierarchical and iterative process, first the building architecture - then structural engineering - then services design, mechanical, electrical and plumbing. This requires many revisions by each discipline, each taking between two to six weeks, which is both time consuming, and difficult to synchronise. The resultant output is then issued for tender and even released for construction (in stages), usually whilst the design process continues alongside the construction process, which is error prone and inefficient.

‍

‍

Modelling in 3D is inherently much faster than 2D drafting, but ironically takes longer when following Level 2 BIM guidance - especially when each discipline creates an independent model. It is common then to reduce these data-rich BIM models to a set of 2D outputs - drawings, accompanied by general specifications - similar to those produced in the 1960s. It is therefore not surprising that output in productivity has barely changed for more than 80 years.

‍

This compares especially poorly with other industries where regular productivity improvements are expected and achieved each year.

‍
The AEC sector was siloed prior to BIM technology, and now those same silos seem to have been reinforced. Today BIM is still mostly used for simple 3D representations, with low levels of definition or detail, created in multiple models, prepared in isolation by each discipline. These models are only federated (one way interoperability) for basic coordination, and to produce 2D pdf templates for plans sections and elevations. There is no unified or integrated model produced at the end, that can be handed over on completion of the project. The process does not include 3D deliverables to the constructor, client, or produce precise and detailed schedules, nor does it form part of the 0&Ms (Operation and Maintenance). Doing the wrong thing right is worse than doing the right thing wrong. (Ackoff)

‍

So, does BIM help or hinder the industry? ‍

‍

The answer is both. BIM vastly increased the performance in many individual disciplines and at the same time has failed to deliver that gain in performance across the wider industry, primarily because of:

‍
The failure of the software industry to overcome the issue of interoperability
especially between the authoring platforms, which severely limits its ability to
bring together all project data, both graphical and non-graphical into a single database.

‍
The siloed and conservative processes, and guidance that continue to adhere to outmoded 2d practices, results in data bottlenecks downgrading the available information, which handicaps potential and curbs progress.

‍
Commercial considerations amongst the two significant authoring software companies which monopolise the sector, may also be a significant factor. Each is engaged in an arms race to match the other, tool-for-tool, instead of delivering substantial or useful improvement and innovation.

‍

Even when BIM is used by architects, it rarely applies the ISO 19650 standard, so the resultant models are usually simple 3D surface models fit only for client presentation purposes.

‍

‍If reliable, high-fidelity interoperability were to be achieved, the design team could work in real time on a single model. This would vastly improve performance, especially in comparison with the 2D iterative process. The work would be coordinated at source and associated data could be cross-checked, validated and embedded with the single source of truth - providing a secure and reliable golden thread of information through its life cycle. If the construction teams could work from a single centralised BIM model, there would be little confusion, (geometrical or personal) or delays. Schedules, timelines and accurate quantities could be created at the click of a button.

‍

Identifying the Causes_2
| Communication, Standards, Databases and CDEs

‍

Currently project information is still sent and received via email and the post, (paper drawings and printed specification documents). Main contractors employed on large projects use an array of construction ERPs (Enterprise Resource Planning) systems, and these expensive and complex systems are usually not fully or properly utilised. The software, personal and construction typology change from project to project, so the continuity that is enjoyed in car manufacturing for example, where systems for design and manufacture work hand in hand, and are regularly refined and optimised, is not available to AEC. Each new building is considered both a prototype and finished article, and because of the procurement process neither the designers nor the constructors are likely to work together on the next project. Drawings and documentation connected with proiects are often to be found stored across multiple offices and in many different formats. The 0&M (Operation & Maintenance) manuals are normally handed over to the client at the end of a project, in hardcopy housed in A4 ringed binders. Any knowledge gained in the process is rarely transferable to the larger AEC community.

‍
EIR. Emplovers Information Requirements is a cornerstone of the new standard, ISO 19650, (the international standard developed for BIM) which requires the employer at the outset of a project to produce a detailed set of 'information requirements', a data specification that the BIM team can work to. The standard is both relatively new and also technically demanding, with few examples available to learn from. Employers rarely know how to define their 'information requirements', much less able to specify them. As a result this fundamental first step is often poorly specified, providing the instructions for equally poor outcomes.

