BIM CoDE•SA | BimcommunityAfrica

Convention for a Digital eSouth Africa: CoDE•SA

This white paper is presented in part, towards a series of papers in the development of a South African digital infrastructure delivery, beyond Building Information Modelling policy.

This paper is intended to inform and guide in the development and implementation of a National South African Policy on Digital Infrastructure, Design, Delivery, Operations and Management.

Download the white paper

Convention for a Digital South Africa
Laying the foundation for the digital transformation of South Africa’s built environment

Building Information Modelling, or Better Information Management, BIM, holds tremendous potential to boost project delivery during all phases of projects, for the benefit of project stakeholders and ultimate users of those built assets. The skills, processes and technologies required are already widely used in South Africa. Our industry is poised and ready for wholesale adoption of this transforming approach to development. What we need is a national policy to create an environment for all the stakeholders to operate within to deliver the benefits to our citizens.

The BIM Community Africa (BCA) has undertaken a number of key actions to pave the way for the creation of such a Policy. BCA have established a network of Professionals related to the built environment, representing public sector, private sector and education. These professionals operate in various domains, ranging from planning and policy to architecture, engineering, construction and facilities management. Through this active network, BCA have championed the adoption of the ISO19650 standard by the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS). The process of comment and adoption by SABS is well underway with the first two of the modules of this 5-part standard, having already been circulated for industry comment.

These activities by the BCA have created a groundswell of interest and awareness of the potential benefits of BIM implementation to the South African Construction sector. The topic of BIM adoption has been studied by various tertiary institutions, answering the question “why is BIM not adopted more widely?” Consistently, the findings point to the absence of a South African Policy about the use of BIM in South Africa. Anecdotal evidence within the BCA at its various conferences and meetings supports these findings, and has led to this BIM CODE•SA Initiative.

The vision of the BIM CODE•SA is to commence with the process to develop A BIM Policy, by the South African AEC industry, for adoption by the Cabinet of the Republic of South Africa. The policy should define the Roadmap for meaningful implementation of BIM in the Built Environment of South Africa, for the benefit of its citizens.

The development of a Policy is clearly defined in the National Policy Development Framework (NPDF 2020). Policy development will require a Task Team to drive the process, involving key stakeholders, subject matter experts, policy drafters, industry professionals, representatives from government departments, educators and researchers. This is a mammoth task.

It is with this vision in mind that we held a half-day workshop on 20 April 2023 in Fourways, Johannesburg that was a collective first step towards this policy development, during which we discussed the need for this policy, identified the key benefits of the policy, and set out to establish a Task Team to drive this policy development.

Workshop 1 - 20 April 2023

Opening remarks from Amanda Filtane, event moderator:

BIM CODE-SA: BIM Convention for a Digital eSouth Africa

Towards a Digital Built South Africa
Inclusive and Progressive
Undivided SA > United Built Environment
Common citizenship > common data environments
Patriotism + Loyalty = Digital B.E. (Built Environment) “for us, by us”

Harnessing the power of digital technologies in:

Increasing the rate at which infrastructure is:
- Planned
- Delivered
Improving inefficiencies in managing infrastructure

Why do we need BIM and why do we need a national policy?

Facilitator: Richard Matchett (Digital Lead, Zutari).

Delegates: Nikki van der Walt (Technical Solution Executive COO, Autodesk), Professor Innocent Musonda (Professor: Construction Management, UJ, Director Centre for Applied Research + Innovation in the Built Environment), Nicolette Pingo (Programme Manager: Inclusive Cities, South African Cities Network), Michael van Rooyen (CIO, GIC)

Benefits / Why?

Information availability, enabling the generation of revenue, and planning
Lack of information makes the management of facilities very difficult.
Efficiencies - workflows make life easier and save time and effort.
Inefficiencies from engineers to contractors, transfer of design information into construction information,
Progress reporting, frequent progress information updates.

The little guys

Access information, update project status easily, remain updated through changes,
The little guys… better information to drive procurements, payments, material planning.
Digitised processes are quick, payment approvals are quick, complete value chain is better.
Visualisation and clarity of scope, technical complexity… comms to the community, tradesmen, stakeholders, politicians…
Information is valuable, to communicate issues, problems, risks…
Common view of project intent, common view of “need to know” information

Challenges to overcome…

Back yard dwellings… informal development is big, how would BIM apply to them?… does it need to? If its not practical, is it a “why not” or is it another topic to explore in due course? Better Information Management applies to these dwellings too, and is relevant.
Different categories of projects / asset types / compliance requirements etc. that would trigger different grades of requirements for BIM
Each category of asset would have a requirement.
Transitional process - Level 1…Level 2…? Similar to the UK?
Access to technology, viewability of models, IFC and open BIM standards?
For local, un-digitalised contractors, BIM will support the drive to digitalise the country

Facilitator: Jay Moolman (Director and General Manager, Modena AEC and I).

Delegates: Alastair de Wet (Territory Sales Manager: ZAR, Autodesk), Carla Schmidt (Lecturer and Coordinator of the Foundation Programme at the Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, TUT), Neelan Moodier (Director, LDM)

During the table discussion on "Why BIM?", the participants highlighted the numerous advantages of Building Information Management (BIM), including:

rapid clash resolution,
informed decision-making,
breaking down silos,
improved project management,
better planning,
increased efficiency,
value for money,
enhanced service delivery,
accurate data for bill of quantities,
live data control,
global competitiveness,
cost savings due to reduced information loss,
effective information dissemination.

The discussion emphasized BIM's ability to scale and its potential to make South Africa more attractive for foreign direct investment.

Final Benefit Statement:

Building Information Management (BIM) enables better information management and collaboration, resulting in improved service delivery and increased global competitiveness for South Africa, thereby attracting more foreign direct investment.

Facilitator: Selvan Murugan (Digital Practice Leader, Zutari).

Delegates: Geraldine Clark (Territory Account Sales Executive, Autodesk), Ian le Roux (Head of Department, Systems Development, GIC), Lucert Nkuna (Manager, LDM), Dipesh Dhaya (Senior Architectural Technologist, Datascape Architects)

We started off by being practical and understanding the many benefits that BIM provides in terms of project management, real-time decision making, and information sharing. The ideas evolved and the team started seeing BIM for what it is i.e., the production of data collaboratively for many purposes – some still to be defined. It was realised that the benefit is the data and using data services to derive additional value for all stakeholders from project teams to infrastructure users – everyone can make use of the data to produce value. This can give rise to a value driven, digital economy to build skills, and services.

