1

RICS information paper

RICS professional information, UK

Overview of a 5D BIM project

1st edition

2

Acknowledgments

RICS would like to thank the following for their contributions to this information paper: Authors Andrew Turner MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

Joe Edwards (Henry Riley LLP)

Contributors

Rob Cox (Henry Riley LLP)

Paul Curran MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

Chris Donachie MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

Matt Haines MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

Steve Hodson (Henry Riley LLP)

Gil Newby MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

Emma Sellick MRICS (Henry Riley LLP)

This information paper is independent of Autodesk, Inc., and is not authorised by, endorsed by, sponsored by, affiliated with, or otherwise approved by Autodesk, Inc. Autodesk, the Autodesk logo and Revit are registered trademarks or trademarks of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries.

Published by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) Parliament Square London SW1P 3AD UK www.rics.org No responsibility for loss or damage caused to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of the material included in this publication can be accepted by the authors or RICS. Produced by the Commercial Property working group of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. ISBN TBC © Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) 2014. Copyright in all or part of this publication rests with RICS. No part of this work may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means including graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or web distribution, without the written permission of RICS or in line with the rules of an existing licence.

3

Contents

Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................... 2

RICS information papers……………………………………………………………………………………4

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 5

2 Project details ................................................................................................................................... 6

3 Key problems identified, process and solution pre-tender ............................................................... 7

3.1 Understanding the role of the quantity surveyor in relation to 5D BIM ................................ 7

3.2 Lack of 5D case studies ....................................................................................................... 8

3.3 Level of detail and level of information................................................................................. 9

3.4 Agreeing on an execution plan ............................................................................................ 9

3.5 Naming protocols ............................................................................................................... 10

3.6 Agreement of data drops with the design team ................................................................. 10

3.7 Objects and naming conventions ....................................................................................... 11

3.8 Use of NRM ........................................................................................................................ 11

3.9 Automatic quantification and understanding of costing software ....................................... 12

3.10 Object detail versus cost detail ........................................................................................ 13

3.11 Coordination and benchmarking with the client’s existing cost model ............................. 13

3.12 Coordination of design detail ........................................................................................... 14

3.13 Importance of quality assurance ...................................................................................... 14

3.14 Tender inclusions ............................................................................................................. 15

4 Post-tender review ......................................................................................................................... 17

4.1 Mid-tender interview feedback ........................................................................................... 17

4.2 Tender analysis and contractor engagement .................................................................... 17

4.3 Contractor feedback ........................................................................................................... 17

4.4 Issues encountered ............................................................................................................ 18

5 Lessons learnt ................................................................................................................................ 19

5.1 Starting a BIM journey ....................................................................................................... 19

5.2 Use of NRM in a BIM environment. ................................................................................... 19

5.3 Tender period: next steps .................................................................................................. 20

5.4 Information (BIM) Manager and next steps for the quantity surveyor ................................ 20

Glossary…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 22

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………………………...23

4

RICS information papers

This is an information paper. Information papers are intended to provide information and explanation

to RICS members on specific topics of relevance to the profession.

The function of this paper is not to recommend or advise on professional procedure to be followed by

members. It is, however, relevant to professional competence to the extent that members should be

up to date and have knowledge of information papers within a reasonable time of their coming into

effect.

Members should note that when an allegation of professional negligence is made against a surveyor,

a court or tribunal may take account of any relevant information papers published by RICS in deciding

whether or not the member has acted with reasonable competence.

This information paper is believed to reflect case law and legislation applicable at its date of

publication. It is the member's responsibility to establish if any changes in case law or legislation after

the publication date have an impact on the guidance or information in this document.

Document status defined

RICS produce a range of professional guidance and standards products. These have been defined in

the table below. This document is an information paper.

Type of document Definition Status

Standard

International Standard An international high level principle based

standard developed in collaboration with

other relevant bodies

Mandatory

Practice Statement

RICS practice

statement

Document that provides members with

mandatory requirements under Rule 4 of

the Rules of Conduct for members

Mandatory

Guidance

RICS Code of Practice Document approved by RICS, and

endorsed by another professional

body/stakeholder that provides users with

recommendations for accepted good

practice as followed by conscientious

practitioners

Mandatory or

recommended good

practice (will be

confirmed in the

document itself)

RICS Guidance Note

(GN)

Document that provides users with

recommendations for accepted good

practice as followed by competent and

conscientious practitioners

Recommended good

practice

RICS Information

Paper (IP)

Practice based information that provides

users with the latest information and/or

research

Information and/or

explanatory

commentary

5

1 Introduction

Through consultation with RICS, Henry Riley LLP was invited to write an information paper based

on its experience of 5D building information modelling (BIM) throughout 2012 and 2013, with

particular focus on a project in which an RICS New rules of measurement: Order of cost

estimating and cost planning for capital building works (NRM 1) pricing document based on

quantification from a BIM model was issued for tender.

Henry Riley LLP has been active in the BIM environment since 2011 and has continued to further

its understanding of BIM, with a particular focus on cost management. For Henry Riley the

journey was slow-going due to various factors which are reviewed within this information paper,

but through perseverance toward its goal to be able to automate a quantified BIM model in

conjunction with cost databases, Henry Riley managed to develop its learnings and produce its

first NRM BIM tender pricing document.

