BIM IN ASSET MANAGEMENT MONTHLY FORUM 26-02-2025
RICHARD FREER As many of you will know, we’ve been running a number of pilots over the last couple of months as a way of getting people engaged, but also of getting practical hands-on experience of solutions to issues. The more people that get involved in that, the better the feedback and ergo the better the output at the end of that. We’re going to run through the different workstreams and working groups and showing you some examples as we go through the meeting. George, why are we doing this?
GEORGE STEVENSON Really, to bring together the knowledge of the industry to identify how we can overcome some of the challenges that we’ve got. Because, quite frankly, there is a lot of confusion as to what people do or don’t need to do and also we’re trying to engage people in coming up with ways of addressing it. Das from David Miller is going to be running through a good example of that later.
RICHARD FREER The first run-through is going to be on the DAC workstream, so Cliff Kneale and Paul Womack.
GEORGE STEVENSON (shares screen). The various things that people have been seeing at previous workstreams, we’ll see what Sodexo have been doing, who are the largest implementor of digital asset capture. What they’ve been doing is using it to capture information on buildings where they don’t actually have any asset information. And they’re just using low cost 360 cameras which then their subject matter experts in their offices, or at home, are carrying out the tagging. And by doing that it means that they can create an environment where the people don’t need to travel to site, they can have subject matter experts being able to work remotely, anywhere in the world. We’ve got people on this call today perhaps in the Middle East, who may well be interested in contributing to some of this type of work.
So, it’s bringing together a lot of experts who can then look at a 360 photo and then go through and identify what assets they can see. And that is building asset lists, so that can then connect back to other things like maintenance information. So, as part of the pilot, we’re also using this to train AI so that we can then prompt the user. At the moment, it’s very much the expertise of the human that’s doing it, but we’ve now got 100,000 assets that have been recorded using this methodology. And we’re therefore training large language models to be able to recognise a valve, for example. So, the more people that can get involved in this the better, and also the other thing that’s relevant to this is that it’s six times faster than sending boots on the ground surveyors. So it’s a much more effective way of pulling together the information.
What we’re looking to do is have experts, so if you have expertise in mechanical services and could recognise mechanical plant ti would be great if you could drop your name in the chat, if you’re interested in doing that. The same with electrical and also controls is a different specialism as well, so maybe commissioning people. Passive fire protection is an important part of what we’re trying to do and also people that are involved in active fire protection, smoke control and things like that.
PHIL THOMPSON A question on the integrity of the information. When you showed some of the scheduling data there was no manufacturer name in there and the part reference seemed to be a fairly arbitrary valve 1, and it didn’t define whether it was a gate valve or a butterfly valve. What level of intelligence are you going down to?
GEORGE STEVENSON It’s up to the FM people, but typically they wouldn’t know that and for maybe a 10 year old building they probably wouldn’t care either. Because to be able to actually identify that particular product, that’s a later exercise. I agree with you, that’s where we should be going, but in those cases it’s just a matter of identifying what SFG20 reference is needed for that. Does that make sense?
PHIL THOMPSON It does, it makes me uncomfortable, but it’s almost like as if this looks like a solution, but it’s kind of not, in my view. Because there’s just no intelligence information around the product, it might have a particular manufacturer maintenance requirement, it might have a recall on it. This information is, I don’t mean this in the wrong context, but kind of dumb.
GEORGE STEVENSON OK, just to be clear, we’re doing this also with intelligent product information, so in the golden thread process we’re doing exactly what you’ve just said, tying it back to manufacturer’s product details. So, that is already in process. What I’m showing here is where somebody takes on a contract for managing 50 buildings, they’ve got no record information, no asset information. And what they’ve got to do is get that building mobilised within a month or something like that, and the only way that they can do that is by sending surveyors to the site and actually doing that exercise. It’s a different use case.
PIERRE VENTER Two points of issue, the first one, there’s two streams. The one is post-construction where we’re capturing stuff like you’ve got now, The better method in my opinion, is the other side during the design and development process that there is a record being done. Now, in terms of what Phil has just said, you’re not identifying that it’s a gate valve, but to me that’s really important because at the end of the day classification for a valve would be one value. We don’t know who the manufacturer is because we’re just capturing it, but if we capture what kind of valve it is that immediately is incredibly useful in the asset use later on.
So, the question about the balance between how much you’re capturing now, how much will have to be identified later, is really important. So, those two things about post-construction and where the better method is because it’s got a longer lifespan, during the design and development. And then handing over through the tender into construction, and then final handover there.
GEORGE STEVENSON I absolutely agree and that’s really why we’re putting this call out to people who are on the call who are adequately experienced to be able to recognise the difference between the different types of valves.
RICHARD FREER Matt Wilkie has put into the chat that he’s currently doing that process, missing info he pulls from drawings, schematics and O&Ms. The important bit is the location and what, then layer on top.
CLIFF KNEALE I’ll say something about what Phil and Pierre have just said. This is a way of capturing a lot of information very quickly, so it can help building owners go from fuzzy to focused. The initial thing is what’s the location and then later on what exactly is it. and it takes a subject matter expert to come in and define that and pull the information from the project information that’s there. So, you can take hundreds of photographs in one day in 360, and what’s really good about it is that you can’t miss anything. You press the button and it’s a 360 sphere, so everything is there and it’s quite useful.
I’ll carry on with the presentation now. This equipment that we’re using to capture these photos comes in at under £500. If you offset that against a Lidar scanner which comes in at tens of thousands, with a licensing as well each year of a couple of thousand. This has no licensing agreement, you can just use it, go to site and take some photographs, which is what we’ve done here. What I did on this building, it’s down in Brighton, Bedford Towers, it’s got a hotel at the bottom and then it’s residential on top. When you escape you find yourself on this roof on the 6th floor. You can see there is no edge protection and there’s actual works going on there, so if you were running out of a fire you’d have to then run back in to a smoking building. But I didn’t, I carried on going.
There was no indication of where the exit was, but I had a little walk around and I found the exit over here. You’d have to go through a huge puddle to get to it. That also wasn’t shown on the PIB plans that were in the PIB box. So now going into the risers you can see photographs taken there, there’s a valve, you can open the doors and see what kind of equipment is in there. if you need a closer look to get some more information, you can take your iPhone or your Android and take some photographs. You can see quite clearly that that floor bat? 12mins 10secs has fallen through and you can see who serviced that equipment. What we typically do is we try and find some plans, but often they’re not available, but you might find some in the premises information box, which we did.
And then I used that digital tape measure just to take some key dimensions of the corridor. On the left hand side there’s unstructured PDF information which is human-readable. Then, we can put that into CAD, AutoCAD in this case, and that is now structured data, so all of that text and those camera locations are linked back to the digital model. One of the first steps is to gather the information, there we were in Bedford Towers in Brighton. You can see from this photograph, there’s a fire alarm panel there in the left had side. Then, in the middle you’ve got some resident information, there’s a QR code. I scanned that, it took me to the resident’s portal for information about their building, then there’s the break class. If you look on the right hand side, that’s the premises information box.
