BIM Standards and Uniformat II

[jhd]

This is sort of an open statement/question. I'm currently researching the process of providing our BIM model as the deliverable document for bidding. Whether or not the model is supported with printed documents is an entirely separate conversation. I've been doing extensive online research and have come across the National BIM Standard. I've noticed that the document that was put together is extremely loose and abstract. On quite a few occasions there were statements made in reference to the standard still being a work in progress and alot of the information provided is rough. I noticed that it was written in 2007, so I was wondering if anyone knows about a document that may exist that me be more up to date. That's question one. Question two is about Uniformat. I'm trying to tie together the project manual (spec), which was created in Master Format 2004 to Revit's assembly codes which were derived from Uniformat. I've been having a very difficult time finding an online (free) document of Uniformat. Typically they will only reveal the top 2-3 levels of detail in the specification, however Revit shows a total of 5 levels of detail. I want to be able to look at the same source as Revit with the same level of detail.

Ultimately if anyone has experience provided a BIM model as deliverable please let me know. Our studio has extensive knowledge of Revit, Catia, Generative Components, and a wide variety of other applications. We've got the operability part working in our favor - now it's all about taking it to the next step into construction.

[BigBadBIM]

Question two is about Uniformat. I'm trying to tie together the project manual (spec), which was created in Master Format 2004 to Revit's assembly codes which were derived from Uniformat. I've been having a very difficult time finding an online (free) document of Uniformat. Typically they will only reveal the top 2-3 levels of detail in the specification, however Revit shows a total of 5 levels of detail. I want to be able to look at the same source as Revit with the same level of detail.


You should rewrite your Revit Uniformat file (UniformatClassifications.txt (default location:C:\Program Files\Revit Architecture 2009\Program)) so that it matches what's in your Specs (Uniformat 2004.) Then you can set your families up with whatever assembly code you see fit. This assumes that you aren't intereste din using E-spec to extract a model based Project Manual (spec) as I beleive they are still using the older Uniformat .... format. :)

[jhd]

I actually discovered especs shortly after I wrote the initial post. However, the question still remains regarding the uniformat spec. we're actually writing our spec in Master Format and we want to tie it to our assembly codes being used in Revit. Espec sounds like the perfect resource for this, but are you saying that you can customize the assembly codes and create new ones? Does uniformat outline conditions for creating custom assemblies?

Also, if anyone has any input for the first part of the thread regarding using a BIM model as deliverable I would be very interested in having that conversation.

[azmz3]

Regarding your first question, using the BIM model as a deliverable makes sense. Here in my office we are working on a project that requires us to turn the models over to the contractor at the end, as well as paper documents. We are basically going to provide a NavisWorks model every week for collision detection, but we must also turn the model over when the project is complete. During the working time, each model is owned by the respective consultants building the models. I know that Autodesk and Tocci Building actually did a full electronic, paperless construction document deliverable for the new Autodesk building. From what I understand that was a successful venture for both companies.

[BigBadBIM]

but are you saying that you can customize the assembly codes and create new ones? Does uniformat outline conditions for creating custom assemblies?


Revit allows you to assign/reassign assembly codes to objects in the project. Uniformat, like all systems used to classify objects has an element of the arbitrary. You will always find assemblies that don't fit neatly into just one category. So each office will flesh out there Uniformat Assmblies slightly differently.

However, what I was mostly suggesting is to take the Default Uniformat Classifications file (supplied by Autodesk) and rewrite it to match your 2004 Uniformat Assembly designations. Just be aware that Uniformat 2004 may not be supported by Especs.

[cphubb]

Also, if anyone has any input for the first part of the thread regarding using a BIM model as deliverable I would be very interested in having that conversation.

JHD,

I am part of the NBIMS and I can tell you the standard(s) are still in progress. There has been a recent push for a National CAD standard type of document to be added to the mix, but as of now no such document exists. Many users are developing their own BIM standards as a way to get proper documentation for model exchanges. However one must be careful to at least use another standard like Uniformat, Masterformat or OmniClass as the underlying standard. This will ensure some compatibility later when the standards are defined.

I also invite you to join buildingSMART alliance and participate in the definition of the standards. Any and all comments are welcome.

http://www.buildingsmartalliance.org/

[cporter.207875]

JHD,
You might also look at the AIA's BIM IPD (integrated project delivery) contract: AIA Document E202-2008. It may cover some of the gaps in NBIMS standard.

[gordie_v]

It is a little confusing
there are 2 different standards

MasterFormat 2004
and Uniformat II

MasterFornat is based on CSI divisions
this is typically how a specification is organized

Revit Uses Uniformat
which is a clasification of components

Both standards are written by the same group

We ended up creating our own standards to Level 5 for use in e-Spec
but you can find info online for a level 4 standard

[arqt49]

It is not confusing.
Both standards are for different thing.
Uniformat is for elements and masterformat is for work results.You can understand the difference in some presentation PPTs.
In revit, as for start, keynoting is for work results and assembly codes for elements.
And yes, I use both at the same time, as they complement each other.
Once you understand each other scope, they are great tools for filtering views and schedules.
There is a new uniformat draft (for comment) in which I found a lot of improvements (structure organization, etc) over the uniformat II version.
There is also omniclass (still behind the old standards in development and implementation) but with the integration of the classification of all the project (and construction) information.