Module: Candidate Number: Topic Selection:
Professionalism 88 3
Word Count: 2490
The effects of economics on the design and procurement of the built environment. Using UK, and/or EU international examples, how has economic and technological change and/or changes in practice and the delivery of buildings affected the architect’s role in the procurement of the built environment in the last 20 years.
What happened to Rotring pens? A critical assessment of the future influence of Building Information Modelling (BIM) on the architect’s role in the procurement of the built environment.
Postgraduate Diploma in Professional Practice & Management - ARB/RIBA Part 3 The Bartlett School of Architecture Faculty for the Built Environment, UCL March 2014
CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3 INTRODUCTION 5 BACKGROUND
EARLY INTEGRATION
7
LATHAM, EGAN & THE ECONOMY
9
ANALYSIS
BUILDING INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
11
ARCHITECTS & BIM
13
CONCLUSION 18 BIBLIOGRAPHY
20
IMAGE REFERENCES
22
APPENDICES
Page 2
INTERVIEWS
23
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AHMM
Allford Hall Monaghan Morris
ARB
Architects Registration Board
BIM
Building Information Management/Modelling
BIS
Department for Business Innovation and Skills
CAD
Computer Aided Design
CIoB
Chartered Institute of Building
COBIE
Construction Operations Building Information Exchange
CPD
Continuing Professional Development
ERG
Efficiency & Reform Group
GDP
Gross Domestic Product
RIBA
Royal Institute of British Architects
TfL
Transport for London
TMPa
The Manser Practice Architects and Designers
UKGCS
UK Government Construction Strategy (2011)
Page 3
“Somehow, every worker in the cutting-edge work place is now supposed to act like an ‘intrapreneur,’ that is, to be actively involved in the continuous redefinition of his own job.”1
1
Page 4
Matthew Crawford. The Case for Working with your Hands. New York: Penguin Group, 2009. p.19
INTRODUCTION “Liquid modernity”2 said Zygmunt Baumann sees “liquid modern man flow through his own life like a tourist, changing places, jobs, spouses, values and sometimes more.”3 The pace at which the construction industry has evolved over the last twenty years be it through government review, in response to economic uncertainty or technological advance is leading to a reassessment of the architect’s role. Today, the industry has been widely recognised in the United Kingdom (UK) to be economically inefficient at a time when austerity is on the agenda.4 In May 2011 the UK Government Construction Strategy (UKGCS) highlighted that “an industry that accounts for 7% of UK GDP”5 was not giving the UK “full value from public sector construction”6 and had “failed to exploit the potential for procurement of construction and infrastructure projects to drive growth.”7 Overseen by the then government construction advisor Paul Morrell, the Efficiency Reform Group (ERG) and Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) laid out a phased five year implementation plan for a new means of building procurement and the introduction for public sector projects to include “fully collaborative 3D BIM (with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic) as a minimum by 2016.”8 This paper sets out a critical review of BIM, the UKGCS and the implications it is likely to have for architects moving into post-2016 construction. Setting it against the origins and influence of computer aided design and information exchange it will critically analyse how architects in the past have reacted to previous reforms by researching the intent behind prior government led interventions. I have experienced technological change in practice,9 but having only worked (and studied) for six years these issues will be assessed through a series of interviews and analysis of industry-wide reactions to BIM and its future prescription in public sector building procurement. Alarmingly, the terms architect and architecture are not mentioned once in the UKGCS document.10 If the government is looking to change the industry what role will the architect have to play in this and even their own re-invention?
2 Zygmunt Bauman. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000. p.8 3 Ibid. p.8 4 David Cameron. “Conservative Party Forum, Keynote Speech.” Cheltenham, April 26, 2009. 5 Efficiency & Reform Group. Construction Strategy Report. London: HMSO, 2011. p.1 6 Ibid. p.1 7 Ibid. p.1 8 Ibid. p.14 9 I am currently employed by The Manser Practice Architects & Designers (TMPa) as an architectural assistant and practice IT Manager. Machines are now twelve times the speed they were when I started, the once bulging post file now a neat server based data archive. Manser, 2014 10 Efficiency & Reform Group, 2011
Page 5
Figure 1:
Arup Associates’ computer model for the Schlumberger Research Centre. The software was used to see how the experimental materials would respond to different wind loadings - a process of form finding also took place.
Figure 2:
Heydar Aliyev Centre, Baku. The work of architect Zaha Hadid, known for designs that often push the boundaries of architectural and structural design. Many of the projects would not have been realised without computer aided advances.
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Extract from interview with Jonathan Manser, architect and Managing Director of The Manser Practice Architects & Designers.
Extract from interview with Patrick Seymour, Architectural IT Consultant & founder of DP-IT Services.
“Digital photos, surveys etc. have been fantastic and the ability to send them around in emails from computers, pads and phones has really improved the speed in which we often get things done. However, getting rid of tracing paper originals has meant a greater need to be careful with CAD standards and drawing issues and there was often an inherent loss of care when putting a drawing together as errors could be so quickly rectified. We can no longer see a drawing on the paper as it is being drawn which makes it less easy to see if it is developing the right way. Drawings now have a tendency to be drawn for their own sake rather than being drawn to convey information to another party. In the old days a drawing was set up to convey a finite amount of information on a specific area so that it could be costed and built. Getting as much clear information on to a single A1 sheet was important.”
Page 6
“With regard to my role, originally everyone was incredibly upset if their CAD system wasn’t working. One workstation not working could well be 50% of a practices CAD capability and seriously impact productivity. Software was hard to use, therefore a lot of money was made through training and ‘hand holding’. Over the years software has become easier to use, with today’s applications being quite intuitive. Clients will often resolve general application issues themselves due to the ease of use combined with the access to information and assistance on the internet. Fast forwarding to now, clients generally limit any major unhappiness to when their internet or email access goes down, because the internet and email blend both personal and professional worlds.”
