INTEGRATED PRODUCT MODELS IN LIFE-CYCLE EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Transcription

1 INTEGRATED PRODUCT MODELS IN LIFE-CYCLE EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Dr Arto Kiviniemi 1 ABSTRACT: The artifacts which form our built environment are complex and have very long lifespan compared to most products of the modern society. In addition, these artifacts are usually unique, which causes special problems to the design and production process compared to the mass-products; thorough testing is not possible before production. Thus, each building is in some sense a prototype. With the traditional, paper-based design methods many functional properties are difficult to visualize and the life-cycle properties are in practice evaluated only by the earlier experiences of the design team. In such situation any new solution or material is a risk, and this is one of the reasons why construction industry has so many quality problems and has not been able to develop or increase productivity as the other industries. The product model technology enables the creation of virtual buildings which can be used for different simulation and evaluation purposes before the construction process. The life-cycle and environmental issues are very complex. Thus, gathering and evaluating the data for the different design alternatives manually is timeconsuming and error-prone. In an integrated product model environment the complex data can be linked automatically to the design models and used in different simulation engines to evaluate the performance of the buildings compared to the requirements. This helps to compare the different alternatives and supports informed decision-making process. In addition the developing sensor and communication technologies will enable reporting buildings, where the actual performance of a building can be compared to the simulated performance in real time. This will enable automated diagnostics and control systems as well as further development and fine-tuning of the simulation models in the future. KEYWORDS: Decision Support, Integration, Life-cycle Management, Product Models, Requirements Management, Simulation. 1. INTRODUCTION In the first half of the 20 th century the construction process was industrialized and the Architectural- Engineering-Construction (AEC) industry improved its productivity and technical abilities enormously. However, in the last 40 years the methods to design, construct and maintain our built environment have not developed in the same speed as in many other industries. As a result of this the productivity has increased very slowly or even decreased (Figure 1). The information and communication technology (ICT) have not been utilized in its full potential; it has been used mainly as a tool to automate some paper-based processes instead of re-engineering the information management process and improve the communication between partners [1]. Another significant problem in the AEC industry is the unique nature of the production. It is not possible to test the artifacts before production in the same way as mass-products, such as cars. This means that every building is in some sense a prototype. One of the results is that the AEC industry suffers from significant quality problems; often the products do not meet the client requirements adequately. [2, 3] 1 VTT Building and Transport, Finland, Chief Research Scientist 1

2 Figure 1: Productivity development of the construction industry in Finland and USA [4, 5] However, the built environment is the largest national investment in all industrialized countries; in Finland it has been estimated to be 70% of the total national asset. The Real Estate and Construction Cluster also employs 20% of the workforce and consumes 50% of the energy [6]. In addition buildings are one of the critical resources to all human activities. Several studies in the Finnish Healthy Building technology program documented a clear connection between productivity and the indoor air quality of the workplace [7], which means that the quality problems in buildings can have also a strong indirect impact in the national economy. All these facts provide proof of the importance of the built environment, but unfortunately the R&D activities in the AEC industry are far below the industry average. In fact, AEC industry is considered to be uninteresting investment target by many R&D funding organizations. Because of the importance of the AEC industry and the existing problems, the European construction industry has formed a new collaboration forum, European Construction Technology Platform (ECTP), which has set strategic goals for the development of the industry to respond to its socio-economical responsibilities. The key goals of ECTP are [8]: Creating a built environment accessible and usable for all Improving health, safety and security of the built environment Contributing to the objectives of the Kyoto Protocol Adapting to climate change Preserving the natural environment Preserving the natural resources Preserving our cultural heritage Enhancing the urban environment Maintaining at a high level of efficiency and service the patrimony of infrastructure systems Optimizing the life-cycle cost of the built environment Improving Health and Safety conditions of the built environment Meeting these demands is a significant economical, cultural and technical challenge. The built environment is developing more complex at the same time when the design and construction processes are getting shorter. Different shareholders ability and resources to access and process all necessary information to fulfill all these diverse requirements is limited. Thus, there is a urgent need to develop methods and tools to collect, create, process and visualize data and information in an integrated ICT environment to better understand the implications of different decisions in the design, construction and maintenance processes and during the whole life-cycle of the buildings and infrastructures. This paper discusses these problems from one viewpoint; the use of interoperable product models as the ICT platform to integrate the building design and life-cycle information and to enable testing using virtual buildings as prototypes to test the impact of different design alternatives before construction. This was also one of the requirements in the Egan report: There are enormous benefits to be gained, 2

