UCSF Medical Center BIM4FM Revit-Integrated Turnover into Maximo Building Lifecycle

BRUCE MACE: All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Thursday. Last session. Last room. Give you guys a lot of credit for being here. And I certainly appreciate it. The billing was sort out there for us here. My name is Bruce Mace. And this is--

ANDREW ARNOLD: Andrew Arnold.

BRUCE MACE: Andrew Arnold, a cohort. We've got some people that are waiting to get in, but they've got a rule. They got to wait a couple minutes before they'll let them in. So we're going to talk slow for the first couple. If I could-- what's that?

AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] last night here.

BRUCE MACE: Yeah. Exactly. Real quick-- how many of us are designers in the room, come from the design camp? How about owners? Wow. Great. And builders, contractors? We're still outnumbered. That's a pretty good breakdown for any group I've seen. Usually we're really heavy one way, really heavy the other way, or-- anyway, that's pretty good.

So real quick, I'm going to say thank you to both Andrew-- I've got a couple of folks at home, Edmund and [INAUDIBLE], and then Preeti, Fiona, and Tyler. I want to say thank you, too. That's our internal team. We'll get to that. And just real appreciative of all the work, all the folks helping that goes into this type of thing. So let's go ahead and get started.

This is me. I've been with UCSF Health-- we're a Regional Medical Center in the San Francisco Bay Area-- for 12 years now. I came on board as a capital projects coordinator working with all of our capital projects. And I got in and sort of really found out, wow, I like this job, like what we're doing and why we're doing it. And after about four or five years, I'd worked my way up and gotten into some other things and became Director of Facilities just by a series of chances.

And I've really enjoyed it. I've been seven years now as Director of Facilities. And anyway, that's my background. Andrew Arnold--

ANDREW ARNOLD: My background is started off in architecture way too long ago to remember and quickly got into technology for the field early in my career and kind of switched over to technology development for the industry. And I've been in successful start-ups developing tools for the industry. And did a construction engineering management PhD at the Center for Integrated Facility and Engineering at Stanford.

Graduated out there in 2000. And subsequently have continued in the technology area, really with a strong interest in, how do you integrate information across-- initially design information. Now it's moving over to integrating design and construction information with facilities operations and management information. And I'm leader of a consulting group that DPR Construction started up in that area.

BRUCE MACE: Great. Thank you, Andrew. So anyway, that's Andrew. First of all, we're a health system. We take care of patients. Patient care is a number one. That's my job. If you ask me what I have to do, that's what I do. Real quickly, we are Maximo for a CMMS, a computerized maintenance management system. We chose it about four years ago, implemented, and we've been live for two years at our hospitals.

We have three major hospitals. And there's a fourth and a fifth. But I'm going to mention these three here. And we manage with a 20 FTE oversight, all sites. I have about 130 field staff and engineers and trade crafts out there taking care of these buildings. 3 million square feet of high occupancy, plus about 115 other MOBs. We do 24,000 service calls a year. We have roughly 53,000 assets in those three occupancy campuses there.

I started in 2010 in October. And I think it was about November 2nd they told me the CMMS system is going to go away. It was homegrown. It was binding. It was having troubles. And that was a big shock to me. I've never implemented a software platform. I've been interested. I really like new technologies and learning. And we just sort of-- this was a, you're going to have to do it type of situation.

We looked at a lot of products. We settled on Maximo. We put together our own internal team, a project team, to deliver the software platform. That was in 2012 we started. Go live was with the Mission Bay Hospital here, a $1.5 billion flagship hospital, which came live in February 2015.

We built a team-- we're going to get around to this-- discussing it internally. Thought it was very important to do it ourselves and keep a close eye on it and really learn it. We used Agile development. And we share our architecture for Maximo with the campus. So there's the campus entity and there's the medical center entity. We run a single instance of Maximo with two data sets serving both, sitting on a common set of budget books. We run it by governance committee and we chair it on our health side. And we are also the folks that are doing the work on Maximo.