BACKGROUND EARLY INTEGRATION Architecture “before computers”11 had remained widely unchanged for centuries.12 Early introductions came via the engineering route: Arup Associates explored the possibilities in achieving construction of Jorn Utzon’s envisaged Sydney Opera House in Australia13 and Sir Michael Hopkins’ Schlumberger Gould Research Centre in Cambridge, England. (figure 1)14 These early Computer Aided Design (CAD) processes in the industry were cumbersome15 and the development of standalone workstations and influx of online networking in the mid-nineties enabled large scale software improvements (by firms such as Autodesk) to improve efficiency. Computers were no longer simply mechanising drawing methods, they were allowing architects and engineers to explore countless design alternatives before settling on a final solution. Last minute changes became “easily accommodated,”16 and this change in attitude allowed many clients to push cost driven changes to design at even later stages in project programmes. By the end of the decade the introduction of more advanced networking and communications (architects being late adopters17) meant co-ordination between trades became easier and project teams were expanding less on-site and more in office.18 The architectural landscape changed as boundaries were pushed further (figure 2) and the time between concept and realisation reduced dramatically. Each profession was productive but the perceived “inefficiency”19 lay in the split agendas of those involved in achieving a similar end.20 Architects and engineers chased “new means of communication and realisation of the idea,”21 but clients and contractors were focused on the ability to handover information and improve cost efficiency in the building process. BIM, as the next step, sought blanket coverage over “a series of professional industries, 11 “Before Computers, as Architectural Association tutors referred to architecture pre-1995” Adam Nathaniel. (2014). Loving the Rhino. Products in Practice, p.8. 12 In a lecture at the Bartlett on 21st January 2014 the architect Paul Hyatt posed that “(his) father (also an architect) would have been at home in (Christopher) Wren’s office, and Wren in his.” 13 Peter Dizikes. MIT News. June 24, 2012. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/computing-architecture-0625. html (accessed February 9, 2014). 14 “Episode 2: The Power of the Past” The Brits who Built the Modern World, BBC Four (London: February 20, 2014) 15 “…knowing how to drive a CAD system was a job in itself – an architect or engineer would sit adjacent to you and instruct you what to draw. A shift based work rota would gain the most efficient use of the CAD system.” Patrick Seymour, interview by author. Experiences with the implementation of Technology since 1988 (February 10, 2014). 16 Rybczynski, W. (2011, March). Slate Group LLC. Retrieved February 9, 2014, from Slate: http://www.slate. com/articles/arts/architecture/2011/03/think_before_you_build.html 17 Seymour, 2014 18 On 21st January, 2014 at a Bartlett, UCL Lecture entitled “The UK Construction Industry – and Culture” Alan Crane of CIOB stated that today the UK is made up of over 196,000 construction based firms. More and more of whom are consultancy based. 19 Efficiency & Reform Group, 2011 p.1 20 Software and operating standards were being developed on an office by office basis rather than across the entire project team, making collaboration challenging and subject to human error. 21 Dizikes, 2012
Page 7
DRIVERS FOR CHANGE
Figure 5:
IMPROVING THE PROJECT PROCESS
TARGETS FOR IMPROVEMENT
Summary of Sir John Egan’s ‘Rethinking Construction.’ Key drivers were highlighted including customer satisfaction, cost efficiency and most importantly profits - drivers that still follow through into todays reports.
Page 8
educated and practicing in silos.”22 Before analysing what BIM really is and what it means for the role of the architect it is important to understand what current UKGCS is built upon. LATHAM, EGAN & THE ECONOMY Sir Michael Latham’s Constructing the Team in 1994 and Sir John Egan’s Rethinking Construction in 1998 are crucial examples to consider when analysing current UKGCS.23
Constructing the Team focused heavily on customer (or client) satisfaction and
verified an uneasy truth that “current adversarial attitudes result in weak industry performance that provides customers with little assurance on cost.”24 Its core values reflected an appropriate response to the economic situation25 and sought to achieve value in construction by improving collaboration and stimulating a set of industry initiatives such as “Continuing Professional Development” (CPD)26. Constructing the Team was very much the catalyst for the swathes of government led reports that followed but importantly still seemed to hold professions such as architecture in high regard in the procurement process.27 Even though architects were at odds with some of the policies28 the RIBA and other institutes were often consulted and helped shape many aspects of the report. The election of New Labour in 1997 after so many years of Conservative leadership led to previous reports in almost all industries to be torn up and subsequently reviewed. Rethinking Construction29 this time looked to mainly manufacturing based industries as precedent for reform, (figure 5)30 and subsequently introduced the “framework agreement.”31 It’s highly publicised legacy became centred on cost efficiency and architects were only once mentioned in “the process of standardisation.”32 Other references were reduced to “designer.”33 Perhaps this seemingly innocuous change in terminology is a critical point in the way the architect’s role in construction was starting to be viewed? Rethinking Construction set the tone of 22 On 21st January, 2014 at a Bartlett, UCL Lecture entitled “The UK Construction Industry – and Culture” Alan Crane of CIOB discussed how in his experience this had led to much of the problems that were arising when project teams got together. 23 Although not the only reports over the past twenty years, they have formed the basis for many of the subsequent reviews. 24 Sir Michael Latham. Constructing the Team: Report of the Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry. London: HMSO, 1994. p.26 25 The financial crisis experienced in the early nineties. 26 CPD is still considered by both the ARB and RIBA as an integral part working in the UK and abroad and is expected of ARB/RIBA chartered architects and practices. Unlike many government reports Latham appeared to have a legacy which resonated with the architectural profession. Technological changes have also become a part of many CPD events – BIM especially. 27 Latham, p.7 28 On recommendations on the introduction of checklists to assist clients in the briefing process the RIBA believed that a “check list of standard subjects will necessarily be too general and rudimentary and not be of much relevance” Ibid. p.18 29 Commissioned by John Prescott and set up by Sir John Egan who had been chairman of Jaguar – shortly before it went bust. 30 Mainly grocery production, car manufacturing and off-shore engineering. Sir John Egan. Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force. London: HMSO, 1998. 31 The architect Jonathan Manser remembers it well: “… (Framework agreements) were hailed by media and institutions as the greatest change since the flood.” Manser, 2014 32 Egan. p.28 33 Ibid.