Benefit Statement:

We want to do BIM to maximise the benefits of 4IR technology to do better projects and then positively impact the economy through:

Better efficiency
Freeing up capacity
Transforming old ways of working, people don’t want to be stuck in old ways of working

Facilitator: Gary Mansfield (BIM Manager, CKR Engineers).

Delegates: Rory Green (Territory Sales Manager: Anglophone Africa, Autodesk), Phillip Sherman (Specialist Lecturer, TUT), Pumelele Qongqo (Monitoring and Evaluation Officer, CIDB), Sikhulile Nhassengo (Director, Maninga Engineering), Elna van der Merwe (BIM Coordinator, DRA Global)

The need for a Digital Project Delivery (DPD) policy would is beneficial for the South African AEC, INF and MFG industries. This policy will assist these industries by providing guidelines on how better information management will benefit public and private sectors to manage, maintain, and renovate existing and/or newly built assets.

Digital Project Delivery policy would be used by all to demystify Building Information Modelling (BIM) and provide clarity on the usage of these methodologies in the different stages of work prescribed in PROCSA/RIBA and other types of contracts. The policy will assist with embracing technology with clarity and understanding the technology will be the enabler for better information management.

Finally, the DPD policy will provide a clear indication of standardized deliverables that can be executed on any project scale. The policy guidelines will need to look at updated contractual agreements which include workflows, processes, risk allocations, IP rights, and electronic data exchange and should always benefit all stakeholders.

Facilitator: Andrew Mason (Director, Workplace Fundi).

Delegates: Rouxdolf Wentzel (Director and Founder, Amber Financial and Risk Management Services), Logan Reddy (President, SAAMA), Willem Kruger (Architect and Heritage Specialist, HP Architects), Philangetehmba Buthelezi (Project Engineer- Architectural, VWSA), Confident Dlamini (Candidate Property Valuer, Paras)

WHY BIM?

It’s the responsible thing to do!

Firstly, we debated whether this should be led by the private sector or by the public sector.

Public Sector

The issue revolved around the time it would take to get acceptance and whether in fact anything would be done. GIAMA (Government Immovable Asset Management Act) was a policy approved by cabinet in 2005 and enacted into law in 2007 but nothing was actually done. Leaving us with the belief that even if policy was written it is unlikely to be implemented and therefore seen as a red herring or a dead duck.

Private Sector

The question therefore should this be led by the private sector. However, this was seen as not inclusive and unlikely to create the catalyst required to have widespread acceptance.

PPP

It was then debated that the PPP (Public Private Partnerships) environment could be the right avenue to advance the BIM agenda as these are projects delivered by the private sector. If BIM were to be stipulated as a requirement (similar to the level two BIM requirement in the UK) then this could see at least the nascent acceptance of BIM. This would require the payment community to lobby Treasury as the owner of PPPs.

GBCSA

Then we debated whether policy was in fact required at all. The example of GBCSA was used as an example of developments that are now the institutional standard for developments. The businesses for sustainable green developments was outlined in the GPCS a document “Rands and Sense” which highlighted the business case for sustainable development. BIM is often seen as a nice-to-have as opposed to a financial benefit.

Catalyst

We hit upon the idea of BIM as a catalyst. Using the chemical analogy of an additive that speeds up a reaction/ experiment, making it more efficient or more effective without actually affecting the end result.

BIM was seen as the integrator of all data in a common data environment that not only brings the design team together but would continue throughout the BIM value chain. This would result in no data loss and a recognised single version of the truth that would aid and abet efficient and effective decision-making based on data throughout the whole life cycle of the building.

Better information at the outset of the project would result in more accurate and better tendering from those equipped to understand the data. One of the knock-on effects from this would be less corruption and a levelling across the board of the players in the construction industry. We would need to lower the barrier of entry for the smaller players, but this would result in job creation potential of unlocking new markets similar to the iPhone App Store.

Facilitator: Rob Thane (Director, LYT Architects).

Delegates: Jani Viljoen (BIM Consultant, Baker Baynes), Roelof van den Berg (CEO, GIC), William Wilkie (BIM Lead, Geberit), Istell Orton (Professional Planner, Citeplan), Peter Webb (SAICE IT Division, Chair/Treasurer)

Why should there be a BIM policy in South Africa?

Part of the discussion which resulted in the below bullet points around the adoption of a benefit statement, revolved around WHO the benefit statement is / should be targeted at. This was quite a debate in its own right, as each stakeholder would have their own reason for adopting or enabling a policy within their respective environments. Summarized below and in no particular order are the following:

Time Saving

There was unilateral agreement that with the adoption of BIM principles and the way in which it should be working there would be a substantial saving of time – from ALL parties. This is particularly relevant in the current fast-paced environment that we find ourselves. A lot of the time, the consultants are appointed very late in the process and the contractor is urgently calling for information. Using BIM technologies is a way to enable this.

Access to Info

Using a Common Data Environment (CDE) is a way to ensure that all relevant stakeholders have access to the latest (and most correct) info. It reduces the likelihood of incorrect information being issued.

Usability of Info

The info that is placed into the CDE is generally intelligent as opposed to be a static document. This leads to informed decisions being made. Whether it is measuring constructability, comparing changes made to info issued in different revisions or measuring info for inclusion in a Bill of Quantities. All the info is centralized and controlled so it should all be singing from the same hymn sheet.

Integration of Multi-disciplinary Info

The opportunity for integration of all info in one place in one model is invaluable in the coordination process. The knock on of this is that clashes can be picked up before the contractor even moves to site. The theory behind this is that there should be very little abortive work on site and hence major cost savings.

Efficient Workflows

The efficiency of the workflows is a huge contributing factor to the adoption of these BIM processes. Especially in the current localized environment in which we find ourselves. There is a huge amount of pressure on the bottom line for all stakeholders. From developers, to consultants, to end users and even the facilities management teams. So, the old adage of “Time is Money” rings true in that by being efficient, there is a time saving and hence a cost saving.

Risk Mitigation

With the adoption of clear and concise consolidated information, all risks for all stakeholders in the process can be mitigated.