So just a little background data. Learning objective-- real important. Assembling the team. And we'll have questions afterwards, so please get them ready. This is what our org chart looks like internally. My boss, Tim Mahaney, Senior Vice President of Facility Support Services. Two folks I mentioned. And then this is the real important part right here. This is a couple of years old, but anyway, Electronic Technology Group-- that's our internal IT software development group that sits within facilities.

I built a cost center around them so when the Deloittes of the worlds come in and they start benchmarking me against other medical centers, I can sort of carve them out and say that they're IT. But real important.

Back in 2008, my background is architecture project delivery. And I'd been involved with and a believer in integrated project delivery, IPD, as the AIA called it. This is actually one of my notes, something we had worked on back in 2008 before I was director of facilities. And basically real important. Pay attention to the stop sign there. This was honestly a 10-year-old document.

But that was the fence that I felt when I came here and was on-- all of a sudden, I'm on the facility side. We were getting projects. And I felt like there was a giant fence the projects were getting thrown over. We didn't know anything about them. We didn't have much data on them. We were frantically trying to enter equipment data into our CMMS systems. And we were given the keys.

And by the way, we hadn't really been involved with it up until then. So we needed to learn the project. And you got regulatory breathing down your neck. That all happened at this delivery fence. The proposal here and what we started to work on or believe in was our architecture group needed to stay involved later-- project managers, certainly-- stay involved, not up until the delivery, the handing over the keys, but at least a year beyond when we're going through our warranty period.

And facilities-- the most important part was facilities needed to be back here in programming design specification, the world I knew. And at that time, facilities basically started somewhere in here and went forward into operations. So that's our history, where we were in 2008. I've heard it's been called a chasm or an abyss. The difference between BIM output and then operational requirements.

Today, our buildings, we get a huge amount of information out of the BIM. There's a lot of information in there. The projects are very, very data dense. We can use a lot of that. But how do you get it into your operational requirements, how do you access it, and how do you put it to work is sort of the premise of our story here.

So BIM, you all know that. Building Information Modeling. That's just a Wikipedia description up there, definition. When we really started looking at this early in right around 2012, once again, data dense construction projects. But we don't need all that data. And I really espoused, I really felt like if you gave me 5% of the data coming out of the building and you allowed me to specify, you allowed our team to look at it, our engineers and all the stuff that's really important to us, if we had 5% carefully specified and access to it we could run our buildings a magnitude, a great large order of magnitude better just with that amount of information.

So the LOD specification, according to priority and our maintenance system requirements, data collected through Maximo, we need to provide KPIs and generate a return on investment so we can keep moving forward because this has got to be sold across the street to our CEOs, our C-suite. They have to understand the financial part of what's working here-- making up of business case models.

The COBie data in Excel, the augmented bit of information, specified model in 5% and LOD parameters. We'll get there. And this was-- we went and saw somebody the other day. And she had pointed out and was very accurate, BIM is the model and getting integrated project delivery and getting to that point. The 4FM part of it, that's actually building information management, more than the modeling. The modeling is done. Now we're taking the model and we're pulling data out of it.

We figured first thing we got to do, we got to prove that it works to ourselves and to others. We did a proof of concept. We got our new building. I was going up there at Mission Bay. We took the energy center. We worked with DPR, EcoDomus, Autodesk, IBM, and ourselves. And we met at a table for about five months. I think that was about the time period. We're meeting on a biweekly basis. And we actually extracted all the assets out of the tables, out of the project model.

We imported them into Maximo and we learned that we didn't want to reverse engineer things in the future. We wanted to specify them and have them brought in to Maximo because that was very, very painful. Field validation lessons regarding singular identification-- how do you identify your assets, your equipment? And how do you do it out of the model into a CMMS?

Real big example there was I had some VAVs. I knew I had about 280 of them in that large building complex. We queried it. We're all excited. The first time we looked at it and it came up with nine. We thought, I know I've got more than nine in here. And we started looking hard. Turns out the VAVs were named 11 different things. Different detailers, different days, different companies. There was no specification on the nomenclature or the naming conventions for them. And once we cleared that up, data started to work for us.

