ACE is a mentoring program designed to bring together Chicago's best architecture, engineering, and construction companies to mentor high school teens. The students learn about the building process through weekly activities organized by the mentors.
2. Design-Bid-Build: traditional approach – owner contracts separately with all
parties. Occasionally referred to as Design-Bid-ReDesign-ReBid-Build.
Design-Build: One entity performs both architecturalengineering design and
construction under one contract. Either an architect-led or contractor-led
approach.
CM-at Risk, or GMP: Construction Manager is a consultant to the owner during
design phases, and acts as general contractor during construction with a
commitment to deliver the project within a guaranteed maximum price.
Turnkey Project Delivery: frequently used in power plants, manufacturing
facilities, a method to provide an owner with a complete facility, ready to operate
and turn out product.
Traditional processes
3. Design- Bid- Build Most common form of Project
Delivery
•Three phases, three prime
players
•Independent contracts
between architect/owner and
contractor/owner
•Linear sequence of work
•Common with public owners
with requirements to select
low bid
4. •One entity hired by
Owner to complete
design and
construction
•May all be
Contractor's in-house
design expertise or
Contractor may
engage outside
Architect
•Early cost
commitment is made
(GMP) by Contractor
based upon
preliminary design
OWNER
DESIGN -
BUILDER
S
F
Design- Build
E
E
5. Everyone Signs the Same Agreement
Full IPD
Owner
Sub.ContractorCons. Architect
Sub.Cons.
AIA C195
ConsensusDocs 300
6. 1/14/2016
6
Traditional (Today) Integrated Project Delivery (Tomorrow)
Fragmented, assembled on “just-
as-needed” or “minimum
necessary” basis, strongly
hierarchical, controlled
TEAMS An integrated team entity
composed of all project lifecycle
stakeholders, assembled early in
the process, open, collaborative
Linear, distinct, segregated;
knowledge gathered “just-as-
needed”; information hoarded
PROCESS Concurrent, multi-level,
integrated; early contributions of
knowledge and expertise;
information openly shared
Individually managed, transferred
to the greatest extent possible
RISK Collectively managed,
appropriately shared
Individually pursued; minimum
effort for maximum
return;(usually) first-cost based
COMPENSATION
REWARD
Team success tied to project
success; value-based
Paper-based, 2 dimensional;
analog
COMMUNICATION
S
TECHNOLOGY
Digitally based, virtual, 4
dimensional; BIM
Minimum effort for maximum
return; minimize or transfer risk;
don’t share
AGREEMENTS Encourage, foster, promote and
support open sharing and
collaboration, full integration
Individually focused, emphasis on
composition
EDUCATION Team-based, integrated,
collaborative; technologically
inclusive; materials and methods
focus in addition to compositionAIA California Council IPD FAQ - 2006
7. 1/14/2016
7
PD SD CD PR CA OPDD
Time
Effort/Effect
PD: Pre-design
SD: Schematic design
DD: Design development
CD: Construction documentation
PR: Procurement
CA: Construction Administration
OP: Operation
Graphic originated by Patrick McLeay, AIA / HOK
Ability to impact cost and
functional capabilities1
1
Cost of design changes
2
2
Traditional design process3 3
Preferred design process
4
4
• Owner Leadership
• Integrated Project Structure
• Open Information Sharing
• Virtual Building Models
It’s about Productivity
11. Competitive Schematic Design. The winner was ($655,000)
under 2nd place.
Competitive approach to 3 systems, saving ($132,000) in
supplemental support steel.
LEAN approach to have contract documents designed to 1
curtain wall system manufacturer
Integrated approach with all stakeholders collaborating to
achieve the best solution
12. Used pre-engineered
curtain wall system.
Architect spent less time
designing. Project relied
heavily on Trade Partner
shop drawings and Revit
model for final construction
drawings.
Saved time & money!
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19. Hand Drawing 2D CAD 3D CAD
EVOLUTION From Hand Drawing to Smart Models
BIM
In the following diagram provided courtesy of Patrick McLeay of HOK, we understand that the ability to impact cost and functional capabilities during a project decreases over life of the project.
All the while, the cost of design changes increases as the project cycle progresses.
Currently, most of the project design decision-making occurs in the white curve, where the ability to impact cost and functional capabilities crosses with the cost of design changes.
A preferred scenario would be to move the design decisions forward in the design process, when the cost of change is low, and the ability to impact cost and functional capabilities is high.
A building information modeling approach seeks to accomplish this objective.