Clear Deliverables

By using ISO principles in the planning phases before the “real” work starts, there is a clear definition of what information needs to be delivered at what stage of the project and what that information is to be used for. This translates into time savings as well as the associated risk mitigations as mentioned previously.

Better Decision Making

With access to better information, there is the opportunity for better decision making from a financial, design and opportunity point of view.

Contractor Integration

The final point is that the BIM processes allow for greater contractor involvement from an earlier stage which enables design decisions to be made based on Contractors work flows, processes and construction methodologies.

The adoption of a BIM Policy is an absolute necessity in our opinion, but, it was widely realized and understood that the theory and the implementation are often two widely separate issues. It was our belief that the starting point to enable the adoption is to be driven through the above principles into the Private Sector and once clients in particular start insisting on the adoption of these principles, the rest of the stakeholders will be pulled along and the benefits of adoption will be realized.

Facilitator: Rudd van Deventer (Director, Spaceworx).

Delegates: Nick Tenner (VDC Manager, WBHO), Dash Coville (Technical Manager, Special Projects, GBCSA), Bridgette Hattingh (Training and Accreditation Administrator, ASAQS), Rudi Vermaak (HOD Structures, iXEngineers)

The table had representatives of the professional and construction side of the industry and the discussion was focused on the practicalities of rolling out BIM.

Who

An interesting aspect to come up was the descripting from FEDIC that BIM was a ‘Way of Doing’ and not a Deliverable!

Why

Integrated Project Delivery - The biggest reason for the adoption of BIM or Digital modelling was the ability to run an integrated project.

‘Into a wall’ was a description of the current status with people requiring 2D from 3D models to work on site. There was a bit of a misunderstanding about the capabilities of the authoring software which can set up 2D views in the model so that a separate version of the information is not generated.

It was understood that the National Annex would provide the necessary guidance and define the roles in producing a digital project.

BIM Execution Plan – there was a need to set up many aspects of a project at the outset and to get all parties to agree on timelines and deliverables. There was not an understanding of the ‘Level of Information Need’ (LOIN) definition with confusion with other LoD descriptions such as Detail and Development.

There was a call for Estimating Software that can work with the main digital model and not require a separate database. Measure rates, Value and duration for managing the construction process. Hopefully this software will not require a BIM co-ordinator as a project overhead. What was also mentioned was the need to have rules and a policy around the model preparation – another necessity to be covered in the National Annex.

There was a concern that there needs to be a process to finalise the digital model to include information that informs the type of construction contract and terms. The value of the digital model was discussed and the loss of embodied knowledge through a lack of a repository for the information and an extract of the relevant information for Facilities Management.

The primary benefits for all parties were from Collaboration and Integration – this requires a focus on teaching and a set of common standards, formats, and policies. These will support the environment.

How

The national Annex once explained was seen as an essential part of the adoption of Information Management for Building (IMfB) or BIM. The primary focus must be on educating the built environment!

It was also seen as an opportunity to promote Buy-in through the value chain with each person having a stake in the success.

The procurement methodology for both Public and Private entities was seen as part of the education and roll-out process.

Facilitator: Ginika Egwuonwu (Founder, Project Management Consultant, The Closed Circuit).

Delegates: Amanda Filtane (Lecturer of Construction Management, UCT), Vuyani Gxagxama (Vice President - Technical Divisions, IMESA), Otto Botha (MD, WACO), Brian Mahachi (Director, Artis Quantity Surveyors)

Why aren't we using BIM in SA?

THERE'S A TRUST DEFICIENCY BETWEEN THE different roles players on a construction project. It also raises the question of how does one protect their IP.
There is a perception of one losing their competitive edge by being overly transparent and cooperative.
The contracts and industry is set up in a way that doesn't foster collaboration amongst the different role players, but makes things more adversarial.
The competition commission also encourages the protection of IP and competitive edge, which doesn't encourage a collaborative environment. In the public sector space, the use of BIM would introduce transparency and expose the errors, faults and corruptive practises of people. In the public sector space, there is no incentive to share success stories between agencies as there are usuaully political agendas to portray the one political party as being better than others. There is also no incentive to implement long-term solutions that would go beyond one's service tenure. Also, government agencies have mandates to spend money or their budget which contradicts to the benefits of BIM finding ways to save money.
The other aspect why people arent BIMing like they should is the perceived benefit of its investment. Many professionals can't see ROI, they also feel like the cost of investment might be significant and hence they aren't compelled to make the investment

Why BIM and How to Adopt it?

It will make projects more efficient, it would allow for the continual improvement of the information and structure, it creates transparency and a common goal.
For the public sector, it would speed up processes and would speed up South Africa's goal to deliver infrastructure.
It would lead to increased cost certainty.
We need a public sector and private sector approach -

Public sector approach:

Implementation of ISO 19650 and Policy to compel public sector works to implement BIM.
Getting public sector and private sector to work together. We need incentives for municipalities or districts to transfer best practise knowledge between themselves. Right now, due to politics and different municipalitoes being managed by different political parties, there isn't collaboration as each party wants to put perform each other.

For private sector:

Get the design team and the execution of the design on the same contractual team, so there are shared risks and shared reward, which would foster and open & collaborative atmosphere and approach.

Facilitator: Marius Bierman (VDC Manager, MD Construction).

Delegates: Nathan York (Managing Director, York Bros), Ketumile Mojanaga (Research Architect, CSIR), Wally Mayne (Manager, Contractual Affairs, CESA), George Young (CAD Coordinator, DRA Global), Lungelo Sibande (Draughting Engineer, Maninga Engineering)

Why BIM

Our discussion initially highlighted the following keywords/phrases:

Collaboration
Total cost management
Time management
Information
Makes life easier
Increases productivity
Better life cycle management
Complex to simple
Optimizing of lifecycle phases
Accuracy and live up to date data
Less time waste
One stop shop (CDE) for data
Same playing field
Inspires trust

Our discussion covered topics from a top-down and a bottom-up perspective. Top-down discussion included lofty ideals where collaboration is key but does not really address the why. We then looked from a different approach, i.e. bottom-up. We attempted to distil all of the keywords and phrases to answer the question ‘why’. BIM is human-centric, and the discussion leads to a more individualistic view. The industry practitioner first needs to realise the benefit and value add proposition of why BIM needs to be implemented. We concluded with a benefit statement that reads. “BIM is a collaboration tool that increases my productivity, increases the productivity of my colleagues and has immense possibility to improve the productivity of our industry that fosters transparency and inspire trust, this in turn create value for all involved”.

