BIM Ready - BIM Capability of Queensland Architects 2018 · 2018-08-24 · future BIM requirements...
Transcript of BIM Ready - BIM Capability of Queensland Architects 2018 · 2018-08-24 · future BIM requirements...
1
MAY 26 2018
Association of Consulting Architects QLD/NT
Australian Institute of Architects QLD
BIM Ready BIM CAPABILITY OF QUEENSLAND
ARCHITECTS IN 2018
2
BIM Ready BIM CAPABILITY OF QUEENSLAND ARCHITECTS IN 2018
Issued for Release May 2018
Report Author: ACA QLD|NT | AIA QLD BIM Taskforce
Chair: Nathan Hildebrandt Fulton Trotter Architects
Members: Don Marshall Thomson Adsett
Kevin Green ICE Architects
Louise Street ACA
Mark Cronin Peddle Thorp
Mark Williams ACA President | MWA
Mell Greenall AIA
Quinton Cooper Cottee Parker Architects
Scott Crichton BVN
Stephen Tritchler Jacobs
Copyright 2018 Association of Consulting Architects QLD/NT and Australian Institute of Architects QLD
3
Introduction
In February 2017 the Queensland Government, through the then named Department
of Infrastructure and Local Government and Planning released their ‘Building
Information Modelling – draft policy and principles for Queensland.’ This draft policy
was released for public consultation which closed in April 2017. The draft policy
proposed that projects where feasible delivered by State Government from 2020
would require Building Information Modelling (BIM) deliverables.
In a proactive move the Association of Consulting Architects QLD/NT branch (ACA) and
Australian Institute of Architects QLD branch (AIA) signed an MOU and formed a BIM
Taskforce to assist the Queensland Architectural profession understand and adapt to
the incoming BIM Policy through the following actions.
1. Provide quarterly updates on industry movement and government requirements
though joint newsletter reports.
2. Investigate the viability of providing BIM training to architects for required skills
through joint CPD events or training series similar to PALS.
3. When Policy or Standards are mandated that we provide Practice Notes (or
equivalent) to assist in implementation.
Prior to setting a path and direction for the committee a survey was created and sent
to members of ACA and AIA to complete. Overall the results from the survey present a
strong starting point for the profession. Many Architects in Queensland are already
using BIM processes to deliver projects without clients specifying or requiring it.
Over the next 2 years the Taskforce will deliver content and recommendations aligning
with the three nominated actions to ensure that the Architectural profession in
Queensland is BIM Ready for the State Government’s BIM requirements.
4
Findings – Practice Demographics
Overall the survey had a total of 172 responses, of those responses 141 (82%) were
metropolitan based and 31 (18%) regional based. Of those practices 78% of
metropolitan practices use BIM and 71% of regional practices advised that they used
BIM processes. The results also demonstrate that the majority of practices that have
over 25 staff used BIM processes with the percentage of non-BIM use being highest at
the sole practitioner level reducing as it approached more than 25 staff.
Metropolitan Architects
Regional Architects
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
SO
LE
PR
AC
TIT
ION
ER
2 -
5
6 -
10
11
-2
5
26
-5
0
51
-1
00
10
0+
No BIM
BIM
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
SO
LE
PR
AC
TIT
ION
ER
2 -
5
6 -
10
11
-2
5
26
-5
0
51
-1
00
10
0+
No BIM
BIM
No
. of
Res
po
nd
ents
N
o. o
f R
esp
on
den
ts
5
Findings – Client Types
Client type hasn’t driven any abnormalities in BIM usage with BIM usage based on
client type sitting between 69-82% in all of the client types. The key statistic being that
41% of the respondents provided Architectural Services for a State Government
Agency. Of these respondents 80% of them currently use BIM processes putting a clear
majority of Architectural practices that currently provide services to the State
Government in a strong position to adapt to meet BIM deliverables from Government.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
PR
IVA
TE
(IN
DIV
IDU
AL
)
PR
IVA
TE
(C
OM
PA
NY
)
PU
BL
IC (
CO
MP
AN
Y)
LO
CA
L A
UT
HO
RIT
Y
ST
AT
E G
OV
ER
NM
EN
T A
GE
NC
Y
FE
DE
RA
L G
OV
ER
NM
EN
T A
GE
NC
Y
No BIM
BIM
No
. of
Clie
nts
6
Findings – Project Type and Scale
The results of BIM use by practices vs the project type and scale that they are providing
services for produced unexpected scattered results with dips appearing across a
number of project types in the $1M - $25M ranges. Key findings to take from this
graph is that all practices that are working on projects over $100M are using BIM and
across all project types that the State Government would procure all sit over 70% BIM
usage already.
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 > $1M $1M > $5M $5M > $10M $10 > $25M $25M > $100M $100M +
Education Cultural Health Civic Infrastructure Sports and Recreation
Per
cen
tage
usi
ng
BIM
7
Findings – BIM Uses
To gain a true understanding of the current level of BIM usage occurring within the
profession it needs to be pegged against a common source. The table above shows
BIM uses included in the NATSPEC BIM Guide. This is a source document that a number
of practices in Queensland use as a base for their BIM Management Plans.
