Building a Digital Future: Practical Steps for Implementing Digital Construction Standards

Welcome to another episode of Building a Digital Future. In our previous discussion, we focused on resetting our approach to digital construction, emphasizing the need to achieve positive outcomes through digitalization, Building Information Modeling (BIM), and standards like ISO 19650. In this episode, we’ll take a hands-on approach, exploring practical steps businesses can take to achieve these digital outcomes effectively.

A Look Back at Foundational Standards

To truly embrace digital workflows, it’s essential to revisit foundational standards, starting with BS 1192 from 2007. This standard laid the groundwork for collaboration in construction and introduced key principles for managing digital information within organizations. A core element of this preparation lies in establishing workflows that streamline how information is organized, stored, and shared.

The Value of Naming Conventions

One of the simplest and most practical starting points for digital construction is adopting a consistent naming convention. As specified in BIM Level 2 documents and ISO 19650, industry-standard naming conventions help projects stay organized. However, strict adherence to this exact standard isn’t mandatory for achieving BIM compliance. Rather, the emphasis is on maintaining consistency.

Without a standardized naming convention, teams risk inefficiency. For instance, if one file version is named “3D Model Final Version Test 1” and another, slightly updated version is named “3D Model Test One Final Version Test 2 Promise,” these inconsistent names create confusion and extra work. Project coordinators may need to treat each file as a separate document, adding to the workload and creating risks. Standardizing file names not only saves time but also reduces project costs and risks.

Though not always user-friendly, standard naming conventions create a smoother workflow and reduce potential misunderstandings. Adopting this practice early helps prepare teams for future projects, as it is increasingly becoming an industry standard.

Implementing a Common Data Environment (CDE)

Moving beyond naming conventions, the next critical step in digital construction is implementing a Common Data Environment (CDE). Introduced in BS2, the CDE is an organized system for sharing information between teams and ensuring that everyone has access to the correct version of project files.

A robust CDE system offers benefits beyond project coordination; it also impacts a business’s reputation. Inconsistent or poorly labeled information can reflect badly on a company, leading clients or stakeholders to question the professionalism of the team. A well-organized CDE ensures a cohesive, polished image while also reducing project risks.

The CDE system involves specific network areas designated for different types of files, each following a clear folder structure. For instance, within a project’s environment, there may be designated folders for “production” or “work-in-progress” files. Although exact folder names may vary, their purpose is to ensure that unvalidated or incomplete information is kept separate, avoiding any accidental sharing of drafts or ongoing work.

The Role of Work-in-Progress Folders

Files in a work-in-progress (WIP) folder represent ongoing work and are typically unvalidated. For instance, a 3D model might be in development, featuring a layout that still requires adjustments. Architects often use WIP files to make design decisions, testing options, like tweaking kitchen layouts or adjusting fire escape stairways. It’s crucial that these files are only shared within the project team. Prematurely sharing WIP files externally can lead to confusion, as recipients may not understand if they’re seeing a finalized design or a draft still under review.

The primary purpose of the WIP folder is to support design decisions within the team. When it’s time to share information for external review, the files undergo a validation process, ensuring they meet project requirements and adhere to necessary standards.

Ensuring Accuracy with a Validation Protocol

Before any information exits the WIP folder, it goes through a validation protocol. This process answers key questions: Is the file named correctly? Does it use the proper CAD standards? Does it include all relevant information? The protocol serves as a checklist, ensuring that every file meets project requirements before distribution.

Additionally, suitability codes indicate whether a model is fit for sharing. For example, a file might be marked “suitable for information sharing” but not yet finalized for construction. After validation, the approved file moves to a designated “shared” or “output” folder, signaling it is ready for external use.

Managing Incoming Information and Ensuring Reliability

In a well-organized CDE, incoming files from other project partners are stored in an “incoming” folder. This structure clearly indicates that these files, while necessary for reference, do not carry the responsibility of the internal team until validated. Upon receiving information, the team runs a validation check, verifying that it meets expected standards and aligns with the protocol.