This information paper overviews a Henry Riley 5D BIM project delivered during the procurement

stage, as described in PAS 1192-2:2013 Specification for information management for the

capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling (BSI, 2013)

(Figure 2: The information delivery cycle). This information paper is split loosely into chronological

sections documenting the project from outset to issue of an NRM BIM tender and tender analysis

stage.

Note that this information paper has been written to help small to medium enterprises (SMEs)

starting or having recently started their BIM journey (please refer to www.bim4sme.org for more

information). This information paper tries to minimise BIM jargon where possible to help new BIM

adopters. However, where technical terms have been used please see the glossary for definitions

and for further details on BIM terminology refer to PAS 1192:2, a free downloadable copy of which

can be found on www.bimtaskgroup.org.

6

2 Project details

Henry Riley was appointed as the project quantity surveyor on this project by a key client and

worked closely with them over 18 months to help develop their BIM strategy, processes and

protocols. As such it was a learning experience for all involved, with the skills and expertise of

those involved developing along the way.

Key details of the project:

Mixed-use new build.

Brownfield site.

JCT Design and Build contract.

Client standard amendments.

Client Employers Information Requirements (EIRs).

Construction Industry Council (CIC) BIM Protocol.

Design and build procurement.

Tendering on stage 3/4 of 2013 RIBA digital Plan of Work.

Design team included:

o architect

o structural engineer

o mechanical and electrical designer/contractor; and

o sprinkler designer

Pricing document: NRM 1 formal cost plan 2.

7

3 Key problems identified, process and solution pre-tender

Based on the experiences Henry Riley LLP gained over an 18-month period, the company was invited

to be part of a BIM trial, working to a client standard BIM procedure, alongside other disciplines.

Henry Riley’s role was to produce a pricing document for detailed tender analysis, but using a design

and build procurement method. Prior to commencing this project a number of issues had been noted

when working within a BIM environment. The issues concerned included:

understanding the role of the quantity surveyor in relation to 5D BIM

a lack of 5D case studies

the level of detail and level of information

agreeing on an execution plan

naming protocols

agreement of data drops with the design team

objects and naming conventions

use of NRM

automatic quantification and understanding of costing software

object detail versus cost detail

coordination and benchmarking with the client’s existing cost model

coordination of design detail

the importance of quality assurance; and

tender inclusions.

Each of the issues identified posed their own risks and needed to be overcome in order for a

successful tender pricing document to be produced.

3.1 Understanding the role of the quantity surveyor in relation to 5D BIM

It is important to understand how the role of the quantity surveyor could change or adapt in the future;

this is because the direction of the industry is still being defined and developed in line with level 2 and

3 principles of BIM.

Henry Riley took the approach to develop a number of themes associated with 5D BIM:

quantification from models, including automatic updated quantification once rules for sectors,

clients and pricing methods have been established

using NRM standards in conjunction with BIM models (noting client-specific requirements

where necessary)

library management:

o applying rate libraries to the quantified information; and

o creating cost databases per sector or client

the ability to file share with design team and contractors alike; and

improved benchmarking capability

o moving away from detailed measurement and spending more time on improving

value; and

o understanding where value can be improved and understanding this earlier in the

project timeline, ensuring savings can be achieved through the design development.

8

If these points can be achieved, it enables a serious discussion about the Government Construction

Strategy efficiency stretch of 20 per cent. It is clear that 20 per cent of waste can be saved during

construction if the designs used do not contain inherent clashes that could be prevented. However,

the industry could also be able to save 20 per cent on the pre-tender period, not in terms of fees, but

in what is being designed and its associated outturn cost, as a project’s design principles become

leaner at tender and construction commencement.

It appears that the future of quantity surveying in the short to medium term will be, much as it is now,

with a quantity surveyor providing detailed estimates and pricing documents based on design

information. There could be a shift away from detailed measurement by hand but this, at least in the

short term, will be replaced by detailed quality assurance procedures to ensure the information is

being interpreted correctly. Furthermore, the quality assurance role will become vital to the project

team, as the quantity surveyor will be the first to use the information rather than calculate it and

initially this will be a time-consuming role. Finally, a bigger expectation for the quantity surveyor is to

drive the value decisions within the design teams and client because, with better benchmarking and

analysis, the quantity surveyor will have the data to lead these conversations.

Key learning

Understand what 5D means to you and your clients. Understand how you can use the data available

to improve your service level agreements.

3.2 Lack of 5D case studies

Throughout the BIM journey to date there have not been many case studies available to read and

review with either a 5D bias, or that contain clear quantity surveyor outputs. The various examples

that do exist provide only a brief overview of what 5D could be but, for example, just being able to

measure steelwork within a model is only part of a solution. For 5D practices to become the norm for

quantity surveyors, the quantity surveyor role needs to be undertaken in its entirety within a BIM

environment, and the industry needs case studies to demonstrate this.

Through Henry Riley’s BIM journey at the time of writing, the following projects had been undertaken:

re-creating client cost models into a BIM cost database

measuring and estimating project costs from BIM models

agreeing negotiated contract sums based on design model output, incorporated within the

chosen BIM cost software; and

the issue of Henry Riley’s first NRM BIM tender.

