Civil Integrated Management (CIM) for Departments of Transportation, Volume 2: Research Report (2016)

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.

22 CIM Case Studies The nationwide surveys conducted by the research team helped in shortlisting most of the candidate projects for case studies. Overall, 15 project representatives responded to the project survey, indicating their willingness to provide details. However, secondary resources (agency surveys, FHWA docu- ments, CIM workshops, DOT websites, and academic jour- nals) pointed to a few other exemplary projects and subject matter experts (SMEs). Thus, the research team decided to balance the data sources taken from the case study projects (those for which the pertinent agencies responded to the project survey) and interviews with CIM SMEs. Table 6.1 lists the projects chosen for case studies. The SME interviews are listed below: 1. Lance Parve (CIM Design-Construction Engineer, SE Free- ways, Wisconsin DOT [WisDOT]) 2. Ron Singh (Chief of Surveys/Geometronics Manager, Oregon DOT [ODOT]) Following is an overview of each case study’s objectives; the individual case studies are detailed in the subsequent sections. 1. The Connecticut DOT’s (CTDOT’s) rotary upgrade project is representative of a smaller roadway design project that performs 3D design of all its involved entities. 2. The Kiewit case study was conducted for the Colorado DOT (CDOT) I-70 project and was helpful for understanding a contractor’s perspective on various 3D technologies. 3. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) KY7 reloca- tion project is the pilot roadway project of the agency that tested implementation of 3D design. The project also had a unique “special note” that gave priority to 3D models as contract documents over plan sets. 4. The Kosciuszko Bridge Project was studied in detail to under- stand the New York State DOT’s (NYSDOT’s) 3D design processes, QA/QC checks using GPS equipment, and 4D/5D modeling specifications. 5. The Michigan DOT’s (MDOT’s) I-96 Livonia construction project was examined to study the agency’s e-construction initiative, its widespread traffic simulation efforts on proj- ects, and its pilot effort to create a guide for data exchange for managing utilities. 6. The Massachusetts DOT’s (MassDOT’s) Fore River bridge replacement was selected because it involved 3D model- ing and CIM implementation practices on a steel bridge project. 7. Crossrail is one of the few mega projects that has com- mitted to deploying CIM—or BIM, as it is called in the UK—throughout its entire life cycle. It was also an inter- esting case study to understand the UK government’s initiatives and legislation for adopting BIM on its public infrastructure projects. Note that the case studies represent various types of proj- ects and budgets—restoration (2R) to new construction (4R), $1.45M to $20B. Examined together, the case studies are a com- plete representation of all CIM-related practices on a typical transportation project. Such diversity in the case studies also enabled the research team to highlight the requirements for successful implementation of CIM on small-scale projects (i.e., projects with funding regulations or other constraints). A semi-structured interview guide was developed to serve as a basis for conducting the case studies. It is included in Appendix C. Appendix D contains the specific questions under each section. The framework of the interview guide is divided into five topics representing all facets of CIM, as presented in Table 6.2. Interviews were conducted based on the availability of the contacts, the scope and project complexity, and the potential opportunity for learning new practices related to CIM. The number of interviews (per project) ranged from 1 through 3 and the interviews lasted between 1.0 and 2.5 hours. The meet- ing minutes were synthesized and detailed case studies reports were then generated. Subsequently, a cross-case analysis was C H A P T E R 6

23 performed to capture the generalized trends and lessons learned from all the case studies. CIM implementation was analyzed in-depth for each of the case studies performed. The following section provides a report on the seven case studies. 6.1 Case Study 1: CTDOT— Rotary Upgrade Project 6.1.a An Overview of CIM Practices—CTDOT • This agency is in the process of developing specifications for the kind of projects that would require CIM technolo- gies and the level of detail for modeling purposes. Work- force training programs are currently informal—used at construction QA/QC areas for grade checking using rovers. The organization is also planning to train designers in 2015 for transition to 3D design. Though CIM use is desirable for designing all the highway elements (including terrains, bridges, and others), there are practical constraints that need to be overcome (regarding software, equipment, and staffing requirements). • The agency has completed a few pilot projects experi- menting with IC and stringless paving (although there are no results to share on the performance and benefits of IC right now). However, the agency believes that AMG will be used more in the future, along with rover-based QA/QC checks. Currently, there are not many indica- tions from the contractors about increased use of AMG for all pavement construction operations. However, on some projects, contractors find it useful to develop the 3D model out of 2D plan sets (often using a third party). In such cases, the liability and risk of using them for AMG are transferred to the contractor. • With the current understanding of AMG, the agency believes the maximum benefits of using this technology will occur in earthmoving for highway jobs. It also believes that for the digital workflow of all the project elements, the main challenges are as follows: non-availability of clear 3D specifications for all the elements, inadequacies of software tools, and challenges in managing design changes. • The agency uses a combination of Bentley ProjectWise and AASHTOWare. These are project suites for document management, field reporting, quantity estimation, and payments to contractors. It plans to use SharePoint in the future. • Bridges have been spatially located throughout the state and locating signals is 50% complete. They are currently working on collecting information related to retaining walls and sign supports. Bridge data was collected through Google Earth and the ET 2000 guardrails were located using Table 6.1. Brief characteristics of the case study projects. No. Project Agency Project delivery method Approx. project cost ($M) Actual/ estimated completion dates* 1 Rotary upgrade to modern roundabout CTDOT D-B-B 2.2 Apr. 2016 2 Kiewit case study on I-70 project CDOT D-B 18 Sep. 2013 3 Relocation of KY7 in Elliott County KYTC D-B-B 26.5 June 2016 4 Kosciuszko Bridge Project NYSDOT D-B 555 Nov. 2017 5 I-96 Livonia construction project MDOT D-B-B 124.1 Jan. 2015 6 Fore River bridge replacement project MassDOT D-B 300 Sep. 2016 7 Crossrail Ltd. (UK) Crossrail Various 20,000 2019 Note: D-B-B refers to the design-bid-build method, while D-B denotes the design-build method. * The estimated completion dates were taken at the time of the case study and may have changed. No. Title Brief description 1 Organization CIM-related DOT practices, specifications, and guidelines 2 Contracts and governance Issues concerning delivery methods and legal concerns 3 CIM integration with project work processes Deployment of specific CIM technologies for the project being investigated 4 CIM lessons learned and best practices Means and methods through which lessons learned are shared and best practices are recorded at the agency 5 CIM performance goals Performance measures and objectives for CIM at the agency and project level Table 6.2. Interview guide framework.

24 GPS technology. Existing survey information was also obtained using Bentley maps to create and validate the project limits. • Important benefits of CIM technologies’ implementa- tion include improved safety on-site as well as time and cost savings. The process uses electronic engineered data (EED) and GPS/model-based controls for pavement con- struction. Additionally, rovers provide the added advan- tage of creating as-builts in real time and identifying quality issues before it is too late. The agency feels that the total benefits are much higher than the initial invest- ment costs. Moreover, apart from the software upgrade, other tools and functionalities (e.g., rovers) do not rapidly change with time. CTDOT has a system of nine real-time network base stations called ARCON that help obtain accurate coordinate locations and real-time corrections. • Modeling the structures, such as bridges, requires advanced software tools (integrated with roadway design packages) and additional training. Cost of design effort will also increase. As an agency that performs 25% of the design in-house, doing QA/QC checks on the remaining consul- tant deliverables will also be challenging. Hence, it is not widely used on its projects. 4D modeling is used only on rare occasions, where there is complicated construction sequencing/staging. 6.1.b Data Sources for Case Study The research team used case study interviews and obtained some resources from project websites (http://www.biznet. ct.gov/scp_search/BidDetail.aspx?CID=32989). 6.1.c Introduction and Project Characteristics The project’s objective is to upgrade the rotary inter- section of Route 188, Route 334, and Holbrook road in the town of Seymour to a modern roundabout facility. The need for the project arose as a result of traffic safety concerns at the rotary intersection, occurrences of high approaching speeds (~40 mph), and poor sight distance issues. After its completion, the modern roundabout is expected to benefit the commuters through controlled operating speeds at the roundabouts (15 to 25 mph) and enhanced safety condi- tions. The salient characteristics of the project are shown in Table 6.3. 6.1.d Brief Project Description The proposed project would upgrade the current four-leg rotary to a modern roundabout by modifying the approach geometry, and raising and lengthening the splitter islands. To improve sightlines and visibility, the center island will be raised and the profile on Route 334 lowered. These improve- ments are anticipated to provide a safer intersection through reduction in approaching speed and providing maximum deflection to the circulating vehicles. A schematic represen- tation of the proposed condition based on the preliminary design is shown in Figure 6.1. 6.1.e Motivation This project was chosen as a case study based on the analysis of the survey response. It emerged as a reasonable candi- date to provide insight into the suitability and adaptation of CIM technologies for the smaller projects undertaken by many DOTs. Additionally, this project used 3D design for all the major roadway components (existing surface, finished surface, drainage, and curbs, among others). From an organizational standpoint, the CTDOT had pre- pared its specifications for documenting EED. It has also envisioned moving toward uniform 3D design for all road- way and major structural elements on projects in the future (as reported in its EED manual). Moreover, the agency is per- forming its pilot projects to experiment with advanced CIM technologies such as IC and AMG for stringless paving. Hence, the research team investigated this project in detail to understand the practices of model-based workflow for roadway projects, as well as the organizational challenges of and motivation for embracing 3D technologies. Feature Value/description Project cost/Agency $2.2M, expected to be fully state funded/CTDOT Project no./Contract method 124-162/D-B-B Project type Roadway project (no major structures) Current status Currently in design completion stage; construction anticipated to start in spring 2015 ROW acquisition Mostly within the limits of state’s ROW Utility coordination and relocation No major utility conflicts expected due to low project complexity and minimum utilities interference. Two utility poles are to be relocated. Table 6.3. Project characteristics—CTDOT.

25 6.1.f CIM Implementation Analysis— Rotary Upgrade to Modern Roundabout Project • The rotary project, with smaller scope and lower complex- ity (no major structures such as bridges), is designed up to 90% in 3D using Bentley InRoads. The agency also believes the next planned software upgrade to SELECTSERIES 3 would facilitate designers’ transition to the model-based design process for many projects. • During the bidding process, the EED data (that was used to extract contract plans) and contract plans were both pro- vided to the contractor. However, the contract plans were the official governing documents for the design and con- struction process. The provided EED information included surfaces (DTM), alignments, design files of existing ground, proposed ground, proposed traffic and landscape design, storm and sanitary database, and preference files. As per the specifications, the liability and risk of verifying and using the data for AMG and any other purposes is transferred to the contractor. • Digital signatures had been used only to sign the contract plan sets. Models were not verified or vetted with them. • Surveying was performed using total stations to collect the data required to create the 3D DTM models. The project conditions did not necessitate using advanced sensing tech- nologies for data collection, although there was some mini- mal LiDAR support to supplement the drainage design. • As reported in Section 6.1.c, interference with utilities in the project area was minimal and the entire ROW fell within the state’s limits. There were no challenges expected in this regard and hence no advanced CIM technologies were used for these tasks. A “utility work schedule” was provided by each of the utility companies to the DOT, delineating their scope of work in the project. These schedules were then included in the final bid specifica- tions to assist the contractor in his detailed schedule development. However, the contractor had been asked to verify its accuracy and coordinate with the concerned utility companies to incorporate the latest utility sched- uling information. • In the planning stage of the project, traffic modeling was performed using VISSIM to lay the roundabout and to visu- alize improvements in the traffic behavior and safety with the proposed conditions. The same simulation model was used for public information purposes. • The staged construction and constructability reviews are performed during the final design using in-house construc- tion expertise. Figure 6.1. Schematic representation of the proposed conditions of Project 124-162.

