Upload
aleesha-harvey
View
219
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
© 2012 Autodesk
Successful Coordination on Actual Projects!SE2534-RoundtableDesirée Mackey, PEStructural Engineer, Martin/Martin
© 2012 Autodesk
Class Summary
In this roundtable session, we will present several coordination items that occurred on an actual project where the project team had various levels of BIM expertise and a quick project schedule, but still achieved a high level of coordination among all disciplines. The project team employed numerous strategies—some tried and true, and some newer ideas—to make this a successful Building Information Modeling (BIM) project. These strategies will be presented for discussion among the group. Discussion topics will include the kick-off meeting, model coordination, modeling techniques, the challenges encountered on this project, things that we would repeat or do differently next time, and anything else the group may choose to discuss.
© 2012 Autodesk
Discussion Topics/Learning Objectives
Kick-Off Meeting
Model CoordinationAvoiding modeling any element more than once “Using” each others’ models – walls, roofs, slabs
Collaboration/Clash Detection
Time permitting: Model groups challenges
© 2012 Autodesk
The BIM Kick-Off Meeting
Who should initiate/run the kick-off meeting?
If no kick-off meeting is initiated by the prime, should a consultant take the lead? If so, how should the consultant go about doing so?
How do different levels of experience influence the kick-off meeting and/or its results?
Should a consultant offer a “what we will/wont model” document as part of their standard contract as a sort of safety net?
© 2012 Autodesk
The BIM Kick-Off Meeting – Case Study ExampleVaried Revit experience among project team (SE more experienced than Arch and MEP)
Structural Engineer took the lead
Included a “what we will/will not model” page in our contract
No other official LOD/modeling documents
© 2012 Autodesk
Model Coordination
Who should model what elements?
What are the benefits/challenges with this approach?
Elements to discuss:WallsSlabsRoofsOthers?
© 2012 Autodesk
Model Coordination: Walls – Case Study Example
Architect models the walls, down to the footing depths
Benefits No chasing down wall geometry No time spent modeling walls
Challenges Only wanted to see the Structural Core on the Structural Drawings
Solution used: Parts and filters – would have been better in Revit 2013 No control over inaccuracies
Solution used: Stopped updating the link and manually edited the link Modeling wall footings without walls
Solution used: Many considered – used slab edges hosted to a model line
© 2012 Autodesk
Model Coordination: Roofs – Case Study Example
Architect models the roofing, Structural Engineer models the metal deck and framing directly below, matching Architect’s geometry
BenefitsGood coordination between systems/disciplines
ChallengesNo control over inaccuracies – “Line slightly off axis” warnings
© 2012 Autodesk
Model Coordination: Slabs – Case Study Example
Architect models all slabs
BenefitsNo modeling the slabs!
ChallengesGraphics of footings below
Solution used: linework tool, but had to constantly fix itSlab on grade schedules
Solution used: Arch added a parameter to the relevant slabs, SE scheduled through the link
© 2012 Autodesk
Collaboration & Clash Detection
How does collaboration/clash detection with the other disciplines work?
How does the design team define coordination/clash detection? Does the contractor define it differently?
Are Navisworks models utilized? If so, to what extent?
Does the level of Revit experience/different levels of experience significantly impact coordination?
Is there a “trust” issue when using the models for coordination? Is there a disconnect between the models and the drawings if we focus on model coordination?
© 2012 Autodesk
Collaboration & Clash Detection – Case Study Example
Arch/Struct coordination issues became apparent in many model viewsBenefit: coordination issues were easy to catch by just lookingChallenge: Elements “looked wrong” in live views, so a high level of continual QA/QC required.
MEP Coordination mostly through visual observation of Revit and Navisworks models
Benefit: good resultsChallenge: Would have been difficult under any other principal
© 2012 Autodesk
Model Groups – Challenges
Complex “trusses” created using independent pieces and then grouped together
Movement of the groups caused annotation issues in live views
Exchange with analysis ungrouped and then regrouped all of the instances of the group into separate groups, thus defeating the purpose/eliminating the benefits of the group
© 2012 Autodesk
Autodesk, AutoCAD* [*if/when mentioned in the pertinent material, followed by an alphabetical list of all other trademarks mentioned in the material] are registered trademarks or trademarks of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. Autodesk reserves the right to alter product and services offerings, and specifications and pricing at any time without notice, and is not responsible for typographical or graphical errors that may appear in this document. © 2012 Autodesk, Inc. All rights reserved.
Please fill out your surveys!
Contact Info:Desirée (Dezi) MackeyEmail: [email protected]: http://bdmackeyconsulting.com/blog/Twitter: @RevitGeeksWifeLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/desiree-mackey/7/308/448