In subsection 3, Level of detail and level of information, the experiences of Henry Riley to date are

outlined, and the issues and problems faced are discussed in more detail, confirming what was

achieved in trying to use NRM in a BIM environment.

Key learning

Keep sharing and collaborating experiences. BIM in isolation will not help the industry to learn and

progress and as such it will only hold back your own ability to keep developing. Also note that

BIM4SME wants to showcase SME case studies on their website; as such SMEs should look to

collaborate with this resource.

9

3.3 Level of detail and level of information

Designing to the correct level of detail (LOD) is a common problem that can be encountered

consistently in BIM projects. Although LOD outputs to a specified graphical representation, it has a

direct effect on the level of information provided (data), as the greater the number of graphical items,

the more data are available when viewed within costing software. Prior to commencing any design the

team should agree on a key set of principles. Understanding the relationship between the RIBA digital

Plan of Work stages and NRM classification requirements is important when confirming what LOD is

required. For example, at an early RIBA stage basic design and object parameters are required to

produce a visualisation of a building and its associated cost, therefore a high LOD model could over-

complicate matters as this would show elements of the building as too numerous and detailed for that

specific design stage.

LOD takes on more significant importance for a design and build tender, as the level of information

designed should be such that it can be developed by the tendering parties. For example, should a

concrete slab be represented as a composite item (graphically and spatially) or with all associated

elements shown separately – concrete slab, floor finish, insulation, damp proof membrane,

reinforcement and so on? Of course, it is possible to determine a lot of these quantities from a

composite item, but if detail is required for each element then it should be modelled individually, but at

the correct stage of the plan of work.

It is therefore important to discuss what information is due to be produced with the design team and

run through the structure and elements of the pricing document that is to be issued, so it is clear what

LOD is required, based on the specifics of the project.

Key learning

Agree the procurement method and RIBA Plan of Work stage(s) and ensure a model is not designed

beyond this point at each stage you are working to. The appropriate level of NRM formal cost plan

can then be used consistently throughout the matching RIBA stage.

3.4. Agreeing on an execution plan

Building on the LOD example in subsection 3.3, Level of detail and level of information, what is

important is how this is defined within the execution plan. The execution plan is just as important to

the quantity surveyor as it is to the other disciplines. From the point of view of a quantity surveyor it

has been noted that the following key points are required within an execution plan:

naming protocols: particular costing software will use the name of the objects to group like

items for quantification; therefore, standard naming protocols must be agreed prior to

commencement such that object names can be understood in plain language. Additionally

they cannot change after this point, as it would make redundant the work the quantity

surveyor will have put into the estimate/pricing document up to this point

LOD versus RIBA Plan of Work versus NRM (see subsection 3.3, Level of detail and level of

information)

definition of a common data environment: in this project it was agreed that the transfer of

model data between the team would take place via the client’s own internet-based information

portal

definition of file format: consider which systems are used and which files can be opened.

Expenditure on design licenses should be avoided where possible, particularly when the

appointment is for a quantity surveyor only

10

file-exporting instructions: software vendors have guides on how files should be saved from

design files to those that a quantity surveyor can open and use. Issue these documents and

include them within the execution plan appendices; and

amalgamated files and ‘by discipline’ files: it is usually important that the designers

understand that the quantity surveyor needs both of these file types and that, when 3D

models are issued, they have checked all of the information included. Far too frequently files

are issued with incomplete information (where layers are turned off etc.). (The lead designer

or nominated person within the execution plan should ensure the amalgamated file is fully

updated prior to issue.)

KEY LEARNING

Understand what information you require and in what format. Clearly state this and ensure it is

captured within the execution plan.

3.5. Naming protocols

Previous experience with other projects of considerably lower complexity and cost had highlighted the

importance of setting up a robust naming protocol as early as possible and retaining it throughout the

duration of the project. This is important for a number of reasons, not least to make analysing the

model as straightforward as possible.

Initially, upon receipt of 3D models that were not specifically optimised for costing, there was

considerable difficulty in understanding what objects within the model were meant to represent. It is

not always practicable, or necessary, to have a high level of visual detail within a model, as long as all

the relevant information is present and clear. However, it was found that, where designers had used

default family names for objects from when they were originally created (not necessarily from the

design software packages), they were totally incoherent, and interrogation of the model itself proved

difficult. This made identification time consuming and, in many cases, almost impossible. As such a

standard naming protocol including plain language descriptions was agreed.

Robust naming protocols did not only make identification of objects much simpler but are also key in

creating a standard name for like objects, which is important to how quantities are taken off in a BIM

environment. Within the software used by Henry Riley, links are created to the names of objects; this

is analysed in more depth in subsection 3.7, Objects and naming conventions; however, the key point

is that names must be kept the same for like objects so as not to quantify objects in the wrong

sections of the estimate/pricing document and unnecessarily increase the time taken to audit the cost

document.

Key learning

It is imperative that naming protocols be introduced and agreed upon as early as possible, so as to

avoid abortive work. It is also important that protocols are followed as deviation can be costly to the

programme – in particular to the quantity surveyor.

