bim at stanford - building success

BIM at Stanford Hospital and Clinics

April 2014

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Stanford Main Campus

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion

1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion

1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion

1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion

1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

Existing Hospital New HospitalAdvanced Medicine CenterLPCHLPCH Expansion

1.1M sqft824K sqft221K sqft303K sqft476k sqft

Stanford Hospital and Clinics

3M+ sqft on campus

4.5M sqft on and off site and growing

9

Organization

Design and Construction

Engineering & Maintenance

New Stanford Hospital

Capital Improvement

Projects

LPCH Expansion

Project

Engineering & Maintenance

Stanford Cath Labs 7, 9, & 10 Numeric results of CAD vs. BIM to 2” vs. full BIM

Jason Holbrook David Denysenko Eric Peabody

7

9

10

BIM Use Area* Start**

Cath Lab 7 CAD 720 SF 2006

Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 1,173 SF 2009

Cath Lab 10 Everything 1,060 SF 2010

Experimental Variables

*Results expressed per SF to normalize this variable**Cost values escalated to 2010 relative value to normalize this variable

Experimental Controls

Potential Savings

Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs

Potential Savings

35% less $Complete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs

Potential Savings

Save up to 35% on project costs

35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs

Potential Savings

Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% faster

Changes to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs

Potential Savings

Save up to 35% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%

44% fewer RFIs

19

Cath Lab 7

Cath Lab 7CAD Only

7

Cath Lab 7: Siemens Biplane Cath LabProject Area: 720 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2006

Procedure Room: 600 Net Square Feet BIM Use: None

(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction

(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction

(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction

(E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction

“ ”The delay was caused…by the over-head structural and M/E/P/FP not being coordinated. The majority of the overhead had to be re-designed.

DPR Construction

Cath Lab 7

27

Cath Lab 9

Cath Lab 9Model to 2”

9

Cath Lab 9: Siemens Biplane Hybrid ORProject Area: 1,173 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2009

Procedure Room: 821 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model to 2”

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

34

Cath Lab 10

Cath Lab 10Model Everything

10

Cath Lab 10: Siemens Biplane Pediatric Cath LabProject Area: 1060 Gross Square Feet Construction Start: 2010

Procedure Room: 717 Net Square Feet BIM Use: Model Everything

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

3D Scan (E) Model (N) Model Construction

41

Cath Labs 7, 9, 10

Results

42

Results

BIM Use % from CAD

Cath Lab 7 CADCath Lab 9 2” Standard -15.0%Cath Lab 10 Everything -4.1%

Construction Cost

Change Order Cost

*All figures in 2010 Relative Value

BIM Use % of Total

Cath Lab 7 CAD 12.4%

Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.1%

Cath Lab 10 Everything <0.1%

*All figures in 2010 Relative Value

43

Results

BIM Use Construction Days/SF % from CAD

Cath Lab 7 CAD 8.40 mo 0.23 D/SFCath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.50 mo 0.15 D/SF -34.8%Cath Lab 10 Everything 8.45 mo 0.16 D/SF -30.4%

Construction Schedule

All Costs*

* All costs normalized to 2010 dollars** All design professional fees, including non-BIM fees*** Cath lab contribution margin of ~$8,000 per day

Survey All Services** Construction $ Margin*** Total

Cath Lab 7 18.5% 18.5%

Cath Lab 9 1.6% 27.3% (15.0%) (48.5%) (35.4%)

Cath Lab 10 1.6% 18.5% (4.1%) (54.7%) (34.6%)

Conclusion

Save up to 23% on project costsComplete project 35% fasterDrop change order rate to <0.1%44% fewer RFIs

45

That Went Well

Next Project 6% CO RateNot everything was resolved in the modelSome of the same team membersStandard Work is Needed

46

BIM Procedures Manual

Ensuring proper equipment access through BIM

48

• Fire / Smoke Dampers• Domestic Water valves• Heating / Cooling Water Valves• Medical gas valves and pressure sensors• Supply, Exhaust and Return Air Valves• Fan Coil Units• Small Supply and Exhaust Fans• Duct Humidifiers• Re-Heat Coils• Cable Tray• Low Voltage controls such as BMS, lighting, etc.

Typical above ceiling MEP access

49

The goal is to minimize or eliminate disruptions to patient care caused by maintenance activities.

• Whenever possible place serviceable items in “off-stage” areas like staff working areas, utility rooms and corridors that are not normally used for patients and visitors.

• Avoid placing items above ceilings in areas used for public circulation.

50

Ceiling Access through an Infection Control Cube

Containment cubes are typically just slightly larger than the 2’ X 4’ ceiling tile opening.

An opened 8’ ladder barely fits within the cube.

51

Plastic “Zip Wall” Containment:

If you can’t use a portable containment cube the next option is to build a temporary plastic wall. A valve at or above 16 feet high will

require a 14 foot ladder for safe access

14 Foot ladder base is over 100” wide

52

1st Floor @ 18’

2nd Floor @ 20’

Patient Floors @ 16’

Ground Floor @ 18’

The New Stanford Hospital’s deck to deck heights range from 16’ to 20’.

This makes it easy to place MEP equipment out of reach even if there is nothing blocking it’s access.