To gain a better understanding of the current profile of architects using BIM, the
results have been split into all respondents as the bottom bar and respondents that
currently provide services to State Government Agencies as the bar immediately above
it.
11.0%
15.9%
8.1%
14.5%
7.6%
17.4%
15.1%
21.7%
22.7%
27.5%
8.7%
15.9%
9.3%
18.8%
1.7%
4.3%
6.4%
11.6%
2.9%
7.2%
63.4%
65.2%
52.3%
46.4%
38.4%
29.0%
55.8%
52.2%
50.6%
50.7%
47.1%
40.6%
42.4%
43.5%
8.1%
4.3%
19.2%
14.5%
7.6%
4.3%
1.2% 0.0%
1.2%
1.4%
1.2%
1.4%
2.9%
1.4%
2.9%
2.9%
1.7%
2.9%
5.8%
4.3%
2.3%
2.9%
7.6%
14.5%
2.3%
2.9%
1.7%
2.9%
1.7%
4.3%
2.9%
4.3%
1.2%
2.9%
0.6%
0.0%
2.3%
2.9%
5.2%
4.3%
9.3%
10.1%
4.7%
4.3%
8.1%
13.0%
22.7%
15.9%
36.6%
33.3%
50.0%
47.8%
25.0%
21.7%
23.3%
18.8%
40.1%
37.7%
37.2%
29.0%
78.5%
78.3%
62.2%
55.1%
79.1%
72.5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Modelling Existing Conditions
Site Analysis
Space and Equipment Validation
Spatial and Material Design Modelling
Design Visualisation for Communication
Design Visualisation for Functional Analysis
3D Coordination
Quantity Take off and Cost Planning
As Built Modelling
Facilities Management
Currently delivered as client requirement Currently part of most / all projects (not required by client) Completed a Pilot Project Currently Conducting Research No BIM used
8
At a high level across all BIM uses Architects that currently provide services to State
Government Agencies are utilizing BIM at a slightly greater level than the group as a
whole.
The positive that can be taken from this graph is that despite the very low
requirements by their current clients across the majority of BIM deliverables, a large
number of Queensland Architects are either currently using BIM processes on their
projects, have undertaken a pilot project or are currently conducting research into
specific BIM processes.
The low BIM usage in the Quantity Take off and Cost Planning, As Built Modelling and
Facilities Management categories are a stand out for low client requirement and low
Architect use.
The low usage of BIM for Quantity Take off is aligned with the Quantity Surveying
profession working to develop processes and methodologies of implementing BIM into
standard practice1
The low usage of BIM for As Built Modelling and Facilities Management is probably due
to there being no benefit for a Consultant in undertaking this level of service if they are
not being engaged and remunerated by their client to do so.
1 The Building Economist – September 2017 – The BIM Issue
9
Findings – Standards, BIM Management Plans and Contracts
When it comes to Standards the biggest challenge we face here in Australia is that
there are no BIM delivery Standards in place. In other countries there are well
documented standards including the UK and North America which some of
respondents nominated as the standard they were following. A number of the
respondents out of the 33% that nominated that they were using a standard stated
that they were following software based standard ANZRS or an internal standard.
Disappointingly BIM Management Plan usage of BIM users was extremely low at 22%.
Of those respondents that did use a BMP a large number of respondents advised that
they used a modified NATSPEC template.
The level of usage of BIM inclusions in the Client Architect Agreement at first
appearance is low at 17% but when you look through the client deliverable
requirements a number of the client required deliverables have been a traditional
deliverable from Architects in traditional delivery practice.
33% Standards
22% BMP
17% Contract
10
Conclusion
The Survey results indicate that the level of BIM capability perceived by the Design
industry is exceeding the client delivery requirements, however the BIM requirements
of the client/construction groups at this stage are not fully defined and do not have the
clarity to provide an explicit framework for the Design industry to aim for. It is
important that there is a solid baseline understanding of the current and possible
future BIM requirements with the capability to be nimble enough to meet any future
industry needs. If the Queensland Government was to endorse a BIM policy for
mandatory BIM deliverables from 20202 the profession should be well placed, with
additional training to be BIM Ready in time.
With 80% of respondents that provide services for State Government already started
on their BIM implementation journey the number of Architects requiring starting from
no BIM capability is minimal.
The ACA | AIA BIM Taskforce will continue to increase awareness of BIM requirements
through quarterly newsletters and articles.
The Taskforce is currently investigating options for its members to provide training in
accordance with the APCC & AFIC BIM Knowledge and Skills Framework.3 This training
may be delivered by an RTO or delivered as a structured course similar to the PALS
series delivered currently by the AIA.
Prior to Architectural Practices developing internal processes and delivery systems the
State Government will need to nominate standards and document their Information
Deliverables. Once the client-side templates are in place the Taskforce will write
Architectural Practice Notes for Acumen and use by ACA members. These Practice
Notes will provide advice for Architects on how to meet the State Government’s
requirements.
2 Date nominated in the Draft Policy. May not be the same date in a future endorsed policy. 3 APCC & ACIF BIM Knowledge and Skills Framework