3 in terms of eliminating waste and rework for example, from using modern CAD technology to prototype buildings and by rapidly exchanging information on design changes. Redesign should take place on computer, not on the construction site [9]. Another important dimension in the use of integrated product model technology is its potential to improve the information management process in the AEC industry. This can have a significant impact in the productivity, because information management problems have been estimated to form at least 7% of the total cost of the buildings [10], but the financial implications to the process are not the topic of this paper. Because of the background of the author and the current status of the product model development the examples in this paper are from the building industry. However, the same principles are applicable also for the infrastructures, and the current development seems to be moving towards integrated product models for the infrastructures as well at least in the Nordic countries [11]. 2. STATUS OF BUILDING PRODUCT MODELS Traditional AEC documents, such as drawings, are only human readable. One prerequisite for the computational use of the information is a defined syntax and semantic data structure, such as a product model. Many current design software products are based on such models: for example, ArchiCAD by Graphisoft, Architectural Desktop and Revit by Autodesk, MicroStation by Bentley, and Tekla Structures by Tekla [12]. However, all these products have their own internal model, which is also different compared to the models used by so-called down-stream applications, e.g. applications which could utilize the model later in the process, for example, in simulation, cost estimation, structural or environmental analyzes, etc. This is an unfortunate consequence of the fragmented nature of the AEC industry, where the development of software has been based on domain and task specific needs instead of a holistic view to use software as a media to enable communication and data sharing between project participants. This situation leads to reproduction of data for different purposes, which is nonvalue adding and error-prone process. A recent NIST study quantified approximately $15.8 billion in annual interoperability costs in the U.S. capital facilities industry, representing 1-2% of industry revenue. However, according to NIST this is likely to be very conservative estimation of the total costs of inadequate interoperability, because the study did not cover all related aspects [13]. To improve the situation the International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI) started to develop a specification for international building product model standard in 1994 [14]. IAI has produced several versions of these specifications called Industry Foundation Classes (IFC). The IFC2x Platform specification was officially accepted as a Publicly Accessible Specification ISP/PAS by International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in October 2004 and the status as ISO/PAS 16739:2005 was confirmed in October 2005 [15]. ISO/PAS approval gave an official standard status to the IFC2x Platform specification. In addition, some countries adopted already in late 1990s IFC specifications as the basis of their national ICT strategy for the AEC industry, for example, Finland in the Information Networking in the Construction Process (Vera) [16] and Singapore in the Corenet project [17]. In January 2004 the US General Service Administration (GSA) published an Internal Directive stating that the GSA will start demanding IFC compliant design models to support concept reviews for projects receiving design funding in 2006 [18], and US Coast Guard and the US Army Corps of Engineers have started to use IFC in several of their projects [19]. The latest example is China which in autumn 2005 made the decision to transfer IFC 2x as a national standard [20]. These decisions have strengthened the status of IFC specifications also as a de-facto standard, and at the moment it seems to be the only significant standard for interoperable for building product models. 3. SOME EXPERIENCES OF BUILDING-PRODUCT-MODEL-BASED PROJECTS The use of interoperable building product models in real construction projects has still been very limited; the official IAI web-site documents only 7 projects which have used IFCs [21]. However, this is not the whole truth, because many projects have not delivered their information to the IAI, for example, Senate Properties in Finland have used IFCs at least in 11 projects (Figure 5), but only one of 3