Page 9
Figure 6:
Promotional mock-up model of the Autodesk Revit Software for BIM. Design details, structure, services are all incorporated into the same model environment. Allowing for easier ‘clash detection.’
Figure 7:
The levels as mapped out by the BIM Task Group are filled with BIM based jargon, a lot of which is not clear to architectural practices. For those smaller firms still working at levels 0 - 1 there is a huge leap to fully integrated 3D BIM. Level 3 also holds an enormous dependency on the quality of and reliabilty of a working network connection.
Page 10
industry focus on cost and importantly, began to acknowledge for the first time the future role of information technology in achieving improved integration.34 The pre-cursors of economic uncertainty and new government have now aligned alongside the formation of the latest UKGCS.35 Integration of technology as its main driver could be how members of the design and construction industry can once again get involved and perhaps give UKGCS and any future reports more depth and consistency. 36
ANALYSIS BUILDING INFORMATION MANAGEMENT At present the architectural profession doesn’t seem to hold the awareness of the process that it perhaps should do at this stage.37 A child of the level of technological integration in construction and government’s continual drive for cost efficiency, Building Information Modelling (or Management) is no one particular software but a means of streamlining and organising exchange of information throughout the construction team.38 (figure 6) To achieve this, a series of levels were defined in order to categorise where those in the industry currently stood and the perceived target to apply for public sector projects in 2016. (figure 7) Prior to network and CAD based systems the pen and pencil were the universal language of communicating information. However unhindered development had led to variable systems that had a lack of compatibility, standards and protocols. Architects, engineers, contractors, surveyors were all driving down different roads to get to the same place. Using this phased implementation process along with the Government Soft Landings Policy the ultimate aim was to have all professions operating from a single 3D model from concept to construction, with life-cycle analysis of completed projects allowing improvements to the BIM system as it developed. Each profession would not only be driving on the same road, but would occupy the same 34 Ibid. p.28 35 The 2008 financial crisis and the election of the Coalition Government in May 2010. 36 Largely produced by government civil servants, these reports have been overseen by ever changing departmental staff and teams, each with their own agenda. BAA’s development of Heathrow Terminal 5 started alongside The Egan Report and in the time it took to start on site Madrid Airport was designed and built. The architect for the project (Richard Rogers) felt this was largely down to changes in administration over the project lifespan. “Episode 3: The Politics of Power” The Brits who Built the Modern World, BBC Four (London: February 27, 2014) 37 A survey by Building Design Magazine found that half of the profession did not know what the three levels of BIM were, as defined by the government, and nearly 55% did not know about Cobie (Construction Operations Building Information Exchange) — the format in which the government wants all practices to supply information by 2016. Andrea Klettner. BD Online. May 14, 2012. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/riba-fallsshort-on-bim-say-architects/5036549.article (accessed February 9, 2014) 38 Set up by the government in 2011 the ‘BIM Task Group’ has been charged with refining this process up to 2016 to a point where a shared BIM model becomes: “…a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics…a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle; defined as existing from earliest conception to demolition.” BIM Task Group. Strategy Paper for the Government Construction Client Group. London: Depart of Business Innovation & Skills, 2011.
Page 11
Figure 8:
The completed Oriel School, Oxford.
Figure 9: Extract from interview with Jeremy Barltrop, member of the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers. “There has been much heated discussion within the architectural ironmongery world to the pros and cons of Building Information Modelling (BIM). The most obvious being as to whether or not it would make our current roles within the industry obsolete? Our traditional role within a building project is to work with an architect, designer, client or contractor to go through buildings plans with rigor, door by door and specify the correct ironmongery needed based upon door sizes, weights and the how each door will be used within the environment of the building. Within our industry there is definitely a concern that in a short number of years a designer, architect or even client will simply be able to go to an online “iTunes” style store and simply download a fully functional pre-designed building which allows for the correct size hinges, and the correct door closer. BIM will know this simply based on pre-defined calculations that have been input into a database.”
Page 12
vehicle. Oriel School in Oxford (figure 8) constructed under the Crawley PFI project required the inclusion of a 30 year maintenance contract making it an ideal trial project for BIM usage. It was delivered on time and budget but it was noted than there was a “reluctance from some of the supply chain to try new ways of working.”39 Common reactions to this were that there was a “lack of education in the process.”40 Of course another way to look at it could be that at all of the literature, the reports, the presentations on BIM were so client and cost focused that central beliefs in professions such as architecture - design quality - were not being taken into consideration. Smaller professions also felt vulnerable; Jeremy Barltrop, a member of the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers worries that “it may take away many opportunities to provide specialist ironmongery. Databases will no doubt improve, but at this stage we seem very disjointed from the process.”41 (figure 9) Like Rethinking Construction it could be viewed that this lack of inclusion could lead to an inherent disregard for the process, a combative rather than constructive attitude.