In closing, when we realise the benefit on an individual, company and industry level at large one then sees the need for a policy to unify all practitioners.

TASK TEAM: Digital Built SA - Policy Development

People
- skills
- competencies
- environments

Technology
- soft
- hard
- infrastructure
- interoperability

Process
- collaboration
- security

Transition

Stakeholders

TASK TEAM: Governance

Governance - BIMcommUNITY.Africa

Task Team - EXCO (approx 4 executive members)

Framework for
- policy development
- policy components
- collection of best practice (sample globally)

Determine task team deliverables

Open Mic Session

Proposed CBE
- critical for a unified Digital Built Environment policy development.

MOU for:
- appointment of members/individuals/organisations/institutions/associations to be part of the extensive task team;
- collection of best practice and pilot project data in order to validate recommendations in the policy.

Forward thinking
- housing of the Digital Built SA Policy: custodian/enforcer body.

MOU acceptances:

iX Engineers
IMESA
CIDB
Lyt Architects
CKR Engineers
Zutari
ASAQS
DRA Global
UP (University of Pretoria)
UJ (University of Johannesburg)
GBCSA
MD Construction
Archimus
WBHO
CSIR
VWSA
CESA
Maninga Engineering
UCT
SAICE
TUT (Tshwane University of Technology)
WACO

Workshop 2 - 13 July 2023

Download CIDB Presentation

Presentation by Ishmail Cassiem from the CIDB

Ishmail shared the CIDB’s plans for a BIM Mandate and their sponsoring of the national annex for ISO/SANS 19650.

Conversation between Selvan Murugan, Lewis Watts and Pontus Bengston

Selvan Murugan (Digital Practice Lead, Zutari), Lewis Watts (Global Major Project Executive, Autodesk), and Pontus Bengston (Business Development Executive, Autodesk) share their insights to the approaches of BIM, Information Management and ISO19650 from a UK and Swedish perspective. They also discuss the pros and cons of a top-down BIM government mandate approach of the UK compared to the more organic approach in Sweden.

The aim of this conversation was to learn from other BIM journeys, and then see what we can apply in our South African context.

Facilitated conversations

The first conversation focused on Governance. Delegates were asked to look at the eco-system of BIM from a Provincial, National and International perspective.

The second conversation was to identify a Needs/Gap analysis for the Built Environment from the perspective of various disciplines.

These conversations are recorded below.

Conversation 1 - Environmental

Information Requirements - what metrics are needed, for what purpose - focus on the output of whatever tech and system is used, the information that is produced should assist to manage the Environmental Sub-systems.
Systems of systems, environmental concerns, stewardship and action occur within a system of systems, good information (predefined) is needed to measure, track, reports and benchmark.
Driven by economics (money talks), with a latent driver from Legal (policy / regulation)
BIM could drive the digital economy in a country - new services, new workstreams… its an enabler for the broader industry and economy (4IR transformation of South Africa)
No-one is going to pay more for BIM… it’s rather a matter of survival. Adopt or DIE. This is the new way of doing engineering, without this approach, you will fall behind and fail.
Benefits and use cases… who benefits, and when do they benefit in the asset life cycle?
Big Bang adoption… people will adopt to meet a need, rather than merely to tick a box. Companies developed organically, however the mandate created a movement for improvement and change.

Conversation 2 - DHET / SAQA

Education of the professionals that will be operating in all stages of asset lifecycles, all roles in contracts, all activities around asset operations.
Curriculum will change to meet the emerging / changing needs
BIM as a skill, not an area of theory, introduce “in service training” / apprenticeships
De-stigmatise the paradigm of designer / modeller, recognise the parallel roles of creativity and design and equip / certify accordingly.
Incorporate learning about information and its use, in undergrad courses. Point to the IM in each course, highlighting the use of the IM in the lifecycle.
Teach process, expose to technology.
Maintain feedback from industry to keep the curriculum relevant.
Involve industry to close the gap between theory and the changing practical landscape.
How much does the formal education do vs the in-service training?
While CIDB is driving policy, we drive the capacitation of the industry. What we have in our hands is the widespread capacity growth of the individuals in the industry.

Conversation 1 - Social: What is the Social Impact of Implementing or Mandating BIM in South Africa?

Potential to physical change and improve our Built Environment where People "live", "work" and "play", through:

· Improved procurement with transparency over entire project lifecycle for Public and Private sectors.

· Optimised infrastructure service delivery.

· Improved maintenance of built infrastructure.

· Availability of data for proactive response and communication.

· Sustainability, energy efficiency, reduce carbon footprint.

· Improved relationships and collaboration with all project stakeholders.

· Digital roadmap for effective communication and community buy in.

· New job opportunities and professions.

· Upskilling and adapting to change for future skills.

"....by the people for the people."

Conversation 2 - Chosen Partner: Political

Civil - Building: ECSA

Civil and Structural Engineering:

Information package, End-user focus --> for FM-Facilities Management (Operational Phase):
We discussed that the handover requirements would need to be defined and agreed with the asset owner and provisional service providers, during the design phase of the project. At that stage the FM might not yet be appointed.
The civil and structural handover would be made to the owner, who would be best suited to initiate future alterations or extensions to the building during the operational phase, and the relevant information would then be shared with the FM as agreed.
The focus should be on a digital handover pack. (Improved storage and accessibility)
Accurate and comprehensive As-built information:
Structural: elements, designs, loads, etc.
Civil: Location of all existing and new As-built services, etc.
All relevant "BIM" 2D & 3D Data, drawings, models, documents, etc.
Standardised in native, open BIM, PDF and other digital file formats.
Suitable for downstream operational and FM access and usage.
Early creation and progressive updating of the PIM (Project Information Model) to prepare the AIM (Asset Information Model) for an improved handover, …..don't wait till the end of the construction phase!!!.

Conversation 1 – Political

The two questions that need to be asked are WHY (Would political entities want to adopt BIM) and WHO (Ultimately drives BIM adoption). These two questions are the crux of a far larger discussion.

There are a few elements that need to be considered as part of the WHO of this discussion.

