Mortenson Construction Virtual Mockups A Collaborative Solution

Transcription

1 San Diego, CA February 10, 2011 Mortenson Construction Virtual Mockups A Collaborative Solution Rick Khan, LEED AP Senior Integrated Construction Manager Building what s next. Mortenson Construction Family owned and operated since 1954 Headquarters in Minneapolis, MN Seven Geographic office Locations Five industry-specific operating groups International operations in China 2,200 team members $2.3 Billion in Revenue Strong repeat customer base Leaders in VDC 5 AIA TAP BIM Awards to date 1

2 Mortenson VDC Timeline Copyright 2010 Mortenson Construction Mortenson VDC Timeline Copyright 2010 Mortenson Construction 2

3 Virtual Mockups: Agenda Introductions The what, why and how of Virtual Mockups Physical Mockup vs. Virtual Mockup Process Improvement Case Studies What? Why? How? Safety planning / Construction Sequencing Quality plan / Inspections Subcontractor model coordination / Physical Mockup Q & A Discussion Increase Planning Increase Communication Increase Collaboration Eliminate Interpretation 2D or 3D - You be the judge The answer maybe obvious 3

4 Virtual Mockup? (VM) Highly detailed 3D model used as the central medium of collaboration to resolve constructability issues virtually prior to construction activities Level of Development = 400 (AIA E202 model progression spec) Model elements are modeled as specific assemblies, accurate in terms of quantity, size, shape, location, and orientation. Model elements are virtual representation of the proposed element and are suitable for construction. Why Virtual Mockups? Drive innovation and ingenuity through continual process improvement Process Improvement objectives: Increase coordination Increase safety awareness Increase constructability Increase productivity on site Increase opportunities for prefab Improve construction sequencing Reduce / Eliminate field conflicts Reduce construction time / cost Reduce language barriers Increase Collaboration Increase Communication Increase Planning Eliminate Interpretation 4

5 How do we use Virtual Mockups? Focus on our construction process High risk planning - enclosure Integrated Work Planning (IWP) Quality plan / inspection Safety plan Efficiency Plan Construction sequencing (4D) Physical mockup planning / review Team communication / integration Owner / Design / Construction Effective Virtual problem solving through Collaboration How? Virtual Mockup Process PLAN Project team identifies high risk areas Gather data from all sources SIMLATE Verify data Generate 3D Model Identify problems / ask questions REVIEW Integrated team meetings Model = Live meeting minutes Share meeting model with team APPROVE Document solutions Shop Drawings Individual party approval per scope Construction team implementation APPROVE Owner Design Team PLAN Mortenson Construction CM/GC 3D Virtual Mockup REVIEW Trade Contractors Product Manufacturer SIMULATE Start with the End in Mind! 5

6 Wait a minute What about a physical mockup? Isn t a physical mockup a requirement on your projects? Are you saying to replace the need for a physical mockup? Physical Mockup Most projects require a physical mockup per the contract which may include an exterior and/or interior mockup Limitations of a Physical Mockup Problems uncovered during construction of physical mockup One physical mockup doesn t address all conditions! Delays actual constructible solutions Expensive time, material, labor Wasteful usually destroyed Legacy project requirement 1800 Larimer Office Building Denver, Colorado 6

7 Why only build one Physical Mockup When you can build multiple virtual mockups for a fraction of the cost! Cost Aversion Example Cost of Physical Mockup Enclosure Cost of one physical Mockup = $56,700 Constructed 1 st and then problems were resolved PHYSICAL MOCK-UP COST Precast: $22,000 Curtain Wall: $25,000 Framing: $5,000 Caulking: $1,200 Foundation: $3,500 TOTAL $56, Larimer Office Building Denver, Colorado 7

8 Cost Aversion Example Value of Virtual Mockup Reduce waste = greener solution Saved time, material, labor = owner cost! Increased visual communication and collaborative solution for all project stakeholders Let s say that we had to build 4 physical mockups to capture all the conditions on the enclosure to address the high risk factors! Cost Aversion Calculation: Cost of PM $56,700 x 4 = $226,800 Cost of 4-VM - $11,680 $215,120 Minus cost of 1 PM - $56,700 Cost aversion = $158,420 Virtual Mockup & Physical Mockup Virtual Mockup should be used as part of the Physical Mockup planning process! PLAN CM/GC APPROVE Owner DT 3D Virtual Mockup P/F SUBS SIMULATE REVIEW 8

