rics professional information, uk - bim institute · 1 rics information paper rics professional...
TRANSCRIPT
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