bim at stanford - building success
TRANSCRIPT
BIM at Stanford Hospital and Clinics
April 2014
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Stanford Main Campus
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion
1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion
1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion
1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion
1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion
1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft
Stanford Hospital and Clinics
3M+ sqft on campus
4.5M sqft on and off site and growing
9
Organization
Design and Construction
Engineering & Maintenance
New Stanford Hospital
Capital Improvement
Projects
LPCH Expansion
Project
Engineering & Maintenance
Stanford Cath Labs 7, 9, & 10 Numeric results of CAD vs. BIM to 2” vs. full BIM
Jason Holbrook David Denysenko Eric Peabody
7
9
10
BIM Use Area* Start**
Cath Lab 7 CAD 720 SF 2006
Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 1,173 SF 2009
Cath Lab 10 Everything 1,060 SF 2010
Experimental Variables
*Results expressed per SF to normalize this variable**Cost values escalated to 2010 relative value to normalize this variable
Experimental Controls
Potential Savings
Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs
Potential Savings
35% less $Complete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs
Potential Savings
Save up to 35% on project costs
35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs
Potential Savings
Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% faster
Changes to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs
Potential Savings
Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
19
Cath Lab 7
Cath Lab 7CAD Only
7
Cath Lab 7: Siemens Biplane Cath LabProject Area: 720 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2006
Procedure Room: 600 Net Square Feet BIM Use: None
(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
“ ”The delay was caused…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
Cath Lab 7
27
Cath Lab 9
Cath Lab 9Model to 2”
9
Cath Lab 9: Siemens Biplane Hybrid ORProject Area: 1,173 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2009
Procedure Room: 821 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model to 2”
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
34
Cath Lab 10
Cath Lab 10Model Everything
10
Cath Lab 10: Siemens Biplane Pediatric Cath LabProject Area: 1060 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2010
Procedure Room: 717 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model Everything
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction
41
Cath Labs 7, 9, 10
Results
42
Results
BIM Use % from CAD
Cath Lab 7 CADCath Lab 9 2” Standard -15.0%Cath Lab 10 Everything -4.1%
Construction Cost
Change Order Cost
*All figures in 2010 Relative Value
BIM Use % of Total
Cath Lab 7 CAD 12.4%
Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.1%
Cath Lab 10 Everything <0.1%
*All figures in 2010 Relative Value
43
Results
BIM Use Construction Days/SF % from CAD
Cath Lab 7 CAD 8.40 mo 0.23 D/SFCath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.50 mo 0.15 D/SF -34.8%Cath Lab 10 Everything 8.45 mo 0.16 D/SF -30.4%
Construction Schedule
All Costs*
* All costs normalized to 2010 dollars** All design professional fees, including non-BIM fees*** Cath lab contribution margin of ~$8,000 per day
Survey All Services** Construction $ Margin*** Total
Cath Lab 7 18.5% 18.5%
Cath Lab 9 1.6% 27.3% (15.0%) (48.5%) (35.4%)
Cath Lab 10 1.6% 18.5% (4.1%) (54.7%) (34.6%)
Conclusion
Save up to 23% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs
45
That Went Well
Next Project 6% CO RateNot everything was resolved in the modelSome of the same team membersStandard Work is Needed
46
BIM Procedures Manual
Ensuring proper equipment access through BIM
48
• Fire / Smoke Dampers• Domestic Water valves• Heating / Cooling Water Valves• Medical gas valves and pressure sensors• Supply, Exhaust and Return Air Valves• Fan Coil Units• Small Supply and Exhaust Fans• Duct Humidifiers• Re-Heat Coils• Cable Tray• Low Voltage controls such as BMS, lighting, etc.
Typical above ceiling MEP access
49
The goal is to minimize or eliminate disruptions to patient care caused by maintenance activities.
• Whenever possible place serviceable items in “off-stage” areas like staff working areas, utility rooms and corridors that are not normally used for patients and visitors.
• Avoid placing items above ceilings in areas used for public circulation.
50
Ceiling Access through an Infection Control Cube
Containment cubes are typically just slightly larger than the 2’ X 4’ ceiling tile opening.
An opened 8’ ladder barely fits within the cube.
51
Plastic “Zip Wall” Containment:
If you can’t use a portable containment cube the next option is to build a temporary plastic wall. A valve at or above 16 feet high will
require a 14 foot ladder for safe access
14 Foot ladder base is over 100” wide
52
1st Floor @ 18’
2nd Floor @ 20’
Patient Floors @ 16’
Ground Floor @ 18’
The New Stanford Hospital’s deck to deck heights range from 16’ to 20’.
This makes it easy to place MEP equipment out of reach even if there is nothing blocking it’s access.
53
MEP Access Zone Guidelines
These guidelines are intended to be used during finite coordination to reduce possible remodeling and re-coordination efforts needed to maintain maintenance access to above ceiling MEP equipment.
Fire / Smoke Damper access:• Accessible from the corridor side. • Place over break rooms, conference rooms, mechanical and electrical rooms.
