Session 3: Construction and Operation

Next Page | Previous Page

Executive Summary

This session focused on the process of handing over the project to the contractors. The contractors in turn taking the information forward and the building operators using the information developed in the design and build stages.

As with session 2, there was a significant debate over whether interference and coordination checking needed to occur at all. Some suggesting that if we could get stage 2, Design Delivery correct then it wouldn’t be.

There was a lack of clarity over the process for developing federated design data and who would be responsible for this, with some suggesting it was the contractors role, other the design leads. It did however seem to be consensus that the resulting models and information should be federated in neutral and open formats. In the case of a graphical model, Autodesk Navisworks (NWD) and Industry Foundation Class (IFC) were repeatedly suggested as appropriate formats.

It was repeatedly stated that the Design Models cannot be expected to immediately transfer to the contractor requirements. Design models are simply not created with these requirements in mind. The example of un-spliced columns was used to illustrate this. It was suggested that the contractors needed to be involved in the Design meetings to ensure that their requirements could be correctly communicated and understood.

For the same reason, it was suggested that the QS or cost consultant role needs to be involved at an earlier stage of design to ensure that information they require can be extracted. This would have to include an understanding of supplier capability and who was participating in the modelling process, as well as what elements suppliers would model.

A general theme here seems to be that that all parties need to be involved at an earlier stage, including assigning clear responsibilities of the team in order to meet over requirements for this to effectively work. This seems to significantly differ from traditional project setup.

With regard to handing over the model to the building operators, there are concerns regarding the integrity of graphical data. It was repeatedly pointed that a design model is neither complete nor as built and this needs to be considered and understood by the client. There is agreement to the principle of data drops however this event demonstrated that current guidance has not been sufficient for this activity to be understood.

Next Page | Previous Page