We connected Maximo to, at that time, Autodesk Navis, the viewer, so we could demonstrate loading an asset in the viewer from Maximo and then open a work order to show that compatibility. And we did so. That's when we really started paying attention to proven products-- what's the least resistance to creating an integrated functional suite, because there is the project delivery, the design, the project, and then the operations. And we were sort of really coming around that corner here.

This is Mission Bay hospital. A lot of you recognize these kind of models. This is MEP. And my kids ask me what I do, and I say, that's what I do. When I approach a building, when I'm walking into a building, that's how I see it, right? And this is sort of our 5%. The floor coverings, the wall.

ANDREW ARNOLD: Oh, that's the 100%.

BRUCE MACE: Well--

[LAUGHTER]

ANDREW ARNOLD: That's the fully coordinated design and construction model that DPR delivered to UCSF.

BRUCE MACE: In that 100% we get all the way down to-- we're loaded with equipment, we got MRs, we got CTs, we got floor coverings, we got walls. None of that's in here. So we've got the space. We got the full MEP coordinated. So anyway, there's a lot of information. And how do we break this down into systems that are usable for a facilities group?

When we really started looking at it, we have a lot of old buildings. We got new buildings. This one was just built. And this is critical. These are the four design solution sets. New Construction-- we got the PCMB we're going to show you here in a minute and it's a brand new building. It's getting built, getting designed. We're at 100% CD. Plans are getting reviewed and approved right now. That's a brand new building connected to Mission Bay hospital.

The other one there is a mixed model, where Mission Bay hospital and the Gateway Medical Building, they're being connected to this new PCMB. That was a mixed model of Revit, AutoCAD, and proprietary softwares that were used for fabrication in the design processes. How do we stabilize sort of the languages that went into building that group of buildings onto a 100% Revit model, PCMB? And renovations-- existing BIM, partial BIM, are we going to Maximo reverse engineer?

Our two old big hospitals we have in space models in Revit. And we are just now starting with the solution of how are we going to build systems back into them. You can go from your do your point cloud, you can go in and tear it apart, but where's the value proposition? At what point do we say, maybe we just want to build into their sort of an equipment asset list with distribution systems that look more like an isometric or a single line diagram to building engineers.

So there's different levels of solutions that need to be made. If you try to lift it all over the fence, we sort of really felt like, wow, that'd be too much work for us. We can't do that. And we certainly can't afford to do that. So where's the value? And then so those are our four big solutions. And these are some of the value props that we were really focused on in this whole project.

Why do it? And I think it's really important here to point out that this is a facility-centric sort of view of the whole process. Background is in architecture, design, development, delivering projects. But now being on this side of the fence for 12 years, the perspective completely has changed. And how do we take that information and create an interoperability that allow us to maximize on the information that we get out of buildings?

We have a bunch of these. And they happen-- so the facility owner, folks out there, wave your hands. You're the ones that feel these type of experiences. And I certainly have. This was last fall, 2016. My phone rings at 11:15. Anytime it rings after 10:00, I know something is really wrong, because I've got people that take care of things until they get really bad.

So this was about 11:15. I was on site by midnight. My chief engineer coming from a different direction was there by midnight. This is Mission Bay, the cafe. This is a structural chase. So it's fire rated. It's about two inches of sheet rock. It's sealed. Seven stories tall and it's got structural steel in it-- except in this case, it's now filling up with water, some liquid. And it's coming out at the bottom. And we've got seven stories and we don't know what the source is.

The engineers had not been able to figure it out, couldn't isolate it. Chris and I got there-- that's my chief engineer. And for the first time ever-- this was amazing-- we took one look at it and instead of running for a plan room, for paper, we said, the model. And we ran upstairs to the second floor. We got the model open, popped it open. And we're very familiar with it. We grew up with it, building this building.