4 them is documented on the IAI web-site. In any case, by a rough estimation probably less than 50 real projects globally have used IFCs as a part of their process. The reasons for the slow adoption of the interoperable technologies are both technical and cultural. The quality of the current IFC implementations is not sufficient [22, 23], and the change from document-based, domain centric process to the use of shared models will have significant business impacts and involve also many legal and contractual issues [24]. Thus, the change will most probably be slow also in the near future until the use has reached the critical mass on the market. The first test of interoperability in a real project was HUT-600, which was designed and built in in Finland. The project consisted of an expansion for new main lecture hall for the main building of Helsinki University of Technology, a landmark building designed by Alvar Aalto in 1960s. The testing of new software tools and methods in this project was funded by Tekes [25] as a part of the Vera technology program [16]. The process was analyzed and reported in detail by Martin Fischer and Calvin Kam from the Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE) at Stanford University [26]. The project tested the use of a wide variety of different product-model-based software (Figure 2) Figure 2: Software applications used in the HUT-600 project [ CIFE/Stanford University, 26] The HUT-600 project team constructed and maintained product models with explicit knowledge of building components, spatial definitions, material composition, and other parametric properties. During the early schematic phase, product-model-based software and IFC data exchange allowed the project team to shorten the time for design iteration, develop a reliable budget for effective cost control, and eliminate the need to re-enter geometric data, thermal values, and material properties as different disciplines contributed to the design progress (Figure 3). Additionally, visualization tools such as photo-realistic rendering software, Virtual Reality-Experimental Virtual Environment (VR- EVE) fostered early communication among the end-users, owners and the project team, who then captured valuable inputs and effectively translated the client s intent into long term values [27]. Building on the resulting efficiency and time-savings, the project team was able to conduct a variety of in-depth life-cycle studies and alternative comparisons on thermal performance, operation costs, energy consumption, and environmental impacts. Compared to a conventional approach, these relatively seamless data exchange and technology tools substantially expedited design and improved the quality of interdisciplinary collaboration. The improved design, visualization and communication methods empowered the building owners to better align the long-term facility values with their strategic plans [27]. As desired, most benefits occurred during the early design phase. Even though the integrated modeling improved upon conventional practices in terms of design quality, project risks, and life-cycle values, the project encountered technological, cultural, and business barriers to extending the benefits. 4

5 Project participants in the HUT-600 project could have enjoyed further benefits if product modeling tools supported revision-handling, two-way exchanges, simpler mapping of data formats from exporting to importing applications (Figure 4), and if IFC-compliant software tools were extensible and robust [28]. Figure 3: Examples of simulations in the HUT-600 project [ Granlund, 29] Figure 4: Data exchange process in the HUT-600 project [ CIFE/Stanford University, 30] 5

6 Culturally, 4D technology could have introduced additional analytical benefits beyond its current utilization if it had been conducted earlier during the preconstruction phase. The online project extranet, if developed optimally, would have made information exchanges more efficient during the construction documentation phase. At the same time, building owners and designers could have exploited business opportunities for the architects role in developing and coordinating a sharable product model [28]. Despite of the technical problems in the HUT-600 project the positive results convinced the owner, Senate Properties, to continue to use and test interoperable product models in several new projects since The focus of the tests has been different in different projects varying the use of product models in different phases by different actors (Figure 5). It is already quite obvious that the use of product models as a normal design method in the Senate Properties projects is not far in the future. Figure 5: Product Model projects of the Senate Properties [ Senate Properties, 31] One of the project participants in the HUT-600 project was Granlund, the leading Finnish building services consulting firm, which has developed integrated design methodology and software tools actively since early 1990s. They have created world-class design methodology by combining advanced simulation and analysis engines, such as DOE2, Energy+, CFX, Lightscape [32], etc., with their own user-interface and integration development. Granlund has also moved from the traditional building services design to the life-cycle management providing both services and technology [Figure 6] including the Reporting Building concept (Section 6). Figure 6: Granlund service concept [ Granlund, 33] 6

7 Some of these tools include also detailed product databases which are needed for simulation and analysis purposes (Section 5). Granlund is not only an excellent example of the potential of these technologies, but of an early-adopter company which is in many areas at the same level as if not ahead of the best research institutes in the world and at the same time able to turn their R&D efforts into successful business, which is not usual in the AEC industry. VTT is also developing the methods to utilize building product models and manufacturer s product data in the building services design and evaluation process in the Virtual Space 4D - Management of indoor environment project [34]. The computational model is based on the standard ISO 7730: Moderate thermal environment - Determination of the PMV and PPD indices and specification of the conditions for thermal comfort", where the input data are people s metabolism and clothing, indoor temperature, average radiation temperature, relative humidity and average air flow speed. The output are PMV index (+3 Hot; +2 Warm; +1 Slightly Warm; 0 Neutral; -1 Slightly Cool; -2 Cool; -3 Cold) and PPD index (the proportional share of unsatisfied users). The goal of the development is a tool which can evaluate the thermal comfort in different workplaces and visualize the results using OpenGL based 3D tools (Figure 7). Figure 7: Virtual Space 4D approach [ Pekka Tuomaala/VTT, 34] One result of the successful pilot projects in Finland was that the Confederation of Finnish Construction Industries RT (RT) decided in 2001 to take the use of building product models and IFCs as a key element of their new technology strategy (Figure 8). Because RT is one of largest industry associations in Finland, representing both construction companies and building material and component industry, this decision was a pivotal step in adopting the use of these technologies in Finland. After this strategy decision RT started in 2002 the ProIT project, which has developed practical means to move towards the wide use of these technologies in Finland [35]. Among the results of ProIT project are process models and design guidelines for the use of building product models, definitions for product structures and libraries, testing of the methods in several pilot projects, and educational seminars. The ProIT project is finishing by the end of 2005, but the product-model-based R&D work at RT will continue in other projects, such as VBE2 (Section 7). 7