3.6 Agreement of data drops with the design team

Prior to commencing the project the client had already agreed a set of data drops against key

milestones within their design and construction phases. These closely followed those identified within

the CIC BIM Protocol document. This project was started without any BIM inputs and as such had

already progressed beyond a number of data-drop stages.

The design team therefore agreed to work to the last data drop stage prior to issuing the tender

information. The drop required the design to be complete to RIBA digital Plan of Work (dPOW) 2013

11

stage 3; however, as the client was quite advanced in understanding its design requirements, what

resulted was a design that was at minimum RIBA stage 3, but in areas such as engineering services

design it contained more detail. As noted in subsection 3.3, Level of detail and level of information, for

a quantity surveyor this poses a potential problem. Should the additional detail be ignored and

measured and priced to the appropriate NRM stage or should the additional detail be included, such

that part of the pricing document provides detail beyond the required level of information? For

example, should all external walls be measured together and therefore rated together as one item, or

should the various wall types be clearly identified and separate rates entered against each one?

As Henry Riley was part of a trial and as both the client and contractor base were familiar with the

specifications, the team decided to include all of the detail that was available. The belief was that the

more detail provided to a contracting party, the more they are empowered to understand the

information and pass on their most competitive tender prices.

Key learning

Understanding of client/CIC BIM Protocol data drops is critical to aligning both RIBA Plan of Work and

NRM pricing documents.

3.7 Objects and naming conventions

Rather than permitting object naming to follow the typical conventions of the particular design practice

responsible, or even to follow the standard families systems in design packages such as Autodesk®

Revit® software products, it is important to agree at project inception how model objects will be

named to allow them to be used most effectively by the whole design team. For the quantity surveyor

this is particularly important as one of their key roles is in the collation and sorting of the data to form

meaningful cost plans.

From the quantity surveyor’s perspective, agreeing to incorporate NRM descriptors into the BIM

object parametrics at the BIM execution plan stage allows successive developments in the model to

align cost comparisons through the cost plan stages as well as to benchmark costs across projects

against data held in house.

It has been noted that individual clients often require cost outputs to be presented in accordance with

their own modelling preferences; object naming conventions should be agreed and adopted from the

outset to enable this to happen.

Once implemented successfully the process of extracting useable quantities is greatly simplified and

cost models can be almost entirely automated. The quantity surveyor’s value can then be maximised

in interrogating the efficiency of the design with reference to the client’s requirements.

Key learning

Objects should be created with all of the data users in mind, and the correct LOD and level of

information should be understood and included to ensure that objects have maximum usability.

3.8 Use of NRM

Previous work undertaken for this client had used a client-specific costing document. However, this

document had a very high level of detail in a number of sections, similar to the level of detail required

for the NRM formal cost plan 3, and a far lower level of detail in other sections. In particular issues

were encountered with the mechanical and electrical services cost plan, as the mechanical and

electrical documentation was highly detailed, and had each work package split by physical location.

The issue of its detail became a problem when trying to incorporate it into the wider cost plan, which

only allowed for a line item for each work package (see NRM1). Furthermore, the issue of costs being

12

split by location caused a problem with naming objects within the models, which in turn would have

resulted in a cost plan that was too detailed.

The aim was to work with industry standards and best practice and initially NRM formal cost plan 3

(NRM FCP 3) was to be incorporated to form the basis of the standard cost documentation. However,

the lower detail of certain sections of the client’s existing cost plan was prohibitive to a certain extent,

particularly due to the fact that the client did not want BIM to have an effect on project timelines, and

also because a number of existing objects would require significant alteration for use with FCP3

(increasing LOD and level of information). The decision was made to use NRM formal cost plan 2

(FCP 2) in order to meet the time constraints, the requirements of dPOW 2013 and to test out the

principles of putting together an NRM BIM tender. Where further detail was available, this was

captured by creating an optional extra ‘level’ to the cost plan, so that developed design could be

quantified, and yet all of the NRM elemental detail was included as intended.

An additional consideration in using an NRM cost plan was the ability to benchmark back to the client-

specific cost plan. The client had a system of coding costs so that each aspect of a project could be

benchmarked back to a ‘blueprint’ model cost. Therefore, moving to an industry standard cost plan

meant incorporating these benchmarking codes. This became a key driver in adding extra detail to the

NRM FCP2 template. Where a line item in FCP2 fell within two of the benchmarking codes, another

level of detail was created below the line item in order to properly allocate costs and give a real

reflection of the expenditure within each section.

Key learning

Understanding the ‘object’ relationship with existing 2D cost model measurement techniques is key to

developing a workable 3D cost model.

3.9 Automatic quantification and understanding of costing software

The role of the quantity surveyor will adapt within the BIM environment. The largest difference will be

the volume of detailed measurement by hand that is no longer required and will be replaced by

automatic quantity take off. There are a number of software solutions that can be used for this;

however, in this project it was considered shrewd to opt for software that not only had automatic take

off, but also the ability to produce and link to costing documents within the same application.