26 6.1.g Inferences The agency has been reasonably successful in implement- ing several CIM technologies and practices. This case study has helped deduce some important lessons. Defining and standardizing EED requirements is a signifi- cant step in ensuring seamless transfer of project information across all stakeholders, in a timely manner. The importance and requirements of each of the engineering elements and their associated deliverable formats should be clearly articu- lated in the specifications. This step helps align all the con- tractors and consultants with the agency’s expectations. 3D terrain modeling of roadway elements can be performed in a cost-effective manner for smaller projects as well (e.g., roadway improvements). Selection of appropriate survey- ing techniques will assist in the collection of pertinent data for modeling. Wherever required and depending on budget, the data can be supplemented with aerial imagery (photo- grammetry) and static LiDAR to obtain more accurate infor- mation. Good quality as-built data helps; however, utilizing that data for new project development is still a major chal- lenge given the multiple data variants (2D plan sets, 3D spatial point clouds, electronic data, among others) and these data sets are not continually updated throughout the life cycle. CIM consists of some emerging technologies that are not common to the business workflow of many agencies (e.g., IC, 4D/5D as reported in project surveys). Performing pilot proj- ects to understand the benefits and challenges, engaging with relevant stakeholders (partnering), and jointly collaborat- ing with other agencies (e.g., counties, state DOTs, FHWA) can help in promoting and integrating emerging technologies with project workflow. Systematic technology implementa- tion planning at the organizational level also helps in phasing out and channelizing the implementation efforts for multiple technologies. Workforce training programs are vital for ensuring smoother transition to CIM adoption—for both the designers (3D mod- eling and design, information management) and the field staff (pavement operations, QA/QC checks using rovers). 6.2 Case Study 2: Kiewit I-70 and Pecos Bridge Case Study 6.2.a An Overview of CIM Practices—Kiewit • Kiewit Corporation has been using Bentley software to develop 3D models for construction for several years. The project type and delivery method have an influence on how the models are created. For example, for a traditional D-B-B project, the models would likely be developed 100% in-house from the 2D plans. However, if the project were an alternative delivery method such as design-build (D-B) or construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC), the model would be based on the electronic files from the design. The contractor found that most of the time the roadway and drainage design files were generated in 3D and those files could be used as a starting point to develop 3D files. When these new 3D files are developed, the contractor can use them to verify design information and for construction. • During construction, the 3D files were typically used as a check against survey and roadway construction technolo- gies such as AMG. On projects that are more complex, the 3D models are used for visualization purposes as well. 6.2.b Data Sources for Case Study The research team used case study interviews and the CDOT website. 6.2.c Project Characteristics This project involved replacing the Pecos Street Bridge over I-70, which was in poor condition, and improving the traffic operations at the interchange by installing roundabout type intersections and a pedestrian bridge. The estimated con- struction cost for the project was $18 million. It was deter- mined that accelerated bridge construction (ABC) would be used to reduce the overall construction schedule thereby minimizing the impacts and traffic delays to the traveling public, especially along I-70. The project limited the impact to the commuters along I-70 to a 50-hour shutdown, as opposed to traffic control for approximately 12 months if built using conventional methods. Characteristics of the proj- ect are described in Table 6.4. Figure 6.2 represents schematic views of the project and bridge. 6.2.d Motivation This project was chosen as a case study based on presenta- tions given at the 2014 Western Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials conference. The conference pre- sentation highlighted the innovative ABC techniques along with the alternative contracting (CM/GC) method. More- over, it was indicated that 3D modeling was used in this proj- ect in the design and construction phases. 6.2.e CIM Implementation Analysis— Pecos Bridge Replacement over I-70 • Bentley’s MicroStation and InRoads software were used to model the roadways and approaches during design. Dur- ing construction, the same software was used to recreate the models for the roadway but also included the model for the bridge elements, superstructure, and substructure, as well as the bridge staging area. The project used 3D design

27 for the roadway and drainage, but had to develop addi- tional bridge models because the design was carried out in 2D. As a result, 3D models of the bridge in the final design state and construction state (i.e., at the bridge staging area located 800 ft away) were developed for both constructing and moving the bridge. • The 3D model of the bridge was developed as follows: – The bridge was modeled in the final condition using the 2D plans. – The bridge in the model was copied and moved to the bridge staging area 800 ft away. This was necessary to determine elevation lengths, and so forth, for the con- struction of the bridge. – The falsework for the bridge was designed and modeled at the bridge staging area. – The bridge was copied and moved back from the bridge staging area to the final location to verify that the constructed bridge still fit the final location. This was extremely important since the bridge was going to be moved via Self-Propelled Modular Transporters (SPMTs). Figure 6.3 displays the 3D model of the bridge superstruc- ture and Figure 6.4 presents the elements of the substructure included in the modeling processes. • During the modeling described above, the modelers dis- covered that the bridge was approximately 3 in. higher than the proposed roadway profile when the bridge was moved from the construction area to the final location. Feature Value/description Project cost/Agency $18 M/CDOT Contract method Design-Build (D-B) Bridge type A 156-ft-long, single span, cast-in-place, post-tensioned concrete box girder bridge with a variable depth and a transverse post-tensioned deck. The deck overhang span varied from 8.5 to 15.5 ft. Bridge webs were post-tensioned internally and externally, exterior webs were curved, and web spacing varied from 16 to 23.5 ft. Current status Construction completed and Pecos Street opened on September 1, 2013 Table 6.4. Project characteristics—CDOT. Figure 6.2. Schematic views: (left) a contextual view of the project plan; (right) simulation of the completed project. (Source: CDOT.)

28 This difference in elevation arose because the bearing pads were not accounted for when the bridge was modeled at the bridge staging area. Making this discovery during the planning phase, rather than during the final move of the bridge was quite valuable. • Once the models were completed and verified for the con- struction of the bridge elements, the bridge movement was modeled—a critical step, given the limit to the differential elevation between the SPMTs. This model was completed by taking cross sections of the roadway surface and then overlaying the SPMTs and bridge to ensure everything fell within the tolerable limits. Figure 6.5 is a graphical repre- sentation of cross sections used for modeling the planned final location of the bridge. • Having the model of the sequence of movements on-site enhanced the communication among project stakeholders and contributed significantly to the outreach efforts to educate the public. Figure 6.6 shows a rendered image of the bridge movement simulated by using the model and the picture of the SPMTs used in the movement. 6.2.f Inferences On this project, the contractor was the primary driver for the use of 3D modeling. The contractor believed a significant benefit could be derived from the models. The critical aspect of having to build a bridge offsite and then move the bridge into its final location made it imperative that the dimensions and relative locations in space were accurate. Furthermore, while the step from 3D to 4D was not necessarily used for tra- ditional scheduling purposes, it was used to help determine the move of the bridge over time. This project illustrates that using 3D modeling for major bridge elements can reduce construction delays by resolving conflicts digitally rather than in the field. This project serves as an example of how to integrate design and construction digitally for future ABC projects. 6.3 Case Study 3: Relocation of KY7 in Elliott County 6.3.a An Overview of CIM Practices—KYTC • Through this project, the agency is experimenting with incorporating specifications into contracts for using and prioritizing 3D models on roadway projects. KYTC will analyze the results of this project to determine whether these specifications can be included in the contracts of future projects. • The agency uses a wide variety of electronic tools and web- based platforms to organize the information flow during project development. ProjectWise is used to manage and share the information during design (IFC, Notice for Design Changes files) and construction (daily reports). Bidding processes and documents are maintained in electronic plan rooms that are handled by a third party website; bidding and submittals are sent through the Bid Express online service. • Designers are trained and motivated to perform their work in 3D. Currently, roadway structures are designed only in 2D. The agency plans to use 3D modeling in a twin bridge project in the future, but this may be limited to visualiza- tion. There is no imminent requirement to transform the design process to model-based delivery. Also, there are few reported cases of 4D/5D on Kentucky projects. • The KYTC envisions preparing an effective Utility Conflict Matrix in the future. Field inspectors and permitting rep- resentatives will all be equipped with GPS equipment so that whenever a new utility construction/relocation takes place, the geo-located coordinates are obtained. There are Figure 6.3. 3D models: (top) bridge superstructure; (bottom) bridge superstructure in final position. (Source: Kiewit.) Figure 6.4. Model of bridge substructure elements and earthwork. (Source: Kiewit.)

29 also plans to adopt quality level “A” subsurface utility engi- neering (SUE) to retrieve the geo-location of existing utili- ties. Currently, the efforts to obtain geo-referenced utility information are constrained to a project-specific environ- ment and not transferred to a central state/district level repository. Initiatives will also be undertaken to create and maintain a sort of central database with this data. A major challenge in the SUE process is getting the utility compa- nies on board. Utility companies maintain a significant portion of ROW information, but are not always willing to share that data, citing national security concerns. Legislative action may help here. (For example, Utah has mandated that utility companies locate all their assets in 3D, although this is not strictly enforced.) • Construction inspection is performed by staff from section offices (a section office takes care of work from multiple counties). Although KYTC perceives rover-based QA/QC checks as an important benefit, lack of technology, training, and personnel hinders field implementation for inspection. KYTC plans to deploy rovers for this pilot project and to follow and implement the lessons learned on this issue across the entire state. • Electronic signatures are primarily used to sign the plan sets. Engineers and consultants provide digitally encrypted PDF files and they are unencrypted for bidding purposes. InRoads/DGN files (3D models) are not encrypted. • Kentucky takes initiatives to spatially locate most of its assets—handheld GPS was used to obtain information on a high-tension cable barrier and other facilities. KYTC Figure 6.5. Cross section of SPMTs and the bridge in final location. (Source: Kiewit.) Figure 6.6. Pecos Bridge: (top) rendered view of bridge movement (Source: Kiewit), (bottom) picture of SPMTs and bridge superstructure (Source: Aspire, Winter 2014).

30 generally uses trucks equipped with a variety of pavement sensing equipment to obtain information on cracks, dura- bility, and so forth, but LiDAR has not been deployed on the trucks because of cost-related issues. However, there are plans to deploy mobile LiDAR for as-built new con- struction projects. • The public information process is conducted through public meetings. For urban reconstruction/congested areas, dedicated Public Information Officers follow specific requirements. There is limited usage of visualization. Traf- fic simulation is provided only in cases involving complex interchanges or congested urban areas. 6.3.b Data Sources for Case Study The research team used case study interviews and a pre- sentation at the 2014 International Highway Engineering Exchange Program conference. 6.3.c Project Characteristics The project’s objective is to relocate an approximately 5-mile stretch of rural arterial KY7. The route consists of 60 approaches and entrances and involves 3 million cubic ft of excavation work. It started as an in-house (county) project and KYTC took over the project development after PL&G (Preliminary Line & Grade) submittals. Other salient char- acteristics of the project are given in Table 6.5. Figure 6.7 represents an aerial view of the project scope. 6.3.d Motivation This project was chosen as a case study based on the survey response. The project involved a large amount of grading, drainage, and excavation operations. A special note written for this contract specifies that the 3D surface models super- sede the plan sets if discrepancies arise between the two. As per the special note, “KYTC shall use the same model to inspect the contractor’s work.” This project adopted 3D modeling, AMG, and digital asset management in the delivery process. From an organizational standpoint, Kentucky represents an aspirational agency that is in the process of integrating several CIM practices in its project workflow. The project is strategically important to successful CIM adoption in KYTC. It has leadership buy-in and expert guidance from the FHWA and the Kentucky Association of Highway Con- tractors, among others. The agency is testing 3D models and several other CIM technologies for the first time in the state. The lessons learned from this project will be used in the fol- lowing ways: • Ascertain and validate the best practices for 3D design adoption. • Find out the best submittal practices for contractors and other stakeholders. Figure 6.7. Schematic representation of project scope. Feature Value/description Project cost/Agency $26.5 M/KYTC Project no./Contract method 09-0126.51/12-1363/ D-B-B Project type Roadway project (no major structures other than box culverts and circular pipes) Current status Construction anticipated to start in spring 2014 and completion expected in summer 2016 ROW acquisition Mostly within the limits of state’s ROW Utility coordination and relocation No major utility conflicts expected due to low project complexity and minimum utilities interference Table 6.5. Project characteristics—KYTC.

31 • Document the realized benefits and challenges. • Understand the design(er) role and its impacts on the downstream construction process. • Establish the level of detail and completeness required for 3D model development. • Set comprehensive policies for future project development. Hence, it was decided to investigate this project in detail to understand the motivation behind the “special note” on the contract and document the benefits and challenges faced while evaluating implementation of CIM technologies in this pilot project. 6.3.e CIM Implementation Analysis— Relocation of KY7 in Elliott County • The agency’s past experience indicated that unless they give the EED data (3D terrain model in this project) prior- ity over 2D plan sets, contractors tend to always use the plans and digitize them to create their own models for various purposes (including AMG). It has to be noted that constructors are contractually obligated to use the KYTC’s data. Hence, the agency believed that this change in speci- fications would ensure contractors use the EED and avoid redundancy. • For modeling purposes, existing information was collected through aerial imagery that was then digitized (photo- grammetry). It was supplemented with traditional sur- veying techniques to enhance accuracy on obscure areas (some drainage and tie-ins). Design of the elements was done in Bentley InRoads. The elements modeled in 3D include approaches, entrances, ditches, and surface ele- ments (finished grade, subgrade). Utilities were not mod- eled in 3D. • All the design files were provided to the contractor in both native and converted file formats. The deliverables included surface elements, breaklines, and alignments (existing and proposed conditions in both DTM and XML formats). On this project, machine control files are only used for grad- ing operations and not for finished surface pavement con- struction, primarily because of the contractor’s inability to afford all the machines. In addition, the contract did not explicitly specify the individual stages for which AMG had to be used. • Documents are managed and shared across all the project stakeholders using the ProjectWise tool during design and construction. • The agency also plans to analyze and quantify the benefits of using CIM technologies on this project. The design effort for this project happened mostly in-house and it amounted to 8 to 10% of construction costs. For this ongoing 2-year project, the KYTC plans to track change orders, assess their magnitude, and compare them with those of similar projects (in terms of budget, delivery method, earthwork, etc.). From a QA/QC perspective, although it is difficult to quantify, there are benefits resulting from greater confi- dence and accuracy in the inspection process and record- ing of as-builts. • There were no major changes reported on this project, except a Maintenance of Traffic issue that arose early when temporary surface models were not considered for the culvert construction. However, the contractor resolved this issue. • Advanced CIM technology such as IC is not used on this project. If KYTC wants the contractors to move in this direction, it will have to approach the grading committee, asphalt-paving subcommittee, and the contractors asso- ciation to educate them, get their feedback, and address their concerns. 6.3.f Inferences Although the project is not yet complete, the agency has reported that it has learned several important lessons and best practices from this pilot project. The technology adoption experience has yielded impor- tant points to be followed while implementing model-based design. KYTC has realized that it is beneficial to use con- tinuous breaklines for all the design entities. Deliverables should include DTM/XML/DGN files of all subsurface layers. Designers have to pay close attention and incorporate max- imum design details when modeling complex elements of roadways (such as intersections, gore areas, lane additions/ drops, widening for guardrail, etc.). The project had a unique “special note” that gave contrac- tual priority to 3D models for quantity calculations, QA/QC checks, and conflict resolution. However, the project team learned that it is more important to include clauses in con- tracts specifying how the model will be used (e.g., AMG during construction) and the extent of utilization (for grading, string- less paving, compacting, etc.). Such detailed definitions would help maximize the benefits of developing and using a 3D model. Also, it would help avoid any potential conflicts among vari- ous stakeholders. The agency also noted that prequalification for bidding may be necessary to ensure competent contrac- tors perform the intended work. Leadership buy-in and expert guidance have been the major organizational drivers in the agency undertaking and execut- ing this pilot project. The agency has plans in place to perform a second pilot project to sustain its efforts in incorporating CIM technologies.