So, that can all be tagged up and again, that’s one photograph, we didn’t have to go round and try to remember what to take photographs of, you can’t miss anything, there’s even a smoke detector on the ceiling. Most recently with Paul Womack up in London at Eclipse House, Paul was kind enough to provide the gerda plans from the PIB. And we were scanning the building by taking the 360 photos and we noticed here that there was rubbish underneath the staircase, even though that sign that’s on the stringer of the stair does say please don’t dump anything here. It’s at eye level, you can’t miss that, so there’s a lot of stuff there that obviously could potentially catch fire. You can see on the right hand side there’s a television there, so that’s electrical equipment which can catch fire.
But more importantly, it does seem that the opening, as you get down that staircase on the right hand side there’s clearly an opening there, but that’s not shown on the premises information box plan. So, as it happens Paul was an ex-fireman and he was horrified to think that if you’re relying on that information going in to a smoking building to get people out and it’s clearly incorrect. Here again, the PDF in the middle is the plan that we found in the PIB. You can see that flat 5, the south of that is shown as one flat, but we looked in some of the documents that were provided a couple of days later and you could see on the left hand side the PDF of an AutoCAD drawing clearly shows three flats there. So, it’s quite a bit of a different scenario if you’re going into that building.
On the South elevation there are windows, so you wouldn’t know which flat you were putting your ladder up against, if you were going to evacuate somebody. You’d think you’re going into one flat, but suddenly you’d find yourself in a different flat, so that’s also quite misleading. So, we’re now at the Sky City development which is residential apartments, about 150, on top of a shopping centre, you can see them at the top of the photograph there. Paul is just taking some photos just to show that the 360 does actually work very well externally. We used the photographs taken to actually establish the height of the building because there was some discussion about how high the building was. So, just basically counted the bricks, we all know the dimension of a brick, so it was quite easy to establish how high the building was.
Here we’ve got a similar situation where it does seem that the information in the premises information box was incorrect. Because if you look at the photograph you’ll see straight ahead of you in the centre of the photograph there is a door and on the right hand side there is another door. But you’ll see on the PDF that’s shown there there’s only one door shown. Also, it does say that there is a dry riser main outlet and shows you where it is, but there’s nothing on that wall. if you can see where the lift is, there’s no dry riser outlet to the left of that lift, but there is one to the right, just below the escape ladder. So again, the 360 photographs are very, very useful to verify what’s on site.
We’ve taken these 360 photos and started to develop the golden thread by creating a spacial model in the database and putting those photo locations in, linking them to the images. And once you’ve done that you can then click on a door and put in the information that you have about the door. So, you probably know that that’s a 30 minute door or a 60 minute door. You might not know at this stage who manufactured it, who installed it, but all of that information can be added later by the teams that know about those things. We’ve got a fire fighting lift here, and then we’ve got a smoke shaft with the OAV which opens, the actuator has been tagged there. There’s also a button there to activate the OAV, which hasn’t been tagged, but it’s so easy to just go back and tag it later.
There’s a smoke detector being tagged, obviously you’ve got the emergency escape lighting as well and some signage. So, you can basically tag anything that you like. If you’ve got your own internal numbering system you can use that, or you could use any system that you like for numbering things. Here we’ve got a tag going on which says that this requires subject matter expert input. So, if you have some contractors available you could invite them in to the system and they could search for anything that’s got SME on it. And if they are the subject matter expert for that item and you’ve appointed them, they can just go in and tag it. And then you know it’s correct and, of course, they’ve taken responsibility for that as well because they are the experts in it.
RICHARD FREER I want to move on to democratising digital asset capture, Barry, take it away.
BARRY BASSNETT One of the things that we’d like to do in the coming weeks is you’ve seen the 360 imagery, we’d like to do a workshop on how you can use 360 imagery. So, there are three or four things, one is how do you get the base stuff? The other thing is how do you take good photographs? Because although they look good, there are things that happen when you’ve got bright sun coming in. There’s another thing about naming conventions, how do you organise all of these? Because you’re going to be taking lots and lots, so we want to do a workshop on how you fix that. And the third thing is also how we can geotag these? How can we locate where these are in space? So we can make life a lot quicker so you can auto-populate 360s into your plans, rather than having to manually place them.
The reason it’s so important, the reason we call it democratisation, although i’m not awfully sure I like that word, for me it says basically you’re all going to do it to the code we tell you to do but that’s something else, it’s because this is a continual job. The best way of doing this is you’re looking at things that change, you put new doors in, you put new windows in, new systems in, how do you document and keep these things up-to-date? The simple way is for people to be able to simply document things in 360, whether that’s the asset inspector or whether that’s the contractor giving evidence of work. So, what we’re planning to do is run a little workshop on using 360 imagery because we think this is the core to everything, not just the first bit, as-built.
And we’ve got this whole discussion about BIM new build, but 95% of the assets that we’re trying to document are pre-BIM. So, we don’t necessarily have all of this information, how can we get this and capture it? So, we’re planning to do one of the workshops on democratisation, basically how do you use a 360 camera properly, cost effectively and make it work for you. To do the workshop on the 13th is fine.
RICHARD FREER Anybody interested in joining that workshop, put your name in the chat with ‘360 workshop’ and we’ll get invites sent out to you.
BARRY BASSNETT I’ve been doing this for a long time, so I’ll be sharing some of the mistakes so that you don’t make them.
GEORGE STEVENSON There’s a lot of people already signed up for the digital asset capture group, so we’ll certainly be making you all aware of that. But there’s new people on this call now, so we want to make sure that everybody that wants to come on it is available.
GEORGE STEVENSON I’d like to bring in Paul Womack because Paul is the really experienced person on this. Paul, what is your take on how useful this is?
PAUL WOMACK To say it’s useful is an understatement, it’s a fantastic piece of kit, exceptionally useful. You’ve got the evidence of your fire doors, front entrance doors, electrical riser doors etc, you’ve then got the evidence of having got the intumescent smoke seals etc. And they always worry as a building safety manager when I was a fire risk assessor, is going back to the office and did I capture that photo, and with a 360 you can’t fail to capture it. One of the things that I have picked up on is that when I’m looking inside the various dark cabinets, I’ve actually brought myself a decent light and I can shine up and use the light, which emphasises the equipment more.
It’s also got the 360 video which allows you to take evidence of AOVs in use. The potential is really out there and it can go forward to fire brigades if they want to see inspections of properties, what evidence have you got that you’ve done an inspection? Here’s the 360 pictures, here’s a 360 video of the equipment working. It's very easy to use and the other thing I have purchased, no disrespect to George and the equipment he sent, I have bought a stabilised tripod. It’s a game changer, 100%.
PIERRE VENTER A quick one about the naming conventions, the only reason is for standardisation. So if you’re naming something, I’d like to see a standard that we can follow. it just makes it that if you’re sharing information between different parties it becomes a standard, and it just means that it’s clearly identifiable and that’s really the philosophy behind it. it needs to be clearly identifiable, which will help the ongoing process.
GEORGE STEVENSON We are following that, we’ve been working with the housing association teams to standardise that, so yes, absolutely.