It can not be seen to be a “Tickboxing” exercise. There is a very real risk of losing the real purpose of what BIM is and what it stands for and as a result, it needs to impart REAL value to the industry as a whole.
The reason that it could become a “tickboxing” exercise is that politically there could be a view that our government is obsolete or outdated due to the lack of adoption. This could be true in the context of developed economies who have taken the view that BIM adoption is mandatory for any consultants who want to be involved in government projects. Currently in an environment such as the UK, it is only mandatory for public sector projects and not for all construction.
BIM adoption is currently seen as a roadblock due to the costs involved in implementation. There is a perception that it is only the “Big” players who have the ability to adopt due to the perception of these costs.
As far as the WHY of why they would want to mandate BIM adoption at a legislative level, this needs to be analysed carefully as the environment we currently operate in, has some unique challenges over some other countries.
On the positive side, the following applies.
Financial benefit – as much as there is a cost to BIM adoption, the financial benefits of adopting are substantial. Due to the way in which the process is handled in a collaborative space, the coordination and documentation process is substantially reduced. The time saving in people resources outweighs the investment in the software.
Quality – the quality control procedures are enhanced. This is of course dependent on the user and therefore training is important, but the opportunity for far better quality is enhanced.
Efficiency – as mentioned, the efficiency of producing documentation is amplified which in turn is a time saving / cost saving.
On going management – one of the biggest benefits of utilising BIM principles, is the life cycle management of a building. The information that is available to FM teams at their fingertips to ensure operational efficiency is enhanced.
There are also the potential negatives of government engagement at this level. The big one is obviously how it can be corrupted in a system that has opened the door for such corruption, but it was our view as a group that we focus on the positives as they far outweigh the negatives.

As part of our discussion, we were asked to “partner” with one of the other categories. And after much deliberation, we decided that we would have to partner with ECONOMIC as we felt that this is where the single biggest benefit could be attained. As stated previously there is a financial barrier to BIM adoption and one of the ways that was considered as an option to alleviate this would be the implementation of a “BIM development” levy that would be applied to companies larger than a certain size. What this would do is enable assistance to be given to SMME’s in the form of a subsidy or the like to enable them to afford the software rollout and training required for implementation.

Conversation 2 - Construction Management

The second part of the day revolved around the benefits of BIM Principles from a Facilities Management point of view, with our group’s focus being particularly what construction management involvement would assist building operators down the line.

This is an extensive topic with input required from multiple users, but we tried to limit it to the requirements from a CM point of view specifically.

This we broke down into effectively 4 containers.

1. Type of Contract

The type of contracting solution was one of the biggest topics debated amongst our group. Effectively the discussion revolved around 2 main forms of appointing a contractor.

i. Design then Build (historic form of contracting)

Typically, this would involve the design of the building being undertaken, costings being done, value engineering being imposed, design being updated, documentation issued for tender, a contractor pricing accordingly and the finally getting to site. This is how most of the industry has worked for a very longtime. Effectively there is no contractor involvement in any design decisions or more effective ways for potentially doing thing and therefore potentially less efficiency and coherency in the final product.

ii. EPC/EPCM/PP (Unique way of approaching a contracting solution)

This form of contracting has existed and has been utilised, butthere was a feeling that it could be utilised far more beneficially. What this means is that a contractor is brought on board at the early stages of the design process and has input to various decisions that are made. This could be as an example, changing from a standard reinforced concrete slab to a post tension slab because they have particular knowledge around the process, and it is more efficient.
In this scenario, there is also an opportunity to bring an FM team on board at the start of the process to enable operational requirements to guide the design principles up front. This could be something as rudimentary as how are light bulbs changed in a particular environment.

2. End user Performance Specification

There was a strong debate around this requirement as it goes a long way into the operational capability of a team at the end user stage. As a quick example it could be broken down as follows (but not limited to):

Material availability – are the tiles specified going to be available down the line if replacement is requirement. What wc’s are being specified, what is the water consumption specification and what is the expected lifespan. Just 2 examples of where having a requirement upfront helps guide the design decisions at an early stage.
Ease of accessibility – as mentioned, changing a lightbulb, or cleaning of windows and how easy it would be for an FM team to manage aspects such as these.
Ease of maintenance – this could apply to façade materials as an example. Plaster and paint may need to be maintained and repainted every few years at great operational expense vs the upfront expense of aluminium cladding, but very little maintenance required in the long term.

3. Formation of a Digital Twin

This is a BIG topic and room for lots of debate, however, with the use of technologies available, and an FM team having access to a digital twin (in whatever format) allows more accurate data to be used to fine tune a building in order to operate in its most efficient form. An example would be the HVAC system, by understanding the initial design intent in terms of power consumption, operational efficiency etc, and FM team can monitor actual numbers and fine tune the system to operate at its most effective and efficient capability.

4. Impact on creativity

The negative side of having a “toolkit” from an FM point of view is that there is a possibility that it may hamper design creativity and create buildings that are “all the same” because the operational requirements make it easy to manage without taking into account individuality of buildings, their intended purpose or any other intended principles as set out in the beginning as part of the design intent.

Table 2 and 5 were merged. The team had several people from AECOM so there were good skills in place for input.

Conversation 1 – The team was handed Technology as the aspect to discuss regarding BIM.

Software was the initial point brought up. It was considered that without software, not necessarily from a specific vendor, BIM was not possible.
This flowed into the aspect of Data from the software and how it was stored. Where it needed to be kept, in the cloud for proper integration across the different parties.
Next up was the Processes that make BIM work in a coordinated cross disciplinary way – discussed what is outlined in ISO 19650.
The next item was having properly trained people who could use the software and also understood the principles on how to work with other parties on a project. It also requires resources to be able to support a team with the necessary support such as training and research and development.
Just using BIM software does not necessarily create BIM data that can be interrogated and worth keeping for the long term.
Research and Development cycles back to the processes and resources allowing a company to develop their knowledge of BIM and climb the up the maturity levels.
It was also acknowledged that every team needed to work across discipline/fields to properly deliver a full BIM project.
Critical to having the Data/information was access controls and its management, including security and version control.
The next aspect was that of affordability.
IT Infrastructure was a critical aspect with the large data models. Network speeds and workstation hardware to reduce delays in reading and writing data.
It was also felt that BIM as a relatively new technology needed management support to be properly implemented. This loops back again to resource availability and support.
While BIM has been accepted by most construction professionals, even some who are not practicing a very mature level of BIM, it is with the clients where the most gains exist and in their adoption of supporting technology that will allow the transfer of data into their FM systems and allowing these to be built on in the future.