ARCHITECTS & BIM The development of this method of procurement by government has made some architects wary of its effectiveness and what it could mean for them. There is already a diverse spectrum of attitudes from practice to practice.42 There were similar reactions to the introduction of CAD43 but the short, five year implementation plan has condensed and amplified concerns at a time when practices are still feeling the pinch from the 2008 financial crisis. There have been client led prescriptions of technology on work before to streamline coordination between software platforms and job roles. The Jubilee Line Extension project for TfL stipulated that all architects involved “were required to produce their drawings on (Bentley) Microstation.”44 The Manser Practice had a relatively minor role in the project but it was important for a practice of its size at the time.45
We initially had to change one or two machines…as a system this was easily compatible with most engineers so in the end the whole system went over. It spelt the death 39 Grand, Zoe Le. Constructing Excellence. May 7, 2009. http://demos.constructingexcellence.org.uk/ knowledgebase/main.php?ProjectID=3442 (accessed February 19, 2014). 40 Mark Wilding. BD Online. May 10, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/lack-of-client-demand-holding-backbim/5054475.article (accessed February 9, 2014). 41 Barltrop, Jeremy, interview by author. Your views on Building Information Modelling (BIM) (February 9, 2014). 42Jonathan Manser of TMPa feels that “it (BIM) may produce better 3D co-ordination but comparison of drawings using an engaged brain is just as good.” Flora Genel, architect at AHMM feels that “it forces you to think of how you build. Maybe a little earlier than you would do with CAD.” Manser, 2014/ Flora Genel, interview by author. Your Experiences with BIM Implementation (February 26, 2014). 43 Past RIBA president Angela Brady discusses the past hurdles architects were forced to overcome in relation to the introduction of CAD. Royal Institute of British Architects. BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work. London: RIBA Publishing, 2012. 44 Manser, 2014 45 At that time, the practice employed around ten people in a single London office.
Page 13
Figure 10:
An overview of the BIM concept provided at the RIBA BIM Small Practice Seminar in 2013. The architect is moved out to the periphery, unlike the historical model where architects themselves were used as the central vehicle for co-ordination.
Page 14
knell for the Apple machines46 in the office, as they no longer supported the software. Balancing finances with the upgrades was a serious challenge. 47
TMPa continue to use Microstation today48 and the success of the project “led many practices in London to follow suit.”49 It could therefore be argued that the long term benefits outweighed the initial costs. Being heavily involved with public sector projects, like many other smaller practices, level 3 BIM will become a requirement for TMPa to retain this much needed work and there is concern “government being the biggest client” will lead others to simply “follow suit.”50 The enormous expense for the small or medium-sized practice highlights further important points. Practice size becomes an issue particularly at a time when many are still recovering financially. Many larger firms are able to swallow the costs of upgrades. Those employing 25 to 100 people operate on much finer margins and some may simply be unable to afford the initial outlay in time.51 The landscape of the profession could change in the coming years, this large segment of the profession being lost.52 Firms like TMPa may need to expand, diversify and become one-stop shops for the client.53 The conventional chartered practice of architects could perhaps become a chartered construction company which employs them.54 Secondly, the successful implementation of BIM hinges on all involved using the same software and at the moment there are six industry leaders.55 Autodesk’s Revit is “the dominant choice in the UK”56 but what happens on an EU and wider international scale in the future? Architect Hari Phillips compares it to “choosing between Betamax and VHS.” Nobody wants to make the wrong investment and the cost implications could prove to be catastrophic – the monopoly that the chosen software company would have may create an unwelcome hold over the industry. Finally, it seems that many consider the process to be a challenge to the architect’s conventional role.57 Architect, Arkhitekton and the master-builder are all perceptions that still heavily ring true in a profession with such an influential history. Looking at the central role the BIM environment adopts (figure 10) in the new strategy 46 This is still now a problem as the Autodesk BIM software is “not available on Apple” and could lead to costs to be amplified further in some practices. Hugh Davies. BD Online. December 3, 2013. http://www. bdonline.co.uk/you-can-use-bim-on-macs-%E2%80%94-but-it%E2%80%99s-not-always-simple/5064425.article (accessed February 23, 2014). 47 Manser, 2014 48 “Having to adapt to their project wide CAD standards meant that we actually set up our own.” Ibid, 2014 49 Ibid, 2014 50 Ibid, 2014 51 Davies, 2013 52 “I think the entire range of middle sized practices from about 25-150 people will be gone, and we’ll end up with two very distinct types of practice at each end of the market.” Building Futures. The Future for Architects? London: RIBA, 2011. 53 In 2007 The Manser Practice Architects formed an interior design team, which today contributes an essential part of office income. 54 It is arguable that many of these companies already exist. Arup Associates are an international firm providing services in architecture, engineering, management consultancy, acoustics, landscaping and many more. In more recent years the Ove Arup Systems (or OASys) has been set up to provide new forms of specialist software tailored to the industry. Other international firms including Gehry Partners (with Gehry Technologies) have followed suit very successfully. 55 Autodesk, Graphisoft, Vectorworks, Tekla, Solibri & Bentley as well as others. 56 Davies, 2013 57 Sheldon Wolfe. Constructive Thoughts. November 21, 2012. http://swconstructivethoughts.blogspot. co.uk/2012/04/what-have-architects-given-up.html (accessed February 22, 2014).
Page 15
Figure 11: Extract from interview with Flora Genel, architect and BIM Co-ordinator at AHMM. “What it does change to me is probably that you need to anticipate some decisions because it gives you too much level of coordination too early. The good thing is that you can arrive on site with a fully coordinated BIM so gain a lot of money on site. I think the key is to understand what you can put in your BIM model and if it is useful : you can envisage BIM just as a way of collaborating with consultants, share information and coordinate better. Or you can push the idea and try to add things to your BIM model such as elements for FM, for sustainability, for cost… But not for the sake of doing it, you need a good reason. To me, level 3 BIM doesn’t mean anything as scary as we hear everywhere, it means that you collaborate with your consultants in the same shared environment, but I have understood there are some legal issues with that and I feel that technically it’s not that simple.”