NICHOLAS NISBET Just on the naming convention thing, could you say a bit more, George? Because I wouldn’t expect, when you’re doing these 360 surveys you don’t know what system it’s part of, you don’t know immediately what space or zone it’s part of and so on. So, how can you have a naming convention, other than what we’ve seen, which is valve 5?
PIERRE VENTER For me the important part would just be getting valve gate. So, getting that sequence makes the ability in the list to very simply say give me all of the valves and they type of valves etc. That’s the only reason why there would be some sort of standard.
GEORGE STEVENSON And we’ve got everything linked back to Uniclass as well. We’ve got 250 or so standard asset types that we developed with the HACT initiative, so we’re using that as the baseline. And as far as descriptions, which are all tied back into Uniclass. And at the moment all we’re doing is identifying that there is an AOV, an automatic opening vent, or something like that, so that’s the first level. But the beauty is, because you've got a 360 photo, you can keep revisiting it. You can keep going back and saying Ok, let\shave another look at that, let’s pull out maybe a schematic of how the thing is. So, it means it can be done progressively and incrementally.
RICHARD FREER OK, I want to move on to Das who leads the BIM3Housing design group.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ What I wanted to do is put a scenario together that we are looking at in the design group, which I think is pretty common for a lot of asset managers, local authorities etc. So, here is the scenario, and this is really a kind of call for help in terms of whether you’ve gone through something like this. What we have is, we’ve goat an HRB (high-risk building) in which the local authority doesn’t necessarily have control over all of the properties. But, they are looking to internally insulate for secondary glazing etc, to improve ultimately the EPC and meet the government and the national targets. So, that’s where it’s coming from.
And the works may only take 2 or 3 days, so when you’re going through looking at the Gateway process they, for example, say you’ve got to give a certain amount of notice before you start, then when you commence and then when you complete it. But in reality the works will be done very quickly. And the aim is to create the least amount of disruption to the residents in those buildings and therefore they want to be able to do the work when maybe the residents go on holiday for a week, and so not having to decamp them. And if you imagine you’ve got a tower block, there may be a certain number of apartments which are the same, i.e. and archetype. You may also then have replicates of that block or that tower, within an estate itself.
So what we’re trying to talk to with the Building Safety Regulator, I’ve just put the call out to them to get a strategic workshop arranged, is to see whether there is any way of generating some sort of archetype approach, or the building or buildings. Which clearly detail the system, the product specification etc along with detailed drawings. The 360 photographs is an interesting one because we have gone into the properties, taken photographs, it probably would have been better with 360. So, we are looking to generate detailed drawings, however if the window is 50 mil higher than another block, do we really need to draw it again is some of the questions we’re going to ask the Building Safety Regulator. But the reason for the archetype approach is because of the nature of when the local authority can go in. or maybe a housing association can go in and do the works, it’s not possible to just say we’re going to do this whole block and therefore we want to go through the Gateway process
So, that’s a bit of a high level summary of the scenario and I don’t think it’s uncommon, it’s probably quite typical for housing associations and local authorities. And clearly there is this particular local authorities, 147 HRBs, and you can imagine a multiple of that in terms of the actual homes that need to be done. So, the question really is has anyone gone through some sort of system or archetype approach like this? And has anyone gone through the experience of doing the works within this very short period of time? To avoid having to wait for weeks and weeks to get Gateway approval of every single flat every time that the works are done. I have reached out to the Building Safety Regulator and they’ve sent back some dates for a meeting, so i’ll keep everyone informed.
But we thought we’d just ask in the asset management team because you’ve been involved in doing works to improve the thermal performance, not really to do with necessarily re-cladding for fire reasons, but actually just about improving the performance of buildings themselves. So, that was really my request for information.
RICHARD FREER Neville Tomblin has put in the chat, are the authority looking to charge the leaseholders? If so, it would need a Section 20 process.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ I am not sure, I will ask. I think they’re looking to do it as just improvements to meet the targets of the owner of the buildings for EPCs etc.
GEORGE STEVENSON I think the principal question we’ve got is, is there a way that this can be done so that it becomes pre-approved works? It's almost like scheme works, but scheme works seems very limited now, to be able to have this quality assured as a solution so that you don’t have to wait to go through the Gateway process for something that is small.
KEVIN BAYLISS First of all, if they’re minor works and so on, I think you only check the regulations to say certain things are exempt, such as self certification. But there are minor works that are not part of that and doesn’t deemed part of that, if it is then within that, that was my first point. My second point would be at Wolverhampton we have a number of HRBs that we’re putting through various applications and things like that, where we’re doing that exact works where we are doing so many improvements and things like that. So, we start off at looking there, but then also most of the buildings are different types of archetypes, so we’ve branched all of the buildings into various archetypes. But unfortunately, which is probably the big you’re seeing, is the fact that actually trying to get access to all of those areas is quite difficult, you can only get into certain parts some of the time.
And you cannot survey every part of the building, just be trying to get access to those. And they do slightly differ, even if you’ve got the same archetypes, so that’s why it’s quite difficult. So, what we’ve been doing at the moment, we haven’t done some of the development that you’re talking about in terms of here is a complete, here’s an archetype, this is what we expect and this is what it should be. What we have been doing is doing enough survey work to identify it is actually typically we’ve done this amount of surveys around the building that gives us an idea of saying, actually, these are all similar. And in our proposals for the Gateway and all of that kind of stuff is saying this is what it is. Now, as part of that element, if it’s an HRB and you need to do a Gateway application, you then need to go and say I have to have a change control plan in place, you have to have that login for them.
What we try to do is to write to say in the construction and control plan and so on, is to say this is what we think it is from the information that we’ve got. And therefore if we have a scenario that it is not this, this is how we’ll apply to it. And then equally, we then obviously go if there’s a change control, identifying the risks to the client to say we can’t get into all of these areas, and these need to be done. But if we find something on site, that specific one if it’s different, we will then have to consider will that have to happen as part of a change, and there is a risk there. That’s effectively where we’ve got to at the moment. I think you might want to see where there’s an exclusion if it’s just simple maintenance work or some improvement, but the envelope is a difficult one if it’s envelope.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ Yeah, thank you Kevin, and that is the thing because the works are purely to do with the envelope, the internal face of the external wall buildup. Sometimes they’re also listed, so that adds another complication in terms of the works having to be done on the inside. I did reach out to the BBA in terms of, George, you mentioned whether there is an accredited scheme, accreditation for installers/the particular products that we’re looking to use. So, I’m waiting for feedback on that, because that would then eliminate the need to go through the Gateway process.
So, I will keep you informed because it was quite good actually, there’s a particular email address and a particular subject heading that you can send to the Building Safety Regulator, I’ll share it on the chat. And they actually did reply within a day. I’ll be meeting them at the end of this week or next week, so I’ll keep everyone informed on that through the group.
GEORGE STEVENSON Does anybody else have any practical experience of this? Is anybody else doing it? (There is no response). That’s interesting.
RICHARD FREER Does that mean nobody else is doing it? or nobody wants to speak?