Conversation 2 - Economical.

The Team was given the subject of FM/Asset/Property management. The team felt that it was necessary to make the comment that this was not the Delivery Phase, but the Management Phase of the Assets. This was what the team believed was necessary for the proper implementation of BIM (Information Management for Buildings).

Correctly classified data – Room Data Sheets
Records of the building’s construction in the broadest sense.
Maintenance guidelines for the systems and components.
O+M budget estimates and cycles from Quantity Surveyor and Engineers.
In some cases, Disposal Guidelines, sustainability, recycling, and advanced construction techniques.
BMS System configured and normalised after commissioning, seasonal adjustments recorded.
- Balanced for Thermal Comfort
- Benchmarked for Energy Management.
As-Built documentation, 2D, 3D, Product literature and documents.
OH&S Documented, rational design for Fire and Structure where relevant.
Warranties for products and equipment, including service requirements to maintain warranty.
Servitudes and other legal requirements.
Sustainability properly documented to maintain the facility.
Security plan and operations
Waste management, spaces, equipment, and processes.
Proper risk management, including fire and emergency processes.
Establish a CAFM (Computer Aided Facilities Management) system. Store information such as service actions and intervals, work carried out in the facility, etc..
Induction and training for new staff – proper handover and system documented so that new staff can find out what they are not told.
In some instances, it is a necessary for the Asset/Building to integrate with the community such as shopping centres and Corporate Head Offices.
A lot of the above is possible through the early involvement of the FM team in the construction of the new Asset/Building.

Conversation 1 - Project Management Services/Documentation/Communication adapted to suit the understanding of Facilities management

The current state of Project Management Documentation/Communication to FMs:

Hard Copy/Manual Compilation of information transferred to FMs, in the form of 3 hard copy/boxes containing all information about the building project and 3 soft copies in the form of a USB/Dropbox file transfer

The Ideal:

The presentation of information/data in a more intelligent way relevant to FMs daily operations, as opposed to just an amassing of uncoordinated information dump.
So from the get-go the information collected from the professional teams designs, manufacturers guides, installation manuals, warranties & guarantees needs to be organized & presented to the FM teams in compartmentalized formats (such as the different sections & areas of the building or project) in a digital format. The use of Digital twins and the incorporation of a Digital handover file, divided into sections & libraries for common information (such as manuals etc.) Such information should contain as-built designs, useful life, service information, warranties & guarantees, manufacturers contact information, maintenance teams etc. and a notification system synced to important dates.

Conversation 2 - Economics

Example - the economic motivations for the UK government adopting BIM was to reduce cost of projects by about 10%

The economic considerations for adopting BIM by the Public sector should consider the following:

The Cost-Benefit analysis to a project, as opposed to a blank mandate over all public sector work. Some public sector projects would incur more cost implementing BIM on that project than benefits. Why? Public sector projects have other projects attached to them, with the government's additional objective of creating short-term employment & boosting economic activities in the areas of implementation; such as, the Expanded Public Works program designed to employ local contractors in the areas. Some of the sub-contractors from the local communities are less tech-saavy and their involvment on projects is driven to boost economic activities, as opposed to using the best sub-contractor suited to achieve a time & quality objective, with the use of the best resources driven by technology.
As a result, public sector projects would need to do a mandatory assessment process for the use of BIM on their projects. The objective would be the determination of the use of BIM on that project and if the benefits would be worth or exceed the cost of implementing BIM on the projects.

The other sector we would need to enable the economic implementation of BIM was - Political (the sitting government in power) & Legal (from a regulatory & judicial point of view).

Conversation 1 - Legal

Our table listed several aspects from a Legal perspective when considering the BIM Mandate. We identified that BIM has several key aspects, i.e. Technology, People and Process. Each of these aspects has inherent risk. A significant consideration is the intellectual property and who owns the data; furthermore, how do we manage the use of the data? At present, and in the absence of a mandate, this is controlled by the author. The identification of risk of each party is required to generate risk mitigation mechanisms. One such mechanism would be to amend the standard forms of contract to account for the use of information. The implementation of BIM and how the parties collaborate still contains an element of uncertainty; this can be managed by setting clear legal boundaries regarding how the parties will collaborate. In simple terms, de-risk the process and define clear roles and responsibilities.

Conversation 2 - MEP

End-user focus – what needs to change.

We listed several key aspects which we believe would benefit the end user.

Energy efficiency of the built asset
Maintenance of the built asset
Performance of the built asset
Interoperability of the new system with existing owner systems
Access to real-time data
Ensure compliance with regulations
Simplification of complex engineering information for easy operation
Cost of effort considerations

With the identified outcomes, it was clear that the Client will need to define the requirements for facility management. This will require the earlier involvement of other key stakeholders, such as Owners, Facility Managers etc.

In conclusion, to provide the best possible solution to the end user, we will need to proactively and collaboratively work toward generating a Project Information Model (PIM) within a common data environment (CDE). The project team will be required to generate sufficient information to be transferred from the PIM to the Asset Information Model (AIM), which will ultimately become the digital twin of the built asset. To this end, the digital twin becomes the single source of truth for the asset, with the correct information readily available, which facilitates better decision-making.

Conversation 1 - Quantity Surveyors

Our table discussed the involvement of Quantity Surveyors and the incorporation of BIM into future building management processes. As a facilities manager, it is important to understand all aspects of a built environment asset. A bridge also needs as much maintenance and use planning as does a building in the city centre. Part of the mandate would be to use the tools available in BIM to make these processes streamlined, efficient and precise.

Equipment lifespans can be easily documented and planned maintenance can be programmed for the future instead of waiting for something to go wrong. That is reactive not proactive.

Onboarding Quantity Surveyors earlier in the design process using BIM will assist with the following list that we identified as crucial for the longevity of any built environment asset.

