Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
92+ pages; Perfect Bind with SPine COPY = 14 pts Building Information Modeling for Airports AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMACRP SYNTHESIS 70 A CR P Syn th eSiS 70 Building inform ation M odeling for Airports need SPine Width Job no. XXXX Pantone 267 C tRAnSPORtAtiOn ReSeARCh BOARD 500 F ifth S treet, n .W . W ashing to n, d .C . 20001 A D D R eSS SeR ViCe R eQ UeSteD tRB A Synthesis of Airport Practice Sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration
ACRP OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE* CHAIR KITTY FREIDHEIM Freidheim Consulting VICE CHAIR KELLY JOHNSON Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport Authority MEMBERS GLORIA BENDER TransSolutions THELLA BOWENS San Diego International Airport BENITO De LEON Federal Aviation Administration DEBORAH FLINT Los Angeles World Airports F. PAUL MARTINEZ AvAOL, LLC SCOTT McMAHON Morristown Municipal Airport FRANK MILLER San Antonio International Airport BOB MONTGOMERY Southwest Airlines ERIC POTTS Freese and Nichols, Inc. MEGAN S. RYERSON University of Pennsylvania EX OFFICIO MEMBERS SABRINA JOHNSON U.S. Environmental Protection Agency LAURA McKEE Airlines for America CHRISTOPHER OSWALD Airports Council InternationalâNorth America NEIL J. PEDERSEN Transportation Research Board GREGORY PRINCIPATO National Association of State Aviation Officials MELISSA SABATINE American Association of Airport Executives T.J. SCHULZ Airport Consultants Council SECRETARY CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2016 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS Chair: James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, DallasâFort Worth International Airport, TX Vice Chair: Paul Trombino III, Director, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames Executive Director: Neil J. Pedersen, Transportation Research Board MEMBERS VICTORIA A. ARROYO, Executive Director, Georgetown Climate Center; Assistant Dean, Centers and Institutes; and Professor and Director, Environmental Law Program, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC SCOTT E. BENNETT, Director, Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, Little Rock JENNIFER COHAN, Secretary, Delaware DOT, Dover MALCOLM DOUGHERTY, Director, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento A. STEWART FOTHERINGHAM, Professor, School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona State University, Tempe JOHN S. HALIKOWSKI, Director, Arizona DOT, Phoenix MICHAEL W. HANCOCK, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort SUSAN HANSON, Distinguished University Professor Emerita, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, MA STEVE HEMINGER, Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Oakland, CA CHRIS T. HENDRICKSON, Hamerschlag Professor of Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA JEFFREY D. HOLT, Managing Director, Power, Energy, and Infrastructure Group, BMO Capital Markets Corporation, New York ROGER B. HUFF, President, HGLC, LLC, Farmington Hills, MI GERALDINE KNATZ, Professor, Sol Price School of Public Policy, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles YSELA LLORT, Consultant, Miami, FL JAMES P. REDEKER, Commissioner, Connecticut DOT, Newington MARK L. ROSENBERG, Executive Director, The Task Force for Global Health, Inc., Decatur, GA KUMARES C. SINHA, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN DANIEL SPERLING, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis KIRK T. STEUDLE, Director, Michigan DOT, Lansing GARY C. THOMAS, President and Executive Director, Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas, TX PAT THOMAS, Senior Vice President, State Government Affairs, UPS, Washington, DC KATHERINE F. TURNBULL, Executive Associate Director and Research Scientist, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station DEAN WISE, Vice President of Network Strategy, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, Fort Worth, TX EX OFFICIO MEMBERS THOMAS P. BOSTICK (Lieutenant General, U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC JAMES C. CARD (Vice Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, retired), Maritime Consultant, The Woodlands, Texas, and Chair, TRB Marine Board ALISON JANE CONWAY, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, City College of New York, New York, and Chair, TRB Young Members Council T. F. SCOTT DARLING III, Acting Administrator and Chief Counsel, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S. DOT MARIE THERESE DOMINGUEZ, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. DOT SARAH FEINBERG, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S. DOT LeROY GISHI, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC JOHN T. GRAY II, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC MICHAEL P. HUERTA, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. DOT PAUL N. JAENICHEN, SR., Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S. DOT THERESE W. McMILLAN, Acting Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S. DOT MICHAEL P. MELANIPHY, President and CEO, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC GREGORY G. NADEAU, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. DOT MARK R. ROSEKIND, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. DOT CRAIG A. RUTLAND, U.S. Air Force Pavement Engineer, U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer Center, Tyndall Air Force Base, FL REUBEN SARKAR, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation, U.S. Department of Energy BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA GREGORY D. WINFREE, Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Office of the Secretary, U.S. DOT FREDERICK G. (BUD) WRIGHT, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC PAUL F. ZUKUNFT (Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security * Membership as of January 2016.