Credit: New Jersey Institute of Technology

One of our VDC crew sent around this email regarding a recent experience regarding concrete contractors in our area and BIM:

“All of the concrete contractors we interviewed for [the project] lacked BIM experience – they actually barely knew AutoCAD. The need is there; we still modeled slurry wall and cap beam for [the project].

The linked article explains why concrete subs aren’t using BIM and what they are missing out on:

http://www.concreteconstruction.net/technology/pushing-the-technology-envelope.aspx

(As usual, the future is happening on the west coast.)“

As Concrete Construction puts it, it isn’t so much an aversion to change that appears to be hindering BIM progress, as much as it may be a trepidation to dedicate the necessary resources to adopt this process.

Some other key points they’re considering:

• BIM has largely been marketed and developed to cater to the design end of the industry.
• BIM’s clash detection functionality has less of an impact on concrete work as it does for other trades, as it is usually completed first (although there is a benefit in planning).
• BIM models can imply an exactitude that doesn’t mesh with the reality of concrete.
• Because there are so many variables in concrete design, it’s difficult to develop a library of standard parts and components.

Over the years we’ve more than declared our stance on the importance of BIM, so to see such a large portion of the industry arriving late to the game is certainly perplexing. What do you think? Are Concrete Construction’s conclusions spot on? Or is it simply that a large portion of the industry is undervaluing or not understanding the full potential of BIM (once the shell-shock of upfront costs for hardware, software and staff training wears off)?

Side note: When is the future going to happen on the East Coast?? Come on, Atlantic neighbors…

For those of you keeping a tally, last month we had our 2nd lecture in a series of Tocci hosted lectures that focus on transformative ideas in the AEC industry. We were very honored to have had the very pioneer of the IPD contract – Howard Ashcraft of Hanson and Bridgett – join us for an extremely informative presentation. In case you weren’t able to make it, we have just posted the hour and a half talk, segmented into six videos of more manageable lengths. Mr. Ashcraft presented an IPD case story in the form of the famous Sutter Health project, as well as an overview of IPD, common myths, and how to effectively deal with teamwork/collaboration in an IPD setting.

Very, very interesting content. Take a long lunch break and enjoy them all, or spread them out ~15 minutes at a time. (You may want to bookmark this page for easy returning)

Be sure to subscribe to the blog or follow us on Twitter to find out more about our next event.

Enjoy!

The bridge being demolished is part of a highway upgrade scheme in England. The work was performed over the course of a night and normal driving operations continued the next day. You can imagine some effective planning took place behind the scenes for such an efficient execution.

And honestly, who doesn’t like a good timelapse?

Impressive.

Photo Credit: Robert Carr

Safety on the job site is a sentiment echoed throughout the construction industry. We see safety messages plastered all over construction zones and anywhere people in hard hats can be found. There are some people, such as Chuck Eastman of Georgia Tech, that believe construction safety consideration can begin far before breaking ground. Job safety can start in the BIM. While giving a presentation in Finland this past week, Chuck discussed a new safety plugin for Tekla, developed at Georgia Tech, that will have the capability to model holes, edges, slabs, and barriers to make the construction process exponentially safer in a future building.

This type of workflow is similar to what we’ve been exploring in-house for BIM safety on our own projects. Hopefully this idea will not only spread throughout the industry, but become second nature in the preconstruction process. This will definitely  take “safety first” to a whole new level.

Hat tip to Virve Juhola at BIMsight blog for the story.

For the last 30 years, biyearly, the Associated General Contractors (AGC) has been recognizing leaders in the industry with juried awards for outstanding projects.  Last week, Tocci was the proud recipient of the AGC’s 2011 Build New England Performance Award for our project, Park 87 in Cambridge, MA. A performance award is given for extraordinary team collaboration on a project characterized by significant technical or physical challenges. Park 87 certainly wasn’t devoid of these challenges, and the entire team excelled at working collaboratively in order to surmount potentially debilitating hurdles.