‘TRADITIONAL’ WORKFLOW
Page 16
‘BIM’ WORKFLOW
Figure 12:
Indicative tables to show the the increased effort at design stage under BIM. Issues that often arise during detailing and construction can be brought forward in the process to save costs on site.
the view could be taken that architects are being marginalised. Co-ordination of the process had always been regarded as the architect’s role and against a current backdrop of potential educational reform driven by EU legislation,58 in-fighting between professional boards of registration59 and even the questioning of architect as a protected title;60 perhaps to adopt BIM would be another step towards questioning the architect’s integrity? Some feel that “architects have lost the trust of clients…been persuaded to replace trust with the wrong people”61 and believe technology is being misunderstood as the new “silver ‘fix-all’ bullet.”62 This is not to say that the “BIM environment”63 couldn’t prove to be hugely lucrative to the architect. Firstly, the continual increase of products, methods, computer technology and all manner of information systems in the industry make it virtually impossible for any single profession to co-ordinate.64 Collaborating in a shared workspace may well increase the architects understanding of other industries, perhaps enhancing the design process. Flora Genel of practice AHMM believes that BIM allows you to “push your idea”65 and whilst designing “forces you to think how you build,” - which has always been a criticism of CAD in the past66 – “if you know how to use it, you can have the same freedom.”67 (figure 11/12) It may well work two-ways and this shared mode of collaboration could push the importance of good design back up the agenda with others. The adoption of UKGCS in this country and similar BIM initiatives across the world make this change almost a certainty over the coming years. The approach architects have to this is critical: presented not as a challenge, but as an opportunity.
58 Howard Crosskey, www.architecture.com. December 5, 2013. http:// www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2013/ RIBAinfluencesprofessionalqualificationsdirectivechangesandoutlinesprinciplesforfutureeducationreform. aspx#.UxOzEIWW98E (accessed March 2, 2014) 59 Rogers, David. BD Online. January 14, 2014. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/riba-president-takes-aim-atarb/5065743.article (accessed March 2, 2014) 60 Bailllieu, Amanda. BD Online. February 20,2009. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/title-cannot-be-protected/3134298.article (accessed March 2, 2014) 61 Manser, 2014 62 Ibid, 2014 63 Genel, 2014 64 Wolfe, 2012 65 Genel, 2014 66 Manser, 2014 67 Genel, 2014
Page 17
Figure 13:
Top: an indicative line drawing drawn directly in CAD, replicating the ‘idea on the back of a napkin’ mantra. Above: Richard Rogers’ concept sketch for The Millenium Dome. Although drawn quickly, it conveys a sense of life and emotion that CGI renders would find hard to replicate.
Page 18
CONCLUSION Compared with many other construction industry professions architects are blessed with an expertise which is almost impossible to replicate through technology. BIM, CAD, networks and spreadsheets cannot design without input. The ability to communicate the idea (figure 13) on a much more emotive level68 gives architects a constantly open door to affect influence on whichever process future reports adopt. One of the clear complications in the production of reports such as UKGCS is the myopic angle in which they are put together. Rather than tackling cost saving head on construction should be reviewed from the inside, by industry leaders with government consultation. Architects, engineers, plumbers, carpenters, bricklayers, ironmongers together hold an enormous amount of experience and training but it seems that “we are experiencing a genuine crisis of confidence in our most prestigious institutions and professions.”69 Although the past few years has seen some involvement from the RIBA,70 “at the moment there are (relatively) few adopters.”71 72 If architects are able to treat the introduction as a positive opportunity and respond to it rather than fight the process there is an argument to say that much of the cost driven, bureaucratic paperwork we so often associate with government can be swept aside and clients can be given not just low cost buildings but what they really need “good buildings…at sensible prices.”73 In an age of rapid productivity, of “liquid modernity,”74 where much of what we use on a daily basis we do not comprehend, BIM needs to be understood not as a replacement for the architects role but as a means to an end, as a new set of tools. With 2016 fast approaching, further collaborative involvement in the construction of this process is the only thing that can lead architects to retaining an integral role in the procurement of buildings and prevent them from becoming just a series of design consultants in a building making machine.75
68 Something which even the best and most realistic CGI cannot. 69 Crawford, p.9 70 Including the new Outline Plan of Work 2013 and the BIM Overlay to the Outline Plan of Work. However the latter feels more like the institute is trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, attempting to work current models used by architects into a new means of future procurement. Building Design Magazine has produced the BIM White Paper as a response to “how much work needs to be done on BIM adoption.” Klettner, Andrea. BD Online. May 14, 2012. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/riba-falls-short-on-bim-say-architects/5036549. article (accessed February 9, 2014). 71 Seymour, 2014 72 “Over half the profession did not know what the three levels of BIM were.” Klettner, 2012 73 Manser, 2014 74 Bauman, p.8 75 A leading project manager and a global consultancy said that “Architects have shed project management, contract administration, and cost, and ultimately if they lose design co-ordination then you have to ask what they are there for?” Building Futures, 2011
Page 19
BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Bauman, Zygmunt. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000. Crawford, Matthew. The Case for Working with your Hands. New York: Penguin Group, 2009.
CONFERENCES/PRESENTATIONS Fairhead, Richard. 2013 RIBA Conference – BIM: The Small Practice Perspective (London: September 20, 2013)
INTERVIEWS Barltrop, Jeremy, interview by author. Your views on Building Information Modelling (BIM) (February 9, 2014). Genel, Flora, interview by author. Your Experiences with BIM Implementation (February 26, 2014). Manser, Jonathan, interview by author. Experiences with Technology in Practice (February 17, 2014). Meier, Richard, interview by The Big Think. How has technology changed architecture? (September 17, 2007). Seymour, Patrick, interview by author. Experiences with the implementation of Technology since 1988 (February 10, 2014).