Once validated, the information is integrated into the project environment. This step ensures the project team has reliable, accurate information to make decisions and avoid costly mistakes.

Finalizing the Project: The Asset Information Model

Upon project completion, all data—from 3D models to PDFs and Excel sheets—is stored in an archive known as the Asset Information Model (AIM). This archive functions as a central repository, keeping all project-related information accessible for future use. For example, in the event of a renovation or an unexpected incident requiring redesign, the AIM provides a complete digital record, allowing teams to retrieve the necessary files and seamlessly resume the design and planning processes.

CDEs in the Cloud: A Modern Approach

With advancements in technology, many CDE processes are now hosted on cloud platforms, eliminating the need for traditional file transfer methods like couriers or Dropbox. Today’s cloud-based CDE solutions provide a central location where teams can upload and download files, ensuring secure and streamlined information sharing.

This cloud-based environment enables seamless information exchange, empowering architects and engineers to access validated models and make well-informed design decisions. For example, if a 3D model needs to be shared with structural engineers, they can access it directly through the CDE, ensuring they’re using the most current, validated information.

The Importance of a Geo-Coordination System

In any collaborative project, it’s essential that all parties—structural engineers, architects, service teams, and others—work within a consistent Geo Coordination system. This setup ensures that all models align properly, preventing costly mistakes and miscommunications.

When a 3D model is prepared, it runs through a validation protocol that checks if the project is Geo Coordinated. Having a Geo Coordination management system in place reduces risks by aligning all models under a common reference point, or "zero point," which is a shared understanding of the model’s location within the software. This validation protocol doesn't just check boxes; it proactively minimizes project risks by confirming that each file is accurately set up for smooth integration.

How Geo Coordination Works

Geo Coordination essentially calibrates the software’s spatial calculations with the project’s real-world location. Software has limitations on how far geometry can be located from its "center" point. If geometry is too far away from this center, the software struggles with accurate calculations, leading to incorrect placements and errors in design interpretation. A well-defined Geo Coordination system keeps the project within this optimal area, allowing software to reliably perform calculations.

For projects in the UK, for example, Geo Coordination often uses the Ordnance Survey (OS) grid as a reference. A grid intersection point, including Easting and Northing coordinates close to the project site, serves as the model’s base point. This approach positions the project site within a manageable area that the software can accurately process, ensuring that the project aligns consistently across all systems and software used by team members.

Setting up this coordination point typically falls to a BIM manager or the organization’s technical team, who define this shared coordinate system in each participant’s software. This central reference is essential: though the software treats it as “zero,” it represents an actual location on the OS grid, enabling all parties to work from a unified baseline.

Why Consistent Geo Coordination Matters

Once the Geo Coordination system is established, models can be exchanged between team members seamlessly. Each computer reads the model’s data, aligns it according to the defined grid points, and positions it accurately within the project’s shared environment. In theory, this setup should be straightforward, but in practice, Geo Coordination errors are a top technical support issue, often leading to delays, additional costs, and rework. Establishing this system early is vital, not just for compliance, but as a key risk management measure.

Integrating Geo Coordination with Other Platforms

Different software may handle Geo Coordination differently, but with proper setup, data can still be shared across platforms. By setting export options correctly (e.g., using DWG or IFC formats), models maintain their spatial relationships when imported into other systems, ensuring that all teams see the project consistently. This cross-platform integration has proven effective in numerous projects, underscoring the importance of a standardized Geo Coordination setup.

Choosing the Right Software

With Geo Coordination and other validation protocols in mind, choosing the right software for your organization is essential. Autodesk’s Revit is often highly regarded due to its marketing and broad adoption, but it’s not the only viable option. Other software, like Bentley’s MicroStation, offers powerful capabilities, though it may require extensive training and configuration to fully leverage.