PIERRE VENTER Sometimes just piecemeal parts, and that’s what I see the building blocks, so little bits and pieces towards it.
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, I was talking with Steve Copping who’s a Building Safety Regulator expert in all of these sorts of things. And he was with a collection of communications companies, so they are ones that put antennas and things like that on buildings. And they’ve been caught up in the whole BSR route. They’re putting aerials and things like that on an HRB and it takes them about two days, and at the moment they appear to have to apply to the Regulator for approval. Which is obviously then clogging up the system, to say the least.
The point about scheme work is I was at a Devonshire’s event in September and there was a discussion about scheme work. And one of the schemes that are listed like for doors and things like that, none of them are approved because the approving organisations themselves don’t want to take that commitment. I think it’s very confusing.
VICTORIA FINN Really I was just going to say the same before as mentioned, the accredited schemes don’t want to take on that sign-off. There’s a lot of discussion going on with all RPs about what is Category A work and what is Category B work. And therefore both of those have to fo through the Regulator now for Building Control. And basically, from what we can see and gather a number of groups together, it’s everything other than emergency works. And again, what are emergency works? And doors, of course, is one of the big ones for the RPs because they’re regularly kicked in by the Police and we’re having to do one off renewals.
Of course, we’re saying at the moment the repairs that we do, they’re probably emergency work, but the actual renewal of the door, is that classed as emergency work, or not? So, as George alluded to, I’m just thinking if this has got legs really, this could go quite wide and we could start considering we’re renewing wholesale replacement assets in kitchens and what have you, you could really say that falls into Category B works as well.
KEVIN BAYLISS In response to that, it’s quite an undertaking that people that are managing these properties really need to be aware of because there is a whole competency piece that needs assessment. The accountable person, and then if you start going to HRBs you’ve got a golden thread that needs to be maintained and put together. So, it seems a very small piece of work but people need to be aware that there’s significant implications if you do go in those categories. And probably a lot of training for people to really get up to speed on it as well.
RICHARD BACON We’ve been having a bit of a question of is like-for-like replacement in need of regulatory approval because you are doing a like-for-like. I.e. the fire door that you’ve mentioned, Victoria, you should be able to just maybe do the fire door without having to seek any approval. But, when we get to the end of that discussion, I will let you know. George, has anyone been invited from the Regulator for these meetings?
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, they’re very careful of that. I’ve got a meeting tomorrow with the Building Control people and they sometimes come to these meetings. And effectively they’re the ones that often are working for the Regulator. So, I’m going to pose Das’ question to them when we meet tomorrow.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ I’m just going to share in the chat the Miro board that we’ve created in the design working group for trying to navigate through whether a building that you’re working on, new or existing, is an HRB, and the workflow diagram. However, we’re also looking to create ones for existing buildings to try and pick up some of these key scenarios. That’s going to be something that’s going to happen in the future. But, I’m just going to share the Miro and the password, please comment if there is something we’re having wrong, we want to make sure that it’s accurate, based on people’s experience.
RICHARD FREER Moving swiftly on, we have digital handover and templates and that is George and Paul Oakley.
GEORGE STEVENSON (shares screen). What we’re trying to do here is address the overwhelming number of different things that everybody has got to be complying with, so the Building Safety Act. A lot of things that you think you don’t need to do are covered by the Fire Safety Act. There’s also the Defective Premises Act, and then we’ve got ESG as well, so therefore the handover information overall is critical. But what we’ve been doing is looking at one particular area which is not being done properly at all and that’s Regulation 38. But now, certainly for HRBs, there’s a legal requirement for landlords to sign the declaration that they’ve received all of the information that they need and also for the contractor to declare that they’ve provided all of the information that they need.
For example, I was talking with one large housing association last week and they’re saying that they’re just not going to sign this. Which I understand that it’s now a legal requirement, so I don’t know how we move forward with that. And part of the way of doing that is to be able to much more easily identify which are the key assets that have got to be identified. For example, fire dampers, do we have records of fire dampers? And part of the process that we’re trying to get to is a situation where the handover information typically may be complete, but it’s in BIM models, CAD drawings, O&Ms and therefore it’s really difficult to find anything. So, what we’re trying to do is bring those together into something that is then more structured and can then be managed more easily.
And to an extent, people think that that’s going to come through from models, and probably 80% of it will, but we’ve also got to take account of technical submittals. Those are often things that don’t get modelled, and also the digital asset capture is a mechanism to do that. So, that’s broadly where we’re going with this and what we want to do is to make it easier for landlords to be able to identify, from the handover information that they’ve received, what’s missing. So, our goal with this is to try, as far as possible, to automate a lot of this work so that we can make all of those items there green. This is a real job that we ended up identifying. I’m going to hand over to Paul Oakley.
PAUL OAKLEY (shares screen). We had a workshop on digital handover and one of the things in discussion in the back of all of our minds was the golden thread requirements. But we’re trying to standardise the O&M manuals and we’ve done some work on that. And George particularly pushed that we really needed to basically produce a standardised folder structure and we’d had discussions with the HSE about this is terms of to standardise following the principles set out in their documentation. But actually what we realised is that we weren’t really looking about folder structure, we were really looking about what’s the sort of standardised list of contents that should be made available.
But then when we start talking about that, it’s not just documents, actually we’re really talking about how we deliver information. Is it delivered as a document? Or as data? Or a mixture of data and documents? So, we’ve got a group that George is shortly going to be sending out a copy of this schedule that we’ve produced. We’ve identified that there is content, which is still up for discussion. Against each of those we need to identify whether that should be generally provided as a document, or it’s data, or both a document and data. We’re also linking things with a COBie element because we also need to know what that information is provided against. So, is it a document against a facility, or is it data against a specific item, component etc?
So, we set the spreadsheet out and we pick lists which allows people to actually identify what they think things should be against a facility space and all of the standard COBie things there. Then we were looking at documents, we’ve also set out the Uniclass classification of those so you can actually then identify what classification of documents should be provided to meet those delivery requirements And if there is a standard type in terms of how that should be done, that can be done there. Or if it is data, so things like the standard COBie data, it is a contact under COBie, so basically you can use the standard CObie properties in terms of the name space, the schema and the property to actually deliver that. or if it’s something like IFC or whatever, you can identify those as standard parameters that you can be getting out as attributes etc.
GEORGE STEVENSON One of the biggest challenges that we found when we were doing the research on this is that what typically is being delivered is information that’s structured by work package. Because that’s the way that it’s straightforward for main contractors to collect the information. But the challenge is for asset managers, and that’s why we’re so keen o getting your input to this, is that you tend to work on things by a system, or groups of items which may actually go across different work packages. Because you wouldn’t necessarily know in 5 years’ time which work package something was in. So, the purpose of this is to make it so that we can hold multiple ways of slicing and dicing the information, so that’s part of the process here.