JOURNALS Nathaniel, Adam. “Loving the Rhino.” Products in Practice, 2014: 8.
REPORTS BIM Task Group. Government Soft Landings Policy. London: HMSO, 2012. BIM Task Group. Strategy Paper for the Government Construction Client Group. London: Depart of Business Innovation & Skills, 2011. Building Futures. The Future for Architects? London: RIBA, 2011. Efficiency & Reform Group. Construction Strategy Report. London: HMSO, 2011. Efficiency & Reform Group. Government Construction: Construction Trial Projects. London: HMSO, 2011. Egan, Sir John. Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force. London: HMSO, 1998. Latham, Sir Michael. Constructing the Team: Report of the Government/Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements in the UK Construction Industry. London: HMSO, 1994.
PUBLICATIONS Royal Institute of British Architects. BIM Overlay to the RIBA Outline Plan of Work. London: RIBA Publishing, 2012. Royal Institute of British Architects. RIBA Outline Plan of Work 2013. London: RIBA Publishing, 2013.
SPEECHES Cameron, David. “Conservative Party Forum, Keynote Speech.” Cheltenham, April 26, 2009.
TELEVISION PROGRAMMES Page 20
“Episode 2: The Power of the Past” The Brits who Built the Modern World, BBC Four (London: February 20, 2014) “Episode 3: The Politics of Power” The Brits who Built the Modern World, BBC Four (London: February 27, 2014)
WEBSITES Bailllieu, Amanda. BD Online. February 20,2009. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/title-cannot-be-protected/3134298.article (accessed March 2, 2014) Crosskey, Howard. www.architecture.com. December 5, 2013. http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2013 RIBAinfluencesprofessionalqualificationsdirectivechangesandoutlinesprinciplesforfutureeducationreform.aspx#. UxOzEIWW98E (accessed March 2, 2014) Curtis, Russell. BD Online. September 30, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/practice-and-it/me-and-my-it-russellcurtis/5061267.article (accessed February 23, 2014). Davies, Hugh. BD Online. December 3, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/you-can-use-bim-on-macs-%E2%80%94-butit%E2%80%99s-not-always-simple/5064425.article (accessed February 23, 2014). Dizikes, Peter. MIT News. June 24, 2012. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/computing-architecture-0625.html (accessed February 9, 2014). Grand, Zoe Le. Constructing Excellence. May 7, 2009. http://demos.constructingexcellence.org.uk/knowledgebase/main. php?ProjectID=3442 (accessed February 19, 2014). Klettner, Andrea. BD Online. May 14, 2012. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/riba-falls-short-on-bim-say-architects/5036549.article (accessed February 9, 2014). Morrell, Paul. Architects Journal. June 23, 2011. http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/paul-morrell-bim-to-berolled-out-to-all-projects-by-2016/8616487.article (accessed February 9, 2014). Partington, Robin. BD Online. May 21, 2010. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/practice-and-it/me-and-my-it-robinpartington/5000198.article (accessed February 23, 2014). Phillips, Hari. BD Online. July 2, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/practice-and-it/me-and-my-it-hari-phillips/5056469.article (accessed February 23, 2014). Rogers, David. BD Online. January 14, 2014. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/riba-president-takes-aim-at-arb/5065743.article (accessed March 2, 2014) Rybczynski, Witold. Slate Group LLC. March 2011. http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/architecture/2011/03/think_before_ you_build.html (accessed February 9, 2014). Thomas, Marc. BD Online. April 30, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/computers-can%E2%80%99t-design-without-adesigner/5054014.article (accessed February 9, 2014). Wilding, Marc. BD Online. May 10, 2013. http://www.bdonline.co.uk/lack-of-client-demand-holding-back-bim/5054475.article (accessed February 9, 2014). Wolfe, Sheldon. Constructive Thoughts. September 28, 2012. http://swconstructivethoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/howhave-architects-responsibilities.html (accessed February 22, 2014). Wolfe, Sheldon. Constructive Thoughts. April 29, 2012. http://swconstructivethoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/what-havearchitects-given-up.html (accessed February 22, 2014). Wolfe, Sheldon. Constructive Thoughts. November 21, 2012. http://swconstructivethoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/whathave-architects-given-up.html (accessed February 22, 2014).
Page 21
IMAGES Figure 1
“Episode 2: The Power of the Past” The Brits who Built the Modern World, BBC Four (London: February 20, 2014)
Figure 2
http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/heydar-aliyev-centre/
Figure 5
Alan Crane, CioB
Figure 6
http://docs.autodesk.com/NAVMAN/10.0/ENU/Autodesk%20Navisworks%20Manage%202013%20Online%20 Help/index.html
Figure 7
BIM Task Group. Strategy Paper for the Government Construction Client Group. London: Depart of Business Innovation & Skills, 2011.