32 6.4 Case Study 4: NYSDOT Kosciuszko Bridge Project 6.4.a An Overview of CIM Practices— NYSDOT • NYSDOT uses digital information and CIM technologies on any project of any size if the project may benefit from the usage. Typically, NYSDOT finds that contractors are requesting the digital information to use with the con- struction technologies that they have, such as AMG. In NYSDOT’s experience, all the major contractors use AMG and GPS. • The primary contractual/legal language used is its contract control plan for survey specifications (no.: 625). This sur- vey specification requires use of GPS units, total stations, and terrestrial scanners. This extensive level of surveying is what the agency uses to verify quantities for payment. They pay overruns and underruns based on the quantities determined through advanced surveying techniques. CIM technologies such as LiDAR, GIS, and GPS are hardly ever used during the planning phase. There is a large learning curve in order to use these technologies during planning. As of now, there is no formal mechanism to determine the costs versus benefits of the use of advanced survey- ing techniques. However, they feel that regardless of the ROI, the contractors are upgrading their technology and the DOT needs to keep up—specifically for construction inspections, because they are at risk of delay claims if they are unable to turn around submittals in a timely manner. • The agency used 3D models for design, construction, and producing electronic as-builts. They are in the process of determining how to disseminate the digital information to all stakeholders and how to implement usage through- out the organization. Furthermore, the agency sees a lot of value in good 3D models and getting the 3D design files to the contractor so that there is no question as to the intent of the design—thus minimizing RFIs, which will ultimately result in lower project costs. However, this will almost always come with a non-disclaimer form that the files are provided as supplemental information only. Also there may be some reluctance to share the models because sometimes the 3D model may only be developed well enough to gen- erate 2D plans and not be fully “fine-tuned.” • The agency uses CIM technologies for both D-B and D-B-B projects. There is more that the agency can control concern- ing CIM usage, if the delivery method is D-B-B. If the deliv- ery method is D-B, then the D-B team will typically only use CIM if it is needed/required by the contractor in order to build the project the way that they want to build it. For example, if the contractor is going to rely heavily on AMG to construct the roadway, then the design will be in 3D and that digital information will be used during construction. Additionally, the agency believes that the idea of alterna- tive technical concepts may promote the usage of CIM. • Using CIM while coordinating with utility companies can be difficult. The agency has found that many legal and security issues are related to underground utilities. While they try to mitigate any utility conflicts prior to construc- tion, they have had numerous projects where unidentified utilities have been encountered. Sometimes this issue arises when the utility is old or abandoned, or when the utility is related to national security entities and cannot be put on record. The latter becomes a barrier when it comes to docu- menting as-builts and using digital information and CIM technologies for the O&M phase, because those utilities’ locations cannot be documented (unlike the typical DOT information and records). • Although the primary use of CIM within NYSDOT relates to advanced surveying techniques and 3D models, they have also begun using 4D and 5D models on larger projects. The 4D simulations seem to have worked well because the projects that have used 4D have come in on time. The 5D modeling is being used on a few current projects; if its use is successful, then it will probably be a requirement for future large D-B projects. In addition, NYSDOT uses traf- fic models for traffic management, especially when there is staged construction. When there is staged construction, a traffic model is used for every stage to illustrate anticipated traffic flows. 6.4.b Data Sources for Case Studies The research team used the case study interviews, proj- ect survey, and NYSDOT website (https://www.dot.ny.gov/ kbridge). 6.4.c Project Characteristics This project involves replacement of an existing steel truss bridge with a cable-stayed bridge, intended to ease traffic congestion and enhance the safety and driving conditions of the travelers. The D-B procurement process facilitated selec- tion of a competent and qualified entity that used innovative CIM practices aligning with the agency’s expectations. This civil project involved extensive use of a 3D design process and 4D modeling for constructability reviews and the pub- lic information process. Notably, it also deployed model- based verification of quantities and estimation of contractor costs (5D modeling). As of the compilation of this report, the project was under construction. Figure 6.8 shows ren- dered images of the perspective view and drivers’ view of the bridge.

33 6.4.d CIM Implementation Analysis— Kosciuszko Bridge Project • During the planning phase, the agency procured the ser- vices of a third-party consultant for collecting and supply- ing LiDAR data. However, this information was supplied for “information purposes only” and the contractor was instructed to use the plans and specifications from the Request for Proposal (RFP) documents. Photogrammetry was used to prepare a preliminary engineers’ estimate of quantities. The data was used for planning, public out- reach, and visualization purposes. • In the RFP phase, it was decided that the selected design- builder would develop, maintain, and hand over a 3D model integrated with schedule (4D) and cost (5D) infor- mation. Specifications associated with these requirements were also incorporated in contracts asking the project team to provide methodologies that would assist in using mod- els for analyzing the construction sequence, tracking con- struction progress, and payments. In addition, it was also required to use the model for design visualization. • The D-B process enabled the teams to present their techni- cal concepts and proposals using 3D models. The design of the structure followed a model-centric process with 3D models developed from LiDAR and photogrammetry data. The roadways, approaches, structures, and utilities were all designed in 3D. The highway design and bridge models were also integrated using common survey control to analyze environmental issues and perform clash detection among the various entities. The model’s level of develop- ment (LOD) met the specifications in the contract docu- ments. The model helped the project team verify clearances, interface on issues, and check the structural integrity of the model. The required design data was shared with the con- tractor in machine-readable formats (e.g., XML) to support AMG operations. • Design reviews and constructability analyses saw the active use of 4D and 5D modeling. The 4D schedule was resource- loaded to include labor and equipment data related to each work operation, which was created by a software vendor. The 4D model was then used to examine staging conflicts, traffic congestion, and reviewing project progress. The 5D model was to be kept updated by integrating it with infor- mation from an electronic document management tool that tracked daily work operations and quantity payments. • During construction, the project staff used mobile devices (such as smartphones) and a compatible document man- agement tool for recording daily progress and generat- ing quantities. Quality control inspections also involved LiDAR and GPS-based technology (such as rovers) to verify compliance with design documents and survey standard specifications. The frequent checks improved the quality of work and the process, resulting in time and crew savings compared with traditional methods (using digital level or total stations). After the construction, the asset informa- tion in the paper plans was updated from the design sur- vey based on the as-built information and was archived electronically. 6.4.e Inferences This project replaced the existing steel bridge with a cable- stayed bridge. This project gave several insights on practices related to surveying and modeling. Firstly, the agency had Figure 6.8. Kosciuszko Bridge: (left) perspective view from Newton Creek; (right) drive-through view during the day. (Source: NYSDOT.)

34 revised its surveying specifications to enable field staff to use GPS-based inspection technologies for quality checks and quantity measurements. This step was critical to facilitate agency-wide adoption of this practice. Apart from the com- monly reported uses of visualization and communication, the project actively deployed strategies to use 4D and 5D models for monitoring construction progress and verifying quantity estimates for payments. This process was facilitated through incorporating detailed specifications concerning model man- agement plans in contracts. 6.5 Case Study 5: MDOT I-96 Reconstruction Project 6.5.a An Overview of CIM Practices—MDOT • MDOT has been one of the leading advocates and national leaders in experimenting with electronic document man- agement systems and digital signatures at the agency level for project and asset information management. This effort, formally recognized as an “e-construction” initiative, has now captured national attention through the Every Day Counts (EDC-3) program. • The e-construction effort has strengthened the agency’s foundational information management systems by enabling the collection and organization of relevant data in digital formats throughout the asset’s life cycle—scoping and sur- veying, designing, bid letting, construction, and O&M. The ability to manage and provide data in digital formats is a major prerequisite for leveraging the complete potential of state-of-the-art CIM technologies. The agency has col- laborated with several major state and national stake holders such as the Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Asso- ciation, American Council of Engineering Companies of Michigan, FHWA, local agencies, and software vendors to keep abreast with the technological advancements and coor- dinate with them to design best practices and implementa- tion specifications. • The agency provides digital information—including 3D CAD and point cloud models and proposed surface files— to promote contractor innovation and lower construction risk (improved accuracy of the design data). The relevant files are uploaded to the letting-specific folder created in the ProjectWise system. The process not only streamlines data flow but also reduces the paper-based deliverables on projects (creating agency savings). • During construction, the agency follows an electronic docu- ment submittal and approval system with digital signatures. All the required information—such as daily work reports, quality control reports, construction surveys, materials testing records, and shop drawings—are securely stored in ProjectWise. Access and modification of the files (or their hierarchy) is regulated by authorization systems put in place. Review and approval processes follow intelligent and secure workflow with the authorities using approved digital signatures. Most of the information is accessible through web-based systems. • Another noteworthy effort related to CIM is the agency’s use of advanced traffic simulation tools to evaluate pro- posed lane closures and construction stages for projects. The agency has a proven record of executing major projects through full-closures strategies. The availability of quality alternative routes had been one of the major justifica- tions for this approach; nonetheless, the decision-making process was supported by extensive traffic analysis that involved analyzing network-level impacts on measures of effectiveness (travel time, queue length, and average speed, among others). The agency normally uses the base network models from the local MPOs and builds them to the required granularity for the project-level microsimu- lation efforts. Quite often, it also produces interactive CIM models that combine design visualization with traf- fic simulation outputs. Such animations have been used in the past to assist in public outreach efforts and inform/ augment some of the engineering/construction decisions. • MDOT is currently in the early stages of integrating CIM tools and practices for activities beyond construction. Spe- cifically, AMG is predominantly used for excavating and grading operations. The agency has been deploying mobile LiDAR and unmanned aerial vehicles for post-construction surveys and information handover. • MDOT’s effort to create a geospatial repository for utilities has been one of the major strides of CIM implementation. In a pilot initiative, the agency collaborated with relevant util- ity companies (gas, electric, storm and sanitary sewers, and fiber-optic providers, among others) in creating GIS-based utility database systems for new infrastructure projects. In the near future, the agency plans to enhance the quality of this data by investing in SUE technologies. 6.5.b Data Sources for Case Studies The research team used the case study interviews, the proj- ect survey, and the following website: http://www.96fix.com/ project_information. 6.5.c Project Characteristics This project involved reconstruction and rehabilitation of a 7-mile segment of I-96 from Newburgh Road in the City of Livonia to Telegraph Road in Redford Township. The intrigu- ing aspect of this project is that the city had complete clo- sures of portions of the interstate for approximately 1 year.

35 The scope of work involved repairing 37 bridges, rehabilitat- ing and replacing pavements (roads), and adding on and off ramps. The primary objective of this project was to enhance the safety and mobility conditions of the project. A schematic representation of the project is shown in Figure 6.9. 6.5.d CIM Implementation Analysis— I-96 Project Many of the project activities were consistent with the agency’s practices. Information management and sharing primarily occurred electronically from design and bidding through construction phases. As with other agencies, the design information was provided in both native (CAD) and converted (XML) file formats. However, the electronic data was restricted as “information only.” The project team utilized ProjectWise for management, RFIs, shop drawings, contract submittals, and associated trans- actions. Mobile digital devices (such as tablets) and software applications such as SiteManager were used extensively for managing daily work and inspection activities. The Maintenance of Traffic plans were visualized in 3D along with realistic traffic simulations extracted from micro- simulation analysis. The agency used 3D visualization aids and social media for public information purposes. Although AMG is commonly used for excavation, grading, and other related activities, the roads were constructed using conventional methods. MDOT Transportation Service Cen- ter personnel performed QA/QC checks using GPS rovers and total stations to verify quantities and calculate payments to contractors. 6.5.e Inferences The agency now has implemented tools to support elec- tronic document management with digital signatures for approvals, reviews, archiving, and change management. Visu- alization tools (3D and traffic simulation tools) proved effec- tive for public information. The following are some of the key points that the project team and the agency identified as essential when transitioning to the use of emerging CIM technologies and practices: • Identify core competencies that the DOT needs to retain, particularly in terms of staffing numbers, qualifications, and experience. Figure 6.9. I-96 reconstruction project layout.