And we had him fly. We started at the bottom. We put an engineer down here at the bottom with a radio. We put an engineer up on the first floor with a radio. We identified on the first floor of what water systems were impinging inside that chase, isolated them. Radio guy in the first floor said nothing happened. We worked our way up. We hit the fourth floor. We're in an OR where this chase goes through. And we turned off a water system and, bingo, it stopped.

So we effectively used the model to identify a source leak inside of a closed chase that, in the old days, we would have spent a lot of time punching holes, checking out all our diagnostics. And like I say, this happened on a Sunday night. And by Monday morning, we had it sealed up. This was contained. We opened at 7 o'clock. And we were up on the fourth floor at 6:30. We'd been up all night.

When the contractor got there that actually did the braising work and he said, I'm glad you got that contained. But he said, I'm sure it's over here. We said, no, come on, Mark. It's over here. And he said, no, I did it. I know right where it is. And so we put up another containment. And this is in an OR. It's $1,000 a minute to run those things when you're displacing operations. And we said OK, built a containment, punched a hole. He couldn't find it.

We tore apart a bunch of wall. And that was exactly what we would have done in the old days. We said Mark, over here, please. And we went into our containment, punched a hole, and we were 16 inches off from where we had an issue. And that was just a phenomenal learning experience for me. And it really sort of sealed-- we've had several of these where we're utilizing the tool.

So we'd done the proof concept. We had a new hospital that was in a mixed model. So we're all excited we're thinking, great. We've got an internal IT team. We're building towards coming up with these solutions. We're excited. And we thought we were about three years out. And then UCSF, being who they are, hired a guy from London-- Alan Ashworth, preeminent cancer researcher in the world, brought him over to our program and promised him a new building in 36 months.

So I went from thinking I was going to be starting this idea in about 36 months. And I got laid on our plate. We're going to start right now. And I rather sheepishly went to the architect, a big name architect. He's really great, Stuart Eckblad. Some of you may know him. And I said, hey Stuart, we have a long relationship. I said Stuart, let me do this. We really were ready. We want to do it on this project.

We're going to do a BIM execution plan. We're going to bake it into the contract. We're going to do a best value bid because that will allow us to add some experience into the design build side of it and get somebody that we can really work with. And he said, great. He said, can't cost anything. Can't rock the boat. Can't slow down my timeline. But go ahead and knock yourself out. And we said, great. That's exactly what we need. We got permission. Let's go. And we headed off on this project.

This got us back into the big room, the Integrated Center for Design and Construction. Quickly, it was the same as with the hospital. If facilities is embedded and we're working alongside and we're working collaboratively, we really found that the contractors and subs, once they get used to the idea, were very open to having us in there participating, doing field work, checking models, and working on solutions.

Part of what we'll show you here, no fly zones. One of the big issues over history has been you can't get access to anything. My guys just complain and I'll vouch for them. We had a big league a couple of weeks ago. Domestic hot water, 130 degrees, 15 inches away from the valve that you would use to turn it off with a 15 inch access to get up in there.

Well, you can't put your face or your arms up into that kind of a stream. So we built no fly zones, two feet by two feet, deck to deck, transparent, put them in the model. And we're having them build the model with access built right in. And we'll turn it off at the end and we have clear space. So in the model picture here, you'll see we're up to the fourth floor in a seven story building.

We had specific duties that we're doing over here. We're responsible for integration roadmaps that we worked really long and hard, and thanks to Andrew and his team, that keep us in line. Data quality-- how do we know we're getting quality data. Can't take bad data out and move it over to Maximo because it's still going to be bad. So let's make sure we're getting the right data that's specified.

Learning objective-- one of the goals of the class here was to share the tools that we've put together. So for this project, absolutely first and foremost, a BIM execution guide we wrote got baked into the contract. And then once we got the design build on board, we got everybody to the table. We really started focusing on turning it into a BIM execution plan.

