Issuu on Google+

TACTICAL PLAN CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP INITIATIVE March 2003


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Dear Colleague: It is with great pleasure that we present this March 2003 version of the Capital Projects Technology Roadmap (CPTR). Since we published the first version in January of 2002, much has occurred. We presented the Roadmap at numerous conferences, symposiums, and workshops where we have gathered input, ideas, and suggestions for improvement. We held a large, hands-on, workshop in Lansdowne, VA in November of 2002, and have had teams of technical experts examine that input and refine it to produce this year’s version of the Roadmap.

Board of Directors James B. Porter, Jr. (Co-Chairman) DuPont Engineering K. Keith Roe (Co-Chairman) Burns and Roe Enterprises, Inc. Sherif Barakat National Research Council of Canada Robert E. Donaho The Dow Chemical Company Charles Foundyller Daratech, Inc. Ian Howell CITADON Richard H.F. Jackson FIATECH

The excitement generated by this Initiative is both phenomenal and gratifying. A growing number of individuals, organizations and associations from across the industry, have participated in the development of the Roadmap. This interest and excitement has generated an impressive number of opportunities. For example, the U.S. Department of Commerce asked us to ensure that the new realities of Homeland Security were reflected in the Roadmap, so that this it may also be used to guide these new investments. Another opportunity came with the passage of the Enterprise Integration Act of 2002. FIATECH was instrumental in securing passage of this legislation, which authorizes The National Institute of Standards and Technology to work with industry on “an initiative of standards development and implementation for electronic enterprise integration.” FIATECH is now working with industry and non-governmental organizations in the construction, aerospace, automotive, and manufacturing industries to ensure appropriations for this landmark piece of legislation. This Roadmap is a crucial unifying element in this effort. We all know that the construction industry is a critical component of the U.S. industrial base, and that it provides the physical infrastructure that supports our economy and our way of life. We know that this infrastructure has come under increasing pressure in recent years, and that this new pressure demands new responses from us. We know that technology is the engine of U.S. economic growth, so it should come as no surprise that the industry is turning increasingly to integration and automation to improve productivity. Lastly, we know that budgets are tight, margins are slim, and no one organization, association, company, or institution will be able to solve these problems alone. Cooperation and coordination are key to success. This is why FIATECH is developing this CPTR and offering it to its members and the industry at large. We hope to work with all members of the industry, from owners to contractors to suppliers, and from industry, government, and academe, to choreograph the development of a national initiative in capital projects delivery, operation, and maintenance. If we can continue to advance this plan, we will be able to bring about the revolution in integration and automation that this industry so desperately needs.

Richard Pearson National Center for Manufacturing Sciences

Some say this task is too big, that this goal is too overwhelming, or that the industry is too fragmented. Some say that the industry will never change. We say that change will occur in this industry, and it is only a matter of time. FIATECH and those that are working with us intend to accelerate this change. Henry David Thoreau said it best:

C. Chatt Smith Jacobs Engineering

"If you have built castles in the air, your work need not be lost; that is where they should be. Now put the foundations under them!”

David Stinson Intergraph

We invite all who read this to explore these documents, investigate these plans, find those areas that interest you or in which you have expertise, and work with us to accomplish our goal to revolutionize the capital projects and facilities industry.

Randy Williams AVEVA, INC.

Sincerely,

John Voeller Black & Veatch Norbert Young McGraw-Hill Construction

Richard H.F. Jackson Director, FIATECH

Jack E. Snell (Special Advisor) Building & Fire Research Laboratory/NIST

March 2003

2


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 8 2.0 THE PROGRAM PLANS ......................................................................................................................... 12 2.1 Program 1: Master Facility Life-Cycle Model for Project Planning and Management ................ 12 2.2 Program 2: Construction Industry Data/Information/Knowledge Repository .............................. 20 2.3 Program 3: Automated Capital Projects Design Environment ..................................................... 25 2.4 Program 4: Integrated Procurement & Supply Network............................................................... 31 2.5 Program 5: New Materials, Methods, Products, & Equipment .................................................... 36 2.6 Program 6: Intelligent Job Site ..................................................................................................... 39 2.7 Program 7: Intelligent Facility Life-Cycle Optimization.............................................................. 44

March 2003

3


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

FOREWORD In October 2001, representatives from the capital projects industry met in San Antonio, Texas to develop a comprehensive technology research and development agenda. The goal: to identify critical technology needs that crosscut all sectors of the industry, and to identify requirements for focused R&D to meet those challenges. In November 2002, a second team of industry experts met in Lansdowne, Virginia to review the evolving document, address emerging Homeland Security issues, and define an initial slate of focused programs to implement the recommendations defined in the roadmap. This Tactical Plan presents a detailed overview of the results of those efforts – a draft tactical plan, offered to the industry, government, and academic community, identifying technological and business goals that must be met to realize the industry’s vision for the future. This is a living plan that will evolve over the coming months as we bring industry, academic, and government partners together to refine and implement the plan. We encourage you to read it closely and thoughtfully, and provide us with the benefit of your individual expertise and views. It is important to note that in the context of this document, “capital projects” spans the entire life cycle of a capital facility – from requirements definition, project planning, and design, to procurement, construction, and operational handover, to facility operation, maintenance, and ultimate disposition at the end of its useful life. Certain aspects of the roadmap are focused on the “project” view of the life cycle; other aspects are focused on operations and maintenance perspectives. One compelling finding of the roadmapping effort is that both of these perspectives are deeply interrelated and interdependent. It is also important to note that the roadmap spans all manner of capital projects and capital facilities; the goal of the roadmapping team was to be broadly inclusive, ensuing that the needs, issues and concerns of all sectors of the industry are met in this document. If you have any comments, suggestions, or recommendations on this draft document, please direct them to the project team in care of Nicole Testa at testa@fiatech.org. If you would like more information about FIATECH, please visit our web site at www.fiatech.org or call us at (512) 232-9600.

March 2003

4


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish here to acknowledge gratefully those individuals and organizations that assisted FIATECH in developing, promoting, and refining the Capital Projects Technology Roadmap (CPTR) Initiative. First, we would like to acknowledge the efforts of Jim Bartlett (Naval Facilities Engineering Command, retired) who, while he served as Chair of the Construction Industry Institute’s (CII) FIAPP Steering Committee, first proposed the idea of developing a CPTR for the industry. Our thanks also extends to Dr. Jack Snell, Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Building and Fire Research Laboratory, who helped us obtain initial seed funding for the effort from the National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Construction and Buildings. With that funding, we were able to kick off the project and keep it going with additional support obtained from Linda Beth Schiller, Acting Deputy Director of the NIST Advanced Technology Program. The early success of the CPTR was sufficient to excite the interest of the CII Executive Committee, in particular, Ken Eickmann, CII Director, and Hal Yoh, Chairman, and CEO, Day and Zimmerman International, Inc, who was Chair of the CII Executive Committee at the time. They convinced the CII Board of Advisors to provide further support to carry the CPTR forward. This was critical and their support is acknowledged gratefully also. Numerous sponsoring agencies were also integral in generating initial support and interest and they include the National Science Foundation (Dr. Miriam Heller, Program Director), the National Research Council of Canada (Dr. Sherif Barakat, Director General), and the NIST Advanced Technology Program (Dr. Cita Furlani, Director, Information Technology and Electronics Office). Dr. Snell, whose support in the early stages of the CPTR was instrumental, also provided additional support later on to reflect the new realities of Homeland Security. Without the vision, commitment, and support of these individuals, organizations and agencies, this CPTR would not have come to be. Of course, the technical content of the CPTR comes from people: dedicated, motivated, and committed people from all across the industry, at all levels within their organizations and from all types of organizations. It is these technical professionals who volunteered their time to refine the details of the current state, the desired future state, and the path by which we get from one to the other. Additionally, a select group of volunteer technical reviewers provided significant input and thus helped to refine the early versions of the documents. We owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to all of these individuals who shared a common goal to see that the vision was achieved for the capital projects and facilities industry. These are the leaders, the ones who “get it.” They are the ones who realize that the revolution that this industry so desperately needs will not come by watching from the sidelines, but by rolling up our sleeves and working to make it happen. They are listed below. • • • • • • • • • • • •