8 Figure 8: Product model based AEC process [ Confederation of Finnish Construction Industries RT, 35] 4. REQUIREMENTS MANAGEMENT AND VERIFICATION One of the identified problems in the AEC industry is the efficient management of the client requirements through the design and construction process [1]. This problem is also related to the quality problems in the buildings. One interesting new concept to handle these information management problems in the product model environment is the Solibri Model Checker [36]; a spelling checker for building product models which can check and validate the model against a set of configurable rules (Figure 9). The rules can be for example general structure rules for the model (e.g. no multiple identical objects in the place, clash detection, etc.), local building codes (e.g. exit routes, envelope insulation, etc), agreed content (e.g. every building object must have a type, etc.). Without the possibility to check the model and verify its structure and content the data could not be used reliably for different purposes, such as, energy or environmental analysis, cost estimation, etc. Figure 9: Solibri Model Checker [ Solibri, 36] 8

9 The Corenet project in Singapore [17] is based on a similar approach to use product models for automated building code checking. The project is transforming local building codes to a format which can be used by the software, and it has also tested the use of US building codes. This test is an evidence of the efficient use of a generic checking engine combined with the rule database. In Corenet project the checking engine is based on the Norwegian EDM model server and a local company, novacitynets Pte Ltd, is developing the integrated plan checking system including the rule database [37, 38]. Solibri Model Checker and Corenet project demonstrate the need to create validation rules for the building product models. The development of the necessary rules in a computer interpretable format is one of the many R&D issues related to the versatile use of the product models. Similar system is also needed for the project specific user requirements, such as, room areas, indoor conditions, lighting, etc. If these requirements are not defined and stored in a format which the checking software can use, it is not possible to automate the checking process, and it would remain as a manual process. The development of a systematic framework for requirements in the product model environment was the topic of doctoral dissertation of the author of this paper [39]. The developed requirements model emphasizes the need for separated, linked models for different purposes which are also needed for different domain models as discussed later in Section 7. If the requirements are defined as attributes of the design objects there is no possibility to verify reliably, for example, the room program; if the architect removes or forgets some of the required spaces from his design, the model cannot include the requirements for these spaces if they would be its attributes. Thus, the requirements model must be separated from the design model/models (Figure 10). Figure 10: Integrated project information model hierarchy and connections [40] 5. PRODUCT DATA AND LIFE-CYCLE ANALYSIS Crucial part of requirements verification, life-cycle analysis and as-built information are the product data. Different analysis and maintenance operations need accurate, specific data which can be totally different for different products depending of the properties and usage. For example, shading coefficient and insulation properties are crucial information in windows, but not relevant in floor coverings, for which emissions are an important aspect for the indoor air quality. In the same way the energy consumption of lighting fixtures is crucial for energy analysis, but the light distribution and color temperature are needed for lighting simulation. The product specific list of the needed properties is long and complicated, such as expected service-life, maintenance instructions, embedded energy, environmental profile of the used material, life cycle costs, etc., just to point out some crucial elements. It is not possible that the project team or maintenance personnel would define and manage this detailed, product-specific information of all the products and materials used in a project during the design and construction process. Thus, it must be produced and maintained by the manufacturers. In fact, manufacturers have most of this data already in some format. The main problem is that the existing 9

