Today’s facility planning and analysis processes can not predict or evaluate facility results in terms that interest the owner and occupant.
Building Catalyst solves this dilemma through its Systems Approach to BIM. This BIM approach goes far beyond current form-based BIM to that envisioned by the buildingSMARTalliance and National BIM Standard, “A BIM is a digital representation of a facility’s physical and functional characteristics. BIM serves as a shared knowledge resource of information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle; from inception, onward.”
The emphasis is on the functional rather than just the physical characteristics that current BIM places. It requires that all key inputs and outputs are based on the functions of the facility, that make up the facility’s purpose. All planning, design and construction becomes purpose-driven.
Another vital principle of purpose-driven planning is all major decisions are based on the facility’s life cycle value, and not just the first cost. This is also emphasized in the BIM vision.
Figures 1 and 2 illustrate this in summary form – based on a study of 3 solutions to a hypothetical critical access hospital. The Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) results from a life cycle analysis. Using Building Catalyst, Performance Building Systems builds Life Cycle Modeling (LCM) tools to achieve this objects. The Owner Performance Requirements (OPR) tool for the Dept of Homeland Security is an example.
Figure 1 – Total Cost of Ownership Summary
Figure 2 – Total Cost of Ownership Graph
Figure 3 shows how the TCO is assigned to each department and function within the facility. This is possible, because the project scope and costs are derived from the direct costs by function. All site work, core and shell is then apportioned across these functions. Same with the soft costs and life cycle costs.
Figure 3 – Total Cost of Ownership by Department and Function
Figure 4 isolates the Private Patient Bed function for example. This functional analysis provides powerful comparative analysis of the business case for each patient bed in relationship to the facility costs.
Figure 4 – Functional Analysis: Private Patient Bed
From Figure 4 we see that in all three options the facility costs per patient bed is less that 4% of the revenue generated by that bed, but the hospital revenue can more that double through more efficient facility plan and design. The need for purpose-driven planning can’t be overstated.
The following blog describes this illustration in more detail: Illustrating The Way BIM Ought to Be.