Downloaded 36 times
Uploaded byEric Peabody
Experimental BIM Use Comparison on Stanford Hospital Cath Labs
The document compares the performance metrics of three cath labs at Stanford, highlighting improvements achieved through the use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) versus traditional Computer-Aided Design (CAD). Key findings indicate potential cost savings of up to 23%, faster project completion by 35%, and a significant reduction in change orders and RFIs. The results underscore the advantages of BIM in enhancing efficiency and lowering construction costs in healthcare facility projects.
More Related Content
Similar to Experimental BIM Use Comparison on Stanford Hospital Cath Labs
Experimental BIM Use Comparison on Stanford Hospital Cath Labs
- 1. Stanford Cath Labs7, 9, & 10 Numeric results of CAD vs. BIM to 2” vs. full BIM Jason David Eric Peabody Holbrook Denysenko
- 3.
- 4. Experimental Controls Experimental Variables BIM Use Area* Start** Architect Cath Lab 7 CAD 720 SF 2006 Cath Lab 9 2” 1,173 SF 2009 Standard Cath Lab Everything 1,060 SF 2010 10 *Results expressed per SF to normalize this variable **Cost values escalated to 2010 relative value to normalize this variable
- 5. What’s supposedly init for me? Save up to 23% on project costs Complete project 35% faster Drop change order rate to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 6. What’s supposedly init for me? 23% less $ Complete project 35% faster Drop change order rate to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 7. What’s supposedly init for me? Save up to 23% on project costs 35% faster Drop change order rate to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 8. What’s supposedly init for me? Save up to 23% on project costs Complete project 35% faster Changes to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 9. What’s supposedly init for me? Save up to 23% on project costs Complete project 35% faster Drop change order rate to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 10. Cath Lab 7 CADOnly The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 11.
- 12. Cath Lab 7:Siemens Biplane Cath Lab Project Area: 720 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2006 Procedure Room: 600 Net Square Feet BIM Use: None
- 13. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 14. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 15. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 16. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 17. The delay wascaused…by the over-head structural and M/E/P/FP not being coordinated. The majority of the overhead had to be re-designed. DPR Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 18. Cath Lab 9 BIMto 2” The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 19.
- 20. Cath Lab 9:Siemens Biplane Hybrid OR Project Area: 1,173 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2009 Procedure Room: 821 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model to 2”
- 21. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 22. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 23. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 24. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 25. Cath Lab 10 BIMEverything The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 26.
- 27. Cath Lab 10:Siemens Biplane Pediatric Cath Lab Project Area: 1060 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2010 Procedure Room: 717 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model Everything
- 28. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 29. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 30. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 31. 3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 32. Results The Design PartnershipLLP Architects + Planners
- 33. Construction Cost BIM Use % from CAD Cath Lab 7 CAD Cath Lab 9 2” Standard -15.0% Cath Lab Everything *All figures in 2010 Relative Value -4.1% 10 Change Order Cost BIM Use % of Total Cath Lab 7 CAD 12.4% Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.1% Cath Lab Everything <0.1% 10 *All figures in 2010 Relative Value The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 34. Construction Schedule BIM Use Construction Days/SF % from CAD Cath Lab 7 CAD 8.40 mo 0.23 D/SF Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.50 mo 0.15 D/SF -34.8% Cath Lab Everything 8.45 mo 0.16 D/SF -30.4% 10 All Costs Survey All Construction Margin** Total Services* $ Cath Lab 7 18.5% 18.5% Cath Lab 9 1.6% 27.3% (15.0%) (22.0%) (23.3%) Cath Lab 10 1.6% 18.5% *All design professional fees, including non-BIM fees (4.1%) (18.6%) (17.9%) **Cath lab contribution margin of ~$8,000 per day The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 35. Conclusions Save up to23% on project costs Complete project 35% faster Drop change order rate to <0.1% 44% fewer RFIs The Design Partnership LLP Architects + Planners
- 36. Thanks. Questions? Jason David Eric Peabody eric@dpsf.com Holbrook Denysenko jholbrook@stanfordmed.or ddenysenko@stanfordmed. 415 777-3737 g org 650 721-1928 650 736-7546
Editor's Notes
- #35 Quarter million $ saved on Cath 9