10 product data are not in a coherent and automatically usable format. An obvious consequence of this is the need to start producing standards for the content and format of the product information. The format must be computer interpretable, such as ifcxml, and the content must respond to the needs of different simulation and analysis tools. In addition, there must be some authority that checks and confirms that the product properties are correct and measured or calculated using approved methods. One example of the work in this area is the LifePlan research project [41], which was carried out at VTT Building and Transport during The project introduced methods how to use productspecific service-life information in service-life design and within the care and maintenance of buildings. The project has also studied how to effectively create, maintain and deliver service-life information. The objectives of the project were: to create a large product-specific database for service-life information of building products and components. to develop structure, representation and delivery of service-life information in user-friendly format which is compliant with the product-model-based software products. The project defined the service-life information using ifcxml description language. to support service-life design utilizing service-life information of building products. The process should result in the formulation of documents including the designed periods and measures for inspection, care, maintenance as well as for renovation. to create a model for the life cycle of building product information [42]. Figure 11: Outline of product information in LifePlan project [ Tarja Häkkinen, VTT, 42] The final goal of the LifePlan project was to create a framework for databases where manufacturers could store all the product information needed for the design, evaluation and analyses, and during the service-life of the components [42]. This work is now continuing in several research projects including connections to electronic procurement systems which could automate the production of as-built models [43]. The Confederation of the Finnish Construction Industries RT is also preparing a new project, which would develop a system combining the detailed product information to the national construction specific EAN and RASI code systems [44, 45]. The development of usable product model libraries which would cover sufficient part of the product information for the AEC industry will be a huge task requiring extensive international research and standardization collaboration. One of the efforts in this area in the near future will be new IFC extension project Service Life Planning and Durability of Buildings and Materials which is related to ISO standard [46, 47]. 6. REPORTING BUILDINGS One interesting application is to combine the simulation model with the real building, which enables real time monitoring of the performance compared to the client requirements and simulated performance. This possibility is rapidly becoming more and more affordable because of the increasing 10

11 use of virtual models, simulation and decreasing price of sensor technology. By comparing the expected and measured performance of the building it is possible to identify easily potential technical or maintenance problems, and in the near future possibly even automatically adjust the system based on computational analyses or give detailed instructions to the maintenance personnel. Theoretical framework for this idea is CIFE s POP ontology; desired, predicted and observed behavior of a product, organization or process (Figure 12). Figure 12: POP Ontology [ CIFE/Stanford University, 48] There are already some commercial applications of the Reporting Building concept; Granlund has implemented it in their Taloinfo system which is used, for example, in the Senate Properties Headquarters in Helsinki (Figure 13). This is an application focusing to the monitoring of energy and FM issues, but similar applications are at the moment in development also for other domains, such as monitoring road and infrastructure related performance and maintenance issues. Figure 13: Reporting Building by Granlund Taloinfo [ Granlund, 49] 7. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS OF THE PRODUCT MODEL TECHNOLOGY As documented in the PM4D Final Report the main short-comings in the HUT-600 project were the problems in 1) revision-handling, 2) two-way exchanges, 3) complex mapping of data formats from exporting to importing applications, and 4) quality of IFC implementation in software tools [28]. Problem 4 is related the currently low end-user demand for the IFC support and to the complexity of the IFC model; there is not enough incentive for the software vendors to invest the necessary resources to high-quality IFC interfaces if it is not important for their customers. This situation seems to be changing because of the increasing demand of IFC support as documented in section 2. Problems 1-3 are clearly related to the file-based information exchange between the different software products, and the solution requires development of new, substitutive technologies. 11

12 The main reason why file-based data exchange is not a feasible solution for the design, construction and maintenance process is that the data content and structure of the domain specific models are different. For example, one slab or wall in the architectural model can be several objects in the structural model and the data content of these objects is different; even the geometry can vary because of the different needs of detailing. When a model is exported from one software and imported to another software there is no way to maintain the data integrity of the original model because of the different structure and content in the internal models. Thus, the data losses in data exchange process are inevitable because of the many different domain models; this is related to problems 2 and 3. Problem 1, revision-handling, cannot be solved in the current IFC file-based exchange either. The file includes always the whole building partial exchange is not supported and the revisions of individual objects cannot be controlled. A similar problem is related to the ownership and changepermissions of the objects; when the file is imported to another software there is no way to control who can change the properties of the objects or how they can be changed. The first effort to move forward from file-based data exchange in the IFC environment was the IMSvr project [50]. Yoshinobu Adachi introduced the idea of an IFC model server, which was implemented in collaboration between Secom Ltd from Japan and VTT. The result was an open-source solution available for research and development purposes (Figure 14). Figure 14: Overview of IFC Model Server Framework [ Yoshinobu Adachi, Secom/VTT, 50] Soon after the IMSvr project Eurostep and EPM started their development projects for commercial IFC model servers [51 and 37]. The next step in the IFC model server development was the SABLE project which developed a standardized API for the different model servers in (Figure 15). Figure 15: Advantage of a standardized API in model server environment [ SABLE project, 52] 12