36 • Set the vision on the future and the tools the agency will be using; aim for enterprise-wide data management. • Create solid foundations for geospatially identified data. 6.6 Case Study 6: MassDOT Fore River Bridge Replacement Project 6.6.a An Overview of CIM Practices— MassDOT • The agency has been using AutoCAD Civil 3D-based design tools for roadway design since 2012. It has created standards and specifications, design templates, and all supporting documentation for all the stakeholders to assist in prepa- ration of CAD files for highway projects. These specifica- tions and templates also support electronic data sharing and management between various disciplines of the DOT and consultants working for the agency. The revisions and modifications to these standards are also performed at reg- ular intervals to ensure updates with contemporary devel- opments. The agency also issues formal “Engineering and Policy Directives” to promote adoption of new concepts in design or engineering procedures. • The agency uses a wide variety of electronic tools and web- based platforms to organize the information flow during project development. SharePoint Site is used to manage and share the information during design (IFC, NDC files) and construction (daily reports). Bidding processes and sub- mittals are handled through the online service Bid Express. The agency employs a standard prequalification procedure for contractors when projects are worth $50,000 or more. • MassDOT uses a customized “Construction Project Esti- mator” application for current and future construction projects. It has also developed a “Construction Schedule Toolkit,” a set of Primavera P6 templates that can assist contractors in meeting the new specifications of the Accel- erated Bridge Program (ABP). However, the agency has maintained that these tools are provided for information purposes only and the associated risks and liability rest with the contractor. • The agency also possesses a robust Global Navigation Satel- lite Systems (GNSS) network of continually operating ref- erence stations (CORS) network to cater to the real-time positioning requirements of various operations, such as surveying, engineering, and GIS mapping. The agency has also developed detailed guidelines for using this network and the approximate estimates (costs) of the associated field equipment and infrastructure. It has documented potential uses of this network for its highway system under geodetic survey, utility poles relocation, asset management, auto- mated grade control, and construction inspection. From a CIM perspective, the agency is in transition to realize the full potential of AMG technologies for grading and finished surface construction. • Advanced CIM technologies have been tested through pilot projects. The agency issued an addendum in 2013 providing detailed IC specifications for hot-mix asphalt (HMA) applications. It plans to deploy IC in its ongoing “Route 2/I-95 Bridge Replacement Project” for the first time. • The agency has deployed mobile LiDAR for collecting high-resolution point cloud data and colored imagery of the state highways and state numbered routes in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The resulting infor- mation is used to extract roadway signs and signage data to be stored in the asset inventory database. 6.6.b Data Sources for Case Study The research team used case study interviews and the proj- ect website. 6.6.c Project Characteristics The project’s objective is to replace an existing bascule bridge that serves Route 3A over the Fore River between the towns of Quincy and Weymouth with a steel vertical lift span bridge. The imminent end of the existing bridge’s serviceable life and an increase in daily traffic along this route are the primary drivers behind the replacement. Apart from provid- ing better rides for commuting vehicles, the new bridge will also provide several other benefits, such as straight ROW, enhanced and safer traveling conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians, and improved vertical clearance (60 ft in closed position). Other salient characteristics of the project are given in Table 6.6. Figures 6.10 and 6.11 represent a schematic view of the proposed bridge. 6.6.d Motivation This project was chosen as a case study based on analy- sis of the survey response. The Fore River bridge replace- ment represents a significant initiative for the ABP, whose main objective is rehabilitating structurally deficient bridges. Various innovative techniques have been proposed for this project—such as EDC-2’s ABC techniques, advanced proj- ect scheduling and estimating tools, innovative construction sequencing, and alternative construction contracting (D-B). Moreover, the survey response also indicated that 3D modeling and design are actively used in this project from its concep- tualization to environmental analysis through the design and construction phases. The scale and complexity of the project and its component structures also make it an ideal candidate to study CIM implementation for steel structures. Finally, the

37 agency plans to monitor the performance benefits of using these technologies on this project. From an organizational standpoint, MassDOT has stan- dardized the data collection requirements and specifications for model-based design. It is also investing in the testing and implementation of several advanced CIM technologies, such as IC, LiDAR, and AMG. Hence, it was decided to investigate this project in detail to understand the CIM implementation from design to con- struction on a typical heavy civil construction project (steel structure). 6.6.e CIM Implementation Analysis— Fore River Bridge Replacement • For preliminary design, Autodesk Civil 3D was used for modeling the roadways and approaches (geo-referenced modeling), and the superstructure (bridge) and associ- ated utilities were modeled in Revit. Although the models Feature Value/description Project cost/Agency $300 M/MassDOT Project no./Contract method 71680/D-B Project type Steel vertical lift span bridge. There are three approach spans on Quincy and Weymouth side; a main span with vertical towers at either end of it, with two lanes in East Bound and West Bound side and 5-ft bicycle lanes on both sides. Current status Construction underway and final completion by fall 2016 ROW acquisition Apart from temporary easements or strip takings, no major ROW impacts on local communities and business are anticipated. Utility coordination and relocation No major conflicts were encountered during construction. Potential issues were identified during design but were resolved. Table 6.6. Project characteristics—MassDOT. Figure 6.10. A contextual view of the project plan. (Source: MassDOT.) Figure 6.11. A perspective view from the Weymouth Bank. (Source: MassDOT.)

38 were functionally separate, the footprint of the bridge was exported to Civil 3D to visualize and analyze all the ele- ments together, which helped the project team address some environmental concerns regarding the footprints of the foundations: scour and potential obstruction of flow in the channel. As the design was being updated (requiring a couple of iterations), the civil engineering department was able to revise and update the foundation footprints comfortably. The model helped better coordinate this task. • For modeling purposes, getting detailed information was challenging, especially for equipment. The bridge has a machinery house that sits in the vertical lift span of the bridge and two counterweights, one for each of the two vertical towers. For the electrical engineers, getting accu- rate information on the heights of panel boxes, trans- formers, and other electrical elements to be placed in this machinery house was challenging. However, this inten- sive data collection effort proved to be beneficial, because it was used to verify clearance and interface issues and check the structural integrity (with staircases connecting machinery and lift span, panel boxes, etc.). It also helped in positioning the mounting support assemblies for auxil- iary counterweights—they were close to the front face of the control room and the task was coordinated with archi- tects using the 3D model to ensure adequate clearance was provided in all directions. • During the preliminary design, a potential interface issue was also found between the termination boxes of the electric submarine cable (buried under the river bed) and steel tower/bridge fender system. The conflict was identi- fied using the CIM model, and a relocation strategy best suited for the electrical conduit was proposed. Another important benefit was efficient coordination/rerouting of drainage piping and electrical conduits that run through the vertical tower. • At the end of the preliminary design stage, the model (LOD 200–300) and the plans (“Base Technical Concepts”) were uploaded to the MassDOT SharePoint program for the D-B team to perform detailed design. After removing the redun- dancies in the file receipts, the D-B designer preferred to use the plans and implemented a number of major and minor changes. The major changes included an increase of 20 to 25 ft in tower height, a reduction in the number of panels from four to three, and a modification in the orientation of the triangular bracing in the towers. Issues related to the structural design also considerably increased the design effort. The design team also involved 13 specialization subs and they were given ProjectWise access to work and upload their files on to the system. The changes were so significant that it was decided to use the changed design plans and start the modeling process from scratch. This structural steel 3D model was then used for clash detection. Also included in the clash detection process were mechanical models (developed in AutoCAD inventor) and architectural models (developed in Revit using the structural model as a basis). During design development, weekly meetings were held with fabricators to integrate and understand their models. • The availability of the CIM model helped identify and resolve several conflicts through clash detection. The designer reported that they developed their model based on the design plans, whereas the fabricators also prepared their own models based on the fabrication requirements and their interpretation of design plans. A few clashes were identified with fabricators’ models (not evident with design mod- els). The collaborative mechanism under the D-B strategy had facilitated this “second-check” clash detection process early on during the design development. • Although the project had a mature design model, it was not used for developing 4D (schedule) or 5D (quantity take- offs [QTOs] and cost estimating). The project team believes the organization has not reached a stage where doing a detailed 4D/5D during construction presents a good busi- ness strategy. Most of the projects currently use them in the planning/preliminary design stage (either to market their capabilities during bidding or for public information and stakeholder’s communication). The project team also believes that lack of available in-house expertise may have been a factor in the project’s use of the model. • The characteristics of the project do not necessitate the implementation of other CIM technologies such as IC or LiDAR. MassDOT reported that the performance of the project would be monitored to understand the benefits of 3D design and its associated functionalities. • The public information process is coordinated through regular meetings, routine updates through project websites, and social media. The project has robust control measures to mitigate the impact of construction on the neighbor- hood communities. They include traffic control plans, noise control plans, dust control plans, regular public outreach, hazmat handling and disposal plan, and community liaisons. 6.6.f Inferences The design has reached 100% completion and IFC draw- ings have been issued. Construction is in progress for the bridge towers, lift span, and machinery. Although the project is not yet complete, it has already imparted important lessons concerning best practices, benefits, and challenges of model- based design for a steel bridge construction project. Agencies in transition to model-based design can adapt their business processes by standardizing the relevant proce- dures (through developing process-oriented specifications and software templates for assisting modeling) and coordinating with project stakeholders to ensure compliance. On this project, the team incorporated CIM-related prac- tices for 3D modeling and design. The project involved spe- cialized components pertinent to the engineering and design of a movable steel bridge, such as machinery house, counter-

39 weights, sheaves, panel boxes, and other electrical utilities. The team found it necessary and beneficial to integrate 3D model- ing processes with the model development. The 3D model had been very useful for tasks such as environmental impact assess- ments and alternative analysis during preliminary design. Use of model-based clash detection has helped detect and avoid conflicts in a timely manner. Other applications such as 4D and 5D modeling are not quite common, although many projects use them during the planning stage or for marketing and public information purposes (unless the project involves complicated detour configurations and construction staging). Effective change management is critical for successful inte- gration of model-based design with project development processes. This project experienced several changes between preliminary and detailed design, and the team decided to develop the model from scratch with the updated design plans. Avoiding redundancies in information, timely collection, and management of pertinent data, better communication/ coordination strategies among project participants during design development, and change management protocols can all help in mitigating the impacts of design changes. 6.7 Case Study 7: Crossrail Ltd. CIM Case Study This section presents the principal findings and lessons learned concerning BIM implementation in Crossrail, a 118-km railway line under construction in London. Please note that the structure of this case study and the terminolo- gies have been adapted to report the observations of this UK project. The most significant one is the replacement of CIM with BIM, because this term is best known in the UK construction industry. A proper understanding of the BIM implementation pro- cess in Crossrail requires three components: first, an analy- sis of the context where such a process takes places; second, an examination of the implementation process itself (which involves setup requirements and actual use); and third, a review of the cost and quality impacts derived from BIM implementation (Figure 6.12). This is the framework of the analysis used in this study, as well as the structure followed throughout this section. 6.7.a BIM Context Crossrail’s context is characterized in this study by the nature of the stakeholders involved in the project (Figure 6.13). In turn, the nature of these stakeholders is defined by (a) their level of authority and (b) their level of BIM maturity, relative to that of Crossrail Ltd. (CRL). The level of authority refers to the power to impose the use of BIM processes or standards on some other entity. The level of BIM maturity, on the other hand, refers to the degree to which BIM tools and processes have been adopted within each entity.1 Thus, according to the authority level, Crossrail’s BIM con- text includes three different groups of stakeholders: (1) CRL, (2) the agencies to which CRL reports, and (3) the contrac- tors for which CRL is the client. On the other hand, according to the level of BIM maturity relative to CRL’s level, Crossrail’s BIM context includes two different groups of stakeholders: those with a high level of BIM maturity (letter a), and those with a low level of BIM maturity (letter b). 1 For the purposes of this section, the value of these parameters has only been determined intuitively as high or low. In reality, however, these parameters would cover a wide range of values based on different indicators. Figure 6.12. BIM implementation program components in Crossrail.