Mike Alianza, Intel Corporation Julio Arocho, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Michael Atkinson, Aspen Technology Lee Bailey, Bechtel Corporation Gary Baker, Bechtel Corporation Bryan Ball, Merck and Company, Inc. Sherif Barakat, National Research Council of Canada Dwight Beranek, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Harvey Bernstein, CERF Chris Bezuidenhout, Innotec Engineering Scott Birth, Mead Westavo Corporation Ted Blackmon, Reality Capture Technologies, Inc.

March 2003

5

• • • • • • • • •

Doug Brassard, McDonough Bolyard Peck Rob Brawn, CH2M Hill Mark Browning, JP Step Holding Co. Pablo Buki, SKIRE Stephen A. Cauffman, NIST Daniel Cheng, ArFlex Corporation Vincent Chia, Intergraph Systems Mark Browning, JP Step Holding Co. Constantine A. Ciesielski, East Carolina University • Erin Cassidy, Industry Canada • Albeniz Crespo, SAP Labs • John Decaire, National Center for Manufacturing Sciences


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

James Dempsey, U.S. Coast Guard Robert Donaho, The Dow Chemical Company Gary Drury, PMI Roger Eatwell, Quillion, Ltd. Benedict Eazzetta, Intergraph PBS Jose Manuel Estevez, EDF Benson Fergus, CH2M Hill Michael J. Fladmark, Time Industrial, Inc. Charles Foundyller, DaraTech, Inc. Hunter Fulghum, Turner Aviation Security Cita Furlani, NIST/ATP Reginald Gagliardo, Burns and Roe Stephen Garnier, Fairfax County Govt. James Garrett, Carnegie-Mellon University Richard Geissler, IAI Karl Georgi, Bechtel Systems Charlie Green, Aramco Services Company Michael Hayes, CH2M Hill Miriam Heller, National Science Foundation Patricia Parodi Herz, OTEPI Consultores Patrick Holcomb, Intergraph PBS Rob Howard, Jacobs William Iler, Bentley J.W. Jantunen, Bantrel, Inc. Jim Johnson, Bentley Barney W. Jones, Bentley Joe Jones, Dow Chemical Stephen A. Jones, Primavera Systems Issam Karkoutoli, INOVx Solutions Jeffrey M. Kauffman, University of Texas Frank Keyser, Earth Tech Timothy S. Killen, Bechtel Corporation James B. Klein, AVEVA, Inc. Gary Koah, Jacobs Engineering Ed Koch, Bechtel Systems Robert Kwok, Dow Chemical Company Paul Lower, Shell Chemical Company Hal Macomber, Lean Construction Institute Adrian McBrien, Aspen Technology Deborah McNeil, Dow Chemical Company Gordon McPhee, Fluor Corporation John McQuary, Fluor Corporation Gerhard Meinecke, Impress Software Chris Michaelis, Intel Corporation Moody Miles, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Thomas S. Murphy, Bayer Corporation Chris Norris, National Research Council of Canada

March 2003

6

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

William O'Brien, University of Florida Kenneth Olmsted, Smithsonian Institution John Osby, DuPont Mark Owens, BWXT Y-12 Mark Palmer, NIST Ronald Palmer, Palmer Security Consulting Judith W. Passwaters, DuPont Company Feniosky Pena-Mora, MIT Charles Poer, Zachry Construction Corporation James B. Porter, Jr., DuPont Company Robert Prieto, Parsons Brinckerhoff Les Prudhomme, Construction Industry Institute Gord Rachar, GKO Engineering Sylvia Rappenecker, Dow Chemical Company Keith Roe, Burns and Roe Enterprises, Inc. Jonathan Rudick, Reality Capture Technologies, Inc. Mike Saines, Chevron Corporation Tom Sawyer, ENR Stan Schaefer, Zachry Construction Corporation Todd Shearer, Anteon Corporation Ryo Shibamiya, Mitsubishi Heavy Ind. Sunny Singh, Intergraph Systems James D. Slaughter, S&B Engineers & Constructors Ltd. Sarah Slaughter, MOCA Systems Chatt Smith, Jacobs Engineering Jack Snell, Building & Fire Research Laboratory, NIST Lucio Soibelman, University of Illinois Anthony Songer, Virginia Tech Martin Stenzig, Impress Software Larry Stephenson, U.S. Army Engineer Research Development Center David Stinson, Intergraph Corporation Art Stout, Intel Corporate Services Paul D. Taylor, CITGO Petroleum Corporation Tom Teague, ePlantdata Craig Townsend, PDAC, Inc. John Turnbull, BNFL Engineering Jaime Valencia, Aspen Technology Jorge Vanegas, Georgia Tech University Camille Villanova, U.S Dept. of Labor, OSHA John Voeller, Black & Veatch


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE • • • •

• Richard Wallace, Zachry Construction Corporation • Ruth Wepfer, Dick Corporation • Robert Wible, NCSBCS • Randy Williams, AVEVA, Inc.

Dennis M. Wolf, Conoco, Inc. Freddie P. Wong, Aramco Services Company H. Felix Wu, NIST Norbert Young, McGraw-Hill Construction

PROJECT STAFF • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

Gayle Brace, IMTI William Brosey, IMTI Dudley Caswell, IMTI David Dilts, IMTI Lynn Glover, IMTI Ric Jackson, FIATECH Sara Jordan, IMTI Liz Landeros, FIATECH Donna Marks, IMTI

Doug Marks, IMTI Mary Ann Merrell, IMTI Richard Neal, IMTI Barbara Newland, FIATECH Peter Osborne, IMTI Nicole Testa, FIATECH Kathy Thomas, IMTI Ray Walker, IMTI Charles Wood, FIATECH

Lastly, we want gratefully to acknowledge those organizations and associations that have contributed to the development and promotion of the CPTR and are working with FIATECH to broaden industry’s use of it. Their support and commitment to this initiative is most welcomed and appreciated. They include: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

March 2003

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Architectural Engineering Institute (AEI) Association of Owners and Developers (AOD) Civil Engineering Research Foundation (CERF) Construction Industry Institute (CII) Construction Industry Round Table (CIRT) Construction Users Roundtable (CURT) Continental Automated Buildings Association (CABA) Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA) International Alliance for Interoperability (IAI) International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB) National Conference on States Building Codes and Standards (NCSBCS) National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) National Research Council of Canada (NRCC) The Infrastructure Security Partnership (TISP) Uitgebreid Samenwerkingsverband Procesindustrie, Nederland (USPI-NL)

7


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Capital Projects Technology Roadmap defines an ambitious vision for the future of the industry and a broad slate of technology-oriented goals and to realize that vision. Not all of these needs can be addressed simultaneously. However, it is possible to pursue a large subset of developments that will deliver significant capability advances that attack today’s most pervasive problems and support the greater industry vision of the future. Seven programs define the initial core of the Capital Projects Technology R&D agenda: • • • • • • •

Program 1: Master Facility Life-Cycle Model for Project Planning & Management Program 2: Construction Industry Data/Information/Knowledge Repository Program 3: Automated Capital Projects Design Environment Program 4: Integrated Procurement & Supply Network Program 5: New Materials, Methods, & Products Development & Implementation Program 6: Intelligent Job Site Program 7: Intelligent Facility Life-Cycle Optimization.