13 The author of this paper has documented the problems of file exchange and linkage of the domain specific models more in detail in his doctoral dissertation [53]. The separation of the instantiated requirements and design models is necessary, not only because of the different structures, but also because of the direct and indirect links between requirements and design objects (Figure 16). The proposed solution is a method to link any objects in separate instantiated models by changing slightly the reference structure of the current IFC specification (Figure 17, grey objects exist in the current specification). The developed solution also enables individual ownership of the properties, and thus provides a solution to the ownership and change-permissions discussed earlier in this section. Integrated Building Information Model Requirements Model Design Model Set of Requirements Direct link Design Object (for example Space) Subset of Requirements related to the Systems Subset of Requirements related to the Bounding Elements Systems related to the Design Object (for example HVAC system) Bounding Elements related to the Design Object (for example Walls) Indirect link Indirect link Figure 16: Conceptual links between requirements and design models [54] IfcGlobally UniqueID IfcOwner History IfcText IfcLabel *GlobalId OwnerHistory Description Name (ABS) IfcRoot RelatedObjects S[1:?] (ABS) IfcRelationship IfcRelAssociates IfcLabel IfcLabel IfcLabel IfcCalendar Date Ifc Organization ObjectType Name Version VersionDate Publisher (ABS) IfcObject ModelType NewModel Information (INV) HasAssociations FOR RelatedObjects S[0:?] NewModel TypeEnum InModel (INV) ContainedObjects S[0:?] IfcIdentifier IfcLabel IfcLabel ItemReference Name Location NewRelAssociates ExternalObject ExternalObjectReference NewExternal ObjectReference (ABS) IfcExternal Reference Figure 17: Location and structure of the object link between models in the IFC specification [55] The latest, extensive R&D effort related to the integrated building product models in Finland is the Virtual Building Environments II project (VBE II). It continues the VBE I project in [56] and collaboration between VTT and Tampere University of Technology (TUT), and includes also 17 industrial companies. The main goals of the project for the participants are: Clear understanding of the possibilities and problems of the existing and emerging VBE technologies combined to the defined strategy how to implement the new technologies Development of data transfer and sharing technologies Development of advanced decision support methods Development of methods to measure and benchmark VBE benefits Development of model based real estate and facility management processes 13

14 Among the technical challenges in the VBE II project are the development of a functioning prototype of multi-model environment (Figure 10), client applications to SABLE API (Figure 18), and technical solutions for IFC compliant interactive 3D visualizations. End-user application A Interface VBE II projects End-user End-user application application B C Interface Interface 3D component Collaboration projects End-user application D Interface End-user application E Interface Technical implementation support (Service from Eurostep Oy) Current SABLE API (Licenced from Eurostep Oy) Extensions (Eurostep Oy) IFC Model Server 1 IFC Model Server 2 IFC Model Server 3 Figure 18: Interface Development within the VBE II Project [ VBE II project, 56] 8. CONCLUSIONS Although the interoperable product-model-based software applications and true data sharing are still used only in a tiny fraction of the building projects, the technology is developing rapidly at the moment. The impact of the new integrated modeling paradigm into the industry processes and business models is much larger than the change from manual drafting to CAD in the 1980s. CAD only automated the drafting process, but integrated product models combined to the developing needs for more accurate environmental and life-cycle information will change the tasks and the roles in the AEC industry; it is not overstatement to claim that we are on the edge of a process revolution. Some of the companies, which have already been able to merge these new technologies into their business processes, have been able to differentiate themselves from their competitors and create a visible position on the market, such as Granlund and Solibri. However, these companies act in the early adoption and high risk area of the technology wave (Figure 19), and the real market potential for the use of integrated models is still forming. This is naturally at the same time opportunity and risk for these companies as any technology revolution is for the early adopters. Although some companies have already developed commercial tools utilizing some of the potential of the product-model-based design, there are still many open R&D issues on this field. The development of usable object libraries will be a huge international task which requires collaboration of experts in many areas; the content of the library objects must satisfy many different information needs before the data can be used in different simulation and analysis tasks needed in the industry. Before that it is unlike that the product manufacturers will start to produce their product information for those databases in large scale. However, the LifePlan project among others has shown that it is technically possible. Additionally, in the long run the publishing of object libraries will be for the manufacturers more cost efficient than the traditional publishing of paper catalogs, and the use of the object libraries. 14