PAUL OAKLEY That sort of stuff, again, we covered in the workshop earlier on, but these are the fundamental changes in the outcomes from what we discussed last time. The other are was about PTSs, product technical submissions or different specifications, depending on who you work with. And we talked about how we’d been working with the likes of Bouygues and Product Library and the process we put into place in terms of the main contractors and how we were working. Because generally the PTSs are normally produced by the specialist subcontractors and we deal with stuff there with Active Plan in terms of how things are going. But actually, the requirements under the Golden Thread in that process is basically there really needs to be a record, whoever is the designer.
Now, the designer is no longer just the architect, the client could actually be identified as the designer if they’ve defined a particular thing, the QS could be. So, whoever actually puts together the requirement for the products and puts that in would be classed as the designer. So, you may get a requirement to use a particular product that’s coming from a client. And at the moment the PTS process is coming in at the construction stage, but actually the whole requirement about why that product was chosen is much earlier on, possibly from the client or from the consultant designers early on, as well as specialists on the construction side. So, what we really need to do is look at capturing at the early stages the same PTS process in terms of why were particular products identified and map there.
And deal with that in terms of the designer’s process in terms of decision making that they’ve done to capture their requirements and things there. Now, obviously that builds in to the likes of the standard COBie requirements, so if things are actually put into BIM models we can get the types and the IDs, where things are. Things like location can be generic, but there are things that are in kitchens, things that are in bathrooms etc. If they’re attached to systems or circuits, those sorts of things can be picked up as general design stuff and that then later on, that information then feeds in to support the specialist subcontractor who’s actually then choosing the actual product to be used on the site as part of the PTS process under the construction side.
So, we’re trying to basically fill through that whole process, so then actually when we get to the point of doing things like comparisons between the generic design products which was identified by either the client, designer, QS or whoever, there is a record of that and their requirements of why that particular thing was chosen. And then actually the decision making against the actual products put forward by the subcontractors, we can support that process.
KEVIN BAYLISS It was an earlier point about the HRB and a point on what Paul was just making. So, if you’re on an HRB, for example, Regulation 38, it’s the fact that the Gateway process, if you don’t accept it I don’t think you’ll get through Gateway 3. And therefore technically, if it was a new building, you wouldn’t be able to occupy it anyway. So, people do need to request that and assess that for Regulation 38. And then on what Paul was saying, if you’re talking about HRBs and Golden Thread, there is a requirement for HRBs legally. At Wolverhampton we are having contractors in putting submissions together, looking at that way before we get to a Gateway, we call it RIBA stage 3…that’s through the design, it could be a subcontractor, it could be supply, it could be who has that responsibility.
So this stuff that we’re talking about here, because the problem with HRBs is that when you get to Stage 4 or Gateway 2 submission there is a change control element which rules will identify that for your changing control for everything. And anything different that you might design onsite for your technical subs, for example, that’s different and you have to really justify why and all of the research behind it. But that doesn’t come in place until technically that Gateway, so before then you have to have some mechanism, like in the design stages even to say actually, this is why we chose to do this, have we got a decision why that’s been made. So this kind of thing is really useful at those earlier stages as well.
NICHOLAS NISBET I’d just like to point the group to ? 92 Part 6 and now its replacement ISO 19650-6 which says start with the risk register and then identify the products and activities and locations that trigger those risks. And that gives you a priority for what you need to document and the information that may be available as it comes in. There’s no point in, dare I say it, documenting the product information, I was going to say door handles, but I know that some people will object to that. But there are aspects of the building where there may be product data available, but it’s not related to any substantive risks, so why are we including it? Or prioritising it?
And I think it’s starting with the schedule of risks that really allows you to structure both the data and the documents that you require going forward. Now, I think that’s a different view to most asset management systems, unless they’re very reactive, but it’s actually the most efficient way.
GEORGE STEVENSON I’ve not come across an asset management system that records door handles. Principally, what people are normally focused at is the items that are statutory and also are operationally critical. That’s not to say that they don’t bother with other things, Richard is in a much better position to answer this than me, but that’s often informed, quite correctly as you say, by risk.
RICHARD FREER We’ll move on and hear from the Golden Thread workstream.
GEORGE STEVENSON (shares screen). What we’re looking for are examples of projects where the process has gone through from the early stage of specification, into product selection, through the design and construction process and in to asset management. So, this example here, it’s the one that JJ Rattigans have been doing, so I’ll show this. This is in relation to fire dampers, for example. In this particular case the fire dampers have been modelled, but they’re not easy to find in the model itself. So, what you’re able to do is to see the schedule of fire dampers and then when you’re in there you can connect it back to the manufacturer’s product information. And that’s manufacturer’s product information can come through from the manufacturer’s data themselves, either as machine-readable information (or not). And we’ve then got a simple asset manager’s view of the location of that fire damper.
And then what we’ve now got is the asset list there, but we’ve also got it tied back in to the Open Space model. They use Open Space as their reality capture tool to be able to do that, and it can then connect back to the information that the asset team need, including commissioning information documents. So, the principle here is that you’ve therefore got that interconnected Golden Thread of both data and documents in a way that’s simple to navigate. And also from that point of view it means that it’s a lot easier to keep up-to-date. So, that’s one aspect of the golden thread process. We’ve got a Golden Thread group, which quite a few people have signed up for, so we’d like more examples from that group as to these type of joined up solutions. We want to really learn from this to see where we can grow.
I’m handing over to Paul Sheedy because Paul has got an example of how the models and the data that we’re collecting in this way can then be applied, in quite an interesting way, around fire protection.
PAUL SHEEDY Just to give you a bit of background, the unified core piece about occupancy of buildings and the real time evacuation of people through mainly high-rise buildings here. What we did, a couple of years ago we got involved with a company in Singapore that had taken the data points on the fire solutions to a new level. They deployed this technology across 14,000 buildings now in the Far East and haven’t gone outside of the Far East. And when they were made aware of our technology in evacuation, they pretty much wanted to add that in on top of where they go. The whole position that we’ve taken on this is going off the back of what they’ve achieved over there, they’ve been working with pretty much 3 of the biggest insurance companies in the Far East, Ping A, pacific and CIPC.
What’s allowing them to accelerate the business to the extent that they’ve gone to now is that feeding the data on the health of that building straight into the insurance company. And what we’ve done over the last coupe of years is taken the Building Regulations 2010, the Fire Safety Act of 2021 and benchmarked all of these against how well the buildings were performing in real time. And what we're allowed to do is we build a different one of the building, we put in there exactly all of the fire sensors that are in the building are located and digitalised, But on top of everything else, the joint approach that we’ve taken on this is also to make the digital alive. What was your occupancy in real time all of the time? When are you going over your limits etc? Which we have in a number of buildings already.
So, a number of buildings that we have in the Uk, when they reach maximum occupancy rate, we’re alerting the staff that you’ve now got close to or have breached your amounts. What it’s allowing is to do is to now work with the insurance sector and say loo, if you have your finger on the pulse of this building that you’ve insured today, we can send the data enabling you to know that you have actually nailed it correctly, then why wouldn’t you bring the insurance premiums down by around 15%. By having the evacuation technology and enabling the building management and the fire service when they turn up to a building, to see that x-ray of the building and know how the fire is spreading as well. The key thing is when we get an alert you’ll go off and send somebody to see where that alert has gone off.