And it is now-- we're in the project, 100% CD. And we're already on our fifth iteration with a whole lot of lessons learned, as well. And I'd like to point out, we got the BIM execution plan, the bases. We talked to Penn State. We talked to Birgitta Foster, Western Washington University, and the list goes on and on. Army Corps of Engineers. And really amazing that everybody was exceptionally willing to share.

And it was Western Washington University, the guy that was closest to what we wanted to use as a starting point. And he said, take it, make it better, and just give it back to me when you make it better. And that was the only requisite. And he handed it over. We spent a couple months on it and really got it to what we think would serve our needs. But it's critical as a foundation point.

Data dictionary. COBie and Revit. Andrew, you want to speak to this one just real quick.

ANDREW ARNOLD: Yeah. We hear a lot about standards for information exchange and particularly COBie as a standard for exchanging design information into facilities management systems. And it's great as a data transfer bucket, if you will, a file format. But it doesn't specify the nomenclature for the assets you care about managing. It doesn't-- it has a couple of out of the box parameters or property sets in it, that got knocked down to assets specific properties.

And so in terms of coming up with this Common Language, common nomenclature that the university can use across projects for our PCNB, but all other projects, we thought it was wise to put together this set of documents we call a facility data dictionary. And in a couple of slides, I'll go into that. But think of it simply as the standard language, the standard technical language that we're defining, that gets put into a COBie-- in other words, the right named things gets stuffed into COBie to transfer across between systems.

BRUCE MACE: And the example there was my VAVs being named 11 different things. So once you standardize, you specify it. Well, guess what? In this round, we got 279 VAVs because we named them all the same thing. So real simple, but very important lessons.

We're using Autodesk as a platform. That's why we're here, right?

[LAUGHTER]

And BIM 360 Glue and Field. We're in Glue looking at the model. Our engineering team, I've got my chief engineer and a super chief that serves all sites that are heavily involved in submittals. They've been through the building process. They all fly really good in Glue, Navis. We have five engineers that we assign them work to go through the model to verify and validate, to go in and look at the access spaces.

First no access zones on the first floor. You know, they put in about 20 of them. Well, we said, hey, we got 126 of them. So we started that iterative process with the subs and the GCs, the detailers, and they started hanging it in there. And by the time we got to the third or fourth floor, they were sort of like OK, you got us. We're busted. So it's all here. And now they're hitting it almost dead on. It's working really well for everybody.

A way of checking rules or checking your data-- so when we're looking at the model, we're specifying what goes in there, how it's named, what the nomenclature is, what we're all going to call it, naming conventions. We chose a product and we're using Invicara BIM Assure. It's working really well for us. When we started the project with our builder-- and RNS is the builder in this case-- they had put aside money, part of their build package or the bid package was for a rule checker.

And it was that it was a different product. And we sort of sat down. We all looked around. We're working collaboratively, once again. DPR and RNS and our team. And we took a look at several products and we all sort of said, you know what? We think this is going to really work for us. So RNS actually switched. And we selected this and we're utilizing it right now.

And Invicara has been great with us to allow some development sandbox space to look at the actual model to run rules. We can run rules and take a look at the data we're getting and making sure that it's good and clean. And that is a deliverable from the builder and the designer, but we're helping in that aspect and all learning by doing so.

Docs-- historically, we've been using a couple other products for a change management, document management. And in this case-- because once again, when you're looking at a cross integrated platform, if you will-- where you have data, how you exchange it, the easier you can make it becomes very, very important because we don't want to spend all our time and valuable FTE resources out there creating custom integrations. So we're trying to stay really focused on that.

Maximo was our CMMS of choice. And it's working very well for us. And then so that's our pyramid, our pyramid of tools, what we've used. And once again, there's a lot of tools out there. This is just what we have-- I think with a lot of painstaking, looking ahead, and developing and trying, it's working real well for us, and we just wanted to share that.