40 This case study involved interviews with CRL (the owner) and four contractors, the latter representing the range of BIM maturity. Two of the contractors would be classified as a con- tractor a, and two of the contractors would be classified as a contractor b. Thus, contractors will be referred to as contrac- tor a1, contractor a2, contractor b1, and contractor b2. This distinction is important, because it reflects the four different types of relationships maintained between CRL and the other entities involved in the project. Each of these rela- tionships is associated with specific challenges and oppor- tunities that both CRL and the stakeholders in question are facing (Table 6.7). Further, BIM-related contractual require- ments changed from one contractor to another, depending on their BIM maturity level. 6.7.b BIM Setup Any agency or contractor wanting to operate within a BIM environment must address the following organizational dimensions: • The information management system that will serve as a platform for collaboration. • The specifications that will guide and regulate performance. • The organizational structure that will support the project or projects in question. • The training programs that will ensure project teams under- stand and follow the abovementioned specifications. • The organizational culture that will best align with this new environment. This section explores each of these dimensions from the perspective of both CRL and four different contractors. Information Management System The first and foremost prerequisite for BIM implementa- tion in a mega-project like Crossrail is the existence of a single platform for collaboration and information exchange among stakeholders. This platform includes both an Electronic CAD Management System (ECMS), where the 3D model can be shared, and an Electronic Document Management System (EDMS), where non-graphical data and documentation can be stored. It is the owner’s responsibility to decide which platform to use, and to make this platform available to all stakeholders. Making the decisions to deploy these systems and support their data requirements became one of the biggest challenges for CRL. Figure 6.13. Crossrail’s BIM context. Partner Challenges Opportunities Contractors β Owner faces resistance to change, achieves fewer BIM outcomes, and spends more resources in training and engagement. Contractor adopts owner’s BIM practices. Contractors α Conflicting or not shareable BIM practices between owner and contractor. Owner benefits from contractor’s expertise; achieves more BIM outcomes, and expends fewer resources in training and engagement. Agencies β Owner faces resistance to change and is unable to impose its own practices. Agency adopts owner’s BIM practices. Agencies α Conflicting BIM practices between owner and agency. Owner forced to adopt agency’s approach. Owner benefits from agency’s expertise. Table 6.7. Challenges and opportunities based on level of authority and BIM maturity.

41 CRL chose ProjectWise as its ECMS and eB as its EDMS; both pieces of software were developed by Bentley Systems, Inc. Selecting Bentley as a single vendor solution was controversial for two main reasons. First, IFC and Construction Operations Building Information Exchange (COBie) are open-file infor- mation exchange formats that, unlike eB, are not controlled by any vendor. Second, the UK BIM strategy establishes COBie as the format to be used across the construction industry for public projects. Unfortunately, at the time CRL was developing its infor- mation requirements, agnostic standard-based approaches did not seem mature enough for Crossrail’s needs. On the contrary, eB was better adapted to linear infrastructure assets requirements, and BAS 1192 was built into their systems.2 Moreover, eB could be easily linked to the 3D models in Project Wise.3 Therefore, CRL decided to partner with Bentley and use its software.4 Regardless of CRL’s choice, the very fact that CRL as a client requires a specific ECMS (which is an inevitable prerequisite for agency-level BIM implementation) has posed problems for some contractors, whose IT policies would not allow inter- action between their own ECMS and that of a client. An additional challenge for CRL involving its ECMS and EDMS pertains to the level of workflow automation in each of these systems. ProjectWise includes about 70% automated workflows. eB, however, has about 20% automated processes and 80% manual processes. As a result, EDMS processes are much less efficient than ECMS processes. Specifications While in general Crossrail’s specifications seem to have suf- fered minimal changes in comparison with traditional pre- BIM specifications, a number of new contractual clauses5 have been added to each contract, and several related standards have been developed. For the most part, these clauses and stan- dards address design coordination, design submission, design production, and information handover requirements. Table 6.8 briefly describes each of these contractual requirements. Besides enforcing the use of one unique collaboration plat- form, imposing contractual consequences on the handover of the asset information is arguably one of the most relevant features of Crossrail contracts. According to CRL, defects in asset information can be as costly in the long term as defects in the physical asset itself. Therefore, the handover of defec- tive asset information and the handover of a defective asset must be penalized in equivalent ways.7 The above clauses apply to all projects in Crossrail, but CRL also adapts them to the particular capabilities of each contractor. Thus, while contractor b1 was required to deliver only redlined models, contractors a1 and a2 were required 2 CRL was aware of the burden that requiring proprietary software could pose on some contractors. Thus, CRL committed to provide 10 free Bentley licenses for all Tier 1 contractors, provided they made a compelling business case. 3 Despite the apparent simplicity, establishing this link between ProjectWise and eB became an issue that has remained unresolved until very recently. 4 In order to comply with GCS prescriptions, CRL is currently working with COBie to develop COBie for All, which will suit COBie to the needs of linear assets like Crossrail. Also, because open-file information exchange formats are more mature today than they were a few years ago, future mega-projects in the UK (e.g., HS2) are following a more agnostic approach, and plan to request the information in IFC or COBie formats. # Impacts Description 1 Design Coordination Contractor must prepare and maintain a coordinated 3D CAD Object Oriented Model in the ECMS,6 produce a 3D Model Issues Report, use the 3D CAD Model to demonstrate that the design is fully coordinated, and have a Design Management Plan and Interface Management Plan in place. 2 Design Submission Contractor must submit complete sets of Drawings at “ready for acceptance” status produced using the ECMS that allow construction, manufacture, or installation of all or part of the work. 3 Design Production All permanent CAD data must be created and managed through the ECMS using the BS1192 workflows and be in accordance with the CRL CAD Standard. All 3D Objects must be fully modeled using discipline specific object oriented software from the Bentley Building suite of products to a minimum level of development. All 2D models and resultant drawing deliverables must be generated from 3D models. All CAD models must be split according to their design content. 4 Information Handover Contractor must manage redlines in accordance with the Management of Redlines Procedure, and the as-builts in accordance with the Management of As-Builts Procedure. Asset Information is provided in spreadsheets in accordance with pertinent standards. Table 6.8. Summary of the most notable BIM-related clauses in Crossrail contracts. 5 As explained in previous sections, Crossrail’s contracts have relied heavily on the BIM Protocol (Construction Industry Council, UK, 2013a), developed by the Construction Industry Council (CIC). To complement the BIM Protocol, CIC has also developed a guide dealing with insurance issues when using BIM (Construction Industry Council, UK, 2013b). 6 Note that the model is owned at all times by CRL; the contractor only develops it. 7 CRL, on the other hand, is also contractually obliged to provide the necessary briefing and training sessions that ensure contractors are aware of their respon- sibilities within these new processes.

42 to submit full as-builts. These contractors were also the only ones developing a BIM Execution Plan, as PAS 1192-2 stipulates8 (CRL requested this documentation on a voluntary basis). Likewise, contractual clauses have evolved over time, meaning that newer contracts include clauses not included in older contracts, and older contracts have been amended to include these new clauses. Thus, while 4D scheduling was not an initial requirement for the earliest projects, it has been included as a requirement in later stages (again, for the most BIM-mature contractors). Despite the great care exerted in producing these clauses, CRL acknowledges that its contractual base is not as advanced as it should probably be, in two respects. First, Crossrail con- tracts do not include pain/gain-share mechanisms. Both CRL and Crossrail contractors agree that these mechanisms adapt better to BIM environments, for one main reason. Since the risks inherent to BIM implementation are shared with the owner, the use of pain/gain-share mechanisms indirectly encourages the contractor to aim for higher levels of engage- ment with BIM. Higher levels of BIM engagement, on the other hand, as has been seen in some studies,9 tend to result in higher returns. Crossrail contracts do not include this sort of mecha- nism, but CRL has tried to compensate for this by explicitly assuming the costs of BIM-related investments (managers and tools) for contractors. Second, Crossrail contracts do not always facilitate the level of collaboration that most benefits BIM implementation. As a result, there are a number of com- mercial disputes that have remained unresolved, and which CRL will have to deal with at the end of the project.10 Complementary to the above contractual clauses, CRL has developed a careful set of process standards, the most notable ones being the CAD Standard, the 3D Model Review Procedure, the Redline Drawing Procedure, the 3D Laser Scanning Survey Procedure, and the Asset Information Pro- visioning Procedure.11 Crossrail contractors have highlighted three main weaknesses of these standards. First, they are not prescriptive enough (Crossrail standards “suggest” rather than “require”); second, they are updated with too much fre- quency (some standards have changed up to five times); and third, in some cases, they are not specific enough (such as with the model’s level of detail or with the particular informa- tion required for the handover stage). Crossrail, however, is a pilot project. Its BIM requirements were set out in 2007, 4 years before the Government Construction Strategy was published. It is therefore somewhat justifiable that Crossrail’s BIM stan- dards have changed (and improved) over the life of the project. Organizational Structure Both Crossrail and its contractors have undergone orga- nizational changes to include BIM as part of their structures. These changes, however, were especially noticeable on the owner side. In CRL, BIM responsibilities are concentrated within the Technical Information Department, where three interdependent work groups were created to address needs related to BIM implementation (Table 6.9). Besides these teams, in the summer of 2012, Crossrail and Bentley launched the Information Academy, a conservatory whose goal is to provide hands-on training to the Crossrail supply chain on the latest software and technology being used to design and build the new railway. However, the BIM Acad- 8 PAS 1192-2 describes three different sets of documents, one for each stage of the project. These are the Employer’s Information Requirements (EIR), the BIM Execution Plan (BEP) and the Master Information Delivery Plan (MIDP). The employer develops the EIR, while the contractor develops the BEP and the MIDP, before and after the procurement stage, respectively. 9 “The more deeply that construction companies become engaged with BIM, the greater their ability to receive its benefits, and to realize very strong return on their investment” (Dodge Data & Analytics 2014a). 10 Future mega-projects in the UK (e.g., HS2) are working with contractual bodies to develop contracts that adapt better to BIM implementation, as far as both collaboration and risk sharing are concerned. # Name Main Responsibility Specific Activities 1 Technology Development Develop a complete suite of BIM solutions. Articulate standards. Develop BIM Academy. Record lessons learned. 2 Adoption of data into Information Management Systems Establish and maintain a single source of reliable information and models, and ensure migration of reliable information to the systems. Develop data migration strategy. Create asset classifications. Populate and manage Asset Information Management Systems. 3 Leading BIM in Construction Ensure the use of appropriate technical information tools during the construction phase.12 Develop mobility tools, maximize use of modeling tools, and ensure appropriate as-built data incorporated. Table 6.9. Crossrail’s BIM work-streams. 11 Some of the Crossrail BIM standards can run up to 50 pages long. CRL has included a two-page summary in many of them. 12 This work-stream includes three sub-groups: the Mobility Task Group (to develop mobility tools), the Modeling Task Group (to maximize the use of modeling tools), and the As-Built Task Group (to ensure appropriate as-built data is incorporated in the model).

43 emy is not only a knowledge hub that gathers and communi- cates best practice, but it also acts as a lab where contractors can test the potential of new applications. Training Programs BIM training in Crossrail takes place at three different levels: (a) on the owner side for the supply chain, (b) on the contrac- tor side for their own staff, and (c) with external institutions for the current and future workforce. CRL’s training program, however, is probably its most notable initiative. Through Crossrail’s BIM Academy, CRL has developed a curriculum particular to Crossrail, which includes four major training modules: (1) Crossrail Vision and Strategy, (2) Document Control and Information Management using eB, (3) Management and Control of Design Information in ProjectWise, and (4) Asset Information Provision. These ses- sions are directed to any member of a Tier 1 or even a Tier 2 or Tier 3 contractor. BIM managers, however, are considered BIM “super-users” and thus they receive more specialized ses- sions. In sum, the Academy explains Crossrail standards, and teaches the necessary skills to achieve them. While contractors acknowledge the value provided by the Academy, they consider that training at the in-house level is also fundamental. Their common approach is to appoint one person from each project team as the “BIM Champion.” BIM Managers then train the BIM Champi- ons, and these are responsible for passing that knowledge and skills on to the rest of their team. BIM Champions are also asked to use their experience to provide suggestions on how to maximize the use of BIM, and to report the challenges they encounter. The combined result of CRL’s and each contractor’s train- ing program results in a waterfall model for knowledge and skill transfer similar to that depicted in Figure 6.14, where training is passed from CRL to the contractor and its specific teams, and then again back to CRL. The last pillar of BIM training in Crossrail results from col- laborations between Crossrail and educational institutions. While this strategy has not been fully exploited in Crossrail, it is becoming one of the major focus points in future projects such as HS2, a planned high-speed railway. Projects like HS2 and Crossrail have started to collaborate to define the cur- riculums of programs in universities throughout the country to educate the country’s future professionals. CRL has put special effort into training document control- lers. In Crossrail, only 18% of the information is stored in the ECMS (3D CAD data), as opposed to 75% that resides in the EDMS (non-graphical data and documentation). Moreover, most of the EDMS workflows are not automated. Therefore, the mission of document controllers in Crossrail (and in any other project where BIM is applied) becomes especially rel- evant. However, while 3D modelers are always certified engi- neers, document controllers are seldom professionally trained individuals. Organizational Culture While the UK mandate for implementation of Level 2 BIM is clearly pushing industry-wide adoption of BIM in the country, it is still hard for many contractors (and future main- tainers) to see the benefits of BIM implementation. In fact, resistance to change has been one of the biggest challenges for BIM implementation in Crossrail. There seem to be three main reasons behind such resis- tance. First, BIM technologies are only now becoming mature enough not to disappoint its users (past attempts have often distanced potential users); second, there is little evidence that proves the return of BIM investments (see Section 6.7.d); and third, BIM requires collaborative approaches that are uncom- mon within the construction industry. CRL has therefore spent a great deal of time and effort in explaining the value of BIM to all levels of the supply chain. In particular, the BIM Academy has become the main instru- ment through which this message has been transmitted to con- tractors, subcontractors, and future maintainers. On the other hand, CRL has also been very careful in selecting the individu- als within its Technical Information Department. Rather than staffing the department based on extensive construction experience, CRL has selected personnel with new ideas who are willing to do things differently. Figure 6.14. Waterfall model for BIM training in Crossrail.