Valves:• Do not install more than 12 feet above the floor.• Locate valves in corridors, storerooms, utility rooms, etc.• Never place over nurse’s stations or within patient rooms.• Do Not locate valves above any patient care room door.
Do not place MEP serviceable items above fixed equipment, shelving or casework.
How Stanford is addressing access issues during modeling:
54
MEP Access Zone Guidelines continued . . . . .
Supply, Exhaust and Return Air valves:• Provide access directly below actuators.• When actuator is on top of unit, place access adjacent to the air valves.
Fan Coil Units, Supply and Exhaust Fans:• Align ceiling grid, light fixtures, sprinkler heads, etc. with bottom access units to insure
access doors open fully.• In hard lid ceilings insure access hatches are located on the service side of the
equipment.
Other above ceiling MEP considerations:• BMS and Lighting Control boxes require front access.• Medical gas valves and pressure sensors placed below 12’ above the floor.• Re-Heat coil access to control valves and duct access hatch.• Consider sharing Cable Tray access zones with other MEP access zones.
55
“Sufficient access is determined not only by above ceiling clearances but by the ability to use a containment cube and an appropriate sized ladder placed below the ceiling.”
Reviewing the model for access issues:
56
Access Zones should be modeled to the floor and clashed with (known) fixed equipment, shelving and casework.
Modeling Access Zones:
57
• Route the cable tray over the duct or use J-hooks to get over the duct.
• Whenever possible place cable tray 18” – 24” from the wall to share access zones.
Resolve all access clashes: (or they’ll need to be resolved in the field)
58
• Model review completed after 1st pass Finite Coordination• Discrepancies logged and shared with the Design Team• Changes made and closed out during 2nd pass Finite Coordination
Model Reviews and Issues Log:
59
Taking the model to the field to support construction:
BIManywhere Pro iPad App shown here
Using the model in the field is critical to insuring that the fully coordinated model becomes a fully coordinated building.
Stanford will be using the model to it’s fullest potential.
60
For future projects:
1. Make it a requirement to model access zones from the equipment to the floor below and clash with fixed equipment and furniture.
2. Add the “MEP Access Zones Guidelines” to the BIM Management Plan.
3. Insist on getting experienced Facilities Maintenance staff involved. They are your best resource for identifying true access issues.
4. Keep it reasonable. Access to MEP equipment above ceilings has to be provided but it doesn’t always have to be easy access.
BiM for Facilities Management
i=information without information its only a building model
April 2014
Model is complete and building is close to activation? What Now ?
Facilities Services & Planning currently maintains 1.2 million square feet onsite 1 million square feet offsite Staff of 60 building engineers and facility managers with avg of 150
work orders/day New Hospital adds 820,000 SF of high demand clinical space consisting
patient rooms, level 1 trauma,ED, surgical, diagnostic and treatment rooms. Maintenance of the facility must be 24/7 with no equipment
failures or down time
63
Current FM Practices
• Cost and time needed to develop input for CMMS (normally around $1-$3per gross SF, takes significant time after startup
• Cost and time needed to refer to paper files when FM problems occur• Poorer building and equipment performance (lack of adequate data for
preventive maintenance)
64
Integration
65
BIM is a better tool in reducing time to complete a work order
Service Scenario AssignmentFacilities Engineer is assigned to service HVAC Building with 70 VAV, 8 pumps, 14 fan motors & 2 centrifugal pumpsEqualing = 18 tickets per day per trade
66
Real Case
67
Nightmare Case
68
Use Case with BIM
69
Potential Cost Savings just for service on VAVs,pumps and motors
Note:Cost Savings per year in service to VAVs, pumps and motors related to HVAC system
70
Simple and Intuitive
Mobile Capability
Integrated Project Delivery ensure’s delivery of BIM for FM upfront
72
Construction Operations Building Information Exchange
What is COBie?• A standard method of exchanging
information that drives down cost
73
COBie
74
COBie
75
The Plan and current Deliverables
Stanford Hospital & Clinics is in the research and discovery Phase
1. Toured several hospital on the east coast and locally and observed: Technology is NEW and not fully developed in facilities management Lack of data in the model Lack of training in facilities maintenance staff
Goals for FY15
Define Use Cases and Specifications• In 3D model: Simple access to O&M manuals, Warranties, product data and replacement value• In 3D model: Metadata for all objects ie fire rating, floor type,• In 2D drawings: MEP and med gas system flow diagrams with shut off valves and Single lines• Integrated with employee name, dept. & machine• an ‘energy’ model and ability to compare actual energy use to baseline design energy use
Actions• Form BIM for FM execution team • Conduct pilot project and implement use cases in production with staff • Define BIM gaps in current BIM model and establish BIM deliverables from construction team
Estimate costs to maintain BIM system • For TI/remodels: update models, drawings, equip. metadata• Internal staffing and related vendor costs ( BIM Department)
76
Operating Costs
77
Vision: BIM for FM with complete integration with CMMS/BAS/Asset Management/Space Management