Texas Health Resources, Methodist Alliance Hospital, Fort Worth, Texas. Hospital; 188,000 s.f. $46.5m 58 beds with growth potential of 300 beds

Transcription

1 Seminar Objectives 1) IPD and its impact on team behavior 2) Lean and its role in a collaborative process. 3) Pre-Fabrication 4) How Lean, BIM and collaborative processes impact project value.

2 The Project Texas Health Resources, Methodist Alliance Hospital, Fort Worth, Texas. Hospital; 188,000 s.f. $46.5m 58 beds with growth potential of 300 beds MOB; 74,000 s.f. $10m Project of identical scale completed within the last year set the base budget number.

3 The Project Text Text Text Text Text THR Presbyterian Hospital, Flower Mound, Texas Final Cost $43,500,000

4 The Project

5 The Project

6 The Project

7 The Project

8 Contractual Issues Perkins + Will in Dallas is the architect, no IPD experience, no Lean experience. Beck is the contractor, internal integrated experience, but no IPD experience, no Lean experience Owner representative, Denton Wilson, had become a national spokesman for IPD and Lean, left halfway through the project. Unique selection process

9 The Project Initial Budget; $43,500,00 Budget with Additional Scope; $46,500,000 Initial Design Estimate; $49,500,000 Mechanical Upgrades; $2,500,000 -Heat pump chillers -Additional Generator -Fanwall technology Final Cost; $46,500,000

10 Contractual Issues AIA C191 contract-multi party agreement, similar to C195 but does not require the formation of an LLC. Owner/Architect/Contractor agree to waive all claims. Not operating under a true C191 cost-plus model; Architect has a fixed fee Contractor has a GMP Project began $3m above baseline goal, project ended $800,000 below budget, with $2.5m in added value. No accounting for added value.

11 Incentive Plan Fee at risk; Beck $230,000 (.05%) P+W $230,000 (.05%) Savings incentive; Beck $230,000 (.05%) P+W $230,000 (.05%) THR retained savings; $460,000 Any additional savings beyond $1,380,000 will be split equally between the owner, architect, and contractor.

12

13 Incentive Plan Fee at risk recovered with four factors; 1-Overall client satisfaction achieved 2-Final cost less than target cost 3-Substantial completion achieved 4-Quality meets owner standards

14 Incentive Plan Project Savings Incentive Distribution based on the average survey score from a 20 question survey taken by the team. A sample; -Team members demonstrate trust and respect across all levels within the Team -Project participant's time is used wisely and productively -Team successfully incorporates and executes Building Information Modeling for the betterment of the project. -The project team uses LEAN principles for making project decisions that are based upon current relevant data and are for the betterment of the PROJECT.

15 Incentive Plan

16 Incentive Plan

17 Incentive Plan

18 Incentive Plan

19 Project Budget vs. Estimate Texas Health HM Alliance TARGET COST Base Budget Approved Alternates Approved Cost Benefit Analysis Pending Cost Benefit Analysis TARGET COST Current Estimate $50,500,000 $50,000,000 $49,500,000 $49,000,000 $48,500,000 $48,000,000 $47,500,000 $47,000,000 $46,500,000 $46,000,000 $45,500,000 $45,000,000 $44,500,000 $44,000,000 $43,500,000 $43,000,000 $42,500,000 $42,000,000 $41,500,000 $41,000,000 $40,500,000 $40,000,000 6/24/2010 7/19/2010 8/13/2010 9/7/ /2/ /27/ /21/ /16/2010 1/10/2011

20 Project Savings Distribution

21 Contractual Lessons The reward structure has to be sufficient to compensate the architect for the additional work. The reward structure modified the architect s behavior, but they felt that they would prefer to collaborate without the fee incentive. Not including Structural and MEP engineers in the reward structure caused problems on the team. Without an active and supportive owner the process will not succeed.

22 Contractual Lessons The waiver of liability was valuable in creating an environment of collaboration and BIM sharing. On another project with the same owner rep and ambition, but without the contract, the collaboration has been different.

23 Contractual Lessons

24 Contractual Lessons

25 LEAN Process

26 LEAN Process THR hired a Lean consultant to assist on the project. He was an Industrial Engineer with experience on refineries and industrial projects. The processes used were; A3; suggestions fit onto an 11x17 piece of paper Scorecards; the team s monthly self-rating Pull schedule; starting at the end result Weekly Work Plan; review tasks at the start of each week, PPC was not consistently carried out. Target value design; designing to a set budget Retrospective; a one month review of process

27 LEAN Process- Big Room

28 LEAN Process

29 LEAN Process-Promise Wall

30 LEAN Process Target Value Design

31 LEAN Process Target Value Design Hospital building structural steel system using target value design;.05% over budget MOB structural steel not using target based design; 8.0% over budget. Engineer was out of fee to continue meetings. Fabricator completed the steel detailing to minimize tube and angle steel, minimizing the labor while adding slightly to the tonnage.

