After publishing my Architectural Model and my Mechanical and Electrical Models last week. This week I am looking at some of the
pedantic fantastic comments you have provided back and what I have done to resolve them; thank you for these. Remember there is still another week to contribute so keep those comments coming!
So let’s see what comments I have had back.
I was told that I have used the wrong volume code. I had issued using the volume code XX-‘No associated Volume’, however, my Employer’s Information Requirements clearly states that I need to follow BS1192, which uses the default code ZZ-‘All Volumes’. I agree, and have now renamed all of my outputs to use ZZ, and updated the appropriate sections of my BIM Execution Plan to suit. Technically I complied with my BEP, but as Keith told me, I am a stickler for the standards!
I was told that my COBie contact sheet should include all of the suppliers, installers, and other contacts related to my home; not just the project design team. I agree, and have now revised my COBie contact sheet to include all of the applicable contacts. It’s hard to find guidance on the scope of this worksheet #excuse, but Dan knows his stuff! I also really don’t like using the PM table in uniclass 2015 for this, but there isn’t a roles table.
I was told that my COBie documents sheet should be populated with my other outputs such as my drawings. I agree, and as Revit cannot hold this information have used my COBie Post-process sheet to record all of the applicable outputs. Nick, as usual, is technically correct (the best kind of correct).
I was also told that my COBie documents sheet should include other documents such as my property condition survey and any designer risk assessments. I agree, however, there are no designer risk assessments as I haven’t done any design on this project. Similar to the above I have used my COBie Post-process sheet to record all of the applicable documents as well as my outputs. Good thing I have no design, as I have no PI insurance!
I was told that my COBie jobs sheet is empty, therefore I must not maintain my home. I agree with this, but as I have pointed out in a previous post, jobs are optional; so I am not going to use it. However, on reflection it is worth considering, so It’ll feature in the new year when I am looking at my operational Plain Language Questions. As I told Chris, despite what my COBie sheet says, I do vacuum my house!
I was told that my IFC file contains some co-ordinates for my house; luckily for me those Co-ordinates are in London. This is because of my data security requirements within my Employer’s Information Requirements stated each model had to have the co-ordinates of 0,0,0; and without changing the location in Revit, it has defaulted to London. As a proud Welshman I’m disappointed of this default location, but happy my data security measures have worked!
Also, keeping with my BIM execution plan, I had also stated that all outputs should include my ISO7200 title block, but I had not included it in my native models. To resolve this, I have added them as a splash screen when the models are opened. Do I get points for spotting my own mistakes?
Note: I have also had one or two comments about the data format of some of my COBie fields. However, I’m aware of some other comments about this due next week, so I will deal with them all during next week’s post while I publish my documents.
And there we have it. Thanks to the support of our wonderfully open community, I have been provided with a number of fantastic comments have have been used to improve the outputs from my information model. This means that following another week of excellent input I should be ready to complete PLQ2.5!
2.1 What existing information is available?
2.2 Is there sufficient information to produce a BEP?
2.3 What is the layout of the house?
2.4 What assets are contained within?
2.5 What asset information can be linked to the graphical model?
Now that I have the first set of comments resolved, lets see what you guys come up with next week…