Virtual Design and Construction Case Study Martin Fischer Cristina Garcia Calvin Kam John Kunz Kathleen Liston Marcus Schreyer Vibha Singhal.

Virtual Design and Construction Case Study

Martin FischerCristina Garcia

Calvin KamJohn Kunz

Kathleen ListonMarcus Schreyer

Vibha Singhal

Source: DPR


Case Overview• Baseline• Delay• Acceleration• Summary and Analysis

Site Plan

Construction Photos and Site Context



Site Plan




Site Plan




Site Plan

AP

AR

AT




Common Point 4D Color Legend for iRoom Demo

SimVision Color Legend for iRoom Demo

Direct Work Hidden Work

3D Legend Diagram


• Case Overview Baseline• Delay• Acceleration• Summary and Analysis

Baseline Case

• Target 2002 Thanksgiving and Christmas season• Tight site -> single crew per trade• Low coordination risk, but little slack

Functional Requirements (Time and Cost)Predicted

CompletionPredicted

Project Cost

Turnover Baseline Baseline

Overall Project 11/1/02 10/30/02 13,100$ 13,069$ slack (days) 2 99.8%

Bookstore 10/1/02 9/19/02 930$ 930$ slack (days) 12 100.0%

Retail 10/15/02 10/2/02 2,170$ 2,171$ slack (days) 13 100.0%

Theater 10/15/02 10/10/02 6,770$ 6,757$ slack (days) 5 99.8%

Required Dates

Budget

Date Legend:

Cost Legend: Below 1% Over BudgetOver Budget by more than 3%

Within Budget1-3% Over Budget

Up to 30-day lateMore than 50-day late31 to 50-day late

Ahead of Time$ (in thousands)



DESCRIPTIVE (40%)

• When do we have access to retail zone AR-7?• Where are you placing the crane?

EXPLANATIVE (20%)• What drives the turnover date for the theater?

PREDICTIVE (10%) • Can we get access to the parking a week earlier?

EVALUATIVE (30%)• Which acceleration alternative is better?

How we spend time in meetings

4D Demo (Plan View)

4D Demo (Perspective View)

MSP and Time-Controller Demo



SimVision Demo(highlights activity received from

MSP)

MSP sends activity to SimVision



Micro View

Macro View—Organization and Process



Predicted Critical Path

Predicted Work Composition

Schedule Growth Risk



• Case Overview• Baseline Delay• Acceleration• Summary and Analysis

Delay Case

• Hazardous materials found during excavation 2-month delay (MSP #56)

4D Demo (Baseline Case)

4D Demo (Delay Case)

MSP+Time Controller Demo(Delay Case)


• Case Overview• Baseline Delay• Acceleration• Summary and Analysis

Functional Requirements (Time)

Turnover Baseline Delay

Overall Project 11/1/02 10/30/02 1/8/03slack (days) 2 -68

Bookstore 10/1/02 9/19/02 11/25/02slack (days) 12 -55

Retail 10/15/02 10/2/02 12/10/02slack (days) 13 -56

Theater 10/15/02 10/10/02 12/11/02slack (days) 5 -57

Client Requirements

Predicted Completion Dates

Date Legend:

Cost Legend:


Ahead of Time

Functional Requirements (Cost)

Turnover Baseline Delay

Overall Project 13,100$ 13,069$ 13,171$

slack (days) 99.8% 100.5%

Bookstore 930$ 930$ 930$ slack (days) 100.0% 100.0%

Retail 2,170$ 2,171$ 2,171$ slack (days) 100.0% 100.0%

Theater 6,770$ 6,757$ 6,757$ slack (days) 99.8% 99.8%

Budget

Predicted Project Cost

Date Legend:

Cost Legend: Below 1% Over BudgetOver Budget by more than 3%


$ (in thousands)


• Case Overview• Baseline• Delay Acceleration• Summary and Analysis

How to accelerate construction?



4D DemoOpportunities for Acceleration

MSP DemoOpportunities for Acceleration



Acceleration—Hybrid Case

Concrete Acceleration

• Add crew on pile caps and grade beams (MSP #85, 151)• Add horizontal formwork for soffits 2 and 3 (MSP #263, 270)• Reuse horizontal formwork for theater Lv3 (MSP #421, 428)• Rebar crew works overtime (11-hour day) • Add crew for bolt-up and welding

Steel Acceleration

• Add crew for fireproofing • Steel erection and slab-on-deck crews work overtime work (11-hour day)• MSP #708-737, 807-823

Concrete Acceleration

• Add crew on pile caps and grade beams (MSP #85, 151)• Add horizontal formwork for soffits 2 and 3 (MSP #263, 270)• Reuse horizontal formwork for theater Lv3 (MSP #421, 428)• Rebar crew works overtime (11-hour day) • Add crew for bolt-up and welding

Steel Acceleration

• Add crew for fireproofing • Steel erection and slab-on-deck crews work overtime work (11-hour day)• MSP #708-737, 807-823

4D Demo(Hybrid Acceleration)

MSP Demo(Hybrid Acceleration)



Predicted Critical Path


Position Backlog

Resource Allocation



Comparison of Predicted Finish Dates

Comparison of Predicted Work Composition

Hybrid Acceleration

Delay Case

Hybrid Acceleration

Delay Case

Comparison of Predicted Work Breakdown

Hybrid Acceleration

Delay Case


• Case Overview• Baseline• Delay• Acceleration Summary and Analysis

Functional Requirements (Time)

Turnover Baseline DelayConcrete

Accel.Steel Accel.