ANDREW ARNOLD: Sure. Back to the pyramid, how many of you have been to other BIM FM presentations or classes this week? Probably just about everybody. And I'm sure you've heard a lot about the Autodesk solution, OPS. And I think it's worth noting the reasons why UCSF is going with Maximo, because I think there's different solutions for different owners.

And number one, they needed an enterprise class system. And they want to do lots of integrations with other tools in their enterprise, because as a health care provider, they've got JCAHO requirements, annual-- you know, every couple of years, certifications. So they've written applications that semi automate all the documentation behind certification.

They've got some very sophisticated workflows around ticketing and work order generation, and because, again, you've got facilities that just cannot go down. You know, people's lives are at stake if they go down. And so in this case, for this owner, a tool like Maximo is appropriate. And so some of the workflows and some of the system integration stuff is a little different than probably what you've heard in the other 99% of the presentations this week. All I wanted to mention on that.

BRUCE MACE: And real quick while we're on that subject-- so we report federal regulation. We get audited. We have teams come in and survey us at random times. We have an electronic tool that reports all that information to make sure we're whole on it at all times. We've done our first web-based live integrations where we're taking data out of Maximo when it gets changed in the field, reporting to the web, front-facing electronic documentation to our regulatory agencies.

So right now, we can sit and look at all our sites electronically with a surveyor. And then we are now at the point where we're moving into the data can be changed in the field on a handheld by an engineer, a field guy, a tech signing off on a PM. And it would update. And I could be sitting at a table with the federal regulatory folks and have something change. So that's something we're moving towards.

ANDREW ARNOLD: The Autodesk products that are shown here are what Autodesk, as of this AU, is calling their Autodesk Classic 360 environment. And they announced their new environment, their new integrated suite. And that's a whole other ball game. And that will have application programming and open application programming interfaces based on the Forge platform to support these kinds of integrations, as Autodesk product suite goes forward.

Kind of just back to leveraging I in BIMs is probably pretty familiar kind of slide to most of the folks in this room that have been to five other presentations this week. But the idea is, again, specifying, standardizing your specification of requirements and really doing the outreach to the project teams.

One of the critical things that happens-- and I'll probably have another slide dedicated to this-- is if you focus just on the technical requirements and the technical processes and do not focus on organizational alignment, education, explaining to the why all the way through the supply chain, all the way down to the trade contractors, your chances of success are very thin, to be honest with you.

And so as you invest in doing this, invest as much time on the social and cultural alignment issues around projects and collecting information as you do on the technical implementation. So I have a slide dedicated that in a bit, but the whole-- whoops, I'm going a little too fast here. Exporting the information out of models into basically we could have put COBie there, that kind of generalized instead of spreadsheet. And then import to a particularized data management system.

Another thing that Bruce mentioned already and I think it gets glossed over in these overviews is the importance of verifying the quality of the data. And I'll talk more about that in a slide coming up. There's basically two forms of verification. One is kind of the data verification, and the second, which is we use these model checking environments for. And the second is field verification and setting up processes whereby either the commissioning agent, the owner lines the commissioning agent to do that or the builder does it, or even the facility-- the guys who carry wrenches go out and do it.

They actually go verify that in the field, that what's there is really there. And it's got the right nameplate. And if it doesn't exist, you need to go make corrections back in your data set.

And so starting with the typical BIM execution plan, many of you, I'm sure, are familiar with this thing called a model progression specification. And it lays out the systems that are going to be modeled and the people responsible for modeling them and what phase and what level of development and when they will do them.

What we've done in terms of extending what a BIM ex plan is, is to do the breakdown from the systems to the constituent products in those systems, and only that equipment the owner cares about managing. And this is where we get to the 5%. So that's a specification process. And we document all this out in a way that a computer can interpret.

And then for each of those asset classes that the owner cares about, we deal with naming those objects. And there's kind of the canonical name or the name you and I might use for a piece of equipment, and then the name as you might see in the computerized maintenance management system and also the name as you have to see it implemented in AutoCAD or Revit. There's constraints on how you name things in those authoring systems. And so it's important to specify that out.