9 Virtual Mockup & Physical Mockup This Virtual Mockup provided a VALUE ADD to the physical mockup requirement! Process Improvement Case Studies Safety Planning / Construction Sequencing Quality / Inspection Plan Subcontractor Coordination / Physical Mockup 9

10 Process Improvement Case Studies Safety Planning / Construction Sequencing Ballard Medical Office Building Swedish Medical Center Completed Customer HealthCare Real Estate Solutions / Swedish Health Architect Callison Construction Cost $35 million Size 90,000 sf Location Ballard, Washington Quality / Safety Planning Integrated Work Planning Micro level 4D High Detail Focus on the install sequence Safety Planning integration Pinch points Material Handling Worker access / movements Equipment movement Scaffolding Trade workflow Micro level 4D allowed us to plan effectively for the entire building. 10

11 Project Case Studies Quality / Inspection Plan Exempla Lutheran Medical Center North Pavilion Addition Completed Customer Exempla Healthcare Architect H+L Architecture Construction Cost $143 million Size 295,000 SF addition Location Wheat Ridge, CO Quality / Inspection Plans Integrated Work Plan Roof / Expansion Joints 5 high risk areas were identified b/w new and existing 2D design details did not address direction change Multiple trades involved in expansion joint construction Trade shop drawings has conflicting solutions prior to VM 11

12 Quality Plan / Inspection Integrated Work Plan Roof / Expansion Joint 5 high risk areas were identified b/w new and existing 2D design details did not address direction change Multiple trades involved in expansion joint construction Trade shop drawings has conflicting solutions prior to VM APPROVE Owner DT PLAN CM/GC 3D Virtual Mockup REVIEW P/F SUBS SIMULATE Quality Plan / Inspection Integrated Work Plan Roof / Expansion Joint 12

13 Project Case Studies Subcontractor Coordination / Physical Mockup Ralph L. Carr Colorado Judicial Center In Progress Customer Trammell Crow Architect Fentress Architects Construction Cost $195 million Size 600,000 SF Location Denver, CO Subcontractor Coordination / Physical Mockup Bridging the overlap between design and Construction Fast Track Schedule Construction activities begin before design completion Virtual Mockups process becomes part of design completion / constructability solution Subcontractor providing LOD 400 Enclosure Models per MC Contract Clash Detection between enclosure scopes Spray Foam Insulation Physical Mockup Subcontractor Model Scopes: Gage - Precast Cold Spring / Gallegos Handset stone Trainor Curtain wall / Glazing Mortenson Cast in Place Concrete Zimmerman - Steel 13

14 Virtual Mockup & Physical Mockup Early Virtual Mockups prior to design completion Physical Mockup VDC IWP work packages Integrating design and construction team in collaborative problem solving for design detailing Design team provide higher level design detailing as result of integrated work flow Virtual Mockup & Physical Mockup Subcontractor Enclosure Coordination New level of enclosure modeling LOD 400 Required new coordination efforts Performed clash detection between trades Stone vs. Precast Precast vs. Steel supports Stone/Precast vs. Concrete (wall base conditions/haunch beam) Precast Foam Insulation vs. Others Steel Fire Proofing vs. Others 14

15 Virtual Mockup & Physical Mockup Spray Foam Insulation VM & PM Spray Foam is a high risk activity Complex design and constructability of enclosure required further investigation Both Virtual and Physical Mockup were developed to ensure best solution! Process Improvement steps: Identify high risk areas Develop Virtual Mockup Build Physical Mockup Test Physical Mockup Document best practices Generate Integrated Work Plan Virtual Mockups Conclusion Plan the Work, Work the Plan! Value added benefits Increase Planning Increase Communication Increase coordination Increase safety awareness Increase constructability Increase productivity on site Increase opportunities for prefab Improve construction sequencing Reduce / Eliminate field conflicts Reduce construction time / cost Reduce language barriers Increase Collaboration Eliminate Interpretation 15

16 Q&A Discussion BIM for Constructability Review of Building Envelopes: Examples and Best Practices Dace A. Campbell, AIA, LEED AP // BNBuilders Virtual Mockups: A Collaborative Solution Rick Khan, LEED AP // Mortenson Construction [email protected] 16