The chosen costing software groups quantities by the object’s name and type. For example, if two

doors or two lengths of wall are named exactly the same then the quantities or dimensions of those

objects will be grouped in the same ‘dimension group’. This is why it is so important for robust naming

protocols to be agreed, so that each object should be in its correct dimension group. Furthermore, the

required parameters of each object should be included within that object, as agreed within the

execution plan, so that, for example, each wall will have the wall area identifiable and not just the

length of wall. This is also a key point for the quality assurance check: a quick review of the

dimensions will show up any obvious errors.

Another important factor is to be able to create a costing document within the software and import the

quantities from the model and the rates from a database. In order to do this a library of cost items was

created along with associated rates so that a priced document could be built. This links in with the

cost detail and LODs agreed on in the execution plan. The costing software has provision to further

interrogate (‘drill down’) levels of a cost plan, revealing increasing detail. What this creates is an

elemental breakdown of items with detailed measurement, rates and costs in a level beneath that

breakdown. This also allows extra detail to be included that was not included within NRM formal cost

plan 2, but was modelled for detailed requirements.

13

Once the cost plans have been established they allow for a quick update to the project costs, subject

to a thorough quality assurance check. Quantities from the model and rates from the rate library are

‘live linked’ to the costing document; as such, whenever the drawings are revised, so long as the

naming protocol has been followed, the cost will automatically update. However, it should be noted

that, as this was a tender document, and was issued with all zero rate values, actual tender figures

are added back once they have been received as part of the return.

Key learning

Review multiple cost software platforms against your role as a quantity surveyor in conjunction with

your practice and client requirements.

3.10 Object detail versus cost detail

An important aspect to consider is how the designed objects integrate with the required cost detail.

Taking the example of a concrete slab, if the costing document being used simply provides a line item

for a slab there is little point in modelling a detailed build-up of all associated elements. However,

planning for this requires collaboration to potentially save time in both the modelling and costing

phase. Continuing with the slab example, if there is a detailed breakdown of all the elements specified

combining the known depth and the area of the slab, one can calculate the volume of the slab and the

other elements using the same object.

Including more designed objects and detail than the costing document requires, possibly due to the

requirements of other applications of the model, will almost certainly be less of an issue than not

producing enough detail within the model to complete the required cost plan. These issues were

noted with regard to internal doors; for example, where there are different specifications of doors

there are not always enough families created to cover all of the different variances and associated

costs. Where internal doors have been grouped into one family and type, including both single and

double doors, these cannot be separately identified and therefore specific rates cannot be applied to

these objects. The model then needs to be updated to reflect the difference in detail, which adds time

to the overall process.

This demonstrates the importance of getting the initial execution plan – specifically the LOD and level

of information – correct in conjunction with the naming protocols agreed before the start of any design

to avoid unnecessary delays, and particularly to let the design team have an understanding of the

required costing detail before developing further objects.

When the NRM formal cost plans become more widely used and object libraries become more

developed this will be less of an issue, but while this process develops it will be key for the project

team to be proactive.

Key learning

Decide the detail your pricing document will reflect at an early stage. It will be difficult to change this

after design has begun, as it may require new objects to be created.

3.11 Coordination and benchmarking with the client’s existing cost model

The client Henry Riley was appointed by uses ‘blueprint’ principles for design and cost, so they can

benchmark and drive efficiencies within their business. Therefore, an added complication of working

with this existing data had to be dealt with. Due to the detail of the existing cost model, it was felt that

it was not appropriate to use the same detailed document for contractor pricing on a design and build

procured project, where the existing contractor base was more familiar with producing simple cost

tender returns.

14

It was agreed that using NRM as a standard was a suitable way to proceed for pricing, despite the

contractor base not being familiar with it. Setting up the NRM database was straightforward within the

costing software; however, there was the additional requirement of being able to benchmark back to

the existing ‘2D cost database’.

The costing software has the ability to add extra detail against each cost line as required. Therefore,

an additional column was added to the client’s specific coding system. Once data were exported from

the cost software to the external spreadsheet software, it was possible to sort the information and

benchmark back to the client’s existing cost database.

Key learning

Understand how you can utilise existing cost data with NRM and understand what capabilities your

BIM cost software has to assist you with this to avoid manual benchmarking.

3.12 Coordination of design detail

During the process of the design it is important that all of the designers collaborate towards an

amalgamated design in order to avoid abortive work and to minimise clashes within the final model.

As BIM is a collaborative process it is imperative that regular design coordination meetings take

place, out of which an updated, clash-free, amalgamated model should be produced. The quantity

surveyor, if they feel it beneficial, will carry out a quantity measure of each updated model and

undertake a quality assurance check. It is important to run a quality assurance report that checks how

the data have been used. This allows the quantity surveyor to provide specific feedback on naming

protocols, LOD, level of information and any missing objects prior to the following coordination

meeting, for incorporation within the designers’ models. This prevents delays towards the end of the

design period as problems are identified earlier.

Key learning

BIM is a collaborative process, but due care and attention is required when amalgamating models and

interpreting data.

3.13 Importance of quality assurance

Quality assurance is likely to become even more important to the role of the quantity surveyor. The

quantity surveyor now receives information, where previously they would collect the data themselves;

this requires a robust quality assurance procedure for checking data accuracy, as information can

very easily be miscommunicated within a model, as demonstrated at the RICS BIM Conference 2014.