Challenges & Obstacles

Park87 comprised the permitting, design and construction of a 54 unit factory-built apartment building on a restricted budget at a fast track pace. Individual module construction, including rough systems and interior finishes complete, was accomplished in a Maine modular building factory. Module erection occurred in Cambridge, MA on a prepared foundation. The building foot print occupied nearly 100% of the site. The site is bounded on the North by the heavily trafficked Fresh Pond Mall. To the Northwest, New England’s largest door and window supplier abuts the property. A railroad line crosses the property from Northeast to Northwest. To the South, and across a busy two-lane urban thoroughfare, lies the 55 acre family-friendly Danehy Recreational Park. The project is sited on a former City of Cambridge landfill which was not remediated when construction began. To complicate the challenge, excavation kicked off in the early spring of 2010, a season that became widely known as “the worse flood season in one hundred years.”

Reducing Cost & Schedule

AdodeZ spent two years planning the construction of Park87 prior to the 2008 economic downturn. As the economy continued to falter in 2009 and 2010, the company had to make a hard decision—abandon, postpone or rethink the project. They chose to rethink. The rethink did not impact the goals or design requirements but instead focused on cutting the cost and shortenting the delivery time frame. Tocci, using Building Information Modeling, was able to drive the cost down significantly and condense the construction schedule to 9 months.

Tocci spent five full months, after granting of normal entitlement permits, securing secondary permits and permissions—going far beyond a normal building permit process undertaken by CMs. Tocci secured easements through an abandoned railroad right of way obstructing the route for connecting sanitary and water utilities. Tocci negotiated permissions and easements with the MA Department of Transportation and Department of Environmental Protection. It worked with the MA Water Resources Agency to obtain de-watering permits. It also worked with the City of Cambridge’s Department of Public Works, Traffic and Parking Division, Building Department, Police Department, Parks and Recreation Department, abutters and others on various construction and construction impact issues. The secondary permitting process was a project in itself.

Managing Hazardous Waste.

Excavation of the abandoned City landfill raised a hazardous mix of asphalt shingles, refrigerators and old fire hoses. Over 7000 yards of material was monitored and classified for haul to specific landfills. Tocci consulted with the local Police Department to develop trucking routes and schedules that moderated negative consequences on local traffic. Neighbors and residents frequenting the area retailers and the park filed no complaints.

Managing De-watering.

Tocci came out of the ground with piles and pile caps as well over 15 inches of rain washed through the site during March 2010 alone. An on site de-watering system, taking into account the high ground water table, was permitted and implemented. The water was filtered and sampled for contaminants by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority on a monthly basis. The Cambridge Department of Public Works also closely monitored the de-watering system. The program was successful with no violations recorded. Only heavy rain gear and knee-high rubber boots were added to assure that the project maintained schedule.

Delivering & Installing 76 modular units

Park87’s 54 units are comprised of 76 modular pieces factory-built in Maine. Overland transport from ME to MA required State Police notification in ME and NH and State Police escort from the MA border with NH and down to Cambridge, MA. As the tight site did not accommodate the storage and crane setting operation, Tocci pre-negotiated specifically timed use of abutter and City of Cambridge property for the installation. The boxes were dropped off at the nearby Fresh Pond Cinema parking lot. After delivery, and over the course of 5 days, they were moved from the drop off location to a City owned cul-de-sac in preparation for a crane-assisted lift and set process per Tocci’s carefully thought-out BIM-developed assembly sequence. Sequencing took into account on-going work, specifically at the elevator shaft, so that non-installation work could proceed uninterrupted. Only one night-lift during the 5-day process had to be scheduled to avoid day shift impacts. Tocci coordinated with the City of Cambridge Police to divert automotive and pedestrian traffic as necessary while the lifting was conducted directly from New Street.

Below is a short video of the Park 87 process:

We’d like to congratulate the entire Park 87 team for making this project a success.