Figure 8
http://bamppp.com/experience
Figure 10
Fairhead, Richard. 2013 RIBA Conference – BIM: The Small Practice Perspective (London: September 20, 2013)
Figure 12
Fairhead, Richard. 2013 RIBA Conference – BIM: The Small Practice Perspective (London: September 20, 2013)
Figure 13
http://www.building.co.uk/foster-and-rogers/3069503.article
Page 22
APPENDICES INTERVIEWS (all interviews below conducted by author in person or via e mail correspondance) Interview Transcript 1 Interview with Jonathan Manser, Managing Director at The Manser Practice Architects and Designers. Date: 17th February 2014 Title: Experiences with Technology in Practice CJ: What was the response that TMP had to make when awarded the Jubilee line work? JM: Jubilee Line architects were all required to produce their drawings on Microstation. We were using Archicad up until then on a limited basis and had to change two or three machines to Microstation in order to work on the project. This, as a system was compatible with AutoCAD, which most engineers seemed to use at the time so in the end the whole system went over to Microstation. The majority of architects in London generally followed suit to moving over to software that was easily compatible with the major engineering firms. It was expensive and balancing finances with the upgrades was a challenge at the time but in retrospect simply set the tone for continuous and never ending upgrades and changes in the years that followed. There was some initial confusion, training was required and I seem to remember that CAD standards became an issue. In fact it was largely as a result of doing Jubilee Line and having to adapt to their project wide CAD standards that we actually set up our own standards and also got to the stage where everybody was working on computer. In the end it also spelt the death knell for the Apple machines in the office as they no longer supported the Microstation software and this meant another additional cost. CJ: There are obviously many advantages and disadvantages to the integration of technology into practice in the last 20 years. What, in your opinion have been the ones that you would highlight? JM: Digital photos, surveys etc. have been fantastic and the ability to send them around in emails from computers, pads and phones has really improved the speed in which we often get things done. However, getting rid of tracing paper originals has meant a greater need to be careful with CAD standards and drawing issues and there was often an inherent loss of care when putting a drawing together as errors could be so quickly rectified. We can no longer see a drawing on the paper as it is being drawn which makes it less easy to see if it is developing the right way. Drawings now have a tendency to be drawn for their own sake rather than being drawn to convey information to another party. In the old days a drawing was set up to convey a finite amount of information on a specific area so that it could be costed and built. Getting as much clear information on to a single A1 sheet was important. That seems to have gone. Doing large scale details by computer, rather than by hand , results in dimensions on drawings such as 3.762mm which is daft. Hand drawn details still require thought about how things are constructed which computer drawn details tend not to. BIM may produce better 3D co-ordination but proper comparison of drawings using an engaged brain is just as good. Computers tend to allow people not to have to think or ask questions. Many people think that they have answered a question by sending off an email whereas they have simply pushed the problem along. Plotters and printers are now much better and we don’t send bundles of 2-300 drawings out in the post anymore. In fact we get very little post compared to the old days and most, if not all correspondence is now data archived. Telex disappeared and Fax is going the same way and in terms of marketing printed brochures seem to be on the way out. 35mm colour slides in carousels have gone, Letratone and Letraset have gone. What happened to Rotring pens?? CJ: TMP have worked a lot on public sector projects in the past, and still do. What is your opinion on the new UK Government Strategy Report in terms of procurement of building in the private sector? JM: The blunt instrument of Government being used by civil servants who believe in the need for technology but who do not understand what it is or whether they need it. It will give them something they don’t need………universally identical and accessible drawings without giving them what they need………..good buildings at sensible prices. Because government is such a big ‘client’ all the institutes and large contractors toady up and tell them it is a good idea. CPD was treated in the same way when it first came in. CJ: What you think the implications of such a sweeping change in procurement of the built environment could mean for the architect’s role and the medium sized practice (25 -100) in years to come. JM: As you can see from dealing with the contractor in your current project team the growing problem is that building companies can persuade clients to spend money with them on design and build contracts where their often desk bound jobsworths don’t do a good job, don’t understand how to get things built and don’t much care. Page 23
Architects seem to have lost the trust of clients who have been persuaded to replace their trust with the wrong people…………like government they all think that technology gives them a silver ‘fix all ‘ bullet. CJ: Any other final views? JM: Twenty years ago, Sir John Egan, who had been chairman of Jaguar shortly before it went bust took over at BAA to build T5 and expand all the airports. He ann=ounced that the building industry was inefficient and that BAA was going to change all that and change the face of procurement. He introduced ‘framework’ agreements for the first time and all the media and institutions hailed it as the greatest change since the flood. Building costs were going to come down. See his 1988 report ‘Rethinking Construction’. Madrid airport was designed and built and opened in the time it took BAA to start on site with T5…….although it was twice the size! Technology and systems are tools but are only any use when used thoughtfully by intelligent people. Government, almost by definition, does not allow that to happen.
Interview Transcript 2 Interview with Patrick Seymour, Director and founder of IT Consultancy firm DP-IT. Date: 10th February 2014 Title: Experiences with the implementation of Technology since 1988 CJ: After working with you and your company for the last six years in practice and seeing the changes in such a short space of time cold you give me some views of the development of technology and its relationship with architects and architecture in the past. Also how you foresee your future role – particularly in reference to the implementation of BIM software’s and processes. PS: I am from an electronics background (using CAD on circuit board layouts back in ’88). Wanting to earn some better money I applied my CAD knowledge at a building services company, then moving onto a number of architectural practices (mainframe systems transitioning to standalone CAD workstations). After some time with this I realised everyone was reinventing the wheel and saw an opportunity where money could be gained by helping others with their CAD systems. Back in the day it was mainframes; multiple screens working off a single processor, no colour just various shades of green to differentiate between CAD elements. The systems were very expensive and cumbersome to use to the point that knowing how to drive a CAD system (CAD operator) was a job in itself and what you drew was irrelevant to your job – an architect or engineer would sit adjacent to you and instruct you as to what to draw. Also due to the costs of the systems there was often a shift based work rota to gain the most efficient use out of the CAD system and avoid idle time. Over time distributed processing became the norm (standalone workstations), it was at this point that architects and designers starting learning CAD for themselves. Up until the early-nineties networking wasn’t really around. Practices would generally have a few CAD workstations which a select few within a practice would