3D MODELING AS SUPPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION ...animp.it/animp_/images/PDF_archivio/DEL_RIO.pdfMilan....

THIRD ANIMP CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE & ECI AUTUMN FORUM

Milan. Italy, october 12, 2012

PUSHING THE LIMITS OF ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION

1

3D MODELING AS SUPPORT FOR

CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: STEPS FORWARD FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT




2

TASK FORCE “MODELLO 3D E COSTRUZIONE” SCOPE

ANIMP – CONSTRUCTION SECTION, WITHIN ITS 2012 STUDIES PROGRAM, IDENTIFIED THE USE OF 3D MODEL IN CONSTRUCTION AS ONE OF THE TOPICS WORTHY TO BE INVESTIGATED

A DEDICATED TASK FORCE HAS BEEN COMMISSIONED IN OCTOBER 2011, CONSTITUTED BY EXPERTS IN METHODOLOGIES AND SYSTEMS ADOPTED IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, FROM MAJOR ITALIAN EPC CONTRACTORS.

THE TASK FORCE HAD THE TARGET OF ANALYZING AND REPORTING THE PRESENT STATUS AND THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 3D MODEL IN CONSTRUCTION




3

TASK-FORCE “MODELLO 3D E COSTRUZIONE” MEMBERS:

MASSIMILIANO DEL RIO - TECNIMONT - COORDINATOR

EMIDIO DI FELICE, MARIO FICO, MASSIMO FANTASIA - SAIPEM

GIANLUCA DI LECCE, SIMONE ATZORI - TECHINT

TATIANA LIPINSKAIA - ROSETTI MARINO

SALVATORE LONGO, MARCO DI GENNARO, - TECHNIP ITALY

RICCARDO MURATORE - SICES CONSTRUCTION

VALERIO PACE, MARCO DANZINI - FOSTER WHEELER ITALIANA

TRISTANO SAINATI – POLITECNICO DI MILANO

ANIMP CONSTRUCTION SECTION REPRESENTATIVES INVITED TO TASK FORCE MEETINGS:

ANGELO ZUCCONI, FRANCESCO DI SERIO - ANIMP COMITATO ORGANIZZATIVO SEZIONE COSTRUZIONE

MAURO MANCINI - POLITECNICO DI MILANO - ANIMP DELEGATO SEZIONE COSTRUZIONE

SOFTWARE HOUSES, ANIMP MEMBERS, INVITED TO FEEDBACK MEETINGS:

AVEVA SA, BENTLEY SYSTEMS ITALIA, INTERGRAPH ITALIA




4

ACTIVITIES CARRIED-OUT BY THE TASK-FORCE

1. INTERNAL PRESENTATIONS AND DEBATE ON EXISTING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGIES IMPLEMENTATION IN TF MEMBER’S COMPANIES

2. SELECTION OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AREAS WORTHY TO BE FURTHER INVESTIGATED FOR POSSIBLE ENHANCEMENTS THROUGH 3DMODEL ADOPTION.

3. FEEDBACK FROM SITE PERSONNEL FOR VALIDATION OF FOCUSED THEMES THROUGH ONLINE SURVEY

4. FEEDBACK FROM SOFTWARE HOUSES: SOFTWARE FEATURES PRESENTLY RESPONDING TO SELECTED REQUIREMENTS AND FUTURE PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTING THEM

5. OUTCOME PRESENTATION AT THIRD ANIMP CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE AND ECI AUTUMN FORUM: “PUSHING THE LIMITS OF ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION”

6. FINAL REPORT OF TASK FORCE ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS




5

1. AS IT IS: STATUS OF THE 3DM FRAMEWORK AT TIME NOW

1. PANEL RESULTS

2. AS EXPECTED TO BE

1. THREE THEMES DEEMED WORTHY FOR DEEP INVESTIGATION

1. THEME 1: MULTI-DISCIPLINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY

2. THEME 2: 4D MODEL

3. THEME 3: MECHANICAL COMPLETION

3. FEEDBACKS FROM SOFTWARE HOUSES

4. CONCLUSIONS

SUMMARY




6

IN GENERAL

3DM IN COSTRUCTION IS STILL CONSIDERED BY SITE MAINLY A POWERFUL VISUAL TOOL TO DISPLAY THE PLANT BEFORE ERECTION, IN ORDER TO «UNDERSTAND» THE PLANT AND DETECT ERECTION ISSUES

IN ADDITION

SOME EPC CONTRACTORS EXPERIENCED SPECIFIC TASKS (NOT AS COMMON PRACTICE BUT IMPLEMENTED FOR SINGLE SPECIFIC PROJECT):

