Home
> Uncategorized > Common Data Environments / BIM Discussion Topic…
Common Data Environments / BIM Discussion Topic…
Does anyone on the blog have experiences of Common Data Environments (CDE) or BIM to share from their Phase 2 or 3 attachments?
What was good / bad about it?
What system(s) / software / hardware were used?
What user training was required?
If the system was in the cloud how was information security assured?
Categories: Uncategorized
Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog 
Hi, I have been using the basic functionality of CDE whilst on my phase 2 attachment with John Holland (JH) in Sydney.
The project uses Oracle Aconex throughout for distribution of drawings, revision control, subcontractor tender submissions, and technical discussions (mostly Aconex email) between the designers (Jacobs) and construction management team (JH). I have had basic experience of most of the above as an engineer on site.
In short, it gives all users a very holistic view of the technical and commercial aspects of the project. More specifically, there are definitely advantages in terms of giving the team access to the latest drawing / model revisions and notifications on new issues. It also allows users to track analytics on metrics like ‘open RFIs’, ‘workflow status’, ‘open issues’ etc. However, I am as yet to see how it integrates with more universal collaboration platforms (e.g. SharePoint), if at all. The only integration I have seen first hand is the designers utilising Revit to output pdf drawings to Aconex, in addition to granting construction team engineers read-only access to the model through Revizto. Like with any software, if all its capabilities are used then it is extremely useful for construction projects with a large workforce with differing access levels and requirements.
In terms of training, I was thrown a login and told to dive in! The only user training I completed was a short 2mins video on basic functionality and where to find the digital repositories. In all honesty, it doesn’t need anything more than that provided the user has basic experience of working digitally.
Not too sure exactly how the information is secured in the cloud from an technical IT perspective. What I can say is that the login page can only be accessed once logged in to the JH intranet – either on a JH laptop or on your home computer provided 2FA is set up. It obviously holds commercially sensitive data so I’m sure there is some level of security involved.
Hope this helps in any way….
Hi George. Thanks for commenting.
I also used Aconex with JH on my phase 2 although on my site it was only used for transmittals, 2D drawings, hold point release and quality records (ITP, concrete dockets etc). So good to hear that it can support 3D models and you also found using it relatively intuitive.
Do you see an opportunity for use on future RE projects?
It is interesting you say that Aconex was used for quality purposes. JH (certainly on my project) now utilise Project Pack Web (PPW) – a bespoke software package developed for JH – for a number of project management components, notably WH&S (e.g. plant & equipment registers) and quality management (ITP & ITCs, dockets, all attached to work lots) so I’d be intrigued to see why they moved away from Aconex in that regard, or if the use of PPW for the above reasons is just project specific.
If I’m honest, I see more benefit in something like PPW being implemented across the Corps as a CDE for management of construction projects/sites. Again, it is intuitive to use and allows users to be assigned to individual or multiple projects with differing permissions levels. Its fully customisable so can be used as a data repository to hold registers, track construction progress on site, and record site diaries etc.
I am yet to work within 170 Engr Gp so I’m obviously unaware of the current processes, but I predict Aconex would be a little excessive for military construction projects. It’s real benefit is more catered towards the tendering process with assigning work packages to subcontractors and formal communications between a large number of stakeholders working for separate organisations (designers, clients, subcontractors, commercial, finance). I’d be interested to hear from those who have also experienced PPW and working within 170?
Thanks for replying George.
We also used PPW on my site (I’d forgotten so thanks for the reminder). We used it for the ITPs, Work Lots and WH&S. Before when I said we used ACONEX for quality purposes I was thinking of sub-contractors submitting their SWMS to JH for review and JH Project Engineers submitting Hold Points to the Client (although now you’ve reminded me of PPW it might have via that…).
I agree there are small scale projects where an ACONEX type solution would be a bit extreme but a simpler CDE process could be applied.
Hi Mark, one of my `TMRs was about the use of BIM on HS2, in which I describe how they’re achieving level 2, and how they’re not. If you’re still interested in this I’m happy to send it over, let me know your email address.