This document, the Tactical Plan, presents baseline program plans for each of the seven programs, including a synopsis of key industry needs, project goals, statements of work, project schedules, and business cases. The program plans are drafts developed for industry review, and specific resource requirements will be developed as part of the ongoing planning process. The seven programs support key elements of the industry vision of the future as described in the Strategic Overview component of the Capital Projects Technology Roadmap. As indicated in Table 1.0-1, each program directly supports one or more functional elements of the Vision model (Figure 1.0-1), which is described in detail in the Strategic Overview.

March 2003

8


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 1.0-1. The Vision Model provides a systems framework for achieving industry’s vision of the future. Table 1.0-1. Correlation of Program Plans to Functional Elements of the Vision Model Proposed Program

Vision Element Supported Primary Focus

Secondary

Program 1: Master Facility LifeCycle Model for Project Planning & Management

• Scenario-Based Project Planning

• Real-Time Project & Facility Management, Coordination, & Control • Integrated Data & Information Management • Automated Design • Integrated, Automated Procurement & Supply Network • Intelligent Job Site • Intelligent, Self-Maintaining/Repairing Operational Facility

Program 2: Construction Industry Data/Information/Knowledge Repository

• Automated Design

• • • • • •

Integrated Data & Information Management Technology & Knowledge Enabled Workforce Scenario-Based Project Planning Integrated, Automated Procurement & Supply Network Intelligent Job Site Intelligent, Self-Maintaining/Repairing Operational Facility

Program 3: Automated Capital Projects Design Environment

• Automated Design

Program 4: Integrated Procurement & Supply Network

• Integrated, Automated Procurement & Supply Network

• • • • •

Scenario-Based Project Planning Integrated, Automated Procurement & Supply Network Intelligent, Self-Maintaining/Repairing Operational Facility Intelligent Job Site Automated Design

Program 5: New Materials, Methods, Products, & Equipment

• New Materials, Methods, Products, & Equipment

• Automated Design • Intelligent Job Site

Program 6: Intelligent Job Site

• Intelligent Job Site

Program 7: Intelligent Facility LifeCycle Optimization

• Intelligent, Self-Maintaining/Repairing Operational Facility

• Technology & Knowledge Enabled Workforce • Real-Time Project & Facility Management, Coordination, & Control • Real-Time Project & Facility Management, Coordination, & Control

March 2003

9


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE It should be noted that the seven programs do not provide a complete response to all of the roadmap goals and requirements. Additional programs should be defined in each area and the existing plans augmented in order to provide the needed coverage. Comprehensive programs are needed to address Real-Time Project & Facility Management, Coordination, & Control, and Integrated Data & Information Management. Figure 1.0-2 provides a top-level schedule for the seven programs, showing the major tasks and the timeframes for their completion; further detail is provided in the individual program plans. It should be noted that each program is intended to stand alone as well as support the integrated industry vision defined in Section 2 of the Strategic Overview; each of the plans also supports a significant number of the Goals and Requirements outlined in Section 3 of the Strategic Overview. While the plans do not use the Goals and Requirements as a work breakdown structure, the statements of work address key tasks that support the overall “migration strategy.� The emphasis of the initial program slate is on delivering early and quantifiable value to industry. This is a prerequisite to generating the broad consensus and collaboration needed to attack the larger, more complex challenges defined in the overall roadmap.

March 2003

10


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 1.0-2. The summary-level program plan defines the major tasks that must be accomplished to deliver near-term benefits to industry while supporting progress toward the ultimate vision.

March 2003

11


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.0 THE PROGRAM PLANS 2.1 PROGRAM 1: MASTER FACILITY LIFE-CYCLE MODEL FOR PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT Contributors Scott Birth, Mead Westavo Corporation Doug Brassard, McDonough Bolyard Peck Pena-Mora Feniosky, MIT Karl Georgi, Bechtel Systems Miriam Heller, National Science Foundation Hal Macomber, Lean Construction Institute Ronald Palmer, Palmer Security Consulting Camille Villanova, U.S. Dept. of Labor, OSHA Charles Wood, FIATECH Felix Wu, NIST

2.1.1 The Opportunity Modeling and simulation technologies coupled with advanced information technologies offer tremendous opportunities for the capital projects industry. Creation of a unified program and facility planning and management environment is a key element of the future state vision; an environment where all information and applications are accessible from a single electronic source: the Master Facility Life-Cycle Model. The master model is an information construct – a knowledge base of all information about a project and a single interface for all project functions. The master model will radically reduce the time and cost of planning and executing projects; streamline the interaction of all participants; and provide a “single portal” for capture and use of all knowledge needed to make best decisions for every activity at any stage of the project. It will also provide the much-needed framework for integration of all project processes, enabling partners to seamlessly “plug in” to accomplish their respective scopes of work. This breakthrough capability will reduce costs by significantly compressing design and build time. More efficient and effective facilities and structures will be designed and created with reduced business and technical risk. In the operations and maintenance (O&M) phase the master facility life-cycle model will assure optimized operation and support best decisions in every aspect of facility management.

2.1.2 The Problem Capital projects today are planned and executed using a bewildering array of automated tools and manual project processes. Different companies use widely differing tools to accomplish similar functions; few of these tools can interface with each other. This forces project teams to resort to the lowest common denominator – paper – for developing and sharing requirements, plans, and design information. Links between the design/build phase and the O&M phase are even more tenuous, since facility operators typically receive only a set of as-built drawings of limited fidelity. Some specific problems include: • Poor access to accurate data, information, and knowledge in every project phase and function. • Program plans and designs are optimized for a limited set of parameters in a limited domain. The capability to make fully supported “total best value” decisions does not exist.

March 2003

12


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE • Tools for project planning and enterprise management are maturing, but an integrated solution that delivers all needed functionality for any kind of project is not available. • We don’t understand life-cycle issues very well, so we don’t model and plan well for life-cycle value. O&M and end-of-life considerations are given limited consideration in the project planning equation. • The ability to assess uncertainty, risk, and the impact of failure is immature. This is partly due to lack of knowledge to support evaluations, and partly due to the limitations of available tools. • The business foundation for response to homeland security concerns does not exist, and the ability to address these concerns is limited by a lack of understanding of risks and alternatives. The missing link is the ability to integrate all functions and all information in a unified project management environment. That is the challenge that this program addresses.

