Handout Practical bim collaboration in a ppp

BILT EUR 2017
Radisson Blu Scandinavia Hotel Aarhus
5 – 7 October 2017
Session 1.3.
Practical BIM Collaboration in a PPP (Public-Private-
Partnership
Søren Christensen, MT Højgaard
Vivi Nyehuus Andersen, MOE A/S
Marianne Friis, Arkitema Architects
Class Description
This case study concerns the establishment of Denmark's first PPP hospital, involving several AEC firms,
navigating a complex project, by actively using BIM models for collaboration and user involvement in all
phases of the building process. The lecture intends to inform of 'quick wins', successes and how to avoid
pitfalls.
Key Learning Outcomes:
1. Knowledge concerning our experiences in creating an ICT framework that supports/contributes to a
better cross disciplinary model collaboration.
2. Inspiration on how to actively use the models on-site, both for white- and blue collar workers.
3. Knowledge about which information the models should contain in order to be useful both in the
design and construction phase
About the Speaker:
Søren Christensen, BIM Coordinator, MT Højgaard
Vivi Nyehuus Hansen, Head of BIM | Revit development at MOE A/S
Marianne Friis, Head of BIM Management, Arkitema Architects

1.3. - Practical BIM Collaboration in a PPP (Public-Private-Partnership)
Page 2 of 15
Practical BIM Collaboration in PPP Projects
Introduction:
While preparing for this presentation we have had a number of meetings between the contractor,
engineer and architects, trying to sum up 3 years of BIM development on the Vejle Psyc. project. This is
quite a challenge, as we find there are so many BIM stories to be told. But with our key learnings
outcomes as guideline we have chosen a selection of BIM-experiences that hopefully will inspire you.
What we also hope will inspire you, is our story of an excellent collaboration between all involved parties
on this BIM project. Every participant had a high degree of BIM experience, and our collaborative joint
ambitions were overly to use the BIM model to create value for the client, the project and in the
collaboration between all participants but also:
 Provide development within the project teams firms,
 Create better processes,
 Testing of new software/hardware,
 Emphazis on do´s and dont´s
Everyone involved with BIM projects know that collaboration is a cornerstone for a successful BIM project,
so how to organise and create that foundation for the successful collaboration, will also be part of our
story.
Agenda
1.0 Presenting project scope ............................................................................................................................ 3
2.0. First BIM Challenges..................................................................................................................................... 6
3.0. Tender, quantities and interaction with suppliers models ................................................................... 9
4.0 Collision controls ......................................................................................................................................... 11
5.0 Knowledges sharing ................................................................................................................................... 13
6.0 Findings ........................................................................................................................................................ 14

Page 3 of 15
1.0 Presenting project scope
1.1 Key figures.
The project Vejle Psychiatric Hospital, 17.400 m2, is one of several healthcare facilities being built in
Denmark in recent years.
Construction costs: 432 million DKK. / 58 million Euro.
Plot: 40.000 m2 combined with a tunnel and walkway to the existing hospital.
Building time: 32 months, starting May 2014 and delivery January 2017
The architectural ambitions for the project Vejle Psychiatric Hospital
The architecture has a centralized service area, from which eight connected cluster houses emit. Here
are screened sections, sensory rooms, discussion rooms, sports hall, training room, rubber floors in a colour
scale with reference to fixtures, departments and functions - blurred glass walls with colour foil to rooms
and dynamic indoor lighting to support the patient's healing process.
The surrounding nature favours the architecture and gets almost completely into it, with outdoor activity
areas and courtyards. From the first floor you can see forest slopes and colonial gardens and the
environmentally-friendly, sediment-grown roof surfaces. The facades are characterized by large bright
glass sections and lightly changing alloy plates.
Involved parties / Project team organisation
Client OPP Vejle P/S(Sampension, PKA and Pension Danmark)
Contractor MT Højgaard
Arkitema Architect
MOE Engineering Consultants
Brøndum (sprinkling and ventilation), MTH D&E & MTH D&E Vietnam,
Contiga Tinglev (Prefab. Concrete supplier)

