CONSTRUCTION & BIM
HELPFUL HANDOVER
Steve Cooper, General Manager at Aconex, explains how the provision of a comprehensive guide to building design and maintenance at the
completion stage, can aid FMs who have been unable to input into the construction and formatting of a facility.
Design and construction teams are typically contracted to deliver a structured information handover package to support a client’s asset operations and maintenance at a project’s end. How often is this handover information checked for completeness, accuracy and appropriateness at the point of receipt? It’s very likely the answer to this question is ‘never’.
This goes some way to explaining why asset owners and facilities managers can often struggle to ensure an asset delivers against its expectations (cost or scope) in the early years. So, there’s a case to be made that facilities managers can be more upfront to clarify all preferences and expectations of the information they need on day one. BIM and a collaborative approach to building design, construction and handover can play a crucial role in taking us even further along the path towards
36 | TOMORROW’S FM
better executed built assets and less headaches for all.
When they are handed the keys at the end of a construction project, what a facilities manager will be typically given is a box, be it virtual or physical, filled with information and data. That box should contain explanations on building maintenance, equipment warranties, security operating instructions and asset lists among other things. This information may be in all kinds of formats, including paper and digital media like CDs and USB keys.
To complicate matters further, vital building-related information risks being lost during the handover of that box. When the facilities manager notices that there is information missing, they will need to spend time tracking down historical project information. This is a waste of efforts, not least because of the
labour involved. The information that is resurrected after the ordeal often might be inaccurate or incomplete. In the worst-case scenario, that data can’t be recovered and the FM then must undertake a fresh survey of the building or part to capture the as-built condition. The result of this is a cost paid twice over by the building owner, for a survey (and for the maintenance contractor) which should only have to happen once.
On the other hand, assume that every piece of data handed over was proper, complete and future friendly. Not only that, but it was relevant with all immaterial information either filtered out already or organised so that it could be easily sorted and made usable for the next twenty years. Then, the information could contribute to the improved ongoing operation of the building, not just now, but for years after the handover.
twitter.com/TomorrowsFM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