2.1.3 The Goal The goal is to develop a fully integrated facility planning and management system based on the master facility life-cycle model concept (Figure 2.1.3-1). The system will enable project teams to interact with customers and other stakeholders to develop and refine a complete set of requirements and plans. Project design and planning options will be rapidly evaluated using a rich suite of modeling and simulation tools to quickly arrive at the best conceptual design and best plan. The system will interface with external databases to capture codes and regulatory requirements and allocate them to the design requirements set. The system will automatically generate a work breakdown structure, and time-phased workflow based on similar prior projects to provide a framework for project management. The master model will provide an integration framework for all functions of the project. Planning and scheduling systems, financial systems, design systems, job site management and control systems, and other functions will interact with the master model to acquire and provide the informa- Figure 2.1.3-1. The master facility life cycle model will tion they need to perform their functions. integrate all capital project processes, systems, and automated tools into a single, unified system that enables Links from the master model to external plug-and-play interoperability of different tools and information sources will enable scheduling data/information sources. and design applications, procurement systems, etc. to quickly access the outside information they need to accomplish their tasks. The master facility model will be created at project inception and systematically enriched over the course of the project to: • Capture the total design package created in the design effort • Capture all material and vendor requirements, data, plans, and schedules in the procurement phase • Interface with progress reporting functions and capture as-built information and design changes in the construction phase. At facility handover, the master model will be a comprehensive, complete, accurate facility simulation and supporting knowledge base that can be used to manage all O&M functions across the life of the facility. This aspect is further addressed in Program 7.

March 2003

13


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.1.4 Solution Approach Development of an end-to-end project life-cycle management system based on a master simulation model concept will require advances in many information technology areas in addition to modeling and simulation tools, and a significant integration effort. The approach will rely on several key elements that provide the basic architecture of the system: • A 3-D CAD system to provide and manage the basic geometry models • A standard information architecture to enable integration of applications and data flows • User interfaces and mechanisms for accessing system functionality through a single portal • Data repositories for storing and protecting system outputs and inputs • Reengineering of business processes to function in the new environment, with associated workforce training. Specific tasks to be performed are outlined in Figure 2.1.4-1 and discussed below.

Figure 2.1.4-1. Program Schedule for Master Facility Life-Cycle Model for Project Planning and Management.

March 2003

14


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Because many of the needed advances must come from outside the capital projects community, the project team develop a strong industry consensus in order to influence the technology vendor community in the needed directions. The project team must develop an understanding of available and emerging tools and applications and integrate these into an open system architecture. Other aspects of the master model, such as the information to be accessed and acquired, the user interfaces, the applications and corresponding data interfaces, must be developed and tailored to the construction environment in cooperation with technology providers.

2.1.5 Statement of Work Task 1: Information Architecture. The objective of this task is to develop an information architecture that identifies all of the information type inputs and outputs for the capital project process and facility life cycle. Since capital project requirements vary greatly depending on the facility type (building vs. bridge vs. chemical plant vs. manufacturing plant vs. mall), the information architecture must be inclusive of, or extensible to, all possible requirements, and be sufficiently modular so that different modules can be independently activated based on project type and scope. This will also enable the needed developments to be pursued with a large degree of independence, which is essential to mitigating technical risk. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 1.1 Information Model Survey. Evaluate existing information models for capital project processes and select the best candidate as a baseline for the system information architecture 1.2 Business/Technical Information Requirements. Extend the selected baseline model to encompass all project/facility processes, with separate extensions for discrete facility/project types, and develop a comprehensive set of information output/input requirements for each function. 1.3 Model Validation. Broadly disseminate the draft information architecture model to the user and technology developer communities to solicit feedback on accuracy, completeness, and functional interface relationships. Update the model as appropriate and publish as a baseline for system development. Task 2: Tool Survey and Assessment. The objective of this task is to identify and evaluate existing commercial or proprietary tools that can provide the functionalities required for project planning/ management and other phases of the project/facility life cycle. The system must be able to support all of the phases of the life cycle, including design, construction execution, and O&M. Multiple candidate tools should be identified for each function, in order to get the benefit of competition as well as mitigate the risk of depending on a single source. This activity will also include a gap analysis to identify areas where needed tools do not exist, or where current tools are so lacking in required functionality that significant new development is required. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 2.1 Tools Survey. Conduct a comprehensive survey of existing commercial and proprietary tools that support project planning/management processes and engineering design activities. Document tool functionality, data input/output requirements/capabilities, and general specifications and features. Publish for widespread dissemination as both a stand-alone deliverable and for use in subsequent tasks. 2.2 Tool Mapping. Map each tool in the baseline tool inventory to the information architecture model developed in Task1. Determine the “best fit� of the available tools to the model’s functional requirements, with the objective of mapping a minimum of two tools to each function. 2.3 Gap Analysis. Based on the results of Task 2.2, identify needed and desirable modifications to each tool to enable integrated, end-to-end flow of information and data through every functional element of the information architecture model. 2.4

Vendor Feedback. Disseminate the results of the Gap Analysis to the respective tool vendors/developers, and provide support for development of the desired modifications and extensions.

March 2003

15


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Based on the results of these interactions, develop a technology demonstration and insertion plan to support the demonstration phase activities to be conducted under Task 5. Task 3: User Interface. The objective of this task is to develop the visualization and tool access interface. As envisioned, the basic interface will be a 3-D visual representation of the subject facility that provides access to information and functions through pop-up and pull-down menus. At capital project inception, the representation will of necessity be a low-fidelity approximation (generic bridge or building, etc.) since the conceptual design has not yet been created. The representation will be systematically enriched and enhanced as the concept matures and the design effort progresses, ultimately providing a 100% accurate virtual simulation by the time the design is handed off for procurement and construction. Users will be able to do virtual walk-throughs, virtually assemble and disassemble structures and equipment, run performance simulations, do tradeoff analyses, call up technical and business specifications, view current cost and schedule information, and similar functions. Security features will need to be engineered in to provide for protection of sensitive information, such as vulnerability data and failure modes. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 3.1 Simulation Environment. Survey current leading-edge simulation environments being researched and developed by the academic, federal, and private R&D communities and engage two or more sources to develop the simulation-centric environment required for the master simulation model system. 3.2 Graphical User Interface. Convene a working group of industry users, representing a full range of capital project disciplines (planners, designers, financial managers, project managers, etc.) to define required user interface functionality, including menu structures and command/control interfaces. Document the results of this effort, circulate for widespread industry review, and update as required. 3.3 Interface Integration. Provide the validated user interface scheme to the simulation environment developer for implementation; or alternatively, engage a qualified third-party integrator to provide/support the needed integration work 3.4 Interface Demonstration and Validation. Make the integrated simulation environment and interface available for industry evaluation via the web and on local workstations. Document feedback and requirements for modifications, and implement the desired modifications. Task 4: Application and Data Interfaces. The objective of this task is to provide connectivity between the visualization environment, the underlying tools, and information and data sources both within and external to the project. This will require definition of functional interface standards and specifications enabling the application vendor community to “white wire” their existing tools to support demonstration of functionality and compatibility, and ultimately evolve their tools into true “plug and play” applications. This will also require extensive work with the owners of needed external information sources (e.g., regulatory agencies and manufacturers/vendors/suppliers of materials, equipment, and fabricated products) to identify standard data content and format requirements for specifications, CAD models, etc. that enable the system to seamlessly access such data and plug it into the master facility model. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 4.1 Application Requirements Definition. The specific activities associated with this task will depend on the results of the tool assessment developed in Task 2 and the simulation environment developed in Task 3. At a minimum, for each tool identified in the baseline set, specific interface requirements will be developed to enable the tool to be accessed/invoked through the simulation environment interface, and to input/output and share/exchange data with the master model and with the other applications integrated into the system.