If it is a real fire, it’s then monitoring how the fire is going to start spreading, where the smoke is going to start spreading and we then form how to evacuate the building. It’s completely digitalised, I have to say that it’s blown me away. And here is where you go into your regulations, you click on the fire hydrants and it will tell you exactly when it needs to be next updated, what the last results are, which BS standard is it actually relating to and the whole log is digitalised. What it’s led to over there is a 77% reduction in fire incidents in the first place, a 30% increase in the fire management efficiencies of buildings and a 50% increase in the emergency response to issues going wrong because you’re seeing that digitalisation of the building and what’s happening in real time.
As you can see here, when you go to the project management it allows you and alerts you to what is about to come up, what needs to be now tested on the schedules. And you have a complete digital string of data on how the building is performing. What we’re doing is putting a lot of sensors on everything from the pump room to the water tank and everything else in between and reading for you how well you’re actually running that building. The team are over here from the Far East, so I said to George let’s do a quick few minutes on it to illustrate to you just how well this has been developed over there and why we need this over here and they can have mine over there.
It’s a really common sense way of doing this and we’re deploying two major buildings in London in the next few weeks, we’re fulfilling that completely for free. Quite iconic buildings, that will allow the UK market to understand how this is doing and getting the insurance sector fully involved. I hope to get to the point where the premiums drop so low that it actually pays for itself, that’s our focus right now.
GEORGE STEVENSON That’s brilliant, thank you. The thing really here, there is obviously many different ways that we can use digital machine-addressable asset information in buildings, which is obviously what we’re all trying to achieve. And I think this is a fantastic way of implementing that, but I’d like everybody’s view.
KEVIN BAYLISS I just wondered whether, you know BS8644 where it has specific digital that came from Grenfell. In terms of the digital representation of things like various layers of different drawings, for example, which will obviously only be at handover and so on. Would this export it in that level so that you’ve got an element of that specific fit and time, or were you expecting everybody to be going into the model to have a look at that, from that point of view?
GEORGE STEVENSON I think the principle of that is, as Active Plan or as other people, you’d probably manage that in your asset information model which is the granular bit. This is really looking at a specific data set that is performing a function.
KEVIN BAYLISS OK, so this would be like assessing the data that you’ve got and then being very proactive in saying look, actually, as a monitoring process to say you really you’ve actually gone past a certain level, or actually you’re not compliant anymore and so on. Yeah, that’s great.
PAUL SHEEDY It’s really the ones who are running the buildings correctly, they’re going to see the benefit of this, Those who are not going to be running the building correctly will not want to be getting involved with insurance companies. My whole view is the building that we’re seeing later this week, we know they lost 300 million in valuation last year. We’re trying to say if you start getting your building to be really intelligent, once your asset value will be increased on top of that and as well as lowering your premiums and reducing your workload as well.
GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, it’s very much an operational application, rather than a construction application, I would say.
PAUL WOMACK Sorry, this is a strange one. I was dealing with insurance companies a while ago and there’s certain things that, I’ll put it this way, they like fires. Insurance companies like fires to encourage you people to take out more insurance, which seems a bit daft. So rather where we’re trying to lower the premiums, the insurance companies would rather have fires to raise the premiums. That was a few years ago, hopefully that’s changed.
BERNARD HORNUNG My experience has been the polar opposite of that. We’ve been invited to introduce our technology into Lloyd’s lab. Because they absolutely value what Paul has spoken about and they want to increase building performance evaluation in real time. And they want to ensure that we all know much more about how buildings actually perform. And they really do actually want to reduce loses. So, my own experience is that something clearly has changed in the last four years and certainly Lloyd’s of London are looking to reduce risk. I work with Coltraco Ultrasonics and we are scientific instrument makers. You can look us up at https://coltraco.com/
KEVIN BAYLISS I’m just thinking about, because obviously from your asset model is where all of your data comes from. So, once you’ve got that process and it’s analysing that data and does that data then talk back to the data within your asset model to give that kind of element? Or is it just a standalone? Because obviously you’ve still got to manage that data within the ongoing elements of your asset systems, so those things that are coming out of that. is it talking regularly to the latest data that’s in your asset management system? Or do you just, rather than having a separate model, does it base some information from that data? Or is it stuff that you have to keep on updating all the time?
PAUL SHEEDY The data is in real time, looking at all the sensor data that we have in the building and feeding straight back. We’re taking into account all of the regulations that happened and they’ve been put into the system and updated constantly. What you’re left with is that digital report back which is illustrating to you exactly what the building has performed and is performing in real time. And what hasn’t got done correctly, it’s highlighting who in the organisation hasn’t done what they should have done and when.
KEVIN BAYLISS So when that then comes through, that’s for the asset managers and so on within their systems to have a look at that. And then look at that data, put that into their system, have a look at that and then deal with what they need to deal with.
PAUL SHEEDY It’s not for the bad actors, it’s for the ones who actually want to take it seriously.
PAUL WOMACK So, one of the other uses of the data system and everything else which Paul was going through is that it allows you to cost for when the parts need replacing etc. So, if you’ve got a lifespan you know when it’s coming up for renewal and you know potential costs which help all the bean counters.
PAUL SHEEDY I think this is exactly where Active Plan, there is a link in here. We can start looking historically at what’s happening in certain buildings and having that data pushed through.
RICHARD FREER If anybody wants to join the digital asset capture work stream, put DAC in the chat. If you want to join the digital handover workstream put digital handover in the chat and if you want to join the Golden Thread work stream, just put golden in the chat.
GEORGE STEVENSON The other working group that we’ve got is for PFI. Now, PFI is clearly a very specialist area as far as asset management is concerned, you’re only interested in it if you’re involved in a PFI contract in some way. But it has some particular scrutiny and some challenges. We have a good workshop a couple of weeks ago, Matt Wilkie has been leading that for us and one of the things that came out of that. What we’re trying to do is look at where there are things that are common across lots of PFI projects that could be addressed. And there’s a particular information set which is a major bind to every PFI contractor. It's the room data sheets, because it’s a contactual requirement for them to keep them up-to-date.
And if they don’t keep them up-to-date they can face serious penalties. Part of the difficult is that that information is typically historic and it’s actually quite difficult to keep up-to-date. So, what we’ve got is out of the PFI working group about 20 people have said that they’re interested in participating in finding better ways of managing room data. In the healthcare sector that’s called ADB, the activity database which was originally developed by the NHS. So if anybody is interested in room data sheets or getting involved in that side of things, if you put your name in the chat we’ll come back to you.
PIERRE VENTER George, I had a look at the ADB data and it’s very interesting because in my opinion the room data sheets are critical to absolutely every single project type, not just the PFI. But I did share with you the document that popped up on that same day which was about the school that is now failing. And I think as a tax payer a really important facet of that is that that asset is going to be handed over when the end of this PFI contract period comes to and end. And it is going to be unfit for the purpose it was intended, which is a teaching space for children to grow up in.