1 If the correct naming protocols and design standards have been met, then the quantity

surveyor should receive a clash-free, coordinated and amalgamated model with no

quantification errors. However, there have been examples of duplication of the same object

by different disciplines, so the quantity surveyor should have a procedure in place to

undertake some measurement checks, probably using the software’s inbuilt measurement

tools, as well as comparing key indicators such as roof area with floor area. A visual

inspection of the module is key.

2 Good quantity surveyor software should have inbuilt reports that enable quality assurance

checks to be carried out. Different software vendors have different levels of reporting

capability from non-existent to detailed line-by-line reports. All quantity surveyors should try to

work with the software vendors to continually improve these tools, as the quantity surveyor is

the end user.

15

The costing software used by Henry Riley included a feature called a references report. This

gave a line-by-line report of how the data had been used, detailing:

a) where objects were modelled, but not used within the estimate/pricing

document

b) where objects were modelled and used within the estimate/pricing

document and against what line of the report

c) what lines within the estimate/pricing document had quantity information

included against them; and

d) what lines within the estimate/pricing document did not have quantity

information against them.

3 Once it has been checked that the information has been utilised correctly, the final quality

assurance check should be the same procedure that a quantity surveyor would undertake in a

non-BIM environment. Using the quantity surveyor’s knowledge, expertise and benchmarking

experience, the quantities, rates and project values should be analysed to ensure they are as

expected.

On the project in question, estimates had already been produced through the early stages of the

project and as such Henry Riley was able to cross-check the quantities and outturn cost against these

estimates to ensure the cost model was aligned. Where it was not aligned, it could be checked

whether the BIM model had developed or contained any errors. Generally, it was noted that the model

produced the information as expected.

With this project, it was fortunate that existing cost and design information was available; however, it

did not test the quality assurance procedures fully, as a BIM model had not been used from inception

and a safety net of 2D designs and cost was in place.

Key learning

Review in-house quality assurance procedures and ensure they can work within model data outputs

and associated cost software.

3.14 Tender inclusions

Within the tender documents issued, additional BIM outputs from the various models produced were

included. While it did not seem prudent to burden the contractors with additional expense during a

tender period where they were already required to interpret information in a form that they had not

previously received, it was important to obtain as much benefit from the trial as possible.

As with most cost software, the software used in this project was able to export to other file types.

Therefore, information was exported to external spreadsheet software so that amendments, additional

information and rates could be applied by the contractors in a form familiar to them. In addition, a ‘free

viewer’ version of the project-specific pricing document that showed the relationship with the design

model and the pricing schedule with quantities was issued. This file could not be edited by the

contractor, but various layers within the model could be switched on and off, giving the contractor

clear identification of how the various measurements had been built up when read in conjunction with

the measurement descriptions. This meant that queries from the measurement could be resolved by

the contractors themselves in the first instance.

16

By providing both the spreadsheet document and the free version of the pricing document, more

detailed data were provided to the contractor, but without the expense of purchasing additional

software or training.

Other notable tender inclusions were:

CIC BIM Protocol

3D models in design software format

client-specific contract amendments, including specific BIM requirements; and

client-specific BIM protocols and procedures using EIRS.

Key learning

Prior to starting the tender period, undertake a pre-qualification process with the potential tenderers to

understand their capabilities and what software interfaces they can work with.

17

4 Post-tender review

4.1 Mid-tender interview feedback

Two clear themes were identified during the mid-tender interviews:

use of the BIM model; and

having the correct tools and technologies.

During the interviews with the various contractors it became evident that the contractor base was

struggling to view and understand the 3D models. Requests for PDFs and hard-copy print outs were

frequent; however, this was something that the project team were not prepared to issue, as it would

defeat the purpose and intended outputs of this BIM tender trial. It should be noted that the

contractors were pre-qualified and their BIM capability assessed. Based on the client’s requirement to

complete the build before Christmas 2014, the tender period was reduced to accommodate an earlier

on-site start date. The reduced tender period put pressure on the contractors’ supply chains that were

not in a position to view and interpret BIM data, hence the requests for the more traditional transfer of

information.

It was also clear during the mid-tender interviews that the various contactors did not possess the

correct tools and technologies. An inability to use the various systems required proved a delay to

understanding the data that was available to them. This, coupled with only basic in-house usability

and expertise, meant the contractors found it difficult to fully understand and progress during the initial

tender period.

4.2 Tender analysis and contractor engagement

Three out of the five tenderers submitted a pricing document that broadly matched the document that

was derived from the costing software and included in the tender documents. One of the other

tenderers submitted only the summary sheet provided and only on request provided back up in the

required form. The final contractor submitted the summary sheet provided with their own pricing

document as back up.

Of the three who followed the pricing document, only one used the majority of the quantities taken

from the costing software and this, incidentally, was the contractor who offered the lowest price and

was eventually appointed. As well as offering the lowest price and engaging most readily with BIM

processes overall, the work packages that were modelled were where the winning contractor had the

most competitive prices. Items of risk, which neither the BIM model or survey information could detail,

were also priced more competitively by the winning contractor which had a contributory effect on the

overall competitiveness of these work packages. At the time of writing there was not enough

information to analyse how much of an impact the BIM aspect had on these prices, although it is

anticipated that this analysis will be able to be carried out at the end of the project when all risks have

been realised and all subcontract packages let.