Q.S. – SACQSP

Inception to Close -Out

Maintenance cost and Prediction & preventative costs
Feasibility lifecycle costs
Disposal cost / Salvage value
1. Environmental costs
2. Green building initiatives
Initial costs / Property value
Service costs
Operational costs
Rates of returns / ROI
Historical costs and record keeping
Quality (indirect)
Value versus risk

Conversation 2 - Department of Public Works – Benefits of adopting BIM Processes:

Theme – D.P.W – How BIM influences DPW

Document & Procurement
1. Stage – Using BIM
2. Expedite & simplify.
3. Tendering + BOM (1) / BOQ (2)
4. Production
Simplify Construction (Cost Control)
Lean construction
Quality control – Risk mitigation
Potholes & real time maintenance
Collaboration with ALL Stake Holders
Facilities management – total cost revision stage
Potholes again
Skills
1. Training
2. Conversation
Partner with CBE
BIM assist in transparency & Ethics & Political (Legal & Technology)
1. i.e. Tender

In Conclusion,

We believe that the involvement of all Quantity Surveyors, adopting BIM tools, implementing ISO19650 and using the standards will lead towards a more transparent and ethical built environment and that future forecasts of infrastructure requirements will be streamlined, more cost effective, more manageable and have more accurate information at the disposal to any party that would require this information.

Executive Summary:

In the context of the CODESA event, a table discussion centred on the integration of BIM (Building Information Modelling) and digital twins within Civil Infrastructure. Participants explored the potential of these technologies to enhance construction processes and generate value. Key takeaways from this discussion underscored the importance of end-user centricity in infrastructure design, with an emphasis on long-term use and facility management. There was a discernible push towards recognizing and defining an ASSET, focusing on how it can generate tangible value for clients. The industry's forward-thinking attitude was evident as participants discussed potential innovations like traffic guidance systems and the assimilation of self-driving cars into civil infrastructure, anticipating future technological challenges. While designers & engineers were broadly perceived as the right entities to provide digital assets, the benefits of an early and collaborative onboarding of contractors were also recognized.

General Summary (Bullet Points):

Exploration of BIM and digital twins' role in shaping Civil Infrastructure.
Detailed breakdown of Civil Infrastructure facets, emphasizing a user-centric approach.
Key discussion insights:
- ASSET definition and its emphasis on value generation for stakeholders.
- The paramount importance of digital deliveries, particularly COBIE & IFC.
- Strategic questions: "Where do I go?", "How do I do?", and "What are the costs?" indicating a roadmap for BIM application.
- Advocacy for Design-Build, early contractor involvement, and the significance of subcontractor inclusion.
Forward-thinking perspectives: integration of traffic guidance systems and prospects of self-driving cars.
Industry consensus leaning towards designers & engineers as primary digital asset contributors.
Recognized merits of early contractor engagement in the design process.

General Discussion:

The table discussion within the digital South Africa workshop underscored the growing significance of BIM and digital twins in the domain of Civil Infrastructure. Participants highlighted the need to define ASSETs with a focus on value generation for clients. The discourse aimed to position the South African construction sector as an efficient, technologically forward entity.

An essential focus lay on comprehending digital deliveries such as COBIE & IFC. These data standards emerged as pivotal to bridging the gap between construction and operation phases, streamlining project lifecycles. A recurrent theme was the value of involving a diverse spectrum of stakeholders, notably contractors, at an early stage. This approach is poised to facilitate smoother transitions from design to execution, leveraging the combined expertise of designers and contractors.

The dialogue encompassed visionary perspectives as well, envisioning traffic guidance systems and the assimilation of self-driving cars into Civil Infrastructure. These discussions signalled the local industry's proactive stance in addressing forthcoming challenges and harnessing the benefits of a digitally centred construction ethos.

Analysis:

Central Theme:

The core of the discussion revolves around the integration and application of BIM (Building Information Modelling) and digital twins in the realm of Civil Infrastructure. The focus seems to be on creating value, optimizing efficiency, and future-proofing infrastructure planning and development.

End-User Centricity

The mention of "For end-user design" and "Design for Facility Management" indicates a shift towards a more user-centred approach in infrastructure design. This implies that the designs are becoming more holistic, not just concerning construction but also considering the long-term use and management of facilities.

Asset Value Generation

The definition of an ASSET and its purpose, "Generate value for a client", underscores the importance of not just creating physical infrastructures but also ensuring they deliver tangible and intangible value to the stakeholders. This could be in terms of functionality, cost efficiency, or long-term sustainability.

Emphasis on Digital Deliveries

Mentions of COBIE & IFC, both related to the standardization and digital representation of data related to builtstructures, highlight the shift towards a more structured and standardized approach to data management in civil engineering. This allows for a smoother flow of information and collaboration between different stakeholders.

Comprehensive Infrastructure Analysis

The detailed breakdown of the different facets of Civil Infrastructure, particularly in the context of a road, reveals the intricacies involved in such projects. It emphasizes that road infrastructure is not just about the physical road but also involves considerations about safety, sustainability, future development, and more.

Decision-making Queries

The notes "Where do I go; How do I do; What are the costs" suggest a forward-looking approach, trying to chart out the roadmap for implementing the discussed strategies and technologies. These questions likely represent the primary concerns of stakeholders when embarking on a project utilizing BIM and digital twins.

Anticipating the Digital Future

Discussion around "Traffic guidance" and "Self-driving cars" clearly indicates that the participants are not just considering the current scenario but are also keenly anticipating future technological developments and their implications on civil infrastructure.

Collaborative Approach

There seems to be an emphasis on collaborative work, especially when it comes to the roles of designers, engineers, contractors, and their suppliers. The points suggest a preference for early contractor onboarding, implying the value seen in integrating the practical knowledge of contractors during the design phase.

Importance of Quality

The distinct roles of designers/engineers providing the asset model and contractors ensuring quality designs hint at a clear separation of duties but with a unified goal: delivering quality infrastructure that meets the end-users' needs and expectations.

In Conclusion

The discussion, as captured in the notes, paints a picture of an industry on the cusp of digital transformation, eager to integrate new technologies while ensuring user-centricity, quality, and future-readiness. There's a clear indication of recognizing the importance of collaboration among different stakeholders to achieve these goals.

Workshop 3 - 31 October 2023

Facilitated conversations

Mode: Unconference style

Objective: The 3rd CoDE•SA workshop will look at the hurdles / challenges / pain points we anticipate in the national BIM journey, through a “CALLING BULLSHIT ON BIM” approach

Pain points/challenges hurdles to be addressed, as identified by the People. These pain points are grouped and reported under three Digital/BIM implementation fields: People, Process/Policy as well as Technology. Each delegate identified a field of interest from the three and formed 3 groups.