So, I do think that the room data sheets are not unmanageable, they could be managed entirely as an external source of data connected to the actual model. So, there is no real problem there, but what was nice about the ADB system is the fact that you actually have the 3D component model which you can effectively go and drop in to a new project. So, it’s a bigger picture than just the fact that there is a database to manage it. That’s just my opinion on looking at some of the stuff.
GEORGE STEVENSON The only thing I would say is that 90% of the buildings are already built, so there’s no 3D, there’s no models, they’re typically PDFs and, in some cases, scanned PDFs. So, they are quite challenging to deal with.
MARK PILE I’m currently working with the Nottingham County Council on a couple of PFI schools and what you need to add to that mix as well, besides the room schedule data sheets, is you’ve got a myriad in a minefield of commercials behind it. And the biggest problem that I’m finding, not just with this but with my previous role at Crawley Schools, is that your SPV and your service provider tend to hide behind that commercial as long as they possibly can. So, I agree, but there is also a percentage of the commercial intricacy behind it and they will use it to their advantage.
PIERRE VENTER I think, Mark, it epitomises exactly this. In connection with what George has just said they are very poor records. However, there are digital methods now to go and generate information from PDF, from DWGs etc and they’re not unrealisable. But particularly in an asset that is owned by the tax payer and the commercial side there, Mark, is it’s exactly the amount of hiding behind businesses, it’s my concern and opinion, is something that really needs to be brought to the front. Before you start having that very good solid record that you can actually start meeting and measuring the actual performance of the contract that they’re signing up for, which I think is a bit of BS at the moment.
GEORGE STEVENSON We’ve got a workshop on the 7th looking at impact. What impact is, is looking at what the financial or commercial impact of missing information is. So, if you’re interested in that, and quite frankly I think everybody on this call is going to have experience of maybe things being out of commission or whatever, and what the financial impact is of that. It might be useful for you to attend that on the 7th. So, if you’re interested in the practical manifestation of missing information, for example, we’ll get in touch and send you an invite to that workshop.
RICHARD BACON The PFI bit, we’ve got some very complicated situations with some instances of room data sheets. I dare say there is financial impact coming at some of the discussions that are taking place, but we’ve got the complete opposite side of that. I’ve got two Trusts that we’ve got PFI buildings in at the minute and actually the Trust are fighting against us getting room data sheets accurate. Because the rooms have been changed beyond description of what they were designed for i.e.an office with 2 desks is now an office with 6 desks.
The reasoning behind the Trust not wanting us to actually keep the room data sheets accurate is it actually could fuel their? 1hr 24mins 53sec argument of we’ve got a plant that’s running much harder than it ever should because they’re trying to feed areas that have got far more people in than they should. So, although yes, there is a financial implication to that, actually it’s far more about people needing to use their building as it was designed for in the first place. So, not all of the discussions that go on around room data sheets are necessarily about a PFI provider trying to save money. And I’ve also been in past company, I’ve been in PFI for 25 years now…
I’ve took over buildings that were already there, a building completely existed and retained the state where there was a PFI built bit, that accurate information and I retained the state that we were expected to look after where there was no information given at all. Like a place that’s falling apart and it’s been an ongoing battle to get accurate records and everything else in place to be able to suitably look after that. Because all of it needs handing back as an entire entity at the end of the project. So, there’s lots of different bits and pieces with PFI.
RICHARD FREER Salt, do you want to make your comment?
SALT WILMINGTON It was just a comment around the whole building control application and when it is and isn’t required. It was around the comment made about the doors and replacing like-for-like. The Building Regulations 2010 Section 3 are very clear on when Building Control is required. The wording around it is building works is, I believe, a fire door being changed like-for-like would become a material alteration of a building. An alteration is material for the purposes of the Building Regulations 2010 if the work, and I think this is the key point, or any part of it would at any stage result in a building or controlled service or fitting not complying with the relevant requirement, where previously it did. And it’s that ‘would at any stage’.
So, fire doors and such like are not controlled services or fittings, they don’t fall into that category, but they do fall into the category of a relevant requirement. And the relevant requirement applicable for the fire doors is B1 of Approved Document B, so there is no way round it. If your’e going to replace a fire door, even if it’s a single door, then you need to go through that Building Control approval. This has been in place since 2010, so since these regulations came in, it’s not new, i’s just now being more rigorously enforced now the Health & Safety Executive are involved. So, the high-risk buildings procedures England Regulations 2023, so the Regulation 10 on emergency works, Regulation 12 for planned works, you’ve got to follow that process, there is no way around it.
And I did ask the Regulator the question, I actually emailed them directly and asked them outright. And they came back very unequivocally as if you’re replacing the fire door it needs to be approved. And that would fall into Category A works which makes it very difficult to ever replace a fire door, unless it’s an emergency.
BERNARD HORNUNG Salt, does that include remediating a fire door? For example, we have a lot of customers now that are using our device to quantify air loss through a fire door. And then they get hold of somebody, for example, like Lorient who send an approved installer. And that approved installer looks at the significant air leaks and addresses that by applying the relevant seals. So the fire door is not actually being replaced, but there are circumstances where sometimes the fire door in question has to be taken off of its hinges for a drop down seal to be routed in and fit at the bottom of it. So, would that process have to be referred to the Building Regulator?
SALT WILMINGTON This is a debate we have quite often. The opinion we’ve kind of gone with, so this is where we are at the moment, we are looking for some legal advice on this at the moment. If the repair doesn’t involve the door being removed, then we kind of go ahead with it. Whereas if you need to remove the door to do the repair then it’s no different than replacing the door because that door is out. If you take the regulation as written, then I believe even if you’re replacing the intumescent strip, so you’re making that door not compliant to a regulation, even though it’s for a short period of time.
And it’s getting a determination as to what you feel satisfies that and getting that documented before you do the work. So, if you’re not going to go for Building Control approval and you feel that the work doesn’t warrant it, you probably want to get a statement prepared prior to doing the work, to at least show that it had been considered and just not ignored.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ Just on that topic, I guess the issue of adding something or taking away something from a door then brings the whole thing about well, dos it change the certification that it would have already had for a fire door? Because as soon as you start to add or remove things from a certified door set, frame, leaf, ironmongery, then theoretically it may make that not certified in terms of it being a fire door. So, that’s also another nuance to think about.
SALT WILMINGTON You wouldn’t be adding anything or taking anything away from a door that wasn’t within the test parameters of that certificate.
ANDREW DE SILVA ‘DAS’ No, but you’re putting in a drop seal, if you’re routing the bottom and you’re putting something in then you’re materially changing that door. Then I think someone could argue that, well, you’ve change it now.
BERNARD HORNUNG If I could just quickly elaborate, the situation here is the conduct of the fast door smoke test whereby the threshold gap, the letter plate are taped up during the conduct of that actual test. And obviously this has now got to change and that’s why we’re in the 5 year transition period. So, what people are sensibly doing, rather than replacing entire flat entrance doors and fire doors, they are quantifying air loss through the fire door and they are remediating what’s at fault. So, they are improving the performance of that fire door and they are certainly changing it.