March 2003

16


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE 4.2 External Data Requirements Identification. Using the information architecture model as a framework, identify the types and sources of information that must be acquired from outside a project of a given type in order to accomplish the program objectives. 4.3 Data Source Identification and Data Quality Assessment. For each discrete data type identified in Task 4.2, identify the current data source owners (vendors, manufacturers, government agencies) and characterize the current available data for accuracy, completeness, electronic accessibility, and format compatibility. 4.4 Data Community Feedback. Based on the results of Task 4.3, work with the data source owners to implement modifications and improvements required to support integration with the master simulation model system, including specification of standard data formats for standard types of data, such as product CAD models, material models, etc. 4.5 Two-Way Data Exchange. Define requirements and explore options for the master model system to send data to external sources and systems, supporting project “outreach” functions such as submission of technical data packages and reports for regulatory review, dissemination of bid packages for vendor solicitations, distribution of engineering change orders, and similar functions. Task 5: Prototyping and Testing. The objective of this task is to integrate the results of the preceding tasks to create and demonstrate a prototype master facility life-cycle model that supports project planning and management and provides the core of a complete facility life-cycle management system. 5.1 Primary Testbed Facility. Survey interested technology developer sites (NIST or other federal laboratory, or a university R&D facility) and select one or more to serve as primary integration and test facilities for the components of the system. 5.2 Tool Integration and Test Sites. Survey interested capital projects industry firms and solicit one or more sites for independent demonstration and testing of various components of the project management system as it evolves. This will help distribute the cost of the required developments and assure direct user community input and feedback. 5.3 Component-Level Testing, Demonstration, and Evaluation. Consistent with accepted information technology development practices, complete the various component developments, conduct functional and performance testing, host demonstrations for industry users, and once acceptance criteria have been satisfied, provide the completed component to the primary testbed facility for integration and system-level testing. This may include provision of on-site engineering support for troubleshooting and debugging. 5.4 System Integration, Test, Demonstration, and Assessment. The facility life-cycle management system will be integrated and tested against the requirements defined in the preceding tasks and made available to all project participants for independent evaluation and prototype application. User feedback will be documented and provided back to the respective component developers to support further improvements. Task 6: System Evolution. Based on the results of the integrated demonstration and test program, requirements for enhancement and extension of system functionality will be provided back to the developer community to support further evolution of the system. At this point, the system is expected to be ready to “roll out” for commercial usage, supported by the respective component developers and with an industry user/developer steering group directing follow-on technology developments.

2.1.6 The Business Case This program addresses the backbone of the technologies and systems needed to achieve fundamental business-driven benefits of design and build cycle time compression, reduced costs in both the off-site and on-site functions, and highly increased workforce productivity in all aspects of the capital project. It

March 2003

17


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE will deliver a key enabler of the vision for capital project management: seamlessly integrated functions and processes, coupled to live data, with all desired functionality accessible and executable through a common interface shared by all project stakeholders. Project planning functions that today take hours, days, and weeks will be completed in seconds, minutes, and hours. Requirements will be automatically captured from customers to guide planning and engineering tasks. The evolving design will be immediately accessible with supporting specifications and analyses, through a 3-D virtual interface. The underlying simulation environment will enable rapid evaluation of different scenarios to support definition of the best combination of features, cost, and performance. When designs are approved, the system will automatically generate procurement packages and supporting schedule and financial data, and automatically disseminate the packages to project team members and qualified suppliers and vendors. Integration with financial reporting systems will provide project managers with one-click visibility into the status of any task or issue, and automatically variances for management action. The master model will also include the total construction execution plan, complete with specifications, bills of material, time-phased labor/material/equipment staging, and resource allocations. Every task and step in the construction process will be simulated with an accurate time component, turning the 3-D facility model into a complete, 4-D living simulation. This will enable planners to optimize construction sequencing to drastically reduce build time and cost, and assure safety and security of operations. Integration of sensing and monitoring functions will enable the master facility model to be continuously updated with as-built information, providing complete visibility of progress against plans and budgets. It will also enable immediate identification of problems such as misrouted material/equipment, improper assembly, and safety and security incidents. When the program is complete, the master model will be handed off to the facility operation and maintenance function for use as a facility control model, supporting routine O&M activities as well as planning and execution of facilities upgrades and other actions downstream in the life cycle. Specific business benefits of th4e delivered capabilities are highlighted in Table 2.1.6-1. Table 2.1.6-1. The Business Case for the Master Facility Life-Cycle Model Feature Integrated project applications framework Single-point data capture (“enter once, use many times”)

Direct Business Benefit • • • •

Connectivity to external databases and progress reporting tools

Continuously expanded and updated master facility model

• •

March 2003

Assures interoperability of tools for planning, design, and project management Companies can use any tool that suits their need based on cost and features Eliminates cost, time, and errors of re-entering data into different applications Estimated 10%-30% reduction in cycle time for project planning, design, and procurement functions Auto-capture of applicable codes, standards, and regulatory requirements to ensure 100% compliance and eliminate associated problems and rework Continuous, real-time visibility into supplier networks assures ability to access best products at best price with improved confidence of ability to meet quantity and schedule requirements Complete and accurate view of the design to any level of detail at any point in time enables designers, planners and project managers to make better decisions Fully accurate electronic as-built complete with facility simulations reduces handover and startup time and costs by up to 50% High-fidelity simulation enables greatly improved decisions about life-cycle actions and accurate prediction of the impacts of changes

18


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Table 2.1.6-1 (continued). Feature

Direct Business Benefit

Total project visibility from single user interface

• Allows functional and project managers to instantly view status of any activity and quickly “drill down” for additional information reduces project administration costs by up to 40% • Allows team members to interact with the project in a virtual environment to accurately visualize designs and plans • Enables quick and accurate exploration of different options, including impacts of changes. • Allows optimization of project task sequencing, providing up to 50% reduction in build time through optimization of construction sequencing and resource coordination.

3D/4D model-based visualization

March 2003

19


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.2 PROGRAM 2: CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY DATA/INFORMATION/KNOWLEDGE REPOSITORY Contributors Michael Alianza, Intel Corporation Julio Arocho, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mark Browning, JP Step Holding Co. Benson Fergus, CH2M Hill James Garrett, Carnegie-Mellon University Michael Hayes, CH2M Hill William Iler, Bentley Systems Jim Johnson, Bentley Systems Larry Stephenson, U.S. Army Engineering Research Development Center Robert Wible, NCSBCS

2.2.1 The Opportunity Ongoing advances in information technology offer the potential for all capital project stakeholders to have unfettered access to the information they need to perform their jobs more efficiently; to easily reuse knowledge from prior projects and external sources; and to capture current information in useful forms. The capital facilities industry significantly lags in its ability to share and process information. The sheer size of the industry and the diversity of its interests present huge barriers to sharing of information. The opportunity presented by this program is to address a compelling need to create a single industry repository of data, information, and knowledge in which all organizations can share, and to which all organizations can contribute.