In terms of analysis of the tenders themselves, it was considered by the quantity surveyors that using

the NRM pricing document made analysing the tenders simpler and more accurate. Furthermore,

adding client cost codes throughout the document allowed easy benchmarking back to the client’s

previous pricing documents.

4.3 Contractor feedback

The tender was met with mixed responses from the contractors. Generally speaking, those who had

the highest price did not engage well with the BIM tender process. Specifically, these contractors did

18

not want to work solely with a 3D model, and without the provision of 2D drawings they struggled to

effectively disseminate the information through their supply chain. This meant that an already tight

tender period was effectively made shorter with delays in getting information out to the supply chain.

In contrast, the feedback from the winning tenderer was far more positive. They fed back that they

had used the same costing software to drive efficiency in the tender process. They were clearly the

most heavily engaged with BIM, and therefore reaped more of the benefits it can afford. They were

also the only tenderer to provide their own model or mention the costing software during the post-

tender interview.

4.4 Issues encountered

While the NRM format worked well for the analysis of tenders, it was noted that the extra detail

entered into formal cost plan 2 (FCP2) may not be best suited to a design and build (D&B)

procurement route. It was considered that, while FCP2 works well for D&B, the detail closer to formal

cost plan 3 (FCP3) is more appropriate for a traditional contract. As mentioned in subsection 4.2,

Tender analysis and contractor engagement, only one contractor properly used the NRM template

and quantities and even then extra lines were added where descriptions were not adequate, although

this was expected to a degree.

Another issue that was encountered was the time constraint that was placed on the tenderers. The

tender period was already considered to be short, particularly for a BIM trial, but this was exacerbated

by a number of changes throughout the tender period and, as a result of this, the work-in-progress

design. In addition, the client changes meant that the previous library of information did not

adequately cover the scope of the project and as such time was devoted to object creation and

naming as opposed to design development. Therefore, it was found by the contractors that there were

also a number of clashes in the models along with the unfinished design.

19

5 Lessons learnt

5.1 Starting a BIM journey

The experience that Henry Riley gained through its BIM journey, and in particular in connection with

this case study project, enabled the identification of some initial steps that it is believed allow a BIM

novice to start their own BIM journey.

1. Working with BIM should be seen as undertaking the usual role of the quantity surveyor, but

with better data. Therefore, the key to removing any fear of BIM is to gain experience in it.

Quantity surveyors should begin to learn how to work with the new systems and data and

undertake the tasks themselves. By learning and doing, a BIM novice will gain the

experience they require. One method that was used to gain experience was to run a 5D

exercise at the same time as a more traditional route, therefore avoiding making any mistakes

along the way and being able to benchmark the progress in BIM.

2. Once the experience has been gained, this will bring confidence to both the individual and

the wider organisation. With a greater degree of confidence the quantity surveyor will be able

to ask questions of others, integrate with other systems and challenge methods of working

and required outputs. Only by challenging what they are told, in conjunction with

understanding their existing role, will they be able to maximise the BIM benefits that can be

achieved

3. Once an organisation has the confidence to discuss and debate their BIM involvement the

next steps are to work with others and engage their own supply chain. A key theme

associated with working with BIM is collaboration, but if the supply chain used is not aligned

with business objectives, then it will also prevent the business from fully realising its BIM

benefits.

4. With a supply chain in place and increasing BIM knowledge within an organisation, the next

step is to tell clients what is known, what can be done and how the organisation can help

them on their BIM journey and ultimately save them time and money. Once these discussions

are engaged in, progress can be benchmarked and the BIM journey can be analysed to see if

it has achieved what it set out to do, and a return on investment can be evaluated.

5.2 Use of NRM in a BIM environment

The use of NRM on this project was not without its difficulties. This project followed the design and

build procurement method and, as such, a form of NRM 1 was utilised as a pricing document. It was

felt this was a good way to proceed as it enabled quantities to be produced for the benefit of the

contractor. This was an attempt to try and give confidence to the contractor that they were using

accurate quantities which in turn could be passed to their subcontractors in the hope of more

competitive rates. There can also be conflicts in the object nature of BIM designs versus the NRM

structure that exists where like items can appear within different sections and not be grouped as

objects.

By working through the detail of this project and understanding what is possible, a more traditional

method of procurement seems to lend itself to a BIM project. The design team could complete their

full design package and a full NRM 2 quantity take-off could then be achieved. A review of the

procurement method and level of NRM structure and quantity measure is clearly a debate that

quantity surveyors and design teams need to engage with in today’s BIM conversations and at the

beginning of every new project. BIM has the opportunity to deliver more accurate quantities in less

time; however, coordination of the information and accuracy of what is designed is a factor, and for

the short to medium term adopting an approach of using NRM 1 for pricing documents may suit the

current market place.

20

It was noted that, when using NRM for the basis of tender, the object naming did not always line up

with the NRM categorisation for measurement. In order to make best use of the NRM method of

measuring it was felt that naming protocols should have been worked through in line with NRM. By

naming objects in this way the 3D models would have required more consideration for how objects

were used and in turn result in fewer clashes. Any future naming of objects should be reviewed with

the quantity surveyor prior to being created to ensure the data could be used to everyone’s benefit.