SALT WILMINGTON But are they fitting something that is within the original test parameter and certification that you have for that door? Because if what they're doing is not within that that test parameter…
CHAT
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:11 am
Currently doing that process, missing info I pull from drawings, schematics and O+Ms. The important bit is location and what, then layer on top.
Chris Milling (Unverified) Yesterday 11:12 am
In any of these cases, who looks after the captured data so it can be leveraged in future. No point putting it into a spreadsheet.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:14 am
You put into a spreadsheet to allow manipulation, as a client may not even know naming terminology or standards they want at the start of a survey. Being able to manipulate is important. Can go into a database, but depends on handover if data gatherer or whole solution.
Ruben Romero Vivancos (External) Yesterday 11:15 am
hello George Stevenson did you mention that artificial intelligence identifies the assets (products maintainable) correctly from a camera 360 scan or point cloud data?
Chris Milling (Unverified) Yesterday 11:16 am
I just don't tend to hear any conversations around what you capture and a strategy for storing and using i.e. when parts get swapped out for whatever reason
Ganderton, Nicholas (External) Yesterday 11:16 am
We are using 360 cameras for Building / Condition surveys as well as during Construction as it forms a very useful record of where service runs are once the plasterboard has been applied to internal walls etc.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:16 am
Change management is a separate entity, once into a CAFM should be managed there. Often not, hence regular surveys become important
Mustafa Shaikh (External) Yesterday 11:17 am
Are we talking about reverse engineering?
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 11:17 am
This strategy / process should start from your SAMP.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:20 am
100% but often businesses see a SAMP as something for putting into a folder and forgetting.
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 11:21 am
Agreed Matt, but if they are ISO55000 Complaint, shouldn’t be. And a member of IAM
Chris Bicknell (External)
…but they still do in practice
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:23 am
Corporate member.
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 11:23 am
Agreed
Stewart Bailey (External) Yesterday 11:25 am
I'll be at MIPIM
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 11:25 am
Barry how does the 360 degree modelling tie into the Digital Twin Modelling
Soheila X Moradi (VIDA) (External) Yesterday 11:31 am
Components/ element naming convention can be done
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:31 am
If linked back can pull in O+M info
Chana King (External) Yesterday 11:31 am
Pierre Venter & George Stevenson - I am new to this group. Is it possible to get a copy of the 250 descriptions. I am working on a project at the moment and this will help build my understanding.
Kevin Clinton (External) Yesterday 11:32 am
Thank you i am away 8th-15th so guess i will miss it but, if it is an ongoing workshop please add me to the invite
Neville Tomblin (External) Yesterday 11:33 am
Are the authority looking to charge the leaseholders? If so it would need a section 20 process
P T Andrew de Silva (External) Yesterday 11:41 am
To: HRB-OPS-Policy <HRB-ops-policy@hse.gov.uk> Subject: BCA application strategy for complex project
Neville Tomblin (External) Yesterday 11:42 am
We have submitted a number of Gateway 2 applications but specifically related to fire safety work
Kevin Clinton (External) Yesterday 11:45 am
We are in the process of putting together a BSR submission for a new roof covering. Some quite big manufactures and smaller contractors have been difficult to get to complete competency letters. I think people are scared of it.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:48 am
Also multi tier subbing is a risk.
Chris Milling (Unverified) Yesterday 11:53 am
Arh. Data and Documents! and/or both
Bayliss, Kevin (Unverified) Yesterday 11:57 am
It must be noted that you need the reg 38 declaration of handover material for Gateway 3 on HRBs, so there will be no choice to accept it if your happy with it if they want to get it through gateways.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 11:57 am
Assume this could blend with project management and money for value, in a replacement cycle.
Rachel Heaton (External) Yesterday 11:57 am
Perfect Paul - Unique Identifier - GS1 Standards
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 11:59 am
Agree Matt to be confirmed at the Concept stage of Project Management, I would think?
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 12:00 pm
Thinking out loud as it should drop into change management for the building.
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 12:00 pm
Agreed Matt
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 12:03 pm
Door handles should be part of the door schedule
Nicholas Nisbet (External) Yesterday 12:08 pm
But product data sheets for door handles is not a priority.
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 12:08 pm
Correct, was just saying where the info would likely be.
Boardman, Daniel (Unverified) Yesterday 12:09 pm
I'm in the process of having a HRB scanned for BIM of a occupied building and collecting all the data because of absence of asset management data to assist with the Building Safety Case Reports. I would be interested in joining the golden thread group to see if there is a best practice for file structure
Paul Womack (External) Yesterday 12:09 pm
The caveat to that would be Unless they are fitted to fire doors
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 12:09 pm
Fantastic piece of Software
Matt Wilkie (External) Yesterday 12:10 pm
Agree, but same schedule confirms your firedoors.
Karen Ostler (External) Yesterday 12:11 pm
This is incredible Paul. Thank you.
Kevin Clinton (External) Yesterday 12:11 pm
What is meant by an abnormal device
Ruben Romero Vivancos (External) Yesterday 12:12 pm
3d viewer is shit for large models
Paul Smith (psm@fairhursts.com) (External) Yesterday 12:12 pm
looks very impressive. interested in how it monitors numbers of occupants? is this via cameras/sensors at entrances and exits?
Pierre Venter (External) Yesterday 12:13 pm
The issue is that the granularity should be to the highest level, with a drill-down potential. Key point is if the data is owned, managed and audited, or don't do it. Treat all components as assemblies, Door = Doorset, Leaf, Frameset, Ironmongery. One classification + Elem classifications
Kevin Clinton (External) Yesterday 12:15 pm
Does having a system like this reduce insurance premiums
Chris Milling (Unverified) Yesterday 12:16 pm
I think this is great. You can focus on grouping parts/elements that would be involved with Firefighting. Knowing how to group anything is wonderful
Gordon Pringle (External) Yesterday 12:21 pm
Any proactive monitoring process will or should display the good the bad and the ugly systems and allow clients and service providers to focus on lifecycle CAFM and CAAM.
Mark Pile (Unverified) Yesterday 12:23 pm
Correct paper format and very little CAD Drawings
Bernard Hornung (Unverified) Yesterday 12:27 pm
I am interested in room data sheets from the point of view of air leakage and airtightness testing, and the risks of carbon monoxide poisoning resulting from the incomplete products of combustion. Acoustic and thermal containment is our area of expertise as is quantifying air loss through fire doors and flat entrance doors, and testing the integrity of compartmentation.
Pierre Venter (External) Yesterday 12:28 pm
Mark, it would be good to have a quick chat, to look at some ways to address the commercial responsibilities. IMO
Chris Milling (Unverified) Yesterday 12:29 pm
It is difficult to collect data and get it right first time (particularly if little thought is given to where to store it to access). That said more thought needs to be given to how to correct data when you see it is incorrect
Adey Badmos (External) Yesterday 12:29 pm
Did anyone manage to access past slides?
George Stevenson (External) Yesterday 05:11 pm
we are training our LLM to be able to do that, but it needs a lot of training data and so far we have only done 100,000 assets. In the meantime, we are making it MUCH faster for surveyors to do the asset identification - and therefore encourage them to use it (and create more training data