32 Lean Lessons Very difficult to match the flow between architecture and construction. Architect felt financially challenged because of the process. 25% more hours than in a traditional process, half of those hours based on owner decisions. Architectural team found the process rewarding, architectural management not so much. Architectural management struggled with the risk and inability to predict profit on the job.

33 LEAN Lessons LEAN does not mesh with typical efficient architectural processes; go slow to go fast, target based design, many more meetings. If I had to do this on every project we would go broke. P+W Associate Principal...? Be careful when selecting a consultant, begin by implementing a few key processes; PPC, Last Planner, Pull Scheduling... The greatest benefits accrued to the owner

34 Pre-fabrication Strategy Value Proposition for Pre-fab Strategies Reduction in Project Schedule Reduction of peak manpower by leveling resources Significant reduction on labor (50-55%) Productivity loss due to weather Quality Controlled environment Repetition Quality control Safety

35 Pre-fabrication Strategy Prefabrication What systems were targeted? MEP Corridor Racks Typical rack length is 16 feet but total length is 20 feet Maximizes the use of stock length for piping, conduits, etc. Reduces material waste Work is done in somewhat controlled environment Work is also done at table height rather than on ladders, reduces hazards Prefabricating system offsite reduces the peak manpower on the project Patient Room Headwalls The quality of the work produced is high and consistent The coordination allows each system to be perfectly located on the wall The amount of rework is virtually eliminated Patient Room Toilets Finishes can be installed (ie. wall or floor tiles.) Coordination of everything in a toilet room is conducted resulting in consistent location of accessories, outlets, sinks, mirrors, etc. The efficiency of the process produces significant savings in labor

36 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

37 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

38 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

39 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

40 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

41 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

42 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

43 Pre-fabrication Strategy MEP Corridor Racks

44 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

45 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

46 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

47 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

48 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

49 Pre-fabrication Strategy Patient Room Headwalls

50 Pre-fabrication Strategy Sequence of Headwalls and Pods

51 Pre-fabrication Strategy Modeling Studs with piping

52 Pre-fabrication Strategy Restroom Mock-Ups

53 Pre-fabrication Strategy Restroom pre-fabrication shop

54 Pre-fabrication Strategy Qnty Estimated MH's Actual MH's MH Reduction Estimated Labor $ Actual Labor $ Savings Savings / Unit Patient Rest Room 35 3,945 1,474 2,471 $96,653 $36,113 $60,540 $1,730 63% Headwalls 28 1, $47,318 $21,538 $25,780 $921 48% MEP System Racks* 35 1, $32,122 $24,693 $7,428 $212 23% TOTAL: 3,553 $93,748 53% Waste Reduction 19k lbs 9k lbs 10k lbs over 50% reduction in waste generation

55 Pre-fabrication Strategy Baseline vs. First-Run Study vs. Actual

56 Pre-fabrication Strategy Pre-fabrication Strategy; it will be very difficult without strong owner commitment. Implementation must start in design Early Approvals Detailed Planning Mind shift: Construction to Manufacturing Supply Chain Assemble the units do not build them Coordination of Shops (Navis)

57 Pre-fabrication Strategy Location Warehouse Shipping Storage Buy-out Strategy Self Perform Pod Manufacturer Timing!

58 BIM in IPD Signed the AIA E202 but referred to the P+W BIM protocol for more detail. Model is no longer primarily for 2D documentation, it is now a tool for estimating, coordination, and phasing. Everything gets modeled, eliminate 2D content in the 3D model. Accuracy of model is critical, floor and roof slopes modeled, walls modeled to correct height.

59 BIM in IPD P+W agreed to follow some key BIM standards from Beck, these have now been adopted for all their projects.

60 BIM in IPD 2.0 Separation of model elements into objects that match estimating elements. Coding all library items into cost database. Focus on model not drawings as building tool to minimize notation. Generating datapoints to feed directly into Trimble for layout. Model generated by the team for the team.

61 BIM final thoughts BIM is not a substitute for an experienced estimator. Without the IPD liability waiver true BIM cooperation becomes more challenging. He/she who controls the model controls the process. The general standard of architectural documentation is currently low, this will hurt the profession. How to get paid for higher quality?

62 Completed Project

63 Completed Project

64 Completed Project

65 Completed Project

66 Completed Project

67 Completed Project

68 Final result Compared to the comparable building used to set the base budget, this project was; -Delivered in three months less time. -Cost the owner $584,000 less. -Contained $2,500,000 of upgraded mechanical. -Significantly upgraded design.