2.2.2 The Problem One of the largest problems facing any capital project or capital facility operation is timely access to accurate and complete information. Companies spend millions of dollars each year searching for data that exists but is not readily accessible in a useful form. The fluid nature of capital projects makes this problem especially difficult. Teams are formed for a project with multiple partners chosen from a myriad field. Each partner brings its own knowledge to bear on its segment of the work. However, data exchange is complicated by disparate business processes and oftentimes a reluctance to share business-sensitive information. Deficiencies in data impose great penalties in time and cost and are a root cause of problems across the project/facility life cycle. The ability to optimize information flows is further hampered by poor interoperability between systems, competing standards for managing data, and lack of a common methodology for managing project information assets. The same information is typically recreated at great expense from project to project, and useful knowledge captured in the experience of key individuals is lost over time through normal workforce attrition. The Internet and web-based information management tools provide a universal mechanism for sharing information, but there is no overarching strategy and means for capturing and managing the type and depth of information that the industry needs to support its project processes. Useful information is replicated in hundreds of databases in diverse and incompatible formats, and data quality control is, for all practical purposes, nonexistent.

2.2.3 The Goal The goal of this program is to create a shared repository of information that all partners in the capital project process can draw upon. The repository will improve technical, schedule, cost, and quality performance across the board in performing projects and operating facilities. The program will capture and man-

March 2003

20


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE age common types of information in formats that are readily usable by project planning, design, and management systems, and support a new generation of tools that apply information to automate time- and labor-intensive processes.

2.2.4 Solution Approach The proposed program plan (Figure 2.2.4-1) defines a path to delivery of a shared knowledge repository that delivers near-term benefits to the user community. Early deployment of an initial capability will support rapid evaluation and validation of the benefits of the system. The initial system will support the larger-scale evolution desired to achieve the ultimate result: a single, unified repository of industry data, information and knowledge that supports every step and function in the capital project/facility life cycle. The program will establish the information architecture for the repository and begin capturing useful data in standardized formats early in the second year. Areas of initial focus include capture of design information for re-use, creation of a materials knowledge base, and integration of regulatory requirements. Homeland Security will receive special emphasis, with the goal of providing a definitive source of securityrelated information for project planners, designers, and facility owner/operators.

Figure 2.2.4-1. Program Schedule for Data/Information/Knowledge Repository

March 2003

21


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE By the end of Year 2, the system will be operational with a large set of partners and supporting organizations. Attention will then turn to expanding the information sets and supporting integration with the Master Facility Life-Cycle Model being developed in Program 1. Integration will also be a Year 2 focus for project-specific applications such as the Automated Design System (Program 3) and the Integrated Procurement and Supply Network (Program 4). Population of the repository is a major challenge. Companies must clearly see a business case for their contribution, and research organizations must be rallied to assist. Due to the magnitude of the challenge, data requirements will be prioritized and population of the repository will be incrementally phased. Particular emphasis will be placed on critical information needs related to materials, methods, and regulatory issues. Homeland security will receive special emphasis, with the goal of a providing single source of definitive security-related information.

2.2.5 Statement of Work Task 1: Shared Knowledge Environment – Capital projects technical and business data, information, and knowledge will be accessible from any location, on demand, with appropriate control of sensitive assets. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 1.1 Needs Assessment and Determination of Priorities – The information needs of the industry will be assessed and a prioritized/time phased plan will be developed to support the development and population of the repository. 1.2 Shared User Interface – Adopt a transparent single user interface (common desktop), applicable for multiple computing platforms. Adopt collaboration tools that accessible from every desktop to support location independent access. 1.3 Data Management Structure – Develop an architecture that supports the management of diverse data, information, and knowledge for definitive storage, retrieval, and maintenance. 1.4 Universal Data Availability – Establish neutral data format specifications and processes that support instant data/information access and that support the integration of data, information, and knowledge to support user specified unique views of complex information sets, including the ability to scale from high to low levels of detail. 1.5 Conventions for Common Components – Establish common structures that support the storage and retrieval of all common components used in the capital projects industry (in design and construction). 1.6 Capital Projects Data Exchange – Establish a capital projects network with appropriate security to assure access to specific, needed information including intelligent search capability. Task 2: Data Validation – Develop data verification and validation strategies to insure the integrity and utility of the information contained in the repository. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 2.1 Integration of Existing Experimental Data – Establish an electronically accessible archive of existing data needed by the capital projects industry and provide index and search functions to support its use. Include assessment of accuracy and reliability of this data. 2.2 Data Capture Standards – Establish standard methods for companies and research organizations to utilize in submitting data to the repository to assure the integrity of the data and the system. 2.3 Science- and Model-Based Data Validation – Establish intelligent screening systems to assist in the validation of submitted information. 2.4 Management of System Integrity – Establish protocols and administrative procedures manage the repository for assured utility of the contents.

March 2003

22


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Task 3: Repository Population – Populate the repository, compliant with procedures, to provide information useful to all of the capital projects industry. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 3.1 Business Incentives for Provision of Corporate Information – Provide a strong business case and management structure that incentivizes companies and researchers to willingly and enthusiastically support the population of the repository. 3.2 Design/Reuse Repository – Provide benchmarking of best practices and lessons learned in design to enable the reuse of systems and subsystems. 3.3 Priority-Based Repository Population – Implement the prioritized plan of task 1 to assure the aggressive growth of a useful repository. Regularly review the priorities to assure the inclusion of the most useful information. 3.4 Repository Maintenance – Establish automated procedures that force the review of the information contained in the repository, based on rule sets agreed to by the user community. For example, rules might be enforced based on frequency of use of the data or perceived value to the community. Task 4: Materials, Methods, and Regulatory Data Management – Provide special emphasis and access for topics of most pressing need to the capital projects industry including materials characterization, methods and processes, and regulatory and compliance information. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 4.1 Critical Materials and Methods Identification – Provide a dynamic reference resource for current information concerning materials and methods for construction. 4.2 Material Properties Management – Provide detailed characterization of materials common to the construction industry. 4.3 Methods and Processes Management – Provide both business and technical assessment information concerning construction methods and practices, including information useful in automated decision analysis 4.4 Regional and National Code Requirements – Provide dynamic access to regional and national code requirements, including support in highlighting specific concerns and enabling improved decision processes. 4.5 Component Library – Provide detailed data and information concerning all common components used in capital projects, including all details needed for selection and design. Task 5: Homeland Security Knowledge Repository – Provide information that supports a threat sensitive design and operations environment. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 5.1 “Threat Centric” Information – Develop “minimum threat” guidelines for good design practice, and provide information needed to support threat-centric design. 5.2 Risk Level Linkages – Provide knowledge that relates alternatives to risk acceptance and provide information to support design to risk levels 5.3 Response Advisors – Include in the knowledge repository information that supports the proper response to any situation, and provide this information compatible with the inclusion of response in the as-built design package. 5.4 Single-Source Homeland Security Emphasis – Promote the idea of the knowledge repository developed by this program as a unifying single source for homeland security information, eliminating confusion and misinformation.