Hybrid Accel.

Overall Project 11/1/02 10/30/02 1/8/03 12/18/02 12/11/02 11/19/02slack (days) 2 -68 -47 -40 -18

Bookstore 10/1/02 9/19/02 11/25/02 11/5/02 10/29/02 10/9/02slack (days) 12 -55 -35 -28 -8

Retail 10/15/02 10/2/02 12/10/02 11/18/02 11/11/02 10/22/02slack (days) 13 -56 -34 -27 -7

Theater 10/15/02 10/10/02 12/11/02 11/12/02 11/20/02 10/24/02slack (days) 5 -57 -28 -36 -9

Legend:

Required Dates

Predicted Completion Dates


Ahead of Time

Functional Requirements (Cost)

$ (in thousands) Baseline DelayConcrete

Accel.Steel Accel.

Hybrid Accel.

Overall Project 13,100$ 13,069$ 13,171$ 13,410$ 13,491$ 13,649$

99.8% 100.5% 102.4% 103.0% 104.2%

Bookstore Turnover 930$ 930$ 930$ 931$ 970$ 971$ 100.0% 100.0% 100.1% 104.3% 104.4%

Retail Turnover 2,170$ 2,171$ 2,171$ 2,173$ 2,264$ 2,265$ 100.0% 100.0% 100.1% 104.3% 104.4%

Theater Turnover 6,770$ 6,757$ 6,757$ 6,941$ 6,906$ 7,091$ 99.8% 99.8% 102.5% 102.0% 104.7%

Legend:

Budget

Below 1% Over BudgetOver Budget by more than 3%

Predicted Project Cost




Project Total Cost

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

4/19/01 7/28/01 11/5/01 2/13/02 5/24/02 9/1/02 12/10/02 3/20/03

Finish Date

Co

st

BaselineDelayConcreteSteelHybrid

cost increases as schedule is shortened

Alternative Solution Trade-offs

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Recovered Days

Ad

dit

ion

al C

ost

Delay

Concrete

Steel

Hybrid



Project Total Cost

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

4/19/01 7/28/01 11/5/01 2/13/02 5/24/02 9/1/02 12/10/02 3/20/03

Finish Date

Co

st

BaselineDelayConcreteSteelHybrid

cost increases as schedule is shortened

Acceleration Cost

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

$102,000 $341,312 $422,279 $580,093

Additional Cost

Re

co

ve

red

Da

ys

Hybrid

Steel

Concrete

Delay



ProductNo change(4D Model)

Acceleration is possible(MS Project)Acceleration costs money(Excel)

Coordination needs increase as schedule accelerates(SimVision)

Organization

Process

VDC(iRoom)

Summary of alternative analyses

The Macro Problem



to be the world’s premier academic research center for Virtual Design and Construction

• Virtual Design and Construction: develop and test new ways to model, visualize, analyze and evaluate the multi-disciplinary performance of design–construction projects to support explicit business objectives

• Education: increase awareness of the value and costs of strategic IT for practitioners and Stanford students

CIFE Mission

• Need: macro and micro problems require timely stakeholder involvement

• Tools available, effective, affordable– iRoom, 4D, organization, TEI, …

• Objectives and metrics exist– Management theory– Manufacturing

• Actions: 1. Plan your VDC implementation strategy2. Become CIFE member; plan pilot

RateBaseline

($K) ChangeYear-1

(K$)Revenue 100,000 2% 102,000Cost of contracted work 85% 85,000 -2.0% 84,660Cost of self-performed work 10% 10,000 2.0% 12,240Gross Margin 5,000 5,100Sales, G&A 2% 2,000 2,040IT investment 70Amortized costs of IT/yr 33% 23Net income 3,000 3,037Time to payback (years) 1.9Net Income change (%) 1.2

Call to Action for VDC



• Build project model early, before committing large money or time

• What– Product, process, organization

• How: – Detailed: to show the product, process, organization

entities that use significant project time, money– Virtual: in the computer– Visual: multi-discipline, multi-view, for multiple

stakeholders– Objective-based: set and track explicit public objectives

VDC Big Ideas

• Need: macro and micro problems require timely stakeholder involvement

• Tools available, effective, affordable– iRoom, 4D, organization, TEI, …

• Objectives and metrics exist– Management theory– Manufacturing

• Actions: 1. Plan your VDC implementation strategy2. Become CIFE member; plan pilot

RateBaseline

($K) ChangeYear-1

(K$)Revenue 100,000 2% 102,000Cost of contracted work 85% 85,000 -2.0% 84,660Cost of self-performed work 10% 10,000 2.0% 12,240Gross Margin 5,000 5,100Sales, G&A 2% 2,000 2,040IT investment 70Amortized costs of IT/yr 33% 23Net income 3,000 3,037Time to payback (years) 1.9Net Income change (%) 1.2

Call to Action for VDC

The End

The End

The End

Virtual Design and Construction Case Study Martin Fischer Cristina Garcia Calvin Kam John Kunz Kathleen Liston Marcus Schreyer Vibha Singhal.

Documents

analysis slide

msp slide

simvision slide

dpr slide

process slide

d demo delay case slide

d demo baseline case

work composition slide