The second conference, BIM in Public Building: The GSA and Corps of Engineers BIM Initiatives, gave an insider’s look at BIM and government processes. Conference panelist Chuck Hardy, a deputy director of the GSA’s property development division of the Great Lakes Region, elaborated on the GSA’s determination to deliver projects on time, on cost and on budget. Converting to BIM has helped that process.

Geospatial concerns are also important to the GSA. “As we’ve been chasing this holy grail of useable areas, empty space and vacated areas, it has consumed an inordinate amount of time on project teams. So, to be able to automate [processes] is invaluable to us.”

As a guidance to contractors, Hardy advised, “Owners will not pay more for less. We will pay more for better.”

Toby Wilson, an AEC and BIM group leader at the CAD/BIM Technology Center and former project designer and architect for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, presented projections for the COE, beginning with its intent to relax specifications on certain design-build projects, such as barracks, dining halls, administration buildings, etc. “We’re going to significantly reduce those [specifications] and just go with industry standards and industry codes,” he said. “We are partnering with our customers and the industry to find a way to reduce the cost to the Army on these kinds of buildings.”

That’s where building information modeling comes into play. When the COE approached the industry for its input, the industry’s response showed a cost savings of as much as 20 percent over methods used by the COE.

Wilson admitted that it’s difficult to stay vendor neutral in a BIM environment, noting that the COE has chosen Bentley Systems for its preferred software. Though that decision does not sit well with some government contractors, knowing that projects will be product specific helps them know how to proceed. Said one participant, “The COE portion was extremely enlightening, especially as it related to Bentley, as we are an Autodesk shop. This will help us evaluate future RFPs to see if we want to pursue them.”

Another commented that he appreciated getting specific examples, numbers and future speculation “straight from the horse's mouth!”

In the third conference, Contractor Implementation: Considerations and Best Practices for Contractors, CMs and Design-Builders Ready to Take the Plunge, 60 percent of the participants are considering BIM as a future business practice while the remaining 40 percent already employ BIM processes in-house or through an outsourced contractor.

For those participants who have already incorporated BIM into their processes, nearly 80 percent reported that they use the technology primarily for coordination and interference checking. Nearly 12 percent use it for extraction of quantities for estimating and just shy of six percent use BIM technology for planning exit processes and staging materials. None of the conference participants reported BIM usage for task scheduling and sequencing.

“Speed of estimating is certainly something to be reckoned with,” said conference panelist John Jurewicz of AA Architects in Chicago. Citing an example from M.A. Mortenson Company, he said that a 45-person team that works strictly with BIM models was able to slash the preconstruction estimating time from two weeks down to two days by setting up estimating and modeling programs to work together. What does that mean to contractors? Jurewicz said, “When you see an extracted database come straight from Revit through a viewer like Innovaya, ... and when it prefills your spreadsheets in a format that your estimators can jump on, ... it gives you an advantage over your competition.”

Faster estimating isn’t the only advantage. Jurewicz cited coordination, change management, interference checking, phasing and adding information, extractions and communication of “what if” scenarios as other compelling reasons to consider BIM.

Whereas past conference discussions have been more scholastic in nature, the third conference was peppered with discussions of specific products. Specifically, participants are looking for recommendations about specific products and where they can find consultants. Jurewicz and fellow panelists Mel Persin and Arol Wolford weighed in on their recommendations. The important point, said Jurewicz, is to “put a model together that fits with your estimating software ... and your existing construction processes.” Continuing, he said, “Spend the time ... to develop modeling that matches how you do construction estimating.”

To date, the conferences have received positive participant feedback. One participant wrote in, “My company is trying to decide if the time is right to join the BIM community. These conferences give us the opportunity to hear the views of others. Without this forum, where would we have started? These conferences are giving us a little insight into the commitment that we will have to make if the decision is to go forward.”