The Information Age and Construction


Introduction to Change

The construction industry is one of the oldest and most tradition bound industries today. The technology of building has developed over thousands of years, and the concept of building has not changed much over that time. Basic materials like brick, concrete, mortar, steel and glass are the materials, while carpentry, steelwork and masonry, are the typical skill sets, which are the product of adaptation and evolution over many years of gradual scientific improvement

Modern Day construction Firms

Then came modern contracting, with large-scale projects becoming commonplace and contracting becoming a truly big business. Digital technology, which over the past 50 years has evolved beyond mere telephone conversation, now included fax, email and sometimes even teleconferencing. Software developed from accounting and word processing software dependent on expensive central systems to sophisticated project management tools, 3-d CAD, and database based on cheaper microcomputers. Additionally, falling prices for the various technologies, such as wireless networking, remote systems hosting, and other software solutions is beginning to revolutionize the business. The array of tools available to manage and grow business is increasing at an exponential rate.

At first, computer and communications capabilities were readily adapted to certain knowledge-driven businesses. In comparison to other industries such as finance or retailing, construction has lagged in adapting the digital technology to the production process. But the application of the so-called business-to-business has begun to really take hold lately, especially since the Internet seems to attract so much attention…

What we see taking shape


An explosion of investment in Internet related businesses during 1998 and 1999. There were more than a couple of web-sites started in the period to try to supply an “IT” solution for firms in the construction supply chain. Some of these solutions were meant to be stand alone, others recognized the depth of need and offered custom services.

I watched these sites closely during 1999 to see what forms the services were taking. There was considerable evolution and experimentation going on. There were as many models or levels of service among the different firms in this sector as there were in any other sector.  

The biggest fact I noticed was that these firms were still searching for a system model that would satisfy the entire Architecture engineering and Construction teams.  Especially the designers. 
Eventually some of the names mentioned below either met their fate in bankruptcy, being bought , or merged into something else.

Two varieties of web based info systems

            Fitted out, rules based enterprise-wide (project-wide) hosting for projects on web pages.
            (Constructware, Bidpoint)


            One size fits all, smorgasbord of technologies available.
            http://www.Buzzsaw.com
            http://www.Bidcom.com
              http://www.Cephren.com 

Areas that were not up to snuff in 2000:

Resistance by subcontractors to this method of job tracking. (Lack of technology)
Security, reliability and safety concerns
How long are they going to be in business? (Born yesterday syndrome)
What happens if they go offline, is there uninterrupted backup?

Track record demonstrating costs and benefits
How much will they really save?
Is it worth the training time and expense?
What about download and upload times: network bandwidth consideration.

Capture/Input
Data capture process in upstream domain such as suppliers (XML coming to the rescue?)

Interchange/process
Of upstream data with design process
Integration of local construction permit process with contractors
Interchange of suppliers’ data with project design in real time to speed design and decisions.

Output
Upstream data combined with construction drawings for the field
Project design/specs to upstream suppliers


Cost and design software in another industry: Automobile manufacturing

Various software vendors have been building such tools as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) for years. One of the obvious examples is in automobile manufacturing. General Motors has required its parts suppliers to join them in communicating design and supply data for years, with great results in efficiency. Construction has been more than slow to adopt such a methodology. As of this writing it seems relatively non-existent. Contractors are reluctant or unable to share information in the same way that General Motors and Toyota demand. Competition is fierce and it is considered a detriment to share very much information. It doesnt help that there are perhaps 200,000 construction contractors in the US alone.

Besides reluctance or inability to share information, it may be a huge undertaking to make this work in construction.  The very complexity of the task is daunting, never mind the breadth of tieing such a beast together.  It is a very complex and expensive to integrate these disparate companies as opposed to the central 'conductor” scheme of Detroit.


Historical Perspective : the master builder

One of the chief differences between how things are done now and how they were done more than 200 years ago. Once upon a time, projects were done by a master builder/architect. Contrast that with today and the division of labor has gotten extreme. Why today’s building processes are so fragmented. It is the nature of the building business. It is seen in the long list of players: read this list out loud
 


Who


Now add interior designer, , acoustic consultant, kitchen consultant, light consultant, IT consultant, security consultant, surveyor, construction managers, cost consultant, general contractor, subcontractors, material suppliers, equipment manufacturer and their myriad local representatives and distributors, specialty fabricators, specialty installers, software vendors, BAS vendor, data and telecom vendor, testing and balancing contractor, commissioning agent and so on. And then imagine they have a kickoff meeting!