use. These were difficult to use, unintuitive and unreliable. The tasks during this period were mostly teaching CAD, configuring CAD workstations to send data to plotters and to repair broken workstations. Upgrading was the norm due to the cost of buying new workstations and fixes for badly written software would take a long time to apply as they would often be sent by post from the hardware or software vendor. The mid-nineties saw the large scale influx of networking which enabled software houses (Intergraph, Autodesk and others) to enable efficient CAD data use by starting to introduce what you would now call reference filing. This was a massive improvement as storage was expensive and any reduction in file size saved money and increased speed due to less data needing to be considered by the then slow processors. Desktop publishing was starting to appear in-house and the days of cutting and pasting pantone were numbered. After this period the Internet started to appear, very slowly and then by ’98 – ’99 it really took off from an architectural practice point of view (architects generally being late adopters). This improved and eased data transfer significantly (data was transported by disk or site to site modem connections prior to this) and saw the integration of communications into a practice’s I.T. Email became key along with Web access for product and construction information. The changes from then to now are a very heavy reliant on networking and communications with all within a practice having access to email, web, CAD and graphics as you are experiencing yourself now. With regard to my role, originally everyone was incredibly upset if their CAD system wasn’t working. One workstation not working could well be 50% of a practices CAD capability and seriously impact productivity. Software was hard to use, Page 24
therefore a lot of money was made through training and ‘hand holding’. Over the years software has become easier to use, with today’s applications being quite intuitive. Clients will often resolve general application issues themselves due to the ease of use combined with the access to information and assistance on the internet. Fast forwarding to now, clients generally limit any major unhappiness to when their internet or email access goes down, because the internet and email blend both personal and professional worlds. BIM. At the moment there are a few adopters but not nearly enough regard is being given to this given the impending government requirements for BIM use in government and local authority projects. I think there is going to be a mad rush for BIM implementation soon which will lead to a very messy situation of disparate standards which will negate the purpose of BIM and the efficiency it can introduce. I don’t feel that architects are aware of the true complexities of BIM and the time and costs involved in implementing this. There seems to be a feeling that it is simply 3D CAD and some spreadsheets I’m not sure from my perspective if I can envisage a significant change to the roll of the architect. Design, guardians of the design, and interfacing with the client and the trades will always be requirements irrespective of technology. Methods may change but the role won’t. There are changes however to other consultants and services on the periphery of the architectural practice. One being reprographic houses. Originally you would send your CAD files to a repro house for plotting etc., initially by disk and courier, then by modem and now by email. Hard copy data is diminishing (another area of I.T. we deal with less and less) and I have noticed that the repro houses are trying to reinvent themselves with data storage and warehousing as the new commodity.
Interview Transcript 3 Interview with Jeremy Barltrop, Member of the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers Date: 9th February 2014 Title: Your views on Building Information Modelling (BIM) CJ: From a sub-contractors point of view – particularly working in a company who are breaking into the ’large projects’ market – what are your thoughts on the UK Government Strategy, particularly the introduction of BIM? JB: There has been much heated discussion within the architectural ironmongery world to the pros and cons of Building Information Modelling (BIM). The most obvious being as to whether or not in would make our current roles within the industry obsolete? Our traditional role within a building project is to work with an architect, designer, client or contractor to go through buildings plans with rigor, door by door and specify the correct ironmongery needed based upon door sizes, weights and the how each door will be used within the environment of the building. Within our industry there is definitely a concern that in a short number of years a designer, architect or even client will simply be able to go to an online “iTunes” style store and simply download a fully functional pre-designed building which allows for the correct size hinges, and the correct door closer. BIM will know this simply based on pre-defined calculations that have been input into a database. I personally feel this will lead to very ordinary ironmongery being specified and will take away many opportunities to supply more specialist, designer and even bespoke ironmongery. If an individual item is not uploaded to the BIM database it can’t be included within the model. These databases will no doubt improve, but at this stage we seem to be very disjointed from the process. That being said I can see plenty of benefits, the cost of scanning and uploading a product to the BIM database is reasonably high and although this is likely to decrease in years to come, we might find only the higher quality manufacturers will truly invest in BIM, this in turn could mean we see much better products installed and fitted into a project.
Page 25
Correspondance with Flora Genel, architect and BIM Co-ordinator at AHMM. From: To: Subject: Date:
fgenel@ahmm.co.uk cjeffcoate@manser.co.uk Your experiences with BIM Implementation 26/02/2014
Dear Chris, It’s a very general question and honestly it would take me a few days to answer you properly! So maybe it’s easier if we discuss a little bit so I understand what is your understanding of BIM exactly, and then my answers would be more useful for you. I’m not sure what you are calling BIM. Previously architects were hand-drawing, then the learnt to draw on CAD, now they are asked to learn how to design in a BIM environment. To me, it doesn’t change their design process. It is another tool they need to fully understand to make it adapt to their design process, rather than the reverse. I mean architect’s design process shouldn’t have to adapt to this new tool. What it does change to me is probably that you need to anticipate some decisions because it gives you too much level of coordination too early. The good thing is that you can arrive on site with a fully coordinated BIM so gain a lot of money on site. I think the key is to understand what you can put in your BIM model and if it is useful : you can envisage BIM just as a way of collaborating with consultants, share information and coordinate better. Or you can push the idea and try to add things to your BIM model such as elements for FM, for sustainability, for cost… But not for the sake of doing it, you need a good reason. To me, level 3 BIM doesn’t mean anything as scary as we hear everywhere, it means that you collaborate with your consultants in the same shared environment, but I have understood there are some legal issues with that and I feel that technically it’s not that simple. Anyway, for my experience, I’m working in Revit which is a software, you could do BIM with others. Revit allows you to draw your building and if it’s done properly, to create schedules of all types of elements, and to link to data bases to add some more information. It is true that switching from a cad environment to Revit makes you shift a bit your way of drawing things, but if you know how to use it, I think you have the same freedom. It forces you to think of how you build. Maybe a little bit earlier than you would do in CAD. I find the process a bit heavy on early stages, but I can see the benefits from stage D/E. So the trick to me is to identify the good moment to start in BIM. Flora
Page 26