The ‘internet of things’ related to BIM is multi-dimensional and complex
Let’s imagine a BIM model was developed as an architectural simulation during project planning, then further developed into a maintenance and control system following building completion. The building owners will have an unprecedented level of control in its operation and maintenance.
The BIM model will provide a central point for the management of individual assets. With intuitive settings, each asset will work within a system enabling greater control of operational variables. With customisation, a staggering amount of money will be saved.
The collection of operational data back to an analytical source will revolutionise a number of industries. Maintenance management will take on a new dimension. The BIM model can simulate the fast forwarding of operational hours, enabling the operator to prepare for asset design life expiry and other known changes over time. This alone, will provide savings in human resources by allowing the owner to predict when and where maintenance staff are needed – providing the ability to predict and be proactive.
Effects on the environment become immediately measurable in unparalleled terms. In this context reverse manufacturing then becomes a global possibility.
For ‘on-off’ or moveable objects, user behaviour is recordable and measurable. Behaviour pattern data would facilitate object development as well as identify situations for new objects.
The benefits to an economy are overwhelming and outstanding compared to any other development of the past. The efficiencies of an implemented BIM would outweigh installation costs. The interconnectivity would provide a level of asset management only dreamt of until now.
As the ‘the internet of things’ becomes a reality, caution is required. The speed of which ‘the internet of things’ and BIM is implemented without full cause-and-effect’ understandings, could lead to an imbalance of and incompatibilities with existing systems. This could be difficult to overcome and manage.
Any part of this interconnected platform must communicate easily and link effortlessly without proprietary barriers and coding nonsense.
The cause and effect of BIM on economies will depend on those implementing.
BIM would have to quickly ‘kick-into-gear’ to resolve short falls as well as pre-empt major issues.
For example, once deciding to proceed with BIM, the asset and facility managers would need to work on how the data was collected and how much was interconnected electronically. The collection of data has the potential to slow the success of such a project and jeopardise BIM’s future.
Implementing BIM quickly can create a great discourse between existing and BIM strategies and systems. This discourse would ensure that one or the other would have to pick up the short-fall. BIM enthusiasts, I am sure, would hope it is BIM that propels to success. Although I do also hope this to be the case, I believe careful management and sensitivity around project implementation should be a priority.
At this early development stage we should be keeping the connection and communication code open source. The only way this can happen is through a fair and inclusive development process.
The success of BIM in Australia depends on how we as a professional community manage the early implementation stages. BIM opens the door to, provides timing as well as lays the foundations for the ‘internet of things’. Handled well, the future is in the palm of our hands to benefit greatly; handled badly, we face a software-company strong-hold with limited and expensive outcomes.
The choice is ours.