It's also important to specify out the properties for each of these asset classes so that you have-- whether the trade is modeling in an AutoCAD based product or the architect or the design engineer is modeling in Revit, you get the same property names flowing into your computerized maintenance management system.

It's this level of specification that we find as the foundation that we spoke about before for doing two things-- one, educating the project teams about what the requirements are and making it unmistakable and easily executable, and the second is, we use this as the basis for the rules we write in tools like Invicara BIM Assure. So we-- yeah?

AUDIENCE: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt your sentence right in the middle. So we're doing something similar where we're gonna have our own names, our own attributes, for all of these things. But when you have named attributes for specific content, they're using their own parameters for those things. So are you getting your teams to push the stuff from the manufacturers content into these consolidated--

ANDREW ARNOLD: That's a good question. That's a good question. We are getting teams to rename objects and add parameters that are the owner's specified parameters. In Revit, you can map one parameter to another. So you can still bring that manufacturer content in plausibly, but you got to work through the process by which the trades, notes, and map parameters from the manufacturer name to the owner required name in the authoring tool.

BRUCE MACE: And because we didn't want to start a range war, we've been very good about working with detailers and contractors and subs and using our team to whatever extent we can. Let's help you to rename, to do family work, to make that easier.

ANDREW ARNOLD: So the builder Rudolph and Sletten, on the PCMB, is a great partner--

BRUCE MACE: Absolutely

ANDREW ARNOLD: --to the health care group. And this was an IPD project. So there's a weekly cadence meeting. And a commitment on the part of the builder to do this. And equally on the part of health of commitment not to rock the ship. And that's why they're very disciplined, and kind of brutally disciplined, about minimizing the asset classes that we care about and doing things in a way where we take responsibility for a lot of the outreach from the GC all the way up to the trades and explain the why. Once we explain the why and they begin to understand the benefits to the owner, the game gets a lot easier.

All of that fits in this framework that we're putting together for, number one, I've talked a lot about outreach to the trades and the designers to get them to change how they model. And then through specifications, standardized specifications for what they should model that are precise down to the exact object names and the property names. And we even get for properties for which we can validate the values of those properties-- maybe it's a pick list of approved manufacturers, or maybe it's a pattern for a room name-- we also put that into the facility data dictionary as a requirement.

And what that allows us to do is that then allows us to run tests. And this is why an enterprise class tool like Invicara's BIM Assure is good, is it's a kind of a classic web system where you can create an account for a project, invite people into that account. Different people can write rules and share those rules across the system. Am I going too long?

BRUCE MACE: No, doing good.

ANDREW ARNOLD: And then you run those rules and your tests either run red or green. And so red light, green light. And so the owner-- at least the facilities group here-- is in the position really for the first time I know of to say, I accept or I don't accept the models I'm getting from the designers and the trades based on the quality of information in the models. So we finally have acceptance criteria on the part of the owner for accepting data coming from a project.

Then once you get past that stage, there's a lot of configuration that has to go on between configuring the tools that do the COBie export out of CAD and BIM systems and then import into the computerized maintenance management system. And that's a whole kind of education process too for these people who are the responsible authors who are doing the work over here. But when it's done successfully, it works. And so Bruce has some slides that'll show you this thing actually working and working-- I'm not gonna steal your fire.

The last piece is do it incrementally. You don't want to create waste at the beginning by telling everybody to put in data before it's time. And you've got different responsible parties through the project delivery process. And so in the data in the facility data dictionary, we lay out these data views that each stakeholder is responsible for delivering and when they're responsible for delivering it.

The rules, by the way, are aligned with those milestones. So we don't run all the rules, all the time. We just only run the rules for each responsible party for the data they're responsible at a time. And the principle behind that is to keep these data runs small batch. Small batch, so that you can fix problems more quickly and you don't end up with a big batch problem at the end, which drives people nuts and drives up costs.