Page 4 of 15
The project team and models
Introduction to the project time line:
“Under construction while designing underway”
1.2. Why is there so many who have BIM project experience in Denmark?
Since 2007 The ICT Executive Order imposes public requirements to use BIM in all government
construction projects and from 2013 all public construction projects.
Denmark has at the same time invested heavily in the public health sector for the past 10 years. The so
called Quality Funds projects alone have invested 47 billion kr. / 6.3 billion euros in healthcare projects –
among other 8 large “Super Hospitals” ranging from 30.000 – 250.000 m2. This is a large investment and
undertaking for a country with only 5,7 million inhabitants.
All these public projects have very high client-demands for use of BIM, which have kick-started the BIM
revolution in Denmark. The importance of these projects for BIM development in Denmark cannot be
emphasized enough.
… and why is the number of ACE professionals with BIM project experience specifically high in Aarhus?.
A number of the 8 large “Super Hospitals” was won by ACE consortia from Aarhus and executed in
Aarhus.
DNU – New University Hospital Aarhus, 250,000m2,
DNV – New Hospital in West Gødstrup, 130,000 m2,
NAU – New Aalborg University Hospital, 170,000 m2.
So the number of architects, engineers, contractors and other professions participated in these projects
are high and is why the majority of ACE professionals in Aarhus have BIM experience.

Page 5 of 15
1.3. The first hospital PPP Project – Public Private Partnership
The essence of a PPP project is that the public client finds a private investor not only to carry out a
construction project but also to run the building after completion. Thus, the private investor is not only
responsible for running the building, but also for running maintenance and operational tasks.
That is why the public client has more focus on performance requirements than execution requirements,
which on the other hand gives the private investor more margins for maneuver than in conventional
construction projects.
The PPP investor must plan how to ensure that the building contains the agreed functions and how it is
subsequently run and maintained.
BIM workflow supports this way of developing a PPP project, because it supports long-term solutions and
solve the task right from the start.
1.4. ICT specification
For this specific project the Contractor and the rest of the project team had from the very beginning high
ambitions for the development of BIM model and how it will bring value to the project – regardless that
the Client ICT / BIM demands was on an basic level. All parties involved in the project team have been
working with BIM for a number of years and all saw this project as a possibility to develop the BIM
workflow further, and the PPP project conditions supported just that.
1.5. MTH start-up procedure
New projects are screened by the VDC consultants to evaluate the quality of the BIM model according
to MTH standards. This give the project manager an understanding of the project material combined with
the VDC coordinator work practice – the model is always used for QTO, Collision control and 4D,
machinecontrol.
1.6 Findings
 The construction site starts up while we are still planning the project, and leading the design
phase.
 The strategic choice in allocating extra resources into BIM development payed off, and benefited
the outcome, and the internal collaboration while boosting the BIM level in the participating firms.

Page 6 of 15
2.0. First BIM Challenges
2.1. Bumps on the road:
Unfortunately, it was discovered that the building's location in Revit was placed too far from origin. After
delivery for approval by the building authorities. This made the model cooperation between architects
and other participants difficult.
After a long meeting, it was decided that the architects should not restart the model, but MT Højgaard
had to accept the inaccuracies that this might give. Both in the models, but also on delivered sheets.
The startup manual was subsequently made so that the other models were correctly located in Revit's
Origin (0.0.0).
Manuals were created for Link of Revit Models, Export of IFC and Composition of IFC and Revit Models.
2.2 Involving the user
To involve the users of the hospital, a huge 400 m2 mockup was built – see picture below.
CAD drawings were made to show the users, where in the building they were located.
So they had a better understanding of the drawings later in the process.
The mockup was built with the components already considered by the contractor.
A MCS (material component specification) was prepared, which was sent from engineer to architect
and then to the contractors. Everything in the 3D models was created according to real-life database
data.
Communication with the client:
How to communicate BIM related issues with the client organization who is a non-BIM user.
 What worked
o Live viewing of the building with a commentary sets a great scene.
o Manipulating the BIM models to create better understanding with the client base e.g.
colorization of key areas the build, differentiation between types of objects etc.
 Pitfalls
o If it´s in the model the client WILL expect it there in real life e.g. furniture.
o The client must be led according to focus at hand, otherwise they tend to wonder off, and
start cherry picking at the wrong details.