15 Figure 19: Position, competition and risks on the technology wave Creating, and especially maintaining, the different models for different purposes in the evolving design process is not financially justified and thus not widely used in the current AEC process, which has practically prevented the use of advanced simulation and analysis tools. When the use of interoperable design tools and amount of object libraries are on a sufficient level, it is likely that the use of advanced down-stream application will increase rapidly, because the possibility to use existing models and information will make the use of such application much more cost efficient than the current situation where practically every simulation requires its own model. Interoperability will provide much better payback for the modeling investment (Figure 20). Figure 20: Benefits of interoperable models for simulation and analysis [ Dr Vladimir Bazjanac, 57] The interoperable product model technology itself is only a part of the solution in developing information management methods for the AEC industry, but it can already now provide an integration platform for R&D, and in the future also for the new commercial services based on integrated product models (Figure 21). In this environment the product models can serve as the glue combining different domain knowledge and expertise into an integrated working environment where the complex requirements of the future AEC industry can be managed improving both quality and cost efficiency of the process and the products. 15

16 9. REFERENCES Figure 21: Value network of integrated product model based system [58] [1] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Stanford University, ISBN , page 26. See [39] [2] Egan, Sir John, Rethinking Construction: the report of the Construction Task Force to the Deputy Prime Minister, UK 1998 [3] Architects Association of New Brunswick Manitoba Association of Architects Nova Scotia, Association of Architects, and the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada: Succeeding by Design - A Perspective on Strengthening the Profession of Architecture in Ontario and Canada, McGill Business Consulting Group, 2003, page 37. Available in PDF format at [4] VTT Statistics 1998 [5] Teicholz, P., Labor Productivity Declines in the Construction Industry: Causes and Remedies, AECbytes Viewpoint #4, 2004, [6] VTT Statistics 1999, preparation documents for the Rembrand Technology Program, published also in Laiserin Letter #11, 2002 at [7] Niemelä, R., Railio, J., Hannula, M., Rautio, M., Reijula, K., Assessing the effect of indoor environment on productivity, Proceedings Clima 2000, Naples 2001 Niemelä, R., Hannula, M., Rautio, M., Reijula, K., Railio, J., The effect of air temperature on labour productivity in call centres - a case study, Energy and Buildings 2002, vol 34, Niemelä, R., Hannula, M., Rautio, M. Reijula, K., Work environment effects on labour productivity: an intervention study in a storage building, American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2002, vol 42: [8] European Construction Technology Platform Strategic Research Agenda for the European Construction Sector - Achieving a sustainable and competitive construction sector by 2030, Draft Version, Oct 14th, Available at Draft-2005-Oct-14.pdf [9] Egan, Sir John, Rethinking Construction: the report of the Construction Task Force to the Deputy Prime Minister, UK 1998, page 28 16