• 4D ERECTION SEQUENCE VISUALIZATION

• PIPING AND STEEL STRUCTURES FESEABILITY VISUALIZATION THROUGH STATUS COLOR COODING

• LASER SCANNING AND VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF PLANT FOR REVAMPING

• PIPING ARRANGEMENTS EXTRACTED AT SITE THROUGH 3D MODEL COMMERCIAL SIDE APPLICATION

AS IT IS: STATUS OF THE 3DM FRAMEWORK AT TIME NOW (1/5)

3DM RELATED TOOLS IN USE BY EPC CONTRACTORS AT SITE




7

PANEL OF INTERVIEWED NUMBER OF QUESTIONNAIRES SUBMITTED: 100

NUMBER OF QUESTIONNAIRES RECEIVED: 75


89,3%

10,7%

Firm Tipology EPC Contractor

ConstructionSubcontractor

9,3%

64,0%

13,3%

13,3%

Job Tipology Project Manager

Constr./Site Manager

Manager ConstructionDept.

Other

49,3%

21,3%

18,7%

10,7%

Experience in the EPC Sector > 20 years

between 10 e 20 years


< 5 years

34,7%

22,7%

26,7%

16,0%

Experience on site > 20 years



< 5 years




8


51,0%

10,0%

38,0%

How much the construction team is involved in reviewing the 3DM

development

Most of time

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

25,7%

10,0%

60,0%

How important is the 3DM adoption in different construction projects

Necessay for all projects

Necessay for largeprojects

Useful for every project

Useful for some project(e.g. revamping projects,modulear ones, etc.)Low with respect thetraditional methodology

Other




9


44,4%

31,9%

6,9%

6,9%

9,7%

Reasons limiting 3DM effectiveness at site

Weak dissemination of 3DM potential from homeoffice to site

Availability of 3DM specialists able to satisfy theconstruction supervision requests

No previous use of 3DM at site

Effectiveness has never been affected

Other




10


22%

17%

18%

14%

7%

6%

6%

47%

39%

30%

23%

32%

20%

29%

20%

14%

9%

11%

7%

6%

18%

24%

21%

32%

25%

35%

21%

25%

14%

23%

16%

8%

6%

7%

6%

11%

11%

14%

15%

23%

13%

24%

33%

26%

27%

30%

36%

28%

7%

8%

20%

16%

20%

21%

32%

25%

36%

43%

46%

52%

51%

63%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Check of erection interferences

Erection studies for specific equipment

Lifting studies (for heavy and critical items)

Constructability analysis at the beginning of the project

Construction drawings issue at site (piping arrangements, …

Follow up of constructability analysis

Visualization of Isometric Spools

Planning and monitoring of work fronts

Construction progress and reporting activities

Construction development in time (4D Model)

Mechanical completions

Supporting material management

Supporting quality control

Supporting site works accounting

Task Supported nowadays by the use of 3DM

Always

Most times

Sometimes

Rarely

Never




11

AS EXPECTED TO BE (1/9)

36%

33%

24%

4% 3%

Effectiveness of 3DM as core tool of construction information system

High

High, if the 3DM is properly interfaced with themanagment system of contractors

High if the systems is managed by the maincontractor

Low because of the integration complexity

None




12


52%

37%

31%

30%

24%

27%

27%

14%

17%

20%

11%

10%

8%

20%

24%

32%

31%

30%

21%

27%

28%

21%

15%

20%

18%

13%

17%

17%

21%

17%

19%

20%

14%

23%

24%

20%

23%

14%

23%

10%

14%

6%

11%

17%

17%

10%

15%

15%

23%

18%

15%

20%

3%

3%

3%

6%

9%

10%

10%

11%

14%

14%

23%

17%

4%

4%

7%

1%

4%

4%

7%

10%

10%

3%

6%

3%

6%

8%

7%

4%

7%

10%

10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Check of erection interferences

Erection studies for specific equipment

Planning and monitoring of work fronts

Construction development in time (4D Model)

Follow up of constructability analysis

Lifting studies (for heavy and critical items)

Supporting material management

Construction progress and reporting activities

Mechanical completions

Visualization of Isometric Spools

Construction drawings issue at site (piping arrangements, …

Supporting quality control

Supporting site works accounting

Potential benefits on construction site

7 High Potential

6

5

4

3

2

1 Low Potential




13

AS IT IS VS. AS EXPECTED TO BE (3/9)




14

1. FEASIBILITY: 3DMODEL USE FOR PLANNING AND TRACKING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR WORKFRONTS , BASED ON WHAT ALREADY INSTALLED, ON THE ERECTION SEQUENCE AND ON DELIVERABLES (MATERIALS AND DRAWINGS)

2. 4D MODEL: 3DMODEL USE IN RELATION WITH ERECTION PLANNING AND SEQUENCES, INCLUDING PHYSICAL PROGRESS DISPLAY.