Coordination of Data or lack of Interoperability

According to the NIST (2004 study), building owners “could save at least $15. 8 billion through better coordination of electronic data.” (Whatever that means) What are they talking about that will save so much money? Is it a radical new invention? “Better coordination of electronic data”.

Typically the master builder, or in this case, whomever the owner has the foresight to appoint as Chief project manager, is the one who directs the project.

Do the various delivery methods have advantages?  Plan-spec build vs  Single-source Design-build?

Or how about paradigm shift In the continuing evolution of office automation,

Speed is of the essence. Paper has begun to go out of style.

Drafting that routinely and only used to be done by pencil on paper, or pen on mylar, has been replaced by the disruptive technology CAD. Letters used to be written in long hand, typed up and mailed, memos were written, photocopied and then handed out by the ubiquitous brown transmittal envelope. Now we have Email. We have attachments of all kinds, and the process is easier to the point of ludicrous.

The only thing legally we must still send have to issue on paper and physically sign and seal, as professional engineer on a project, are the actual contract documents or permit drawings. Well, I wish it was all I had to print out however. We still must communicate with fax and printed shop drawings to the contractors! And in most of my projects, HVAC and plumbing shop drawings can be in the dozens. Engineers record copies of the shop drawings alone, for a big project, can weigh a hundred, maybe two hundred pounds(in the file cabinet).


Eventual downstream benefits
        Focusing first on the upstream, or front end of the building life cycle.

Further on, that owner makes the decision to build, buy and adapt, or maybe just build to lease. The decision is usually based on initial cost, or the short range view of perhaps 5 years. One point of view says to make this decision based on the total life-cycle cost (LCC); not on some subjective criteria such as past quality of “service” or performance. However, most of the time, the service has a value to the owner that cannot be measured well, but reputations over-rule pure objective cost analysis, in many instances.

But I digress.  Assume that an owner decides to select a single source design-build-operate contractor to provide turn-key facility with performance guarantee.  For this solution to be cost competitive, reducing the cost of delivery as well as operations is crucial. In an ideal situation, the contractor/provider can create the all the facilities construction documents,

shop fabrication drawings,

Occupancy (completed project )

commissioning agents,

maintenance technicians,

building regular QA/QC

maintenance documents, and future projections in one single location.

Few web based solutions even attempt do this, but there is an increasing demand for this “end-to-end solution”.

In the past, traditional methods, these steps are distributed across time and space among various players in these roles, and much manual transformation and re-inputting of the same building data occurs at each step.

Competitive advantages in the Delaware Valley seem to be commonly based on the lowest price, “plan and spec” bidding. At that level, the business approaches a commodity. Some firms attempt to differentiate themselves by including service design-build. This way they extend their staff’s expertise in mechanical construction “vertically.


MY WISH LIST (old 2004)

Capture/Input

I want to see automated data capture in the upstream domain (is BIM coming to the rescue?) Upstream meaning the conceptual architectural design. Better yet, lets take that upstream data and participate. Architects and engineers working together. Thats the natural sequence of architectural design, in larger buildings at least. The program, which dictates that layout is the owners, as to objectives and subjective, qualitative and quantivative goals, often driven primarily by financial underpinnings. The mechanical contractors task has been traditionally the ‘take-off’. In design build process, the owner elects to focus on priorities beyond the lowest bid price. He has favored the conceptual design-build orientation, which opens up to more complex solutions, but often more valuable.

Interchange/process

Of upstream data with design process
Integration of government permits systems with contractor work
Interchange of upstream suppliers’ data with project design in real time to enhance collaboration.

Output
Upstream data combined with construction drawings for the field

Project design/specs to upstream suppliers

A disconnect between how the business is harnessing technology : design time versus real time.

real-time centered is Automation
responsible for
    HVAC
    lighting
    Electric Power Management
    Energy Management

Participants /Organizations
    CABA Continental Automated Building Association
    Automatedbuildings.com
    Builconn

    Echelon
    Siemens
    Honeywell
    Automated Logic Controls
    Delta Controls
    Computrol
    Allerton


    Protocols
    LONWorks    (Encapsulates data in Standard Network Variable Types)
    Niagara
(for interoperability with BACnet)

    OBIX Open building information exchange
    ASHRAE

    BACNET (ASHRAE developed -Encapsulates data in BIBBs Bacnet Interoperable building blocks)


MODBUS
Unit-centered __________________________________________________________________
 

Design not time-centered(Life cycle not real–time)


Responsibilities
Design phases
BUILDING MODELING
Autodesk
Graphisoft
Bentley


Building systems
Trane
Elite Software
DOE
Carmel Software
Autodesk ABS
Project Management tasks
Primavera
Others

Construction phases
Safety and validation phases
Operating phase
Renovations