The key takeaway here is not about software loyalty but rather understanding your team’s needs, technical expertise, and project demands. MicroStation, for instance, is highly configurable and robust, ideal for complex workflows once users are familiar with its intricacies. Selecting the right tool—whether Revit, MicroStation, or another platform—depends on your team’s technical background and the specific project requirements.

Choosing the Right Tool: Balancing Power, Usability, and Business Needs

Selecting the right software for a construction project is a strategic decision that influences productivity, costs, and ease of use for team members. With various tools available, each with distinct strengths, understanding the trade-offs between power and user-friendliness is crucial. Bentley’s MicroStation, for example, is often cited as one of the most powerful tools available. However, it also has a reputation for being less user-friendly, requiring dedicated teams to manage its configurations effectively. For organizations with the capacity to support these configurations, MicroStation can yield precise and accurate results, similar to other platforms like Revit, Vectorworks, and ArchiCAD. However, it can also present a steeper learning curve, making it a potentially more complex choice for standard project workflows.

ArchiCAD stands out for its popularity among dedicated user groups. Its design is user-friendly, and those who work with it are generally enthusiastic about its ease of use and streamlined workflows. Vectorworks, on the other hand, offers flexibility similar to MicroStation, with more extensive configuration options and control over operations. However, as configuration complexity increases, user-friendliness tends to decrease, which is worth considering when transitioning from a simpler 2D setup to a comprehensive 3D environment.

The Practical Considerations of Software Adoption

While transitioning to Vectorworks 3D may make sense for users already familiar with its 2D platform, it’s essential to weigh the benefits of increased BIM functionality against the potential challenges. The question arises: should architects or engineers need to become advanced software operators to leverage these complex tools? From a business perspective, it’s vital to consider whether a more accessible software choice might offer similar benefits with reduced training requirements.

Revit is frequently praised for its relative user-friendliness, especially when compared to the more intricate configurations of MicroStation or Vectorworks. While Revit may not provide the same advanced configuration options, it still delivers the core functionalities architects and engineers need for project delivery, such as drawing output and scheduling. Revit’s simplicity makes it accessible to a broader user base, reducing the time needed to onboard new team members and allowing projects to advance more quickly. For most architects and engineers, the primary concern is a software tool that enables them to efficiently produce quality outputs—not necessarily the fine-tuned control some platforms offer.

Making Informed, Independent Decisions

When it comes to choosing BIM software, there’s often external pressure from vendors or consultants. For instance, Autodesk Platinum partners may endorse Revit as the best solution, but it's essential to recognize that these endorsements may be driven by commission incentives. Instead of relying solely on outside opinions, businesses should base their decision on a thorough evaluation of their specific needs. Transitioning to Revit or any other software might indeed be the right choice, but only if it aligns with your operational goals and project demands. The process should involve assessing the unique challenges and requirements of your business rather than defaulting to recommendations from consultants or vendors.

Aligning Software with Business Milestones

Depending on your stage in the digital transformation journey, you may face different milestones that impact software choices. Some firms might still be working toward securing their first BIM-required project, while others may be fine-tuning their existing workflows. More advanced practices might even have dedicated digital teams or be working toward formal BIM accreditations. At every stage, it’s critical to have solid fundamentals in place: robust naming conventions, reliable geo-coordination systems, and sophisticated CAD standards are foundational. These elements ensure that your organization is prepared to collaborate effectively and produce professional, coordinated deliverables.

When contemplating a shift from 2D to 3D or a transition between platforms, the decision should always come back to your business needs, not marketing hype. It’s valuable to stay informed about industry advancements, but the ultimate choice should address internal issues or inefficiencies that are currently limiting your workflow. Assessing whether a new software will truly resolve those issues, considering the costs, disruption potential, and timelines involved, will help make the change worthwhile.

Preparing for the Next Steps

If your organization decides that a platform change is necessary, ensure that it’s based on a comprehensive analysis of the benefits and potential risks. Positive answers to questions about cost, time, and potential disruptions mean that you’re well-positioned to move forward.