3. MECHANICAL COMPLETION: 3DMODEL AS SUPPORT FOR MECHANICAL COMPLETION SYSTEM INPUT (COMPONENT TAGGING /SYSTEM ATTRIBUTION) AND FOR VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF MECHANICAL COMPLETION STATUS (CERTIFICATION) OF THE PLANT.

THREE THEMES DEEMED WORTHY FOR DEEPER INVESTIGATION





15

MULTI-DISCIPLINARY FEASIBILITY: IT AIMS TO CONSIDER ALL THE COMPLEX RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN

DISCIPLINES, MATERIALS, DRAWINGS IN ORDER TO GIVE INFORMATION REGARDING POSSIBLE WORKFRONTS IN A FUTURE PHASE OF THE PROJECT

MULTI-DISCIPLINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY (1/2)

FEASIBILITY

ENG. DRAWINGS/DOCUMENTS

MATERIAL AT SITE SITE CONDITIONS

ALL AVAILABLE

WORK FRONT NOT AVAILABLE

OK

NO

CONSTRUCTION PREDECESSOR/S

WORK FRONT AVAILABLE

Mono-disciplinary

feasibility

Multi-disciplinary feasibility





16


MULTI-DISCIPLINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY (1/2)

48,6%

45,7%

4,3%

Benefits of multi-disciplinary feasibility implemented in the 3DM

High benefits

Useful (3DM can provide at least the theoreticalfeasibility)

Low benefits (3DM can't include all site conditionsaffecting the multi-disciplinary feasibility analysis)

No benefits




17

KEY BENEFITS:

• CONSTRUCTABILITY (ERECTION SEQUENCE SIMULATION)

• VIEW OF THE ACTUAL PROGRESS VS THE PLANNED ONE

• CROSS CHECK SCHEDULE VS FEASIBILITY

• REPORTING TO THE CLIENT

4D SIMULATION, BY LINKING THE 3D MODEL TO THE TIME DIMENSION, PROVIDE A MEAN FOR ORGANIZING AND DISPLAY INFORMATION RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT (PLANNED, PROGRESS, FABRICATED, ERECTED, MATERIAL AVAILABLE, PLANT COMPLETION…) IN A EASILY INTELLIGIBLE WAY, FACILITATING ITS INTERPRETATION.

4D MODEL





18

MECHANICAL COMPLETION (1/2)

SCOPE: SUPPORTING ACTIVITIES OF • CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION MANAGEMENT

• PRECOMMISSIONING/COMMISSIONING COMPLETION MANAGEMENT

• PUNCH LIST MANAGEMENT

MECHANICAL COMPLETION & 3DMODEL • 3D MODEL SUPPORT FOR MECHANICAL COMPLETION DATABASE TAGGING AND POPULATION

• TEST PACK EXTRACTION TROUGH DEFINITION OF THE BATTERY LIMITS DIRECTLY INTO THE 3DM

• MULTIDISCIPLINARY COMPLETION STATUS (FOR ALL DISCIPLINES TROUGH SUITABLE COLOR CODING)

• PUNCH LIST MANAGEMENT (THROUGH DIRECT PUNCHED ITEMS INPUT IN THE 3DM)

• MECHANICAL COMPLETION DOSSIER (THROUGH FINAL EXTRACTION FROM 3DM SYSTEM DATABASE)





19

MECHANICAL COMPLETION (2/2)

30%

26%

21%

22%

14%

13%

59%

54%

50%

45%

47%

47%

7%

16%

24%

29%

31%

31%

4%

4%

4%

4%

7%

9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Show the completion status

Report to the client the completion status

Optimize the handover of areas/systems (from constructionto precommissioning/commissioning)

Optimize the handover of areas/systems to the client

Optimize the safety management during theprecommissioning/commissioning activities

Optimize the management of theprecommissioning/commissioning activities

Advantages of 3DM support or mechanical completion

Really useful

Useful

Low usefulness

Useless





20

•CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE (CMS) AS POWERFUL CENTRAL INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR ENGINEERING DATA THROUGH 3D VISUALIZATION

•CMS ORIENTED TO NORTH AMERICAN CONSTRUCTION APPROACH

•3 FOCUS ARISEN FROM TASKFORCE ANALYSIS NOT NATIVELY SUPPORTED

•OTHER REQUIREMENTS PARTLY FULFILLED

•STARTED INTEGRATION WITH NEW MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES TO MEET SITE PORTABILITY REQUIREMENTS

