COLLABORATIVE ENGINEERING WITH IFC Common practice in the Netherlands Léon van Berlo; Gijs Derks; Cyrille Pennavaire; Paul Bos
NETHERLANDS ORGANISATION FOR APPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH TNO
Helmond
Eindhoven
Rijswijk
Delft
Leiden
The Hague
Zeist
Utrecht
Groningen
Soesterberg
Trends Transitions
INTERNATIONAL OFFICES / AGENCIES
Offices
Agencies
Trends Transitions
THE POWER OF TNOFROM IDEA TO INNOVATION
Collaborative engineering with IFC
THIS RESEARCH
Interviews with practiceCo-authors are all practitioners
Goal:Finding out if there is a ‘generic’ process flow when using BIM
Methodology:Interviews and observations
Focus/scopeContractors and suppliers
Collaborative engineering with IFC
CONCLUSION
Tentative conclusions (industry still in development)
FoundIFC still works (with reference model concept)Companies use the same kind of phases But don’t give the same names to the phasesStandard iteration inside phases
So let’s have a look at the phases.….
Collaborative engineering with IFC
SOME NOTES ON THE SIDE
Interviews also found sentiment:Many unnecessary myths still around about IFCGrowing use of BCF to communicate issuesTop down policy makers are not on the same trackIt’s not about the perfect modelStandardized ‘BIM Execution plan’ is not possibleAgreements about the model are important, but MVD’s are weirdClassifications are important, but concept libraries are weird
Collaborative engineering with IFC
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
Get the naming straight
Educate top down policy thinkers / Look at current practice!
Increase priority on BIM education (myths)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION