Civil Integrated Management (CIM) for Departments of Transportation, Volume 2: Research Report (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

3 Literature Review 2.1 Overview of CIM Tools and Functions As a system, CIM consists of both foundational processes and emerging practices in the highway construction sector. As the technology has grown, so has the taxonomy and defini- tions. This chapter explains CIM’s scope and the associated terms. CIM encompasses several technologies that have the potential to improve the performance and predictability of the related project work processes, including scoping, survey- ing, design, construction, operations, and maintenance. The primary objective is to enable a transition to digital project delivery to better align it with the modern tools and tech- nologies that have emerged in both the office (planning and design phases) and the field environments (construction and operations phases). To understand the benefits of CIM and develop systematic guidelines, it is helpful to classify CIM into two categories: • CIM tools category, which includes the associated technolo- gies and tools • CIM functions category, which contains the functions (work areas) that one or more of the highlighted CIM tools improve or transform As per FHWA, CIM, in its entirety, also encapsulates con- tractual and legal considerations (FHWA 2012). It is impor- tant to address these considerations when incorporating CIM functions into projects. 2.1.a CIM Tools CIM tools represent fundamental, core technologies. They enable the opportunity to find new and improved solutions for performing project delivery functions. Figure 2.1 enumer- ates the list of CIM tools and their codes under three catego- ries (used herein for identification purposes): modeling, data management, and sensing. An overview of the various CIM tools is included in Section 2.1 of the Guidebook. 2.1.b CIM Functions Technology implementation positively affects the project’s performance by transforming the functions in the pertinent project work areas. Figure 2.2 enumerates the identified CIM functions and clusters them under project activities. In this figure, project activities do not correspond to project phases. Rather, they represent a group of CIM functions that sup- ports the broad activities of surveying, design, construc- tion, and project management. This figure also depicts the functions mapped to the relevant CIM tools (see Section 2.1 of the Guidebook for CIM tool identification codes and descriptions). Each of the mapped CIM tools can transform or improve the processes associated with a function in a certain way. The descriptions of the functions under four categories— Surveying, Design, Construction, and Project Management— are presented in Section 2.2 of the Guidebook. 2.2 CIM Trends and Strategies— A Global Perspective As transportation projects increase in complexity, project personnel are resorting to various CIM technologies to ensure quality, on time, on budget project delivery. Civil infrastruc- ture projects such as highway construction are complicated by design complexity, funding regulations, right-of-way (ROW) acquisition, utility relocation, and traffic management. There is an enormous amount of information that is being generated, organized, analyzed, and managed during various phases of a project (O’Brien et al. 2012). All these issues entail an inher- ent need for applying technologies to make the delivery of the project faster, safer, and of better quality. Table 2.1 provides a glimpse of the current practices of information modeling in C H A P T E R 2

4various countries around the world (Construction Industry Council, Hong Kong 2011). The governments of many countries have been actively involved in promoting or mandating the deployment of infor- mation modeling on infrastructure projects. In countries such as China, Japan, and Korea, the construction industry is driv- ing its use for apparent benefits. In the United States, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is at the forefront of adopting infor- mation modeling for public infrastructure projects. With respect to highway construction, the leadership in promot- ing CIM has come from sophisticated construction contrac- tors, with some state DOTs and other transportation agencies on-board. Note that in Table 2.1, and in later sections of this report, the term “CIM” has been replaced by “BIM” or “BIM for infrastructure” for the transportation infrastructure proj- ects outside the United States. Though the technology and Figure 2.1. Pictorial representation of CIM tools. Figure 2.2. CIM functions (mapped to their corresponding CIM tools).

5 Hong Kong Private sector Building industry, Hong Kong Institute of BIM, BIM software vendors Used by large contractors and developers. Actively studied by public sector, railway operator. BuildingSmart Hong Kong inaugurated in Hong Kong in late April 2013. Building department’s “Feasibility study on implementation of electronic submission system in building” study to be completed in September 2013. Country Type of Organization Driving Organization/Agencies Strategy USA Public companies American Institute of Architects, General Services Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decided in 2008 to migrate to building information modeling (BIM)*. State DOTs of Wisconsin, Texas, Florida, California, and Michigan Many modern techniques being practiced on many projects. City of Las Vegas Created a preliminary 3D model of its underground utilities. UK Government Crossrail Project Project implemented collaborative BIM in 2009. The Cabinet Office of Government Construction Board, UK Government Implement BIM by 2016 BIM UK Strategy Report (March 2011). London’s Heathrow Airport A case study demonstrating several strategies for improving accuracy of relocation information about underground utilities. Canada Association CanBIM Council, The Institute for BIM in Canada Aligned industry to promote use of BIM University of British Columbia published case studies report. Australia Public Organization Organizations such as Australian Productivity Commission, the Australian Construction Industry Forum Issued “BIM in Australia 2010 Report.” Denmark The Royal Government Individual state clients Danish state clients such as the Palaces & Properties Agency, the Defence Construction Service, and the Danish University Property Agency required BIM use for their projects. Mandated use of BIM for projects > h2M. Singapore Government Building & Construction Authority (BCA) Enhanced the electronic plan submission system to mandate BIM use by 2015. China Industry Private sector Successful BIM use in Shanghai Tower project attracted attention. Government Government BIM included in the National 12th Five-Year Plan. Table 2.1. Information modeling across the world—an overview. (continued on next page)

6concepts remain the same, the term CIM is not frequently used in other countries. 2.2.a CIM in the United States—Trends and Projections Information modeling and its utilization and integration throughout the project life cycle forms the basic tenets of CIM. The level of CIM adoption and use in the infrastructure sec- tor is lagging behind vertical construction, but infrastructure projects are well suited to benefit from a model-driven digi- tal approach to design, construction, and asset management, which supports the need for increased usage and broad accep- tance of CIM in this sector (Dodge Data & Analytics 2014b). The adoption of information modeling has seen a signifi- cant increase worldwide in the areas of building, infrastructure, and construction management. The percentage of companies using BIM jumped from 17% in 2007 to 71% in 2012 in North America. SmartMarket Report: The Business Value of BIM for Infrastructure presents a summary of a survey that involved 466 respondents across various infrastructure sectors in the United States (Dodge Data & Analytics 2012). Some of the interesting findings follow: • Of all users, 67% reported a positive return on investment (ROI) for BIM use on infrastructure projects. Respondents were asked to estimate ROI in seven broad categories: nega- tive, break-even, less than 10%, 10 to 25%, 26 to 50%, 51 to 100%, and over 100%. • Of current users, 79% were expected to be using BIM on more than 25% of their infrastructure projects by 2013. • Major investments were in marketing BIM capabilities, and software and hardware upgrades. • Top benefits included reduced conflicts and changes (58%), improved project quality (48%), and lower project risk and better predictability of project outcomes (60%). • The areas reported as weakest in implementation include software interoperability, workforce education/training, and legal and contractual issues. Figure 2.3 shows that irrespective of an infrastructure sector, implementation of information modeling has been consistently on the rise. Specifically, the road transportation sector has seen an increase of 180% in adoption of CIM from the years 2009 to 2012. The acceptance of the model-driven approach for design and construction reiterates the need for all stakeholders to devise a tailored approach and establish guidelines in their respective agencies to facilitate seamless transition to digital project delivery and asset management. Figure 2.4 shows that more than 51% of projects represent a “high/very high” utilization rate of technologies, with the report predicting that this number will likely increase in the future. The report also suggested that 89% of the agencies (architecture/ engineering firms, contractors, and owners) had responded positively to the value offered by using information modeling in their projects. The focus for this review is on analyzing the technology- related trends and projections for major roads and highway projects in the United States. With specific reference to trans- portation projects, a recent literature review conducted of state DOTs revealed the following statistics on usage level of CIM (FHWA 2013): • State DOTs reported varying levels of 3D model usage (some are advanced, while some model the basic roadway prism). Country Type of Organization Driving Organization/Agencies Strategy South Korea Government Public Procurement Service Actively studied (especially in 4D) BIM application; South Korea’s Public Procurement Service made the use of BIM compulsory for all projects over $50 million and for all public sector projects by 2016. Japan Multiple agencies Universities, construction industry Actively studied BIM implementation. France Government National Institute of Geographic and Forest Information (IGN) and utility companies A large 10-year, multi-billion euro project involving IGN and France’s utilities to map France’s entire underground utility infrastructure in 3D to an accuracy of 40 cm (about 16 in.). *The term “BIM” is used in the table as a synonym for CIM; BIM is the term used internationally. Table 2.1. (Continued).

7 Figure 2.3. Level of adoption of BIM in infrastructure projects in various sectors. (Source: Dodge Data & Analytics 2012.) Figure 2.4. Agencies promoting application of BIM. (Source: Dodge Data & Analytics 2012.)

8• Twenty-three state DOTs reported having already transi- tioned to 3D modeling. • Seven state DOTs were using only traditional 2D plans and profile sections. • Fifteen state DOTs stated that they were transitioning to 3D modeling. • Of the state DOTs using 3D modeling software, 28 use Microstation and InRoads; 13 use Microstation and Geopak; 2 use Civil 3D; and 7 use Civil 3D and Microstation. • Slightly more than one-half of state DOTs were using some type of LiDAR technology (aerial, static, or mobile). More statistics on LiDAR usage can be found in the NCHRP Report 748 (Olsen 2013). 2.2.b BIM for Infrastructure in the UK In the United Kingdom, the government’s construction strategy mandates the use of BIM by 2016 to reduce carbon and costs as part of the overall economic development (Govern- ment Construction Client Group 2011). An important objec- tive of this BIM strategic paper is a commitment to BIM on government projects over a 5-year time frame, and mandating a shift to BIM maturity Level 2 from 2016 onward as shown in Figure 2.5. The maturity models help in clearly articulating the levels of competence expected and the supporting standards and guidance notes pertaining to each level. It is also manda- tory to categorize the types of collaborative environment and gain an understanding of the tools, techniques, and processes used at each level for organization and projects. While matu- rity Levels 0 and 1 mandate just the utilization of 2D/3D CAD with some standard data structures and formats (with no integration), Level 2 involves deploying BIM and Enterprise Resource Planning for data management and Level 3 mandates deploying a full-scale open data integration process assisted by Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) (referred to as integrated BIM or i-BIM). IFC is the open and neutral data format for OPEN BIM. The report revealed an interesting finding: European BIM users—though fewer by percentage—are generally more involved in utilizing BIM than their counterparts in North America (Dodge Data & Analytics 2010). The UK also has many interest groups facilitating the industry-wide applica- tion of BIM and addressing the demands of the construction sector. Selected groups are described below. The BIM Task Group The objective of the BIM Task Group is to aggregate the expertise from industry, government, public sector, institutes, and academia (BIM Task Group, UK 2014). With the construc- tion strategy established by the Cabinet office in 2011, the UK government mandated collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation, and data being elec- tronic) on its projects by 2016. This measure will not only make the application of BIM compulsory but will also decrease the construction industry’s capital costs and the carbon burden Figure 2.5. Maturity Levels of BIM Application. (Source: Government Construction Client Group 2011.)

9 from the life cycle of facilities by around 20%. Deployment of BIM technologies and other collaborative strategies is vital to progress toward efficient ways of working at all stages of the project life cycle (BIM Task Group, UK 2014). A notable partner of this task group is BIM 4 Infrastruc- ture (UK). It is a Special Interest Group within the Associa- tion of Geographic Information, which is supported by the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Government BIM Task Group, and the Construction Project Committee. The group’s objectives are to encourage knowledge sharing and learn- ing between its members; assist appropriate industry bodies and institutions regarding application of BIM; identify and promote infrastructure-related case studies that demonstrate best practice and the integrated management of information across all stages of the asset life cycle; and explain how BIM and geospatial information can be integrated. Another important group promoted by the BIM Task Group is the Infrastructure Asset Data Dictionary for UK, whose objective is to develop a common asset data dictionary compatible for all UK infra- structure assets (BIM Task Group 2011). OPEN BIM Network The OPEN BIM Network is a UK-based independent, open, and non-product-specific group facilitated by Con- structing Excellence, a construction sector organization. The group analyzes the common issues involved in implement- ing BIM and other technological tools by the construction sector (buildingSMART UK User Group 2014). It publishes periodical open-source magazines (OPEN BIM Focus) that report on issues relating to the successful implementation of BIM (challenges, organizational factors, market perceptions, etc.). Some relevant snapshots from Issue 2 of the magazine are shown in Figure 2.6. 2.2.c BIM for Infrastructure in Singapore In Singapore, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) implemented the “BIM Roadmap in 2010 with the aim that 80% of the construction industry will use BIM by 2015. This is part of the government’s plan to improve the con- struction industry’s productivity by up to 25% over the next decade” (Seng 2012). To increase the demand side of BIM, the BCA has implemented a strategy through which the pub- lic sector has been vested with the responsibility to lead the application of BIM. As per this measure, all the government/ public enterprises were asked to use BIM in their projects beginning in 2012. To promote the widespread application of BIM and to increase the stakeholders’ confidence regarding its reliability, the BCA created the Centre for Construction Information Technology to establish guidelines for business and professionals in the industry. To help the public sector lead the way, the BCA identified public sector procurement as an important strategy in the BIM Roadmap. The BCA has adopted three major approaches to increase the collaborative usage of BIM (including improving the pri- vate’s sector usage levels): • Partnering with government entities • Training public sector consultants • Reaching out with joint industry efforts The World’s First BIM-Based e-Submission System The BCA led a multi-agency effort in 2008 to create the world’s first BIM-based electronic submission (e-submission) system via the Construction Real Estate NETwork (CORENET). The BIM-based e-submission system streamlined the process for regulatory submission. The project teams only needed to submit one building model, which contains all of the informa- tion needed to meet the requirements of a regulatory agency. By standardizing the way BIM models were being prepared across the industry, the process enabled members of the proj- ect team to efficiently share their data and plans across vari- ous construction disciplines. Building professionals could also use the same BIM model to perform value-added analysis. In 2010, nine regulatory agencies accepted architectural BIM 3D models for approval through CORENET. This was followed by the acceptance of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP), and structural BIM models in 2011. More than 200 projects have made BIM e-submissions as of July 2013. The effort had been lauded by the World Bank Group, Autodesk, and other interested stakeholder communities. Successful case studies from Singapore include the Art- Science Museum at Marina Bay Sands, for which Arup Singa- pore developed fabrication-level digital models to reduce both the client’s and the contractor’s risks. The time to complete the project was also reduced by 3 months. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) completed two housing projects that used the BIM template for modeling and regulatory sub- mission. HDB achieved up to 45% savings in work force in the preparation of building plans. 2.2.d BIM for Infrastructure— Other Countries Information modeling adoption in the United States, UK, and Singapore have been discussed. This section summarizes the level of BIM utilization in other countries such as South Korea, France, and Germany based on findings by Dodge Data & Analytics (2014a). The adoption of BIM is new to South Korea, and the indus- try has been cautious about adopting this new technology that affects so many aspects of the workflow. Only 13% of the

10 Ranked Barriers to BIM Adopon Ranked Benefits of BIM Adopon Figure 2.6. Perceived benefits and challenges of BIM. (Source: buildingSMART UK User Group 2014.) contractors report being very heavy users, that is, using BIM on more than 60% of their projects. The production of “more accurate construction documents” was cited as the top benefit that would entice non-users in South Korea. Though the coun- try is making significant strides in BIM adoption, current users perceive business and industry elements, such as contractual issues and the lack of sufficient project participants with BIM capabilities, as the most critical challenges to improving their current ROI on BIM (Dodge Data & Analytics 2014a). BIM has generated a significant user base with high skill levels in Western Europe, although these users are still in the minority in terms of the overall industry (Dodge Data & Ana- lytics 2010). In a survey published in The Business Value of BIM in Europe, France had the highest adoption rate of BIM (38%) among construction professionals surveyed (Dodge Data & Analytics 2010). French BIM users were the most optimistic about the ROI they get from BIM. Eighty-two percent of users perceived that they would get positive ROI, with 42% seeing ROI of 25% or more. Five percent of respondents reported get- ting negative ROI. They inferred that BIM provided the most value through reduced conflicts during construction (76%) and improved collective understanding of design intent (71%). France has also undertaken a significant initiative through a 10-year, multi-billion-euro project involving National Institute

11 of Geographic and Forestry Information and major utility companies to map their entire underground utility infrastruc- ture in 3D to an accuracy of 16 in. (Zeiss 2014). In compari- son to French and Korean users, German BIM users reported the lowest positive perceived ROI at 67%. They were more aligned with UK users in that they saw the most value from BIM: reduced conflicts during construction (63%), improved collective understanding of design intent (58%), and reduced changes during construction (58%). In summary, the construction sector worldwide has recog- nized the need for a paradigm shift in project management, paving the way for processes and technologies that can make digital project delivery a reality for infrastructure projects. Design complexity, project size, alternative delivery methods, compressed project schedules, shrinking profit margins, fund- ing regulations, and work-zone traffic management have been catalysts for this transformation. Moreover, the amount of data and information generated during each phase has become so huge that it has become difficult to track and man- age with traditional methods of information and data shar- ing. Specifically, the highway agencies in the United States have used different sets of CIM tools depending on their functional/divisional capabilities and the project character- istics. As such, these agencies reflect varying levels of exper- tise and maturity in CIM implementation for project delivery and asset management. Many of these tools and technologies are being incorporated in various projects organically as engi- neers, consultants, and surveyors involved in developing these projects see cost/time savings, efficiency, and quality improve- ments through their use. The deployment of CIM is uncoor- dinated and uneven across DOTs and the specific challenges of transportation projects make direct translation from BIM implementations in other sectors intractable. DOTs need implementation guidelines that are scalable and customized to their business practices, delineating the anticipated invest- ment needs and potential benefits from CIM technologies. The Guidebook will help agencies channel their efforts toward effective deployment of CIM tools and systematically support integration practices with project delivery methods and man- agement practices across project life cycles.