53

MEP Access Zone Guidelines

These guidelines are intended to be used during finite coordination to reduce possible remodeling and re-coordination efforts needed to maintain maintenance access to above ceiling MEP equipment.

Fire / Smoke Damper access:• Accessible from the corridor side. • Place over break rooms, conference rooms, mechanical and electrical rooms.

Valves:• Do not install more than 12 feet above the floor.• Locate valves in corridors, storerooms, utility rooms, etc.• Never place over nurse’s stations or within patient rooms.• Do Not locate valves above any patient care room door.

Do not place MEP serviceable items above fixed equipment, shelving or casework.

How Stanford is addressing access issues during modeling:

54

MEP Access Zone Guidelines continued . . . . .

Supply, Exhaust and Return Air valves:• Provide access directly below actuators.• When actuator is on top of unit, place access adjacent to the air valves.

Fan Coil Units, Supply and Exhaust Fans:• Align ceiling grid, light fixtures, sprinkler heads, etc. with bottom access units to insure

access doors open fully.• In hard lid ceilings insure access hatches are located on the service side of the

equipment.

Other above ceiling MEP considerations:• BMS and Lighting Control boxes require front access.• Medical gas valves and pressure sensors placed below 12’ above the floor.• Re-Heat coil access to control valves and duct access hatch.• Consider sharing Cable Tray access zones with other MEP access zones.

55

“Sufficient access is determined not only by above ceiling clearances but by the ability to use a containment cube and an appropriate sized ladder placed below the ceiling.”

Reviewing the model for access issues:

56

Access Zones should be modeled to the floor and clashed with (known) fixed equipment, shelving and casework.

Modeling Access Zones:

57

• Route the cable tray over the duct or use J-hooks to get over the duct.

• Whenever possible place cable tray 18” – 24” from the wall to share access zones.

Resolve all access clashes: (or they’ll need to be resolved in the field)

58

• Model review completed after 1st pass Finite Coordination• Discrepancies logged and shared with the Design Team• Changes made and closed out during 2nd pass Finite Coordination

Model Reviews and Issues Log:

59

Taking the model to the field to support construction:

BIManywhere Pro iPad App shown here

Using the model in the field is critical to insuring that the fully coordinated model becomes a fully coordinated building.

Stanford will be using the model to it’s fullest potential.

60

For future projects:

1. Make it a requirement to model access zones from the equipment to the floor below and clash with fixed equipment and furniture.

2. Add the “MEP Access Zones Guidelines” to the BIM Management Plan.

3. Insist on getting experienced Facilities Maintenance staff involved. They are your best resource for identifying true access issues.

4. Keep it reasonable. Access to MEP equipment above ceilings has to be provided but it doesn’t always have to be easy access.

BiM for Facilities Management

i=information without information its only a building model

April 2014

Model is complete and building is close to activation? What Now ?

Facilities Services & Planning currently maintains 1.2 million square feet onsite 1 million square feet offsite Staff of 60 building engineers and facility managers with avg of 150

work orders/day New Hospital adds 820,000 SF of high demand clinical space consisting

patient rooms, level 1 trauma,ED, surgical, diagnostic and treatment rooms. Maintenance of the facility must be 24/7 with no equipment

failures or down time

63

Current FM Practices

• Cost and time needed to develop input for CMMS (normally around $1-$3per gross SF, takes significant time after startup

• Cost and time needed to refer to paper files when FM problems occur• Poorer building and equipment performance (lack of adequate data for

preventive maintenance)

64

Integration

65

BIM is a better tool in reducing time to complete a work order

Service Scenario AssignmentFacilities Engineer is assigned to service HVAC Building with 70 VAV, 8 pumps, 14 fan motors & 2 centrifugal pumpsEqualing = 18 tickets per day per trade

66

Real Case

67

Nightmare Case

68

Use Case with BIM

69

Potential Cost Savings just for service on VAVs,pumps and motors

Note:Cost Savings per year in service to VAVs, pumps and motors related to HVAC system

70

Simple and Intuitive

Mobile Capability

Integrated Project Delivery ensure’s delivery of BIM for FM upfront

72

Construction Operations Building Information Exchange

What is COBie?• A standard method of exchanging

information that drives down cost

73

COBie

74

COBie

75

The Plan and current Deliverables

Stanford Hospital & Clinics is in the research and discovery Phase

1. Toured several hospital on the east coast and locally and observed: Technology is NEW and not fully developed in facilities management Lack of data in the model Lack of training in facilities maintenance staff

Goals for FY15

Define Use Cases and Specifications• In 3D model: Simple access to O&M manuals, Warranties, product data and replacement value• In 3D model: Metadata for all objects ie fire rating, floor type,• In 2D drawings: MEP and med gas system flow diagrams with shut off valves and Single lines• Integrated with employee name, dept. & machine• an ‘energy’ model and ability to compare actual energy use to baseline design energy use

Actions• Form BIM for FM execution team • Conduct pilot project and implement use cases in production with staff • Define BIM gaps in current BIM model and establish BIM deliverables from construction team

Estimate costs to maintain BIM system • For TI/remodels: update models, drawings, equip. metadata• Internal staffing and related vendor costs ( BIM Department)

76

Operating Costs

77

Vision: BIM for FM with complete integration with CMMS/BAS/Asset Management/Space Management