March 2003

23


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.2.6 Benefits and Business Case Deploying the Shared Knowledge Repository will drastically reduce individual company expenses for searching for information and recreating data that already exists. In the automotive industry alone, with its handful of key players and tightly integrated supply chains, this cost is estimated at over $1 billion a year. As noted in Table 2.2.6-1, the repository will provide shared knowledge bases of information that are standard resources for any capital project. This will reduce the time and cost of planning and design functions while enabling the delivery of more capable and cost-effective solutions for every project. Table 2.2.6-1. The Business Case for the Shared Knowledge Repository Feature Centralized knowledge base accessible from any location Standard data formats Design re-use knowledge base and component library Materials & methods knowledge base

Regulatory knowledge base

Homeland Security knowledge repository

March 2003

Direct Business Benefit • Fast, single-point access to needed information reduces cycle times in all project processes • Eliminates cost of information re-creation from project to project • Transparent interoperability with all project information systems – eliminates data re-entry requirements and translation errors • Reduces design cycle time for similar projects by up to 75% • Reduces time and cost of validating designs and preparing data packages • Enables rapid selection of best materials and processes for any project • Provides validated models to support analytical simulations, reducing engineering time and cost • Supports open sharing of Best Practices in directly useable form • Provides single-point access to all regulatory requirements, reducing the time and cost of compliance • Supports deployment of intelligent advisory systems to guide design and operations • Provides single-point access to current requirements and leading-edge solutions to support risk assessment and design for secure, safe facilities and operations.

24


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.3 PROGRAM 3: AUTOMATED CAPITAL PROJECTS DESIGN ENVIRONMENT Contributors Michael Alianza, Intel Corporation Julio Arocho, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mark Browning, JP Step Holding Co. Benson Fergus, CH2M Hill James Garrett, Carnegie-Mellon University Michael Hayes, CH2M Hill William Iler, Bentley Systems Jim Johnson, Bentley Systems Larry Stephenson, U.S. Army Engineering Research Development Center Robert Wible, NCSBCS

2.3.1 The Opportunity Current and emerging capabilities in 3-D design, analytical modeling and simulation, intelligent systems, and distributed information management offer the opportunity to create a truly integrated and automated project design environment. In this environment, all tools will work together as an interconnected system. that provides all the functionality needed to develop and validate detailed designs for every aspect of a project. This integrated design environment will drastically reduce the time and cost in moving from concept to construction execution through automation of complex design engineering tasks. It will also greatly reduce errors and liability through comprehensive, automated design optimization and verification.

2.3.2 The Problem Today’s capital project designs are largely produced using computer-aided tools for discrete elements of the facility. The overall “final design” is a compiled package of diversely formatted data ready for handoff to the procurement and construction execution functions. Many aspects of the project design effort, particularly analysis and systems engineering, are still purely manual processes reliant on proprietary tools, interface control documents and individual experience. This process is time-consuming, costly, error-prone, and highly dependent of the skills and experience of the design team. Design tools and technologies have come a long way in the construction industry over the past decade. However, the industry is almost wholly reliant on off-the-shelf commercial applications that lack the features and functionality needed to support unique needs of the capital projects industry. This program will address those specific needs as well as support the evolution of a comprehensive design environment that supports the full range of design needs for capital projects. Key issues addressed include integration of conceptual and detailed design (architectural design and engineering design), design reuse, design requirements integration and management, automated design advisors, and industry-specific modeling and simulation tools.

2.3.3 The Goal The goal of this program is delivery of a complete, integrated and highly automated capital projects design system. The system will address the total project life cycle, from capture of customer preferences and requirements to the ultimate disposition of the facility at the end of its life. The design system will integrate with the master facility life-cycle model (see Program 1) to support total management of project design and performance. The system (Figure 2.3.3-1) will enable the project team to interact with the customer and other stakeholders to assist in decision processes. It will capture the requirements and preferences that serve as a starting point for design, and process options in a mathematically accurate, scenariobased visualization environment. Modeling and simulation tools linked to the system will enable quantita-

March 2003

25


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 2.3.3-1. The automated design system will provide a complete, end-to-end design capability that is seamlessly integrated with both upstream and downstream project processes.

tive evaluation to assess the cost, performance, and risks of each option, including intangibles such as aesthetics. The system will refine conceptual designs to produce detailed designs consistent with all preferences and requirements. Establishment of industry-wide product definition and data standards will enable designers to specify supplier-furnished materials, components, and products that designers can directly upload into the design basis, complete with geometry and associated specifications and performance models. This capability will provide enormous dividends in the construction phase – because all tasks and resources to accomplish construction will be fully defined in the bill of material and integrated master schedule. It will also provide significant dividends in the facility O&M phase, by providing a 100% accurate as-built electronic baseline – the completed master facility life-cycle model – linked to all supporting data.

2.3.4 Solution Approach The vision of totally automated and integrated design for capital projects is aggressive, but achievable. A strategy of iterative development leveraging existing best-in-class tools will be followed that delivers value in the short term while enabling success in the long term, with five primary tasks as highlighted in Figure 2.3.4-1: 1. Define the integration framework for the system, focusing on creating a collaborative design environment. 2. Develop a scenario-based conceptual design capability, enabling project teams to optimize solution concepts up front, where decisions have the greatest impact on technical, cost, and schedule factors. 3. Develop various modules of the design system, including automated design advisors, based on current commercial tools. 4. Develop the system-level integration functionality, enabling all of the tools to work together as plug-and-play modules. 5. Develop design advisory tools for Homeland Security aspects of project designs.

March 2003

26


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 2.3.4-1. Program Plan for Automated Design Environment

2.3.5 Statement of Work Task 1: Shared, Interoperable Design Environment – Design conventions and processes and interoperable tools will enable capital project designers to utilize shared design resources. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 1.1 Design Standards and Rules – Establish common design standards and rules that embrace the best practices of the industry. Ensure that the standards and rules are available to all designers. 1.2 Collaborative Design Environment – Provide a design environment based on the standards and rules of subtask 1, that supports cooperation and collaboration across functional, organizational, and corporate boundaries.

March 2003

27


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE 1.3 Capital Projects Distributed Simulation Environment – Provide a comprehensive modeling and simulation environment that links life-cycle decision points with the design environment. This subtask is a point of integration with the lifecycle enterprise model. Task 2: Scenario-Based Conceptual Design – Provide an mathematically and visually accurate capability for the customer to create and evaluate capital project scenarios (combinations of alternatives) to assess the business and technical impacts of design decisions. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 2.1 Requirements Definition and Prioritization – Provide an environment that enables the migration of user desires and preferences to design requirements and supports the user in determining the relative importance (weighting) of the various preferences. 2.2 Requirements Driven Design Scenarios – Develop the capability to create design scenarios (and, ultimately detailed designs) from customer defined functional, aesthetic, and cost requirements. 2.3 Conceptual Development “Cockpit” – Provide an interactive environment that places the customer/decision maker (in most cases, a team of decision makers) in a “virtual cockpit” enabling real-time trade-off and optimization based on balancing of business and technical alternatives. 2.4 Business Rules Evaluation – Provide specific capability to evaluate alternatives based in business drivers and seeking best value including forecasting capability. 2.5 Scenario Development Tools – Provide toolsets that link modeling and simulation and analysis systems in real-time to support the development and evaluation of scenarios. The scenario development will address all technical and business possibilities. 2.6 Scenario-Based Design Tools – Integrate design systems with the conceptual evaluation systems to automate the creation of designs based on selected scenarios. A requirements database will support this integration. 2.7 Systems Engineering in Scenario Evaluation – Include systems engineering tools and systems of systems capability in the scenario evaluation. Support the build-up of systems from subsystems and the decomposition of systems. Task 3: Automated Regulatory Compliance – Provide design advisors that draw from the knowledge repository and automatically assure regulation compliance. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 3.1 Standards for Regulatory Compliance – Seek a minimum set definition of standards for regulatory compliance. 3.2 Common, Explicit Interpretation of Regulatory Requirements – Provide electronic systems that interact with the human users to eliminate the ambiguity of regulatory compliance and provide positive assurance of compliance. 3.3 Expert Compliance Advisors – Develop knowledge-based expert systems that support the user in assuring compliance. Where possible, compliance will be assured through automated systems with confirmation as the only human interaction. Task 4: Automated Design Systems and Intelligent Design Tools – Develop a rich suite of design conventions and rules that instantiate best practice and support automated design. Utilize these conventions and rules in building a growing set of interoperable design advisors that, in its completion, will support automated design for the capital projects industry. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 4.1 Design Conventions and Rules – For selected modules, develop design conventions that are accepted by the industry as de facto standards for design. Develop rule sets based on these conventions and rules. 4.2 Architecture for Design Advisors – Develop a common framework for the development of design advisors. This framework will support access of needed information and rule sets from the knowlMarch 2003

