1 / 30

The Carl J. & Ruth Shapiro Cardiovascular Center at Brigham & Women’s Hospital Boston, MA

The Carl J. & Ruth Shapiro Cardiovascular Center at Brigham & Women’s Hospital Boston, MA. 3-D Modeling: The Advantages and Disadvantages of a BIM Resource. Sami Boulos Construction Management Faculty Consultant: Dr. Riley. Overview. Credits/Acknowledgements Project Introduction

phillip-todd
Download Presentation

The Carl J. & Ruth Shapiro Cardiovascular Center at Brigham & Women’s Hospital Boston, MA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Carl J. & Ruth Shapiro Cardiovascular Center at Brigham & Women’s Hospital Boston, MA 3-D Modeling: The Advantages and Disadvantages of a BIM Resource Sami Boulos Construction Management Faculty Consultant: Dr. Riley

  2. Overview • Credits/Acknowledgements • Project Introduction • Depth Topic – Building Information Modeling • Breadth Topics • Acoustical Study • Building Envelope Study • Questions & Answers

  3. Project Introduction Project Team Owner- Partners Healthcare System CM – William A. Berry & Son, Inc. Architect – Cannon Design and Chan Krieger & Associates Structural Engr – McNamara/Salvia Inc. MEP/Fire Protection – BR+A, Bard Rao and Athanas RW Sullivan, Inc. • Size: 450,000 SF • 10 stories above grade, 13 total • State-of-the-art facility; going for LEED™ Silver rating • Total cost: $230 Million • Construction: • Start: October 2005 • Complete: April 2008 • Location: Boston • Neighbors Dana Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School

  4. Project Introduction • 134 new patient rooms for Brigham & Women’s Hospital • Location provides for medical students a “research campus” • Floors 1-3: • Administrative offices • Mixed uses, café space & shopping • Floor 4 and 4M: • Mechanical/Electrical equipment • Floors 5-10: • Patient Rooms • Delivery Method: CM @ Risk • Structural • Steel frame with Concrete caissons, piles, retention foundation walls • Mechanical • 19 Air handlers provide 640,300 CFM total • (3) 800-ton Cooling Towers provide 4,800 GPM each • Electrical • 15 kV switchgear for both 480/277V and 208/120 V systems • Diesel generators for emergency power

  5. Organizational Chart

  6. Depth Outline • Overview • Criteria for success • BIM/ 3D modeling Synopsis • External Research • Project details • 3D modeling Advantages • 3D modeling Disadvantages • Conclusion/Recommendation

  7. Overview • Why BIM? • PACE Roundtable – One of 3 major industry issues today • The Future of the industry • Personal Interest • Project Specific • High Profile Project – familiar owner • High Level of MEP Coordination

  8. Overview • BIM today • Used predominantly for 3D coordination, especially with the MEP trades • Only certain members of industry utilize BIM tools, i.e. architects, MEPs, and CMs • Problem Statement • BIM tools growing in the industry today, but opposition still exists, causing the BIM push to stagnate and not reach its full potential.

  9. Criteria for Success • Provide some advantages and disadvantages to the BIM tools in the industry today • Relate BIM to this project • Which tool(s) of BIM used? • Successful/unsuccessful with that tool? • Provide opinions and illustrate research • Come to a conclusion and recommendation • Is it logical?

  10. BIM/3D Model Synopsis • BIM ≠ 3D Modeling • 2 separate concepts, but tools similar • 3D model is an aspect of BIM • BIM model incorporates: • 3D representation of 2D drawing • Cost and schedule data • Materials Information • Future of BIM • GSA: BIM Standard procedures for all new federal projects • Increasing demand from owners • Provides for faster, better quality projects at lower costs

  11. BIM Drawbacks • Industry • Some trades and companies not applying 3D models to projects • New contract models not being written, legal ramifications not addressed • What happens to Design-Bid-Build process? • Experience vs. Inexperience • New workforce members need 3D models to visualize 2D drawings • Veteran members can already “see” in 3D.

