NBS topic areas

Keep up to date with industry developments

BIM and education

by Steve Lockley
Professor of Building Modelling at Northumbria University

When setting out to write this article on Building Information Modelling (BIM) I was reminded of the old adage that before putting pen to paper you should "Know your audience". So who are you? Is this article for the Architect who is interested in the potential of BIM to improve their 3D design capacity; the Quantity Surveyor who expects automated take-off; the Building Services Engineer looking for a more efficient way of calculating energy consumption; the Structural Engineer aspiring to greater integration between analysis and design; the Project Manager needing to simulate the construction sequence; the Contractor wanting to reduce risk and error; the Client wanting to reduce construction cost.

The reality is you may be all, or none, of the above as BIM is relevant to most, if not all, of the roles performed in building procurement. In its most acceptable form it is agnostic to our traditional discipline silos, seemingly supporting our conventions and ways of working, leaving us with the comfortable feeling that we are improving our productivity and efficiency, without exposing ourselves to the risks entrained in real change. Indeed this is the main reason BIM has made headway in its market penetration over the last 3-5 years. In reality, BIM technologies have been available for at least 20 years but like all youth they were perceived by their elders as a little too radical for serious consideration. Now though, BIM has come of age, it is no longer a recalcitrant teenager, it is looking for acceptance from its peers and it is doing this by making concessions that help it integrate with traditional or mainstream construction procurement.

So yes, to the Architect BIM provides 3D support, but is it better than the previous generation of 3D CAD? The QS can automate take-off but does it breakdown a building in accordance with the rules of measurement? The Building Services Engineer can produce quicker energy calculations, but are they as accurate and do they inform the design? The Structural Engineer can perform integrated analysis and design but are the benefits of leaner design carried through into fabrication? The Project Manager can visualise construction sequences but is it having an impact on the building process? The Contractor is reducing risk and error but are they generating better value and profit? The Client may be getting better value but do they realise it and are they willing to invest in BIM?

The answers to all of these questions are slowly beginning to reveal themselves to the industry and in doing so they raise more questions. If the Architect invests in BIM at the early design stage, who benefits and who will pay for this investment? Should the rules of measurement be changed to be more considerate of BIM capabilities? Should the Building Services Engineer be engaged at the early design stages so that they can impact on and improve the energy design of the building? Should fabricators be working with Structural Engineers as part of the Design and Analysis phase? Will construction and resource planning become an integral part of the design process? Could Insurance companies reduce premiums to reflect the lower incidences of error in the construction phase? Will clients favour the appointment of design teams that use BIM?

It is clear that when writing about BIM the audience is not defined by its discipline but rather by its desire to work collaboratively. The tangible benefits of BIM will not come from doing "business as usual more efficiently", they will come from changing the way we work together. Worse still there are those who perceive BIM as a new discipline, the BIM manager. This view turns BIM into some kind of project extranet that is so sophisticated and complicated that it requires a specialist to manage all interactions between it and the design team. Typically we find this referred to as the "single building model" or the" building model server". There is little doubt that in a few years time the technology to support this ideal will reach maturity, but will the working practices and the ability to collaborate in construction projects have matured to a level that can exploit this technology?

Educational establishments clearly have a major role to play in this transition, they should and will seed the next generation of professionals who understand BIM as a technology that supports collaborative working. However, there are barriers to change built into our Universities and Colleges, not least of which is the entrenchment of the traditional professions. In an ideal world these institutions should be microcosms of the way we desire the industry to work in the future. High levels of integration; inter-disciplinary working designed into course content; project work that integrates rather than isolates professional roles. Unfortunately the established rules of engagement between educational institutions and the professional accreditation bodies often mitigate against this form of collaborative education. It begs the question, can collaborative working be taught without actually being practiced? At Northumbria University we have taken initial steps to address this through the formation of the BIM Academy. Rather than force dramatic change into the curriculum the academy seeks to engage with industry and to foster BIM or collaborative thinking in our staff's research, teaching and consultancy. Just as BIM needs to support our existing working practices it also needs to support our existing educational processes before we can move to the next level of inter-disciplinary qualifications.

How far are we from the day when sending a drawing seems a rather naive and perhaps unprofessional way of exchanging information? When this happens, and it undoubtedly will, we will know that BIM has truly come of age; in the meantime may those who value improvement through change and collaborative working enjoy the journey.