Page 7 of 15
2.3. The importance of Structure
Structure and consistency within the BIM models, naming of files and objects are essential to creating a
successful project for example:
1. The object codes run through both the bid lists, descriptions and CAD drawings where it needs to
be coherent in order to provide clarity.
2. The delivery of discipline models between advisor need to be purged of all non-essential material
e.g. work views.
The consequences if the model is lacking structure:
At the receiving end they lose the big picture:
Project browser with structure Project browser lacking structure
2.4. Testing MCS (Material component specification)
Because the project has been sent in tender before the main project was completed. The contractors
were found and they could be consulted during the completion of drawings and model.
This came as a MCS created in an excel sheet. This was sent from MOE to Arkitema, which filled in their
part consisting of among other: doors, sanitary ware and lighting. Then it was sent to the contractors who
filled in all their information.
This information was then sent back to MOE and Arkitema, where we customized the objects and their
data in the Revit models.

Page 8 of 15
Material component specification
Datasheet from contractor
 Excel sheet
 Revit model
Datasheet from contractor
Excel sheet
Excel Sheet refers to data sheets.
But sums it all up in one sheet.

Page 9 of 15
Revit component
2.5. Findings
 Whatever it is public or private projects. It works so well making MCS (material component
specifications). The only difference between the two types of tender projects is the amount of
information that can be distributed.
 A coordinated Kick-off meeting always pays off, as shown on this project.
 Why does it happen so seldom and why is not it prioritized higher?
We are always busy and sometimes too busy!.

Page 10 of 15
3.0. Tender, quantities and interaction with suppliers models
”Short Contiga Tinglev video containing their work process with structural discipline models in PlanBar”
3.1. Tender “Concrete prefab elements”
Projectweb was used for quality assurance and is divided into three stages:
1. For commenting
2. Commented
3. Shop drawings
However this meant each participant handed in their response on separate drawings, and these had to
be combined in the end by the supplier. These days we use online big room concepts, where everyone
has live opportunity to see each other’s comments, and can act on them accordingly e.g. Bluebeam
sessions. This has proven to be very efficient for the workflow!
3.2. Tender “Windows”
The tendering process for windows/doors for the project was kicked off by a random encounter between
a BIM Coordinator, and a project purchasing manager. The manager soon realized that he wouldn’t
have to manually create lists for the supplier dialogue, but could help set up information demands, which
the BIM model then provided.
This payed of in significant ways:
1. The model contained the information, and thus no redundancy regarding revision updates.
2. Every time there was an update the information was placed exactly the same place as last time.
3. The suppliers all got exactly the same starting point on which to place their offer creating greater
transparency.
4. The object classification helped facilitate the process, and was even used by the blue-collar
worker on-site.
Quantities
Who is responsible for the quantities? It is a general challenge in Denmark with huge legal and financial
consequences, as there is no tradition for tender with quantities, and leaves open a number of questions
and challenges that we are battling with at the moment:
 Who verifies the quantities during tender?
 Measurement rules – is there only one set of rules?
 Communication between the involved parties during both the bidding- and construction phase.

Page 11 of 15
3.3 Findings
 Bluebeam helps create a better quality assurance, and collects all data in one place.
 Lacking rules for quantities does have an impact on the efficiency, hours spent and the teamwork
between the parties.
4.0 Collision control
4.1. Processes and methods / Collision control as active project management tool.
We created an IDM showing the collision control process that spanned 2 weeks every time, and
explained each advisor what to receive and deliver. Standard Solibri rulesets were used.
4.2. How do we communicate “issues” in the project team?
We used Solibris internal method of maintaining the issues, where they are in the model, and all
communication between the advisors was via the reporting system. This is a heavy process since solving
collisions require a fast means of communication, where we afterwards learned of online services such as
“BIMcollab”. Here issues are uploaded/downloaded and discussed between the advisors solving them
at a faster rate.
4.3. Focus points – what is most efficient?
When dealing with collision control it´s important to divide this process into smaller chunks that
correspond with your planning schedule for design. Hereby you pinpoint your efforts towards the areas
that need focus her and now, and that is still possible to influence. We divided our building up into
partitions corresponding with the architect drawings, and looked at them separately starting with
structural foundations vs. plumbing and so forth.