‍

ISO19650 is in essence a machine readable numbering system for BIM project files, and is housed in a project database called a CDE - Common Data Environment. The CDE is supposed to be the single source of information and is employed to collect, manage and disseminate all project documentation, both graphic and non-graphic. It is applicable for the whole life cycle of any built asset, including strategic planning, initial design, engineering, d e v e l o p m e n t , documentation, construction, day-to-day operation, maintenance, refurbishment, repair and end-of-life. By employing a CDE, collaboration between project members should be enhanced, mistakes reduced and duplication avoided (Richard McPartland NBS). The numbering system in the standard comprises around 16-20 digits, grouped in a particular order using both letters and numbers, that is unique to each document, drawing or model. tI is an onerous task to ensure that each party is numbering every document or drawing correctly.

‍

Traditionally, architects have devised numbering systems for their practices. This numerical identifier is significant. It is regarded by some as an earned privilege, which they are not easily persuaded to surrender, especially when the alternative appears complex by comparison and seems to add no benefit. Until the positive attributes of ISO 19650 are recognised and the benefits enjoyed, this standard will remain unused and unwelcome. Only architectural practices (usually mid to large sized), who are appointed on local authority or government projects, such as schools or hospitals - where the standard is mandatorv - will use it.

‍

Projects that are supposedly level 2BIM projects, applying ISO 19650, seldom, if ever, have more than the architect, engineer and services engineer applying the standard. However, to be a reliable single source of project information, everybody involved with the creation of a built asset, which stretches well beyond the main design team to surveyors, contractors, arboriculturists and specialist consultants, needs to be applying the standard, in order to gather all project data effectively, thus enabling the production of a complete and verifiable digital database for each new built asset.

‍

Widespread ISO 19650 adoption is essential to facilitating digital transformation in the AEC industry.

‍

Most architects do not recognise or understand the importance of the ISO 19650 standard, more so if they are not involved with projects where its use is mandatory and do not use BIM.

‍

The ISO numbering system is onerous to accurately implement and monitor across project teams.

‍

Most participants involved in AEC (outside of BIM specialists) are not able to easily comply with the standard thus ensuring the database created is incomplete.

‍

Employers do not know how to fulfil their role in compiling EIRs, (the data requirement) and there is no common system for the various digital outputs.

‍

The adoption of a Common Data Environment should be established in all architectural practices as a practical necessity. Ideally this should happen through recommendation and guidance ratherthan be forced byregulation. A ubiquitous low cost, networked CDE with automated compliance would allow all participants to become compliant regardless if 3D BIM was being employed, opening the gateway for greater change across the industry.

‍

Solution

‍

Though AEC is called an industry, it is in reality a fragmented assemblage of People, (architects, engineers, consultants, constructors) - Standards - Software - Guidance - Data, a dysfunctional system of systems. The systems that organise the industry cannot be resolved by improvement of each part in isolation.

‍
Systems thinking helps us to understand the complex and non-linear disabilities inorganisations. These learning disabilities can lead to an incorrect understanding of what is going on as part of the wider cohesive whole. For example, people who are themselves operating as part of the system find it hard to see the entire picture of mutual influence between parts of the system. Trying to solve ' AEC ' problems without understanding the entire system in operation usually causes unwanted outcomes. (Sune Gudiksen, Jake Inlove)

‍
To achieve a viable solution that is practical, effective, scalable and most importantly adopted by an industry, a novel approach is required, realigning the systems to act ni symbiosis, securely validating, authenticating and improving interactions and outcomes.

‍

Step_1
| People - Communities - Connection - Consensus

‍

The AEC Industry can also be thought of as a collection of sub-industries, loosely connected, professional organisations, architect, engineers, consultants, - manufacturers and suppliers- constructors and subcontractors.

‍
People and Community: Teaching peer-to-peer enhances critical thinking, learning autonomy, motivation, collaborative and communicative skills. (M.Stigmar). Teaching peer-to-peer provides a unique opportunity for learning and self-correction. At present most participants in AEC experience CPD, (Continuous Professional Development) as provided by product manufacturers. Whilst this has a place, it is by its nature, biassed.

‍
There is at present no 'go to place' for the AEC community, to connect, learn or exchange peer-to-peer, outside of their individual (siloed) institutions.

‍
High-quality, 'How To' AEC content is in high demand, but is in short supply, creating a void. High quality content is the glue that can build and bind communities. When content supply and consumption can be exchanged, at critical mass, supply and demand find equilibrium and become self-sustaining.

