The new emergent truth in the construction business seems to be the acceptance of BIM as a wonderful all-rounder technology. There is no contest against that fact. However, the crucial question still remains the same: Have we truly, and in every sense, adopted BIM? The answer to this is rather discouraging.
The effort taken by teams of architects, civil engineers, MEP professionals and other such stakeholders is often diluted by poor implementation of BIM on the site.
Communication is essential to an integrated site management process. In absence of tools that simplify communication on the site, it is difficult to keep all the players in the loop and extract the highest essence of the technology endowed in form of BIM. Many clashes are detected when contractors and workers start their on-ground work. Due to the lack of proper on-site communication, the project runs into delays and cost overruns become common.
A collaborative communication seems to be the only solution. Any change in the design proposed by one player, for example, the architect, leads to corresponding changes in other design models too. A single model for the entire project encompassing different players is hardly ever possible. A structural engineer may have his analysis model, a contractor may have his construction simulation model, and a fabricator may have his shop drawings and likewise for other contributors: the key to successful implementation is interoperability.
Though different stakeholders have their own different models, this does not mean the models in themselves are separate and unconnected. In fact, these different models highly move in tandem. A change in one aspect by one stakeholder is capable of changing the design in each of the other stakeholders too. Thus, a constant revision of the current model is necessary to ensure that each model represents the same building which attained through proper BIM Management.