Page 12 of 15
4.4. Drawing or model?
According to the first version of the ICT agreement, the 3D model should be used as the only thing on the
building site. This was later changed to a delivery of DWF drawings, with the text, tags and dimensions not
shown on the standard drawings.
When the contractors were joined, it was changed again to a delivery of PDF drawings, and now with all
dimensions, tags and text etc. As this could not be done, a conflict between contractors and designers
appeared.
Since the building in the architectural model was located far away from origin, a minimum of objects
could be dimensioned. But this deal was not made with those who should receive the drawings, so it
ended up with a lot of manual work. This cost a lot of time and put the design team backwards.
4.5. The object that disappeared and it´s friend
“Picture showing gypsum wall and fire insulation”
“Picture showing a 30 mm excess steel flange”

Page 13 of 15
5.0 Knowledges sharing
5.1. Knowledge sharing through objects
Need to know vs Nice to know.
LOD level / what information is needed on drawings, schedules and tender specifications.
Use predefined schedules.

Page 14 of 15
5.2. Interfaces between the different trades
Anxiety
Economy vs Responsibility
 Automatic door locking systems
 Plumbing fixtures
 Loose and fixed furniture
Component Responsible for placing Responsible for component data
etc.
Sinks Architect Engineer
Toilets Architect Engineer
Floor drains Architect Engineer
Doors Architect Architect/Engineer
Lighting Fixtures Engineer Architect/Engineer
When is a door pinned in a project?
The architect knows that the door should be placed in a wall, the engineer draws a socket next to the
door. The architect moves the door, the engineer moves the socket again. The architect now flips the
door to the other side, the engineer moves the socket again.
Opening direction is actually important especially for the engineer, but for the architect it is different.
When are things so locked for both parties and do we understand things the same way?
5.3. Sitemodel
Landscape Architect could not get the elevations to work in their Revit model, so MOE was bought to do
this work.
It was a challenge because this work was to be done ASAP because the building crew needed the
information, but nobody could see where the covers should be placed.
6.0. Overall findings
 Collaboration ALWAYS pays off especially when this mindset is agreed upon from day one.
 Structure, structure, structure……. and more structure
 The technology development is moving so fast that for instance Bluebeam/VR glasses/BIMcollab
would have made a difference, and made our workflow easier. This holds great promise for the
future!
 Important to retain keypersons on the project, and keep the knowledge throughtout the project.

Page 15 of 15
Overall Sum up
Practical BIM Collaboration in PPP Projects............................................................................................................ 2
Agenda.......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.0 Presenting project scope ............................................................................................................................ 3
1.1 Key figures. .............................................................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction to the project time line:................................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Why is there so many who have BIM project experience in Denmark?.................................................... 4
… and why is the number of ACE professionals with BIM project experience specifically high in
Aarhus?...................................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.3. The first hospital PPP Project – Public Private Partnership.............................................................................. 5
1.4. ICT specification.................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.5. MTH start-up procedure....................................................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.0. First BIM Challenges..................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Bumps on the road:.............................................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Involving the user ................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.3. The importance of Structure............................................................................................................................... 7
2.4. Testing MCS (Material component specification) ......................................................................................... 7
3.0. Tender, quantities and interaction with suppliers models ................................................................. 10
3.1. Tender “Concrete prefab elements” ............................................................................................................. 10
3.2. Tender “Windows” .............................................................................................................................................. 10
3.3 Findings .................................................................................................................................................................. 11
4.0 Collision control........................................................................................................................................... 11
4.1. Processes and methods / Collision control as active project management tool. ................................ 11
4.2. How do we communicate “issues” in the project team? .......................................................................... 11
4.3. Focus points – what is most efficient?............................................................................................................. 11
4.4. Drawing or model?............................................................................................................................................. 12
4.5. The object that disappeared and it´s friend................................................................................................. 12
5.0 Knowledges sharing ................................................................................................................................... 13
5.1. Knowledge sharing through objects............................................................................................................... 13
5.2. Interfaces between the different trades........................................................................................................ 14
5.3. Sitemodel.............................................................................................................................................................. 14
6.0. Overall findings........................................................................................................................................... 14

Handout Practical bim collaboration in a ppp

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Handout Practical bim collaboration in a ppp

Similar to Handout Practical bim collaboration in a ppp (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Handout Practical bim collaboration in a ppp