The discussions around the table were centered around:

Further detailing the pain points
Possible interventions/solutions

The collection of the reports is planned to inform the policy development by the CIDB, happening in parallel to the BIMCommUnity Africa industry engagement events.

These conversations are recorded below.

Background: The current process with the adoption of ISO 19650 is as follows:

ISO 19650 parts 1 (principles) and 2 (Construction) have been published as a SANS standard. Part 3 (Operations) comment period has closed and should be published as a SANS soon. Cidb is interested in supporting the drafting of the National Annex and a protocol but this is a while off. This lack of clarity coloured much of the conversation. There was very little pushback on the value of BIM as a technology, just on the way it is likely to be implemented.

Concern was expressed about the need to clarify BIM’s role before tendering for a project. The lack of proper briefing from the client and the imposition of new requirements only once the project documentation was underway. These are covered in the Process outlined in ISO 19650 and needed to be supported in the development of the National Annex. This is a valid concern as the clients do not get very involved in the briefing of project teams. The role of developers and their project managers in making hard ‘bargains’ focused on reducing fees also played a role.

It was felt that there was little incentive to introduce BIM into projects as it did not tie in with existing frameworks (Contracts, particularly PROCSA, in use) The long-term benefits were also not properly understood or explained to project teams. There was some concern that enforcement would be very one-sided and put unreasonable pressure on project teams. (Lack of Client understanding of their role and responsibilities)

The discussion also addressed the ROI of moving to BIM, forced by the market or willingly adopting a new technology and maximising its potential. Here the actions of the BIM Champion were seen as critical. It was felt that having someone of the same discipline who had the responsibility of easing the introduction of BIM into the practice and providing support to colleagues working with it was critical.

On the point of creating a local need, the necessity of having a predictable and stable process and procedure in support of an accepted policy would lead to wider adoption and acceptance.

There is a lack of experience in BIM Projects where ISO 19650 plays a role and how this will impact the market for any understanding beyond genuine concern.

There was also little understanding of how workflows need to change with a BIM project. During the discussion, the role of having a BIM Champion within the company's structure is to support the rollout of the technology and processes as to simply learning about the software’s capabilities.

This was understood to cover families and libraries that are shared and introduce the benefits of the reuse of components in speeding projects and saving rework costs. A BIM Manager was seen as having a project-based responsibility across disciplines and not helpful in an upskilling role within the team.

Without understanding the organisational workflow, human resources, resources and strategy, it is easy to assume that technology may be expensive. During the discussion, it became evident that the focus is on the upfront cost of technology and less on the impact a tool such as software can have, supporting workflows and enabling companies to do things they haven’t done before. Be that faster processing, more accuracy (or less human error), meeting deadlines, or being more profitable on projects.

The discussion started to unpack the focus that could help companies generate greater internal and external value from adopting technology and position them as trusted advisors on projects rather than service delivery experts. It starts by creating a demand (Establishing a well-documented EIR that cuts the risk of over promise and under deliver) and ensuring that your information needs are documented and explained. From here, assign the correct resources to the correct levels and ensure they have the skills to meet your EIR requirements. There was a fantastic recommendation that a RACI matrix (Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) be created, giving a clear picture of the demand and the requirements and thus eliminating some of the surprises.

The conclusion was that if you don’t understand the impact technology will have on your existing company structure, workflows, workforce and hardware, then the assumption that technology is expensive will remain. Instead, change the perception that technology is an enabler (There is always an investment cost) for the company to deliver on promises and bottom line.

Technology does have significant advantages that can be of great benefit, but deploying it incorrectly can/will have a detrimental effect on the business or the execution of the project. For that reason, it is far more important to understand the impact it may have as different people find themselves at different stages of the Technology Adoption Curve.

Technology will always be expensive if there is no understanding of how to use it to make money. The application of technology can either drive additional profits (Open revenue streams that were previously not an option) or become more profitable (Being more efficient by reducing errors, streamlining processes or automating repetitive actions).

We looked at the various comments that were presented and decided to group them under a generic heading Change Management.

It was a perception by the younger generation that the older generation were stifling progress with BIM, mainly due to a resistance to change. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the new technologies, or just not wanting to change traditional workflows. The younger generation put forward the idea that possibly BIM workflows should be mandated and even legislated.

The lack of not wanting to change workflows may also be because there was a lack of clear understanding of benefits of working within a BIM workflow.

In some larger organisations, it was felt that people worked within “silos”, not wanting to collaborate and therefore protecting their own knowledge silo.

It was felt that there was also not an awareness of the need to change and work within a BIM workflow. It was suggested that perhaps the ADKAR model for Change Management might be appropriate.

A - Awareness: People needed to be made aware of the need for change
D - Desire: People needed to meaningfully and actively participate and support the change
K - Knowledge: Knowledge of how to change - acquire new skills and learn new workflows
A - Ability: Ability to implement new skills and changes in behavior
R - Reinforcement: Reinforcement to sustain the change - look back at progress critically and implement steps for a more successful future to ensure sustainability of the change

It was further felt that the traditional methodology of determining the feasibility of anything new in the industry was difficult to conduct when considering BIM before implementation.

Traditional methodology e.g. a cost-benefit analysis is difficult to conduct if the costs are certain but the (financial) benefit remains uncertain. For example: It is easy to conduct a cost-benefit analysis on installing a solar plant as the energy that it will provide can be measured/closely estimated upfront. Yet improvement in customer experience/satisfaction is not easy to measure upfront (before implementation). The same can be said for improved workflow processes that should save time and costs, predictive maintenance, etc.

Therefore it was suggested that the BIM community could provide Case Studies of the real-world (proven) benefits of BIM to assist with the ADKAR model of change management and to drive the adoption of BIM and the adaption required to implement BIM.

Case studies should focus on:

Cost saving
Time-saving
Environmental benefits
Client experience improvement

Case studies should include all the different phases of the project life cycle:

Conception
Planning
Design
Costing (and feasibility study)
Construction
Tenanting and Occupancy
Operational
Refurbishment
Re-design and re-development

With evidence of the advantages of BIM, the typical uncertainties in the industry that prolong resistance to change could be addressed.

In addition, tertiary institutions could be motivated to educate the younger generation in the Built Environment on the BIM workflow and provide the knowledge and skill sets required for BIM. When this generation then enters the workplace, they will be suitably qualified, skilled and employable globally.