At the time of writing, level 2 BIM was still being finalised. It is therefore important that quantity

surveyors are focused on the current requirements of level 2 BIM and provide feedback to help define

its requirements once a final level 2 definition has been agreed upon. Currently level 2 is very design

focused and quantity surveyors need to work with RICS to ensure cost-management processes are

on the agenda.

5.3 Tender period: next steps

Due to this being an early BIM trial, more time is needed for contractors to understand the processes

required to submit a BIM tender. Despite the fact that a BIM prequalification questionnaire was sent

out, the tenderers were not familiar with the specific requirements of this client. Furthermore, the

prequalifying questionnaire did not ask about the tenderer’s supply chain. In the future, all BIM

prequalification questionnaires should ask if the supply chain is able to use BIM data; or, failing that, if

the contractor has the capability to change the 3D models into 2D information for smaller suppliers.

Additionally, more time and preparation needs to be allowed for the designers. It is imperative that the

information is well developed when the tenders are issued. This means that, even if there are

changes, objects are already available in the library rather than having to be created from 2D

information. In time, more objects will be created from other schemes and the library content will

improve; however, until this has been achieved, more time needs to be afforded for the design

process. This extra time should also result in more detail being put into the models as well as fewer

errors from a short modelling period and more time for better coordination, improving use of objects

and reducing clashes.

5.4 Information (BIM) Manager and next steps for the quantity surveyor

Within the industry there is a lot discussion about information/BIM managers, including who should

undertake this role, and what it involves. As highlighted in subsection 3.1, Understanding the role of

the quantity surveyor in relation to 5D BIM, the project quantity surveyor on a BIM project becomes

the first user of all of the data, which includes a requirement to audit the information. The quantity

surveyor is therefore best placed to order the data in such a way that the information can be

interpreted and used correctly. Although the lead designers have often taken on the role of the

information manager, it is the quantity surveyors who find themselves in a position to review all of the

disciplines’ output and provide feedback on the information produced, and additionally a review of the

data will be from a functionality and usability perspective rather than a design perspective. As such

the quantity surveyors are best positioned to undertake the role of information manager, including an

audit role for quality assurance. As BIM develops further, as does the RICS BIM Management

qualification, it is expected over the coming years that the quantity surveyor will have a prominent role

to play across all BIM projects, providing the knowledge and value to support both clients and design

teams alike, which in turn will support Peter Hansford’s 2025 vision goals and targets of:

‘PEOPLE an industry that is known for its talented and diverse workforce

SMART an industry that is efficient and technologically advanced

SUSTAINABLE an industry that leads the world in low-carbon and green construction exports

GROWTH an industry that drives growth across the entire economy

LEADERSHIP an industry with clear leadership from a Construction Leadership Council.’

21

(Construction 2025, HM Government, 2013)

Crown copyright material is reproduced under the Open Government Licence v2.0 for public

sector information: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/

22

Glossary

Autodesk® Revit®

software products

Widely used 3D design packages.

CIC BIM Protocol Construction Information Council Building Information Management

(BIM) Protocol 2013

Common data

environment

Defined within PAS 1192-2:2013 as a ‘single source of information for

any given project, used to collect, manage and disseminate all

relevant approved project documents for multi-disciplinary teams in a

managed process’ (PAS 1192-2:2013, BSI, 2013).

Data drops Predefined stages of the project where design information at

predefined levels of information is shared between disciplines.

dPOW Digital Plan of Work.

EIRS Employers Information Requirements (defined within PAS 1192-

2:2013).

FCP Formal cost plan: stages of cost planning re-defined within the New

Rules of Measurement.

Level of information Defined within PAS 1192-2:2013 as ‘the description of non-graphical

content of models at each of the stages defined, for example, in the

CIC Scope of Services’ (PAS 1192-2:2013, BSI, 2013).

LOD Defined within PAS 1192-2:2013: ‘Describes the “granularity” of

graphical and parametric content contained within the Building

Information Model’.

NRM 1 RICS New Rules of Measurement: Order of cost estimating and cost

planning for capital building works.

NRM 2 RICS New Rules of Measurement: Detailed measurement for building

works.

SME Small to medium enterprises.

23

Bibliography

BSI, PAS 1192.2: Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of

construction projects using building information modelling, BSI, 2013 (ISBN 978 0 580 78136 0)

CIC/BIM Pro, Building Information Model (BIM) Protocol: Standard Protocol for Use in Projects Using Building Information Models (1st edition), CIC, 2013

RICS New Rules of Measurement 1: Order of cost estimating and cost planning for capital building

works (2nd edition), RICS guidance note, RICS, 2012 (ISBN 978 1 84219 768 4)

RICS New Rules of Measurement 2: Detailed measurement for building works (1st edition), RICS

guidance note, RICS, 2012 (ISBN 978 1 84219 716 5)

Websites

BIM4SME: www.bim4sme.org

BIM Forum: https://bimforum.org

BIM Task Group: www.bimtaskgroup.org

RIBA Plan of Work 2013: www.ribaplanofwork.com

Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors: www.rics.org