This presentation is a cost comparison between three nearly identical projects where the only variable is the use of BIM. The first cath lab was delivered using a traditional CAD approach, the second cath lab used industry standard BIM (modeling objects down to 2"), and the third cath lab modeled everything including studs and outlet boxes. The change order rates dropped to practically nothing but the costs were a bit surprising.
4. Experimental Controls
Experimental Variables
BIM Use Area* Start** Architect
Cath Lab 7 CAD 720 SF 2006
Cath Lab 9 2” 1,173 SF 2009
Standard
Cath Lab Everything 1,060 SF 2010
10
*Results expressed per SF to normalize this variable
**Cost values escalated to 2010 relative value to normalize this variable
5. What’s supposedly in it for me?
Save up to 23% on project costs
Complete project 35% faster
Drop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
6. What’s supposedly in it for me?
23% less $
Complete project 35% faster
Drop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
7. What’s supposedly in it for me?
Save up to 23% on project costs
35% faster
Drop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
8. What’s supposedly in it for me?
Save up to 23% on project costs
Complete project 35% faster
Changes to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
9. What’s supposedly in it for me?
Save up to 23% on project costs
Complete project 35% faster
Drop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
10. Cath Lab 7
CAD Only
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
13. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
14. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
15. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
16. (E) CAD V.I.F. (N) CAD Construction
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
17. The delay was caused…by the
over-head structural and M/E/P/FP
not being coordinated. The
majority of the overhead had to be
re-designed. DPR
Construction
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
18. Cath Lab 9
BIM to 2”
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
33. Construction Cost
BIM Use % from
CAD
Cath Lab 7 CAD
Cath Lab 9 2” Standard -15.0%
Cath Lab Everything
*All figures in 2010 Relative Value -4.1%
10
Change Order Cost
BIM Use % of Total
Cath Lab 7 CAD 12.4%
Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.1%
Cath Lab Everything <0.1%
10
*All figures in 2010 Relative Value
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
34. Construction
Schedule BIM Use Construction Days/SF % from
CAD
Cath Lab 7 CAD 8.40 mo 0.23 D/SF
Cath Lab 9 2” Standard 8.50 mo 0.15 D/SF -34.8%
Cath Lab Everything 8.45 mo 0.16 D/SF -30.4%
10
All Costs
Survey All Construction Margin** Total
Services* $
Cath Lab 7 18.5% 18.5%
Cath Lab 9 1.6% 27.3% (15.0%) (22.0%) (23.3%)
Cath Lab 10 1.6% 18.5%
*All design professional fees, including non-BIM fees
(4.1%) (18.6%) (17.9%)
**Cath lab contribution margin of ~$8,000 per day
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
35. Conclusions
Save up to 23% on project costs
Complete project 35% faster
Drop change order rate to <0.1%
44% fewer RFIs
The Design Partnership LLP
Architects + Planners
36. Thanks. Questions?
Jason David Eric Peabody
eric@dpsf.com
Holbrook Denysenko
jholbrook@stanfordmed.or ddenysenko@stanfordmed. 415 777-3737
g org
650 721-1928 650 736-7546