  12. Industry Poll • Research of articles and survey of AE Construction Mentors revealed: • BIM becoming more prominent part of projects • Software used for modeling: • Autodesk REVIT and REVIT Structural • AutoCAD 3D, AutoCAD MEP • Innovaya – for Estimating • Microstation • Project Specific • Fully Integrated BIM was not used • 3D Model for MEP coordination • Survey of Berry staff results • Berry incorporating VICO 5D Presenter - MIT

  13. 3D Modeling

  14. Cost, Schedule, Quality • One major component against BIM is Cost • Software/technology • Employee to operate • Exact cost unknown for Berry, but 1-2 employees operate and maintain the models for entire company • Value Added • Applying more efforts with 3D modeling and BIM gives a much better quality project • More knowledge about project, better • Schedule Implications • Use of BIM = up front time to make model • Time savings via early problem ID

  15. Conclusion • BIM and 3D Modeling will lead the construction industry of the future • Efforts by GSA, companies like Berry, PSU AE • Better visualization = better projects • For the Carl J. & Ruth Shapiro Project • 3D modeling only for MEP coordination • Breadth topics to discuss any further 3D endeavors

  16. Recommendation • Industry: continue improvements via BIM • More integration of 3D models: • Sequencing of project phases – • Excavation • Superstructure • Building Envelope • MEP • Finishes • 3D models to accompany coordination drawings • As-Builts in 3D for maintenance staff of building • Project Recommendation • Follows Breadth analyses

  17. Breadth Topics • Analysis 1 – Acoustical Study 10th floor VIP rooms • Existing Conditions/ Success Criteria • Redesign and calculations • Results and conclusion • Recommendation • Analysis 2 – Building Envelope • Existing Conditions and Success Criteria • Redesign and calculations • Results and conclusion • Recommendation

  18. Acoustical Study Picture of Rooftop AHUs and Cooling Towers • 10th Floor – VIP Patient Rooms • Sound sources include Air Handling Units, Cooling Towers, Compressors • Strict rules for sound attenuation in hospitals • Research if acoustical system over-designed for space. • Acoustician = Cavanaugh & Tocci Associates, Inc.

  19. Acoustical Study • Over-designed? • Examined the system as installed • Trane Acoustical Program used to estimate acoustical values for Source dB. • NC>65

  20. Acoustical Study • Conclusion • Acoustical Design ok • Meets required design criteria by owner • Added challenge due to restriction of duct-lined insulation • Recommendation • Use design by Acoustician • BIM Consideration • Research into incorporating TAP as part of BIM

  21. Curtainwall Study • Curtainwall of glass, aluminum • Random pattern aesthetic on exterior of building • Original design: 9 different types of glass and aluminum • Architect Design Change: 43 different types of glass and aluminum • Research: • Reason for the change • Implications on the project • Conclusions

  22. Curtainwall Study View of existing curtainwall pattern • Justification • Was there structural considerations that prompted change in design? • Conversation with the Project Manager and Curtainwall contractor. Change for aesthetics only.

  23. Curtainwall Study • Implications: • Mechanical System Impact • Aesthetic effect made • Cost, Schedule, Value-Added

  24. Mechanical System Effect • Change to design alter % glass to envelope • Increase glass = increase solar gain to space/building • Trane Trace calculation • Simple building envelope calculation to test solar gain effect of design change.

  25. 35% glass 55% glass • Effect of % Glass on Mechanical System • The higher % glass, the more heating or cooling needed in a space = higher cost and more energy consumption

  26. Aesthetic Effect • Desire to make exterior pattern more random • Utilize many tints of glass & Aluminum • Effect not attained after construction of design change

  27. Cost, Schedule, Value • Cost • Approx. $2 Million for 43 glass types • Increased Heating/Cooling costs, energy consumption • Project Schedule not affected • Value added: • In theory yes because of random pattern • In actuality, no distinguishable change

  28. Conclusion • Architect’s change achieved minimal aesthetic improvement • Cost increase, no schedule impact, minimal value added • Recommendation • Return to original design • Cost savings > $2 million • BIM Consideration • A 3D model would have been too precise to illustrate the aesthetic differential. • BIM model to illustrate solar calculations • Not used on this project, but capability exists in industry

  29. Lessons Learned Many issues, many solutions One change affects many components 3D Modeling becoming the norm

  30. Questions?

More Related