17 [10] Lautanala, M., Enkovaara, E., Heikkonen, A., Taiponen, T., An Estimation of the Potential IT Benefits in Construction, CIB-W78 Information Technology in Construction Conference Proceedings The Life-cycle of Construction IT Innovations Technology transfer from research to practice, 1998, ISBN [11] The author is currently preparing for the Finnish Infra 2010 program a project, which would evaluate the Norwegian Quadri product model system from the interoperability and lifecycle viewpoint. Infra 2010: Quadri: [12] ArchiCAD by Graphisoft, design software, Architectural Desktop and Revit by Autodesk, design software, MicroStation by Bentley, design software, Tekla Structures, design software, [13] Gallaher, M.P., O Connor, A.C., Dettbarn, J.L.Jr., Gilday, L.T., Cost Analysis of Inadequate Interoperability in the U.S. Capital Facilities Industry, NIST GCR , 2004 [14] International Alliance for Interoperability, [15] International Organization for Standardization ISO, Publicly Available Standards, [16] A national technology program in Finland Vera - Information Networking in the Construction Process by Tekes (National Technology Agency of Finland), [17] A national IT initiative in Singapore Construction and Real Estate Network, Ministry of National Development and Building and Construction Authority, [18] GSA news on the IAI North American website, [19] Official report of the IAI North American Chapter in the International Technical Management Committee (IAI ITM) meetings in Beijing, October 2005 and Building Smart project web site, [20] Information is based on author s personal exchange as the Chairman of the IAI ITM with the representatives of China National Institute of Standardization (CNIS) and meetings at China Institute of Building Standard Design & Research and China Ministry of Construction. [21] Building Smart project web site, [22] Fischer, M., Kam, C., PM4D Final Report, CIFE Technical Report #143, Chapter 6: Barriers to Extending PM4D Benefits, pages See [26] [23] Romo, I., Sulankivi, K., Kokemuksia tuotemallin ja 4D:n hyödyntämisestä pilottihankkeissa, report Experiences from the utilization of product models and 4D in pilot projects in Finnish only: [24] Information is based on author s discussions about the topic around the world and the on-going work about contractual and legal issues in the workgroups of the ProIT project [25] Tekes - National Technology Agency of Finland, [26] Fischer, M., Kam, C., PM4D Final Report, Stanford University, CIFE Technical Report #143, Report is available at [27] Fischer, M., Kam, C., PM4D Final Report, CIFE Technical Report #143, 2002, page 4 [28] Fischer, M., Kam, C., PM4D Final Report, CIFE Technical Report #143, 2002, page 5 [29] Granlund, HUT Building Services Visualizations. Image from author s keynote presentation "Interoperable ICT tools in real construction projects - Finnish experiences of new processes" in the Tokyo IAI Seminar [30] Fischer, M., Kam, C., PM4D Final Report, CIFE Technical Report #143, 2002, page 6 [31] Senate Properties, Kari Alatalo s presentation Tilaajana Senaatti-kiinteistöt vaatii jo suunnitelmatiedostoja IFC-muodossa. Miksi? in Building Information Foundation s Building Forum "Tuotemalleista on jo konkreettista hyötyä, September 6 th, Author s translation from the Finnish slide #7, [32] CFX: Computational Fluid Dynamix software by Ansys Inc., DOE2: building energy analysis freeware developed by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Energy+: building energy analysis freeware developed by LBNL Lightscape: Lighting simulation software by Autodesk, 17

18 [33] Granlund brochure [34] Virtual Space 4D - Management of indoor environment project, CUBE Technology Program [35] ProIT project, [36] Solibri Model Checker software, [37] Express Data Manager (EDM) software by EPM Technology, [38] FORNAX - e-plancheck software by novacitynets Pte Ltd, [39] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Ph.D. dissertation at Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, UMI # and VTT publication 572, ISBN Available also in PDF format at [40] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Stanford University, ISBN , page 68 [41] LifePlan - Service Life Planning - from theory to practical processes project, [42] Häkkinen, T., Service Life Planning from theory to practical processes Proceedings of RIL/RILEM/CIB Symposium ILCDES Kuopio, Finland, pp [43] ISCIS - Integrated Supply Chain Information Systems project, funding decision made in October 2005 as a part of the ERAbuild program, [44] EAN - European Article Numbering, [45] RASI codes by Rasi ry (Finnish Hardware Association). Web site only in Finnish: [46] The plan for new IFC extension project Service Life Planning and Durability of Buildings and Materials was presented in the IAI ITM meetings in Beijing in October The project will include participants from several countries and it will be lead by Byggforsk in Norway, [47] ISO standard Buildings and constructed assets -- Service life planning, parts 1-8, [48] Garcia, A.C., Kunz, J., Ekström, M., Kiviniemi, A., Building a Project Ontology with Extreme Collaboration and Virtual Design and Construction, Stanford University, CIFE Technical Report TR152, 2003, page 9, [49] Granlund Reporting Building from the presentation 3D-model Based Tools for Building Life Cycle Management, Energy and Comfort Simulation and Environmental Analysis in the Finnish FM/AEC Software Day at CIFE seminar at Stanford University 2004, slides 47 and 48, [50] Adachi, Y., IMSvr IFC Model Server project by Secom and VTT , and [51] Eurostep Model Server for IFC, [52] SABLE project, [53] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Stanford University, ISBN , pages [54] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Stanford University, ISBN , page 95 [55] Kiviniemi, A., Requirements Management Interface to Building Product Models, Stanford University, ISBN , page 135 [56] Virtual Building Environments project: [57] Bazjanac, V., from the presentation Virtual Building Environments - Integrating Knowledge, Data, and Software for Multidisciplinary Design, Analysis, and Visualization in the AIA seminar Connecting the Dots, 2003 [58] Image from author s keynote presentation "Interoperable ICT tools in real construction projects - Finnish experiences of new processes" in the Tokyo IAI Seminar