‍

Self-Correcting Mechanisms: There is an inherent trust in peer-to-peer exchanges, which is usually highly valued. As each new building is in effect a prototype, participants in A C regularly and actively seek information through necessity, ie. where information is not provided in enough detail, some dysfunction is apparent, or there is not enough detail. This often happens where different systems overlap, and the product manufacturers cannot guarantee or advise on a particular method or circumstance. An architect who must overcome this type of information void, will need to seek a solution through discussions with the appropriate consultants and then try to convey this to the constructor. The act of learning something new, followed by teaching or transferring that knowledge, enhances or deepens the initial understanding. This valuable exchange is often lost and when the same problem occurs again on a different project, with other players, the problem must be solved anew. Lessons learnt on projects are seldom passed on beyond the individual studio. Industry leaders, governments, regulatory bodies, architects, engineers and constructors are aware of the issues facing the industry and there is a desire as well as an urgent necessity for change, however there are few ways to effectively communicate to this fragmented industry as a whole.

‍

| Connection

‍

The difference between an audience and a community is that an audience will just consume, whereas being part of a community allows participants the opportunity to connect, collaborate and contribute.

‍
We can think of community building as a 3-stage process that takes a potential user from the community discovery stage to a sustained positive-sum participation.

‍

Creating opportunities for people to discover the community/project

‍

Creating ways for people to get involved meaningfully

‍

Creating opportunities for participants to build a sense of ownership

‍

An active and informed community can challenge convention and broaden conversations. Consensus can help to shape new methods and systems, and support the evolution of applications and standards.

‍

‍

Step_2
| Learn- Automate - Optimise

‍

‍

Learn to Earn, Web 3 and a Tokenized Economy

‍
A token economy is a system of contingency management based on the systematic reinforcement of target behaviour. The reinforcers are symbols or tokens that can be exchanged for other reinforcers. (wikipedia) Tokenized economies use blockchain architecture. (A tokenized economy as described here is one based on skill level and participation, rewarding actions that are good for the community and the method by which tokenized access is given or earned.)

‍

‍

Setting a North Star and Transferable skills

‍
Setting a North Star: A Sustainable Waste-Free Future and a Custom-Made World. The goal would be to nudge an industry to regularly produce a Golden Thread (the information that allows you to understand a building and the steps needed to keep both the building and people safe, now and in the future) of verifiable and secure data, graphically represented by a Digital Twin.

‍
Providing playbooks, or offering step by step guidance, could be incentivised in a tokenized economy. Offering access to the best methods for creating data rich and useful BIM models, for example. Each successfully completed step would be rewarded, allowing entry to more advanced courses and guidance. With each completed stage of learning, the gained skills could be verified or certified by peers. Tokenized templates and software downloads to help automate processes could be made available.

‍

‍

| Automation

‍

Low Level Automation - Library Parts and Templates

‍
The "low-level" automation tools can be basic plug-Ins, library components, and templates. Library parts for BIM models are little understood in regard to the true importance, potential and value that they represent. Many of those produced under current guidelines are little more than basic representations that are not parametrically flexible and often are poorly produced with large file sizes that make models unfeasibly heavy. Detailed, light weight, parametrically flexible library parts are essential to optimise the process of BIM. BIM templates can also massively improve productivity, especially when automating 2D drawing production from 3d models or for creating accurate and trackable schedules.

‍
A completed BIM model, developed to a high level, with library parts for all components, would provide many opportunities for the optimisation of processes, including golden threads and providing the ideal entry point for smart contracts, blockchain and Al.

‍

High Level Automation and Optimised Systems

‍

Automating compliance for standards (ISO 19650), via project CDs, ensuring inclusion for all project participants and stakeholders. Machine readable files will allow opportunities for intuitive UI and UX, prescribed data organisation, and an interoperable ecosystem of apps. Al and neural networks can then be engaged to start the process of refinement and optimisation.

‍

Step_ 3
| Digital Twins - Hyper-Granularity - Data Mining

‍

A digital twin is a virtual representation of a real-world physical system or product (a physical twin) that serves as the indistinguishable digital counterpart of it for practical purposes, such as system simulation, integration, testing, monitoring, and maintenance. (Wikipedia)

‍

‍

Digital Twins in AEC are distinguishable from BIM; ideally they are the result of a properly assembled BIM with the additional functionality of real-time connectivity to building systems sensors, such as heating, lighting, occupancy, etc. The digital twin must have the ability to monitor, update and record any change to the physical building, providing an up-to-date service history of the built asset. It is a "living', evolving virtual representation of the physical asset, in essence an IOT display and controller.

‍

‍

Properly constructed BIM and Digital Twins can be mined for information that can be extracted quickly and precisely, at the click of a button.

‍
The level of granularity (LOG) will determine how much can be mined and the level of function (LOF) will determine how much data can be gathered from sensors. Hypergranular VDC+Q (Virtual Design for Construction with Quantities) models will offer the greatest opportunity for mining. By mining we mean to extract valuable data, quantities, specifications, validation of construction, carbon calculation, recyclability - cradle-to-cradle, facilities maintenance, life cycle cost, etc. A hypergranular VDC+Q model can commodify the constituent parts of a building before ti is built and sequence the optimal build. It can work out the cost and time reguired far more precisely, and will produce verifiable golden threads, thus mitigating cost, time and safety risks.. Timelines, sequences and work flows can be optimised. Hypergranular digital twins can deliver the long awaited promise of BIM. It will allow for distributed ledger technology and supply chain management.

‍

Step_4
Blockchain and Smart Contracts

‍

Blockchain is a shared, immutable ledger that facilitates the process of recording transactions and tracking assets in a business network. (IBM)

‍
Smart contracts are simply programs stored on a blockchain that run when predetermined conditions are met. They typically are used to automate the execution of an agreement so that all participants can be immediately certain of the outcome, without any intermediary's involvement or time loss. They can also automate a workflow, triggering the next action when conditions are met. (IВМ)

‍
The future of nearly all business processes and transactions is predicted to be carried out on blockchain architectures, to mitigate risk, by securely validating all transactions. Amongst the first Industries to use blockchain are insurance companies, the automotive and health care sectors and it is now beginning to be applied more broadly.

‍
A hvper granular BIM model securelv exploited on blockchain is a clear example of how the AC industry could move toward a more effective, productive and efficient future. Making a custom-built world and a waste-free future an achievable goal. Hyper granular BIM models are defined by having every individual element in the building modelled, whether it is a fixing bolt, brick or the paint on a steel beam. When each individual part is modelled, ti is quantifiable and can have a unique identifier, enabling it to act as a smart contract.

‍
Through the process of smart contracts on blockchain, each part can be validated. For example a simple screw fixing used in cross laminated timber construction could have multiple potential failure points.

‍

Was it correctly specified for strength?

Was the metal type properly specified ? (the incorrect steel type can corrode or cause oxidation staining to bleed through)

Is it possible to install the fixing? (Buildability)

Was the correct product purchased and its suitability confirmed?

Was it installed correctly by the operative?

Who verified the installation?

‍

A blockchain enabled system employing hyper granular BIM model and CDE would be able to automate the validation of the screw throughout its lifecycle with the building.

‍

Who specified it - structural engineer

Who validated its buildability - designer and contractor

Who purchased it and from whom- approved procurement agent

Who installed it - qualified installer

Who verified the installation - qualified supervisor

‍

Smart Contract - Process for a CLT Screw Fixing

‍

Once the screw is specified it can be entered into a smart contract. The screw is then placed in the model by the designer or engineer where they can be accurately quantified, evaluated for buildability and validated by the contractor, engineer and designer. During procurement before the order is placed, it will need to be validated by both purchaser and vendor. During the construction process, it would be important that the correct screw was validated as being delivered and installed correctly. The validation along its entire journey from specification to installation would conclude the smart contract and ultimately result in an automated payment that is authenticated, validated and with risk mitigated as far as is practically possible.

‍

Conclusion

‍

Interoperability is a basic requirement in the digital-age, whether one is referring to graphic or non graphic data. BIM authoring tools that are not successfully interoperable have come to the end of their useful life. Acommon standard must be adopted by all participants in AEC to allow interoperability. Until this happens it is unlikely that any substantial gains in performance wil be possible. Standards and guidelines drip-fed from the top down will not be sufficient to advance results. The effort must be made from both ends, top down and bottom up, simultaneously. The low cost automation of onerous but necessary standards could be pivotal, allowing all participants to become compliant almost immediately.

‍
Learning coupled with self interest has been proven to be an effective method. Web3 tokenized communities offering peer-to-peer learning might offer the best possibilities for up-skilling across the industry.

‍

Hyper-Granularity enables Blockchain in AEC, and as described above, can deliver the promise of a sustainable waste-free future and a custom-made world.

‍

CUT - TO - FIT FIT - FOR - PURPOSE FIT-TO-LAST

‍

MAKING WASTE-FREE WORKING A SECTOR WIDE NORM

‍

‍