FEEDBACK FROM SOFTWARE HOUSES




21

CONCLUSION (1/2)

•POTENTIAL OF 3DM APPLIED TO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES IS RECOGNIZED BY FINAL USER ALSO (THE SITE) AS VERY HIGH

•SOFTWARE HOUSES REALIZED THIS POTENTIAL AND APPROACHED THIS ISSUE WITH HORIZONTAL PLATFORMS TO BE INTERFACED TO EACH SINGLE EPC CONTRACTORS SYSTEMS

•IN TASKFORCE OPINION, THIS “HORIZONTAL” APPROACH RISKS TO LEAVE PART OF THE POTENTIAL UNEXPLORED

•EPC CONTRACTORS HAVE VERY SIMILAR OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES SO THAT…

•…SOFTWARE HOUSES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPLEMENT VERTICAL COMMON SOLUTIONS INTO THEIR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE, VALID FOR ALL EPC CONTRACTOR WITH VERY SMALL CUSTOMIZATIONS




22

CONCLUSION (2/2)

STEPS FORWARD FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT: WHAT NEXT?

•FURTHER STEPS POSSIBLE IF SOFTWARE HOUSES WILL DEEM WORTHY FOR THEIR BUSINESS TO WORK TOGETHER WITH EPC CONTRACTORS IN DEVELOPING FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND ENHANCE THEIR CONSTRUCTION PLATFORMS WITH THE OUTCOME OF THIS JOINT ANALYSIS

•AS ALTERNATIVE, SOFTWARE HOUSES COULD UTILIZE THESE RESULTS FOR SCOUTING THE MARKET FOR VERTICAL SOLUTIONS, IN ORDER TO NATIVELY INTERFACE THEIR OWN CMS

•BOTH WAYS OF PROCEEDING WOULD GUARANTEE MUTUAL BENEFIT FOR SOFTWARE HOUSE AND EPC CONTRACTORS




23

THANK YOU!

3D MODELING AS SUPPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES:

STEPS FORWARD FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT




24


13 a




25


13 b




26


13 c




27

1. DOCUMENTAL SUPPORTS AT CONSTRUCTION SITE THROUGH THE USE OF 3DM (E.G. PIPING ARRANGEMENTS); INCLUDING A MANAGEMENT TOOL FOR CERTIFYING THE DOCUMENTS ISSUE REVISIONS

2. NECESSITY OF EXPERIENCED PEOPLE IN USING THE 3DM SOFTWARE; AND WHERE THESE ARE COLLOCATED WITHIN CONSTRUCTION STAKEHOLDERS

3. CLIENTS REQUESTS ON 3DM ADOPTION BY THE EPC CONTRACTOR (ESPECIALLY IN TERMS OF HANDOVER AND FINAL DOCUMENTATION)

4. INTERFACE BETWEEN 3MD AND CONSTRUCTION (I.E. CONSIDERING DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES: SPOOLS DEFINITION, QUALITY CONTROL, MATERIAL FLOW, PROJECT PROGRESS DEVELOPMENT, SITE WORKS ACCOUNTING, MECHANICAL COMPLETION, PRODUCTION OF METHOD STATEMENTS)

5. 3DM AND MODULARIZATION

6. FEASIBILITY: 3DMODEL USE FOR PLANNING AND TRACKING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR WORKFRONTS , BASED ON WHAT ALREADY INSTALLED, ON THE ERECTION SEQUENCE AND ON DELIVERABLES (MATERIALS AND DRAWINGS)

7. 3DM AS CONSTRUCTABILITY TOOL

8. ENDORSEMENT OF LIFTING STUDIES IN 3DM

9. 4D MODEL: 3DMODEL USE IN RELATION WITH ERECTION PLANNING AND SEQUENCES, INCLUDING PHYSICAL PROGRESS DISPLAY

10. MECHANICAL COMPLETION: 3DMODEL AS SUPPORT FOR MECHANICAL COMPLETION SYSTEM INPUT (COMPONENT TAGGING /SYSTEM ATTRIBUTION) AND FOR VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF MECHANICAL COMPLETION STATUS (CERTIFICATION) OF THE PLANT.

10 SELECTED THEMES FOR DISCUSSION ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

3D MODELING AS SUPPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION ...animp.it/animp_/images/PDF_archivio/DEL_RIO.pdfMilan....

Documents

Transcript of 3D MODELING AS SUPPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION ...animp.it/animp_/images/PDF_archivio/DEL_RIO.pdfMilan....