44 6.7.c BIM Use Once Crossrail’s BIM environment was set up, CRL and its contractors started to operate and deliver its work within this environment. This section investigates BIM use in design and construction, BIM use in handover, measures of BIM use for each contractor, and Crossrail overall. BIM in Design and Construction Contractors in Crossrail received structural, architectural, MEP 3D models, and 2D drawings from framework design consultants. These models and drawings were developed to different LODs depending on the contract. In most cases, however, accuracy was good but geometry was improvable. Crossrail contractors must develop the design and hand the as-built (or redlined) version over to CRL. Throughout this process, different contractors used the model in different ways to fulfill different goals, and used different platforms.13 All surveyed contractors claimed to use the model to per- form design reviews with both construction and design teams. Before 4D became a requirement, contractors a claimed to use 4D, as well as temporary works modeling, but only for difficult interfaces. It is not clear whether the ROI justifies implementing 4D for the entire project. Such implementa- tion entails significant changes in work processes for project planners. These contractors are also using laser scanning to develop as-builts or incorporate surroundings into the model (which has proven useful for constructability studies). The use of GPR for utilities has been limited (utilities are usually not included in the model and belong to an independent work package), and in most cases the use of 5D has been discarded. Most contractors tended to produce only the information that is required by the contract. CRL, however, has worked against this tendency to try to maximize the use of BIM in construction, through different initiatives, such as the BIM in Delivery Working Group (which brings CRL and contractor individuals together to solve business problems through the deployment of BIM technologies14), and the Innovate18 pro- gram (a CRL-led initiative that allows contractors to submit proposals and obtain funding to develop BIM-related appli- cations). Through Innovate18, some contractors (contractors a) have engaged with different software developers to lever- age the potential of BIM and mobile devices in the field. The result has been a toolset of BIM-based apps that improves work efficiency around pre-existing procedures specific to one contractor. The most basic examples include site diary and field inspection apps. Information Handover At the end of the project, CRL must hand in all the asset information to the operations and maintenance team. This information, which is provided by Crossrail’s contractors at different stages throughout the project, must be linked to the model to build in the concept of “intelligent objects.” It is pre- cisely in establishing this non-graphical-graphical data link- age where Crossrail has faced some of the biggest challenges. Crossrail’s contractors are contractually required to provide a digital model of the asset, as well as a number of Excel spread- sheets including the asset data. Contractors were instructed to use AssetPainter by Bentley to establish this connection, but the process proved to be less efficient than originally expected. As a result, contractors have been providing these two elements separately, meaning that the link between them is inexistent. This circumstance motivated different contractors (con- tractors a) to develop systems that automatically linked model elements and asset information. The benefits derived from establishing this link during construction as opposed to upon completion were substantial, the most important of which was the ability track work packages against asset information, which generated significant benefits during construction. CRL and Bentley, however, seem to have found a solution to the problem that does not involve manual linking. This solution will most likely come at a cost for one of them, but arguably, this cost was inevitable. The product of BIM imple- mentation in Crossrail is very well established, but the tools that make it possible seem to be still under development. This misalignment entails an inherent risk—a risk that in the inter- est of later savings Crossrail was willing to take in the first place. BIM Maturity Evaluations CRL included a clause in every Crossrail contract whereby, as part of its Performance Assurance Framework (PAF), it ensured the right as a client to measure the contractors’ per- formance at any time during the project. Since 2012, CRL has made use of this clause to evaluate areas that reflect BIM implementation in Crossrail on a quarterly basis. CRL has two different BIM evaluations in place: a Design Control Assessment and a BIM Maturity Scoring. Both studies are presented and further analyzed in this section. It is worth mentioning that only contractors a were included in these audits. This includes 10 different contracts/projects. Design Control Assessment. This assessment included four different indicators that were all associated with CAD- related contractual requirements. These included (1) design 13 Some contractors raised the concern of interoperability issues between their platforms and Bentley’s ProjectWise, which arguably kept them from achieving higher efficiencies. 14 The BIM in Delivery Working Group (BiDWG) falls within the “Leading BIM in Construction” work-stream, and it is the last component of the Academy’s curriculum.

45 coordination, (2) design submission, (3) design production, and (4) information handover procedures. Each indicator had four possible values: zero (0) for non-compliant, 1 for compliant, 2 for beyond expectations, and 3 for world class. The definition, scores, and score description for each indicator are included in Table 6.10 (for the sake of brevity scores 0 and 3, which no contractor obtained, have been excluded). Figure 6.15 displays a bar chart with average values of each of these indicators along with the range of data (maximum and minimum values). The results of the sixth run for the Design Control Evalu- ation showed that design production (#3) obtained the high- est average (1.65), and the highest minimum and maximum Table 6.10. Crossrail’s design control indicators, scores, and descriptions. # Performance Indicator Definition Scores and Description 1 - Compliance 2 - Beyond Expectations 1 Design Coordination Contractor is using adequate design coordination methods to demonstrate that all interfaces between individual elements, systems, and parts of the design are fully coordinated. Prepares and maintains a coordinated 3D CAD Object Oriented Model in the ECMS, produces 3D Model Issues report, utilizes the 3D CAD Model to demonstrate design is fully coordinated, has a Design Management Plan and Interface Management Plan in place. Shares the coordinated 3D CAD Object Oriented Model in a controlled Central Data Environment (CDE) that is accessible to all Project Teams throughout the design review period, uses 3D CAD Model as part of regular design review meetings. 2 Design Submission Contractor is using accepted and instructed design submission processes and systems. Submitted a complete set of Drawings at “ready for acceptance” status produced using the ECMS that would allow construction, manufacture, or installation of all or part of the work. Passed a Gate review at first attempt with no significant conditions. 3 Design Production Contractor is using accepted and instructed design production processes and systems. All permanent CAD data is created and managed through the ECMS utilizing the BS1192 workflows and is in accordance with the CRL CAD Standard. All 3D Objects are fully modeled using discipline specific object oriented software from the Bentley Building suite of products to a minimum level of development. All 2D models and resultant drawing deliverables are generated from 3D models. All CAD models are split according to their design content. 3D model is used as the basis for construction sequencing (4D modeling) and for cost estimating (5D modeling). Other extended applications include the modeling of temporary structures, model-based construction progress monitoring, model review for risk management, model- based construction work packaging, model support for procurement and supply chain management, and model use in field applications via mobile devices. 4 Information Handover Contractor is using accepted and instructed redlining, as-built and technical information handover processes and systems. Managing the redlines in accordance with the Management of Redlines Procedure, managing the as- builts in accordance with the Management of As-Built Procedure. Use of laser scanning/point cloud surveys to accurately verify the condition of the installed works. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Coordination Submission Production Handover Figure 6.15. Round 6 design control assessment results.

46 scores (1.5 and 2, respectively) (Figure 6.15). This suggests that many contractors were close to achieving the “Beyond expectations” level on this particular category, meaning that the model was developed using instructed tools, and 2D draw- ings were generated from the model. Furthermore, often times the model was also used as the basis for other BIM applica- tions such as 4D scheduling, 5D estimating, or construction progress monitoring. On the other end of the spectrum, design coordination (#1) obtained both the lowest average (1.05), and the lowest mini- mum and maximum scores (0.5 and 1.5, respectively) (Fig- ure 6.15). This implies that very few contractors surpassed the “Compliance level,” and some even failed to comply with these contractual conditions, meaning that not only did they not use it as part of regular design review meetings, but they also failed to share an up-to-date model in the ECMS or develop the required reports. BIM Maturity Scoring Assessment. Besides the Design Control Assessment, CRL developed a BIM Maturity Scoring Assessment that allowed for a more detailed analysis of the specific applications for which BIM was being used among different contractors. This assessment included 20 different indicators. Unlike in the previous case, all the indicators were measured according to the same criteria, which specifically addressed the level of implementation (Table 6.11). The list of indicators and their descriptions are included in Table 6.12. The results of the sixth run for the BIM Maturity Scoring assessment showed that design authoring (#3) and drawing gen- eration (#4) obtained the highest average scores (Figure 6.16), above 2.5, meaning that for many contractors these two use cases were “business as usual” practices, or at least their pro- cesses were in place (although not prescribed). These results are coherent since these indicators address implementation areas that are contractually required. In fact, these two use cases represent the “compliant” level of the design production indicator in the Design Control Assessment presented in the previous section. The categories 3D model design reviews (#6), temporary works modeling (#10), safety and risk (#12), and stakeholder engagement (visualization) (#14) obtained scores between 1 and 2 (Figure 6.16). For the most part, these results are consis- tent with those obtained for the Design Control Assessment, since use cases #10, #12, and #14 represent the “beyond expec- tations” level of the design production indicator. Use case #6, however, is embedded in the design coordination indicator of the Design Control Assessment, which had the lowest score. This result might suggest that the issue of design coordination has more to do with sharing and keeping the model updated, as opposed to using as the base for design reviews. The rest of the use cases obtained scores below 1 (Fig- ure 6.16). Among these, traditional surveys (#2), phase plan- ning (#7), cost estimating (5D) (#9), construction work pack- aging (#13) and augmented reality (#17) showed significantly low levels of maturity, with scores of less than 0.5. Note that no data was provided for asset tagging (#15) or operations and maintenance (#20), most likely because projects were still not advanced enough to implement these use cases. Figure 6.17 shows average scores for each of the 10 sur- veyed contracts, on both the Design Control (DC) and the BIM Maturity Scoring (BMS) assessments. Both measures are to an extent equivalent, so proportionality among results is to be expected. The average score for all surveyed projects was 1.23 for the DC assessment, with no contract falling below 1 in aver- age score. Thus, on average, BIM-related contractual clauses have been fulfilled. For the BMS study, however, the aver- age for all surveyed projects was 0.94, with several contracts falling below 1 in average score. Thus, while in most cases BIM contractual requirements have been met, except for a few additional applications, in general contractors have not implemented BIM uses beyond what the employer required. As observed throughout this project, BIM implementa- tion affects multiple dimensions of an organization and its workflows. Thus, the progression into a BIM environment will most likely occur over a period of several years, and these results may just be a reflection of this slow pace. None- theless, as it is explained in the following section, this low rate of BIM use among contractors might also be due, among other reasons, to the lack of empirical evidence that demonstrates actual returns of BIM investment. Generating studies to share returns on BIM investment, however, has Score Description Meaning N/A Assessed/Not implemented Assessed and decided not to implement based on project scope. 0 Not assessed/Not implemented Not assessed or assessed and not yet implemented. 1 Implemented—Level 1 (Bronze) Evidence of trial or implementation in progress. 2 Implemented—Level 2 (Silver) Trial completed, processes defined, but not yet prescribed as standards. 3 Implemented—Level 3 (Gold) Processes defined, traditional mechanisms removed, tools in place to measure value. Table 6.11. Crossrail’s BIM maturity scoring criteria.

47 # Title Description Phase* Value 1 Laser Scanning Capturing existing as-built environment into a model. DCO Faster and more accurate production of terrain and as- built drawings. 2 Traditional Surveys Importing survey information into the model. DCO Faster and more accurate production of terrain and as- built drawings. 3 Design Authoring (3D Modeling) Modeling the facility in 3D using CAD object oriented software. D Fewer coordination errors, more accurate content. 4 Drawing Generation Producing drawing deliverables directly from the 3D model. D Fewer coordination errors, more accurate content. 5 Design Change Monitoring Base-lining the model at different stages to keep a record of changes. DPCO Less confusion over correct versions of the design, better estimates. 6 3D Model Design Review Reviewing the design with the 3D model for coordination (clash detection). DP Highlights problems with the design. Clearer understanding of timing. 7 Phase Planning Replacing model elements with Work in Progress (WIP) model elements. DPC Highlights problems with the design. Clearer understanding of timing. 8 Construction Scheduling Works (4D) Tying elements in the 3D model to activities in the project schedule. PC Highlights problems with the design. Clearer understanding of timing. 9 Cost Estimating (5D) Exporting quantities of elements from the model to perform cost tracking. P Helps in decision-making. 10 Temporary Works Modeling Modeling of major temporary works to aid with sequencing and buildability. C Clearer understanding of timing and constraints. 11 Construction Progress Monitoring Updating the model with construction status (electronically or not). CO Information is available faster, easier, and is more accurate. Number of changes reduced. 12 Safety and Risk Integrating safety and risk information into the model to link risks with elements. DPC Helps in decision-making, and safety and insurance discussions. 13 Construction Work Packaging Collecting information related to Construction Work Packages. C Information is available faster, easier, and is more accurate. 14 Stakeholder Engagement— Visualization Supporting design and client meetings. DPCO Enables clearer vision of proposed design. 15 Asset Tagging Collecting information against each functional unit and linking it to the model. DPCO Information is available faster, easier, and is more accurate. 16 Field BIM Providing model and data to field operatives to assist them on-site. C Information is available faster, easier, and is more accurate. Reduces RFIs. 17 Augmented Reality Overlaying the model view onto the camera view of a mobile device. C Clearer vision of proposed design, reduced number of changes. 18 Reporting and Metrics Faster and more accurate reporting and metrics for project management. DPCO Information is available faster, easier, and is more accurate. 19 Supply Chain Model component details are passed electronically to supply chain machinery. C Improve efficiency of supply chain and reduce materials waste. 20 Operations and Maintenance Supplying asset information for future O&M of the asset. O Improve efficiency of O&M. *Note: Phases are defined as follows: D = Design, P = Planning for construction, C = Construction, O = Operations and Maintenance Table 6.12. Crossrail’s BIM use cases.

48 proven to be one of the biggest challenges for both CRL and Crossrail contractors. 6.7.d BIM Return Measuring the return of BIM investment in Crossrail has proven to be one of the most difficult challenges for both CRL and the entire pool of contractors. This section presents some of the findings that Crossrail has provided about measurable returns from BIM implementation, in terms of both quality and cost savings. Quality Improvements The end goal of Crossrail’s PAF initiative is not only to measure BIM implementation in Crossrail, but to evaluate, for every Tier 1 contractor in the project, a wide range of indicators that reflect both inputs (i.e., what is implemented) and outputs (i.e., what is achieved with what is implemented) associated to six different performance categories (namely, safety, environment, social sustainability, quality, commer- cial performance, and community relations). Each category’s results are then plotted in an Inputs versus Outputs chart that shows overall contractor performance (Figure 6.18). Tier 1 contractors should in theory fall somewhere in the Potential Zone. These contractors are complying with all con- tractual requirements and performing just as expected. On the other hand, those falling in the Major Improvement Zone are doing worse than CRL would expect, potentially failing in their contractual obligations. Lastly, those falling in the Value Added Zone or the World Class Zone are going above and beyond the employer’s requirements, and performing better than CRL would expect. To drive performance, the results of Crossrail’s PAF initia- tive will be shared among all contractors (their identities are kept anonymous), as well as with future projects, for which these results will become integral criteria of their procure- ment processes. Contractors agree to these conditions, but they also take part in defining the list of indicators that com- prise PAF evaluations. About BIM performance, to date, CRL has only been able to measure the input indicators presented in the previous sec- 0 1 2 3 Figure 6.16. Round 6 BIM maturity scoring assessment results. 1.23 0.94 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 DC Assessment BMS Assessment DC Average BMS Average A B C D E F α2 G H α1 Figure 6.17. BIM maturity scores by contractor.

49 tion. Output assessments have not yet been performed, and so this study can only define the upper and lower boundaries within which the values of BIM output indicators will fall (Figure 6.18). Cost Savings According to contractors surveyed in this study, the big- gest benefit of BIM implementation derives from reduction in errors, omissions, and rework. This is consistent with what other studies have reported. Unfortunately, it is usually very difficult to quantify these benefits in dollar terms. In fact, both CRL and its contractors seemed to struggle when attempting to calculate cost savings from BIM implementation. This study was nonetheless able to gather some figures on cost savings associated to particular BIM use cases. In par- ticular, 3D model design reviews (use case #6) have allowed Crossrail to save a major incidental rework on every station every year since the project started; construction scheduling works (use case #8) have reduced contract interface risks (i.e., contingency funds) in one of the stations by 8,000,000UKP (5%) after a required investment of 350,000UKP; and tempo- rary works modeling (use case #10) has generated savings of around 500,000UKP for one of the contractors. The following section presents the findings of one partic- ular study developed by CRL in collaboration with Bentley Systems, Inc., where they analyzed savings derived from the combined application of construction scheduling works (#8) and augmented reality (#17) BIM use cases. Cost Savings from Field-Based Project Planning (Aug- mented Reality  4D). CRL collaborated with four differ- ent contractors to prove whether Field-based Project Planning (FPP) brought process and quality efficiencies to Crossrail. FPP allows “construction progress updates to be captured electroni- cally in the field and automatically pushed back into the 4D model environment to assist with project planning activities.”15 A cost savings evaluation was performed on the construc- tion of pre-cast concrete structures forming the superstruc- ture of one of Crossrail’s stations. Results showed an overall productivity gain of 70 staff-hours, or equivalently, a time improvement of 73%. This productivity gain translated into realized costs savings for the team in question and for a 1-year period of 53,481UKP ($89,73816). These cost savings did not include those derived Figure 6.18. Crossrail’s PAF chart. 15 In essence, this is a variation of use case #11 in Table 6.12, construction prog- ress monitoring, when done electronically. This use case reached an average BIM maturity score close to 0.9, meaning that in most cases it had been not been implemented, or implemented only as a trial. 16 Exchange rate used is the average exchange rate between February and August 2014, which is the period of time during which the study took place. Exchange rates were obtained from www.x-rates.com. 24 4 72 14 0 8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Traditional Project Planning Field-based Project Planning A ve ra ge W or ki ng T im e (p er M on th ) Project Field Engineer Planner Information Applications Figure 6.19. Time comparison for traditional and BIM-based project planning.

50 from a more informed and timely decision, which was how- ever acknowledged as a major benefit. A second stage of this study involved a forecasted ROI analysis, where predicted savings for the FPP use case, over 4 years, and on four different sites, were calculated by pro- jecting the realized costs and benefits from the first stage. Results estimated benefits of up to 500,000UKP (around $840,000), with a break-even period of less than 1 year, and a ROI of 325%. 6.8 Cross-Case Analysis and Lessons Learned 6.8.a Agency Practices • On a broader scale, the business processes of each of the collaborating stakeholders (agencies, contractors, utility companies, and consultants) can have an impact on effec- tive CIM implementation on the projects. • Workforce training programs for CIM are significant and they should take the form of a continuous process focused on design and construction areas. While construction training equips the field staff with necessary expertise and infrastructure to handle CIM operations (GPS, rovers for QA/QC, as-builts), design training facilitates the transition of the design process to handling the 3D surveying data and performing collaborative 3D design. The design-related training reportedly involves considerably more effort than the construction training. Approaches such as “Bring Your Own Device” (BYOD) (as implemented by NYSDOT through its 625 specs for contract control plans) can facili- tate rapid adaptation to CIM on the construction side. • Technology implementation planning (TIP) for CIM is mandatory at both the organizational and the project levels because it encompasses a system of technologies/practices that can affect agency workflows and project delivery pro- cesses. Experts noted that it is important to prepare, organize, and continually track an agency’s progress with respect to its baseline TIP. Table 6.13 presents the major requirements for a comprehensive TIP (as understood from case studies and SME interviews). The list might not include the entire set of requirements; it is provided to identify the important needs. The TIP shall also encapsulate any other organiza- tional processes for CIM. 6.8.b CIM Integration with Project Work Processes—Trends and Lessons Learned 3D Design 3D design necessitates different workflows and implica- tions for the constituent elements of highway infrastructure projects. 3D design is more commonly used for elements of Organizational level Project level Typical contents Vision statement for CIM Identification of CIM technologies to be promoted Short-term and long-term mission requirements for promotion (investment/funding requirements) Critical organizational workflows being impacted or having impacts Allocation of lead responsibilities, executive management buy-in Definition and measurement strategies for performance objectives Strategies for involving pertinent stakeholders (contractors, vendors, and utility companies) Tracking and reporting requirements Integrating CIM technologies with Project Execution Plan Specifications, standards, and guidelines development for the CIM technologies and their associated deliverables on projects Workforce- training/motivation programs Project-specific performance measures for CIM—anticipated benefits over investments Examples WisDOT’s 3D Technology Implementation Plan (Vonderohe 2013) ODOT’s Engineering Automation Plan (Singh 2008) BIS BIM Strategy Report (BIM Task Group 2011) Iowa DOT’s EED specifications for 3D design (Iowa DOT 2014) ODOT’s 3D Roadway Design Manual (ODOT 2012) WisDOT’s ROI analysis for CIM (Parve 2012) Table 6.13. Technology implementation planning for CIM.

51 roadway surface models rather than for drainage elements, utilities, or structures (such as bridges). Roadway surface models include elements such as exist- ing ground and proposed surface, alignments, datum points, and breaklines, among others. A good number of DOTs have reportedly performed 3D design for many roadway elements using Bentley InRoads/AutoCAD Civil 3D17 workflows. The relevant EED specifications are also provided in contracts. 3D design for structures and utilities is still an emerging functionality of CIM. Agencies and projects have deployed 3D design if the projects involve complex interchanges, multi- stage construction, and steel structural (cross-river) bridges. Clash detection (hard clash and clearance issues) is reported to be the major application. The work processes typically use Autodesk Revit/Civil 3D and Bentley InRoads/LEAP tools. Some of the “best practices” identified for 3D design include the following: • Performing integrated surveying (LiDAR, total stations, aerial imagery, etc.) to support the 3D data requirements for design (WisDOT). • Providing 3D (roadway surface) models to the contractors pre-bid. • Ensuring availability and implementation of EED specifi- cations for 3D design. • Standardizing software workflows, LOD specifications, and templates of deliverables—examples include WisDOT’s Project Modeling Matrix (Parve 2014), software templates from the DOTs of Florida and Massachusetts (Civil 3D), and Oregon (InRoads). • Managing design changes (schematic to detailed design) is critical for effective 3D modeling in complex structural projects (MassDOT case study). • Attempting pilot projects for transitioning to 3D design (KYTC case study) and extracting best practices for the agency. • Motivating all the disciplines to perform design in 3D (devel- oping discipline-specific 3D design guidelines). • If need arises, draping (geospatial) can be used for ele- ments not modeled in 3D (ROW, buildings). Major benefits include effective downstream application (AMG), clash detection, and other applications, such as cre- ating 4D and 5D models and enhancing public information processes (through visualization). Major challenges include initial capital investments, workflow disruptions, and fund- ing constraints. Benefit-cost analysis can be performed for 3D design for some functions, such as clash detection (among disciplines such as drainage, utilities, and structures), productivity, and labor savings in AMG. Investments in 3D design can also help reduce the overall program costs of future projects (such as WisDOT’s Mitchell Interchange and Zoo Interchange projects). 4D and 5D 4D design adds the “time” component to a 3D model to simulate construction processes. In other words, a 4D model integrates a construction schedule within a 3D model. The technique has numerous benefits for the identification of spatial and temporal conflicts, work area management, con- structability analysis, and evaluating site logistics, among others. In practice, 4D is implemented on projects that involve staged construction (to examine temporary structures, drain- ages, crossovers, and detour configurations). Common soft- ware tools include Bentley Navigator/Autodesk Navisworks/ Synchro. Some of the candidate projects that reported use of 4D include Multnomah Oregon Sellwood Bridge Project, San Francisco Oakland East Span replacement, CTDOT’s I-95 New Haven, TxDOT’s Dallas Fort Worth Connector, and WisDOT’s SE Freeways project. Interviewees observed that the challenges are more process- oriented than technology-based. Some of the lessons learned are listed below: • A clear technical objective and business motive is manda- tory for operationalizing such technologies. • Understanding the relationship between the LOD of the model and the schedule is paramount for achieving com- pleteness and integrity shown in the 4D simulations. • Connecting model elements and schedule activities can be automated if there is an appropriate protocol in place for synchronization. It appears that software tools have the potential to facilitate the process and greater collabo- ration among the project team (especially modelers and schedulers) to solve problems. Recommendations can be drawn from the building industry where assembly codes (Uniformat classification systems) are used to generate rules for automating the linking of model elements and schedule activities. • 5D (cost loading the model) is still an emerging application. Machine Controls for Construction—AMG AMG is an important CIM technology that many agencies are deploying in their projects. The case studies and surveys indicated that AMG is predominantly used for dirt work/ excavation-related operations. Although it is feasible, few examples are available for studying the use of AMG for finished surface (concrete/asphalt) construction; the requirements for 17 The software names are provided in this document for the purpose of illustra- tion. The research team does not prefer a particular application or tool.

52 more total stations and better control equipment are cited as the major barriers. Contractors have reported using equip- ment and software from vendors such as Trimble/TopCon systems. Some of the best practices that can lead to wide- spread implementation of AMG include the following: • Preparing and implementing specifications (especially for finished surfaces) • Having contractor buy-in and equipment affordability • Providing 3D EED deliverables in both native (DWG/ DGN) and converted (XML/machine readable) formats • Performing pilot projects and extracting suitable lessons • Preparing appropriate contract clauses favoring applica- tion of AMG • Implementing BYOD approach so that contractors use their own equipment (NYSDOT case study—625 spec) • Using guidance such as FHWA’s 2014 circular when “con- struction inspectors are responsible for quality assurance” (FHWA 2014b) Integrated Surveying—LiDAR Many agencies have reported constructing and operating a CORS network for surveying and real-time positioning pur- poses. The system has numerous benefits, despite the high initial costs. MassDOT has documented investment costs and potential life-cycle applications for operating such a CORS network (MassDOT 2013). Having a coordinate system that provides low distortion in horizontal and vertical measurements could potentially save a lot of effort in analyzing the survey data (for example, the ODOT has reported that through its Oregon Coordinate Reference System, the need for “rubbersheeting” and intro- ducing “Surface Adjustment Factors” has been eliminated— as per SME interview with Ron Singh). Mobile LiDAR appears to be a central CIM technology, because it has proven benefits throughout the life cycle of a facility (Olsen 2013). When used, mobile LiDAR plays a significant role in aiding digital project delivery and asset management. The case studies and SME interviews revealed that investments in mobile LiDAR would assist in rapid col- lection of semantically rich point cloud models and high- resolution imagery that has agency-wide applications for project development. These point cloud models are useful at all phases of the capital project life cycle—from design to maintenance. Several agencies are evaluating their prospects and invest- ing in collecting this data for their highway systems. The ODOT (SME interview—Ron Singh) is part of a major consortium that is involved in collecting LiDAR data of its highway systems (the Portland LiDAR Consortium). Caltrans and Washing- ton DOT have performed detailed benefit-cost analysis that examined different strategies of using a mobile LiDAR for agencies’ requirements (including such options as contract, rent and operate, purchase and operate, and partial owner- ship). The study concluded that purchasing and operating a survey-grade mobile LiDAR has tangible life-cycle benefits that considerably outweigh the initial investments (Yen et al. 2014). Some of the experts also noted that at a holistic level, investing in collecting 3D LiDAR data would be beneficial for agency-wide CIM implementation regardless of the mode of the ownership. Utility Engineering CIM technologies pertaining to utility engineering (e.g., GPR, SPAR clouds, Electromagnetic Imaging) are generally adopted on projects that have considerable risks and uncer- tainties in locating the underground utilities (especially the elevation information). Although the information on exist- ing utilities resides in 2D plan sets or databases, agencies are now exploring ways and incorporating strategies (techno- logical, contractual) to obtain geospatial utilities data on new projects (especially 4R). Utilities are generally modeled in 3D to perform clash detection with other design entities such as drainage, struc- tures, ITS, and lighting, among others. Although the process has several benefits, some process-oriented challenges could be overcome by use of the following: • Greater collaboration with utility companies (addressing their security concerns) • Optimized deployment of SUE practices such as GPS/GPR and EMI to identify the location of utilities (Maintaining an up-to-date digger’s outline is crucial.) • Extending current utility conflict resolution standards (such as Utility Conflict Matrices being developed by various DOTs) to include CIM data (3D geospatial utilities) • Having agencies request as-built utility data from contrac- tors on their projects (through specifications) Data and Information Management • Most of the agencies have reported using online/electronic modes for the bidding and submittals phase of a project. These are often managed by the agencies or handled by third-party agencies (websites). • For document controls (especially during design and construction), the agencies have used tools such as AASHTOWare Project suite, Bentley ProjectWise, and Microsoft SharePoint. • Some DOTs have deployed the capabilities of electronic document management systems to perform major func- tions such as revising and approving plans, field verifica-

53 Agencies Asphalt IC Specs Soils IC Specs FHWA Asphalt Soils AASHTO Asphalt-Soils combined - PP 81-14 Asphalt-Soils combined - PP81-14 Central Federal Land HD Asphalt Eastern Federal Land HD Asphalt Alaska DOT HMA California DOT HMA (draft), CIR (draft) Georgia DOT Asphalt Soils Indiana DOT Soils Iowa DOT Asphalt Soils Michigan DOT Soils Massachusetts DOT HMA Minnesota DOT Asphalt-Soils combined, Thermal profiles Asphalt-Soils combined Nevada DOT Asphalt New Jersey DOT HMA - coming soon North Carolina DOT Asphalt (draft) Soils (draft) Oklahoma DOT Asphalt Pennsylvania DOT Asphalt (draft) Rhode Island DOT HMA Tennessee DOT HMA Texas DOT Soils, Approved IC rollers Utah DOT Asphalt Vermont Agency of Transportation Asphalt Subbase Table 6.14. Specifications of IC across DOTs (FHWA 2014a). tions, daily log reports, change management, among others (MDOT e-Construction initiative). • Model-based workflow is usually supplemented with tradi- tional project control techniques for estimating, scheduling, change management, design reviews, and approvals (Trim- ble tools, Primavera). There are a few reported instances of directly using model-based tools for estimating QTOs and calculating earthwork quantities. • Some of the lessons learned are as follows: – Cloud-based technologies can be leveraged to organize and share the information among all stakeholders. – Extensive and accurate design of all the disciplines in 3D can make the model usable for all tasks. This would require training (and overcoming the learning curve) and increased coordination efforts among all the stakeholders (involving the various design disciplines and contractors). Intelligent Compaction The case studies and SME interviews suggested that IC is an emerging CIM application with greater prospects for the future. This technology provides real-time verification of various compaction indicators. The general trend among all the DOTs is that they are performing pilot projects with this technology and developing specifications for its widespread use on other projects. Some of the commonly reported chal- lenges include the high initial cost of equipment and lack of contractor buy-in. Following are some of the lessons learned: • Since this is an evolving technology, DOTs should collabo- rate and develop standards from other agencies, as appli- cable for soils, asphalt, and aggregates. • The FHWA’s website “www.intelligentcompaction.com” can be a tremendous resource because it reconciles current practices, specifications, pilot projects, and future trends of IC from many DOTs. Agencies can make use of this data to understand and develop specs. Table 6.14 provides a snap- shot of practices at DOTs taken from the website. GIS Locating CIM data geospatially is important for all phases in project development. Many DOTs have used GIS technol- ogy during the project planning and development phases for a variety of applications, such as Environmental Impact Assess- ments, Alternative Analyses, and ROW acquisition planning. Agencies have also described using GIS data for design evalu- ation and visualization.

54 Some of the nationwide best practices of GIS applications have already been reviewed during this project including the following: • Utah DOT’s UPlan • South Carolina DOT’s Project Screening Tool • Washington DOT’s State Route Web Tool • Florida DOT’s Environment Screening Tool Other Innovative CIM Technologies Technologies examined thus far have already found their strategic significance for digital project delivery and asset management. This section describes other emerging tech- nologies that have been studied in only a few instances, but that hold greater prospects for the future. An emerging technology that is enabling and complement- ing the use of AMG is equipment telematics. The telemat- ics tool, when incorporated with construction equipment such as excavators, dozers, and graders, can provide numer- ous benefits, such as improving machine utilization, allowing real-time tracking of vehicles, reducing fuel consumption, and increasing overall efficiency of the construction opera- tion through an optimized fleet management (Anderson 2012). This web-based tool provides the ability to remotely access the equipment data from the office and helps upload the recent design files for use by operators in the field. Higher initial cost, lack of operator training, and non-availability of standards are some of the reported challenges for this tech- nology. Example applications include Trimble/Topcon/Leica products. Advanced material management systems are also an impor- tant emerging CIM application. A web-based tool—such as FiveCubits—can be deployed to efficiently manage the pur- chasing, transit, and delivery of bulk materials. It optimizes the truck fleets and facilitates real-time sharing of informa- tion among all stakeholders (owner, contractor, supplier, and subcontractors). These tools could be seen more prominently in large infrastructure projects in the future. Digital Asset Management Among all other phases, asset management can benefit con- siderably if CIM tools are implemented. Current issues for digitizing this process are presented below. • Different forms of data for asset management—2D as- builts, 3D electronic, 3D point clouds. Appropriate techni- cal and management strategies have to be defined to deal with heterogeneity in the asset data. • Archival and regular updating of asset information would help complete the life cycle of CIM data. However, there are several organizational and technical challenges that hinder this process. Contracts • SMEs and case study participants had varied perceptions of the relationship between alternative contracting methods (such as D-B) and CIM practices. While everyone agreed that the D-B mechanism fosters a collaborative environ- ment among the major stakeholders, some believed that essential benefits of CIM tools might be available for any project delivery method. Some participants also noted that the CIM data have utility value for the entire life cycle of a facility, including the long-spanning O&M and asset man- agement functions. Thus, the benefits of CIM have to be understood from an agency-wide (system) life-cycle analy- sis rather than project-specific parameters. • Contractually, 2D plan sets remain the governing docu- ments. Some DOTs have carried out pilot projects wherein 3D surface models are given priority over 2D plans (KYTC case study). However, for widespread implementation of this practice, it would require extensive collaboration of all the design disciplines (roadways, bridges, utilities, ITS, lighting, signs, etc.) to perform their designs and detailing in 3D. • Although DOTs provide electronic data in both native and converted file formats for AMG, the models are usually supplemental or provided for information only. The risk, accuracy, and liability issues arising from using them for downstream construction applications are transferred to the contractor. Following are the current best practices: • The agencies should generate their plan sets automatically from 3D (surface) models and include additional details on them. • 3D models and 2D plan sets should be cross-checked for QA/QC and models have to be kept updated. • Incorporating detailed specifications on LOD in contracts would help standardize the modeling and reporting prac- tices among all the stakeholders on projects (Crossrail case study). Governance (Legal) DOTs often use digital signatures in encrypted form for plan sets. These signatures are rarely used for signing the 3D electronic data (due to security and authenticity concerns). Experts believe that this practice might arise in the future because it could save time and money. Some of the best prac- tices to address legal concerns include the following:

55 • Defining software use to avoid interoperability issues and information loss. • Ascertaining pertinent federal and state agency laws impact- ing use of digital intellectual property on the projects. • Apportioning responsibilities for maintaining and updat- ing models. • Specifying ownership and copyright issues of 3D models. • Protecting collaborators on models, such as through “read- only” files, access control, and disclaimer clauses. • Establishing conflict and dispute resolution mechanisms. (Example: If discrepancies arise between 3D model and plan sets, priority should be given to plan sets). Using part- nering on projects to avoid potential disputes. • Defining public information and disclosure issues. • Understanding and implementing digital signatures and their utility on projects. • Working with government and regulatory authorities on strategic decisions to accelerate the implementation of digital technologies. These authorities pave the way for uniform implementation of technologies across organiza- tions and their projects (Crossrail case study, Singapore’s e-BIM submission system). Some national and state standards (for example, NCHRP Legal Research Digest 58) are in place to provide specific guide- lines on implementing the aforementioned practices on projects. 6.8.c Performance Measures— Investment Analysis Participants had varied perceptions of quantifying the benefits of CIM practices. They also cited non-availability of a uniform methodology to guide the investment decisions as the primary concern. However, there was also consensus on the point that such tools can always be subjective and specific to a particular project and business processes. Researchers have performed ROI analysis for BIM implan- tation at an organization level; these resources were reviewed during this project. DOTs have also evaluated the ROI for individual CIM processes, as shown in Table 6.15. Organization Focal point for analysis Brief description MDOT E-document management systems (ProjectWise) MDOT has calculated potential savings of its “e- construction” initiative driven by paper-less work processes. After validating it through their “pilot” projects, the agency is planning for widespread implementation (Farr 2013). WisDOT 3D design (clash detection) WisDOT has evaluated discipline-wise ROI analysis (roadways, traffic, structures, etc.) by implementing 3D design and performing clash detection processes. Savings due to potential conflicts are designated as “avoidance costs” (Parve 2012). Caltrans and WSDOT NCHRP Report 748 Mobile LiDAR Caltrans and WSDOT have performed benefit-cost analysis that examined different strategies of deploying a mobile LiDAR for agencies’ requirements (Yen, Lasky, and Ravani 2014). NCHRP Report 748 has also provided guidelines on procurement considerations and implementation plans. MassDOT GPS/CORS network MassDOT has documented investment costs and potential life-cycle applications for operating such a CORS network (MassDOT 2013). TxDOT 3D design and ProjectWise TxDOT is envisioning implementation of 3D design on its projects and ProjectWise to support the 3D workflow. It has performed a preliminary NPV analysis considering direct IT and bid savings over initial investment costs (TxDOT 2014). ODOT Information Technology Benefit-Cost Evaluation report ODOT evaluated the benefits and costs of nine IT systems put in place by the agency and the Oregon Bridge Delivery Partners in support of OTIA III State Bridge Program. The systems include GIS infrastructure, environmental analysis tools, electronic document management systems, engineering tools, work zone analysis tools, among others (Hagar 2011). Table 6.15. A brief summary of ROI analysis for CIM technologies.