* Membership as of January 2016.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2016 www.TRB.org A IRPORT COOPERAT IVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP SYNTHESIS 70 Research Sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration SubScriber categorieS Aviation â¢ Construction Building Information Modeling for Airports A Synthesis of Airport Practice conSultantS Tamera L. McCuen University of Oklahoma Norman, Oklahoma and Dominique M. Pittenger University of Oklahoma and Arbor Services Norman, Oklahoma
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in transpor- tation of people and goods and in regional, national, and international commerce. They are where the nationâs aviation system connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most air- ports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to intro- duce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Air- port Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agencies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. ACRP is modeled after the suc- cessful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). ACRP under- takes research and other technical activities in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, maintenance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can cooperatively address common operational problems. ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100âCentury of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary partici- pants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operat- ing agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for Amer- ica (A4A), and the Airport Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In Octo- ber 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academy of Sciences formally initiating the program. ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport pro- fessionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research orga- nizations. Each of these participants has different interests and respon- sibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the high- est priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport professionals, the intended users of the research products. The pan- els prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contrac- tors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service pro- viders, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport industry practitioners. ACRP SYNTHESIS 70 Project A11-03, Topic S09-07 ISSN 1935-9187 ISBN 978-0-309-27220-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2016933440 Â© 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educa- tional and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publi- cation according to procedures established and overseen by the Trans- portation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who per- formed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufactur- ers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
TOPIC PANEL S09-07 LUCIANA BURDI, Massachusetts Port Authority, East Boston, MA BRENDAN DILLON, Denver International Airport, Denver, CO DOUGLAS EBERHARD, Autodesk, Golden, CO MARK HUGHES, AECOM, Denver, CO JOHN McWILLIAMS, SeattleâTacoma International Airport, Seattle, WA MICHAEL R. RISEBOROUGH, Greater Toronto Airports Authority, Toronto, ON, Canada ALBERTO VILALBA, San Diego County (CA) Regional Airport Authority, San Diego, CA JOHN A. WALEWSKI, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX DAVID E. WILSON, Port of Seattle, SeattleâTacoma International Airport, Seattle, WA STEVE DEBBAN, Federal Aviation Administration (Liaison) SYNTHESIS STUDIES STAFF STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies JO ALLEN GAUSE, Senior Program Officer GAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer TANYA M. ZWAHLEN, Consultant DON TIPPMAN, Senior Editor CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant DEMISHA WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs MICHAEL R. SALAMONE, Senior Program Officer JEFFREY OSER, Program Associate EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications ACRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 11-03 CHAIR JULIE KENFIELD, Jacobsen/Daniels Associates, Garden Ridge, TX MEMBERS JOSHUA ABRAMSON, Easterwood Airport, College Station, TX DEBBIE K. ALKE, Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT DAVID N. EDWARDS, JR., Greenville-Spartanburg Airport District, Greer, SC DEBORAH FLINT, Los Angeles World Airports, Los Angeles, CA LINDA HOWARD, Independent Aviation Consultant, Bastrop, Texas ARLYN PURCELL, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY CHRISTOPHER J. WILLENBORG, Massachusetts Military Asset and Security Strategy Task Force, Chicopee, MA FAA LIAISON PATRICK W. MAGNOTA AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION ADAM WILLIAMS AIRPORTS CONSULTANTS COUNCIL MATTHEW J. GRIFFIN AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONALâNORTH AMERICA LIYING GU TRB LIAISON CHRISTINE GERENCHER Cover figure: Image symbolizing that BIM for airports can be integrated into all asset life-cycle phases. Source: Benson Photography.
Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to- day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful infor- mation and to make it available to the entire airport community, the Airport Cooperative Research Program authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03, âSynthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,â searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor consti- tute an ACRP report series, Synthesis of Airport Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. Building information modeling (BIM) is a digital representation of a facilityâs physical and functional characteristics. It can be shared by planners, designers, constructors, opera- tors, and maintainers to provide reliable information for decision making throughout the facilityâs life cycle. BIM offers tools that allow airport decision makers to understand all components of a facility, their location, and their attributes, both graphically and systemati- cally, to minimize the total cost of owning and operating an airport facility. The objective of this synthesis is to deliver information about the general, current state of the art and practice in BIM applications in industry and to provide a snapshot of exist- ing experience related to the emergence of BIM in North American airports. The goal is to provide information about BIM and assist airports in understanding available opportunities, benefits, and value related to engaging in BIM. Information used in this study was acquired through a review of the literature and interviews with airport operators and industry experts. In addition to the report, a link to a PowerPoint presentation is provided for use by readers in presenting powerful uses of BIM at airports and information contained in the report. Dominique M. Pittenger, University of Oklahoma and Arbor Services, and Tamera L. McCuen, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, collected and synthesized the infor- mation and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the pre- ceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. FOREWORD PREFACE By Gail R. Staba Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board
vii Acronyms AEC architecture, engineering, and construction professionals AIA American Institute of Architects BBC Balfour Beatty Construction BIM building information model/modeling CMMS computerized maintenance management system FM facility management GIS geographic information systems KPI key performance indicator LOD level of development NBIMS National BIM Standard O&M operations and maintenance RFI request for information RFP request for proposals ROI return on investment Airport Codes ANC Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport BOS Boston Logan International Airport DEN Denver International Airport LAWA Los Angeles World Airports SFO San Francisco Airport Commission Glossary BIM: a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility; multidimensional, intelligent facility information (NBIMS 2015). BIM adoption: begins when an organization makes the decision to use BIM. BIM adoption status: status of an organizationâs decision to use BIM; includes five stages (Jung and Lee 2015): â¢ Stage 1âInterested in adopting BIM, but not yet adopted ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY
viii â¢ Stage 2âBeginning the process of adopting BIM â¢ Stage 3âIntegrating BIM adoption with existing operations, discovering barriers to adoption â¢ Stage 4âCompleting BIM adoptionâovercoming barriers to adoption â¢ Stage 5âCompleted adoptionârealizing benefits of BIM adoption. BIM activity profile: status of an organizationâs BIM activity level based on its BIM experience, expertise, adoption, and implementation intensity over the project life cycle (McGraw-Hill 2014; Jung and Lee 2015). BIM engagement: status of an organizationâs BIM use based on an organizationâs experience, expertise, and implementa- tion; ranges from low to very high (McGraw-Hill 2014). BIM implementation: integration of BIM into an organizationâs business processes (Kreider and Messner 2013). BIM implementation maturity: status of an organizationâs integration of BIM based on use/types of BIM activities that facilitate implementation across the facility life cycle; includes four levels: beginning, basic, intermediate, and advanced (Khosrowshahi and Arayici 2012). BIM implementation plan: a clear organizational strategy that includes the purpose and use of BIM, which is developed during adoption to guide the subsequent implementation process (Penn State 2013). BIM process: the process of utilizing BIM tools and approaches to improve âtraditionalâ business processes and bring value to projects (Penn State 2010). BIM purpose: the specific objective to be achieved when applying BIM during a facilityâs life (Penn State 2010). BIM resource: the systems, tools, and knowledge required in addition to BIM tools to support and complete the BIM pro- cess (Penn State 2010). BIM tools: support BIM processes at the project and organization levels and are generally categorized as authoring tools or audit and analysis tools (Penn State 2010). BIM use: a method of applying building information modeling during a facilityâs life cycle to achieve one or more specific objectives (Kreider and Messner 2013). Facility life cycle: all phases of a facility, from earliest conception to demolition; generally includes planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance, and renewal. Level of development (LOD): describes the minimum dimensional, spatial, quantitative, qualitative, and other data included in a model element to support the authorized uses associated with such LOD (AGC, AIA, and NBIMS 2015). Organization-level BIM: BIM is used by an organization throughout the entire facility life cycle; generally associated with an intermediate to advanced BIM implementation. Project-level BIM: BIM is reserved for project application only; generally associated with a beginning to basic BIM implementation.