And that's-- just one-- this is your slide-- now we're transitioning back to Bruce. But I can't emphasize enough putting planning into organizational developing around this. Bruce started to tell the story by the fact that they stood up their own IT organization within the facilities group at UCSF. That's amazing. So they had control.

They had control over changes in Maximo that had to be made and getting people to actually administer and program into Maximo to talk to the project people who were creating the content. And to work through the issues of configuration of the output and ingestion of the input from one system to another. That's really important.

And also setting up communication processes with the project team so you're educating them on the what and the why and the how. Once they get that, you'll find most project teams-- least in the people I've been privileged to work with-- get motivated and excited about creating this value. Everybody likes to do good things, and when they know why they're doing it, the conversation gets a lot easier. So thanks.

BRUCE MACE: Thank you. Yeah, the bright and shiny object concept-- this is something we're doing that's we think is really valuable. And it's sort of, you know, we're pushing it here with what we're doing. But we're being very clear with everybody that we're sharing this, you know, with the subs, the contractors, the detailers.

And when we-- it's been about four weeks ago is all-- when we went from Maximo 7.5 to 7.6 in a sandbox, we stood it up, and then we pulled our first real pull off of Revit and the actual model for this building. And we stood around and watched while it chewed. And when it flew, we were just ecstatic, right? So all of a sudden now we're really reaping the rewards of this 8 year, 10 year journey. IBM and Autodesk sort of promising things and alluding to things, and now here we are looking at it.

First thing we did was take that model and a shorter presentation than this and went to the ICDC, sat down with all our detailers, the subs, the generals, got everybody in the room and showed them what their work-- because they're really used to looking at that MEP fabrication model. They know it and they have blood, sweat, and tears in there.

And when we showed them pulling it into Maximo and following assets through in Maximo, touching an asset in the large model viewer from within Maximo, touching a work order, opening up the Maximo world through a viewer of the actual model, it was a real eye opener. And then we got interest from UCOP, the office of the president, they came over and they have a procurement group and they want to get COBie data for the construction process. And they're claiming they can save 70 million bucks a year enterprise wide.

Well, that's a real value proposition. I said, yeah, you can guarantee that, but get this-- you're just a stop on what we're developing here. You can get off at the end of the project, and by definition, Revit, you've got COBie data in there. You just need to specify what you want the output to be, to collect, and you can get off at that stop and meet your value proposition. So it's really interesting where it's going.

Real quick, just want to say thank you. We got a few more slides for sure, but this is our builder group here. And we're all working together. When we went over to the ICDC and sat down and showed them the actual viewer and we talked to a couple of the old detailers that have been around a while and come from AutoCAD. And it was really cool. We had one guy 23 years, and forced to come up to 2017 in Revit it for this project.

And he said he was tearing his hair out and threatening to retire. And he said it's the greatest thing that's ever happened to him. He said, it's amazing what Revit 2017 is allowing him to do. And he said, what we're doing with that now-- and we had two detailers in the room that both said the same thing-- he said it just is amazing. And then Autodesk, DPR, and IBM, of course. Let's see.

So this is PCMB. This is the building and this is the MEP fabrication. And this is within. This is Revit. This is Autodesk. Excuse me. This is Maximo. You recognize it. Here's the data that's coming out, being pulled from that. This is the visual. This is what my detailers are used to seeing, touch an item, the bag and bag out filter in this case. All the COBie data. We're getting our enhanced UCSF request to come out.

And here's the viewer. So now my engineers, we have them, in this model here in Maximo. And they are flying around. In this the yellow part you see here, those are part of our no fly zones. Anyway, it's integrated--

ANDREW ARNOLD: Bruce, if could just mention the viewer that's integrated into Maximo, it's the Autodesk Forge viewer. So IBM has developed extensions. Maximo team has developed extensions to incorporate the Forge viewer. And it supports the idea that when you're in a work order in Maximo, you can pop out to the asset. And when you're in the viewer and you touch on an asset in the viewer, you can go to the Work Order in Maximo.