28


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE edge repository of program 1 and the application of that knowledge in automated creation of design modules. 4.3 Automated Design Modules – Prioritize the areas of need to address the best value opportunities and develop design advisors for those areas. Apply the advisors in automated design systems. 4.4 Integrated, Virtual Design and Validation Environment – Building on the conceptual design scenarios, provide a virtual environment whereby automatically created design modules can be linked in systems of systems to assure full satisfaction of design intent. 4.5 Automated Abstraction – Provide the capability to represent the design as a single “object” or master model. Provide the capability to automatically provide models that are subsets of the master model that contain all data and information to support specific applications. For example, an abstraction might be all and only the data needed to support the evaluation of a structure’s ability to withstand wind forces. 4.6 Intelligent Capital Projects Design Models – Provide intelligent design models that, in addition to supporting the automated design, assist the designer in configuring for best performance and best total value. 4.7 Automated Detailed Design Systems – Provide systems that perform the detailed functions of design based on provision of a facility model and requirements. Automated piping, electrical, HVAC, fire protection, etc. are including in this capability. 4.8 Risk-Based Design Advisors – Include user specified risk and uncertainty evaluation in the design advisor development. 4.9 Automated Change Management – Provide the capability to propagate change throughout the design. This capability applies to the initial design and to changes throughout the life of the project (based on changes to the as-built condition). 4.10 Design/Reuse Capability – While the design system will, in the main, be based on automated application of best knowledge, the capability to reuse proven designs and to learn from previous experience will be preserved in the system. Task 5: Automated Systems-Level Design – Provide the capability to design systems by integrating subsystem designs, and to flow-down from the systems level design to the subsystems for distributed execution. The design system will be complete and “closed” in both directions. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows.

5.1 Requirements Flowdown – Develop the capability to parse design requirements and to pass to all organizations and personnel the requirements that impact their operations. 5.2 Automated Abstraction to Subsystems – Develop systems level designs that are rich enough to support decomposition to supply design details for all subsystems. 5.3 Integration of Subsystem Designs – As the converse to subtask 2, the “closure” of the design system will support the flow-up of designs from subsystems to larger subsystems and to full system designs. Task 6: Homeland Security Design Advisors – Provide automated tools that assure the inclusion of security and response issues in all designs. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 6.1 Design Criteria for Threats and Risk Levels – Provide design criteria that maps materials and practices to threat and risk levels. 6.2 “Threat Centric” Design Advisors – Develop design advisors that enable situational design and make visible the options, risks, and costs.

March 2003

29


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE 6.3 Placement of Sensors and Monitors – Include in design systems the automated placement and connections for sensors and monitors for optimum security levels based on assessment of the threat. 6.4 Response Built Into Design – Provide response procedures and part of the design process and assure that these procedures are communicated and maintained throughout the lifecycle of the capital project. 6.5 Integrity Assessment Based on Design – Provide analysis systems that evaluate facility designs and provide integrity assessments based on threat scenarios.

2.3.6 Benefits and Business Case The capability to automatically generate the best designs offers breakthrough potential for the capital projects industry. The change from incremental, human-dependent manual design to totally optimized and validated design will deliver cost and performance savings measured in billions of dollars per year. Typical design cycle times will be reduced by 50% or better. Pervasive use of modeling and simulation and analytical systems will allow new buildings and structures to be designed for total life-cycle performance with greatly reduced, well-understood risks. Specific business-case benefits are outlined in Table 2.3.6-1. Table 2.3.6-1. The Business Case for the Automated Capital Project Design Environment Feature Unified, interoperable design environment Scenario-based design with distributed simulation capability

Automated design advisors linked to industry/enterprise knowledge base

Integrated validation environment

Automated detailed design

Automated change management Automated system-level design Homeland Security design advisors

March 2003

Direct Business Benefit • Eliminates cost, time, and errors of translating or re-entering data between different design tools and functions • Reduces the time and cost of design reviews • Enables rapid iteration of design concepts to arrive at optimum solutions • Enables problems and issues to be detected and resolved before they impact cost and schedule • Radically reduces timeline to arrive at “best” design based on all factors • Plug & play re-use of previous designs • Provides specialty expertise without the high cost of specialty consultants • Enables high-fidelity evaluation of failure modes, vulnerabilities, and risks • Greatly improved ability to design for total life-cycle performance, including total cost of ownership • “Virtual certification” assures compliance with specs, codes and standards • Radically reduces cycle time for design review and approval • Ensures design is buildable in every detail, reducing construction time and cost • Reduces detailed design time from months and weeks to days and hours • Automated generation of total bill of material and specs for procurement • Frees designers to focus on innovation and value • Instantly propagates approved changes, thus reducing the cost of changes • Ensures that all affected aspects are revised correctly – no disconnects • Ensures total project design is internally consistent and coherent • Removes “waste” in the design or in the design process • Provides urgently needed capabilities to assess risk, understand threats, and understand options • Guide teams in creating resilient, hardened, and fail-safe designs with best cost-effectiveness

30


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.4 PROGRAM 4: INTEGRATED PROCUREMENT & SUPPLY NETWORK Contributors Erin Cassidy, Industry Canada Stephen Garnier, Fairfax County Govt. Ed Koch, Bechtel Systems William O'Brien, University of Florida John Osby, DuPont Mark Palmer, NIST Charles Poer, Zachry Construction Corp. Lucio Soibelman, University of Illinois Raymond M. Walker, IMTI, Inc. Richard Wallace, Zachry Construction Corp.

2.4.1 The Opportunity The opportunity for the integrated procurement and supply system is to enable completely automated sourcing and supply chain interaction, from determination of needs to delivery of to-spec orders on time and within budget to point of need. The vision is centered on a project design system that seamlessly interconnects with the supply network and enables rapid implementation of detailed facility designs. The system will enable automated specification of procured items based on parameters defined by the project planning system (cost, schedule, quantity) and by the design system (technical requirements). The output of the design system will be a total procurement package that accurately specifies all needed materials and components, cost and schedule. Automated bid solicitation, vendor certification, source selection, and contract negotiation will slash procurement cost and time. The supply network will be directly integrated with the capital project management system, providing continuous visibility into status and progress of every vendor/supplier activity.

2.4.2 The Problem Despite the advent of automated purchasing systems, electronic commerce, and streamlined business processes, procurement for capital projects remains a time-consuming and error-prone process. Current processes are heavily reliant on human expertise, initiative, and communication to assure that the right goods and services are acquired at the best price and delivered on time to point of need. Many companies have moved to centralized, multi-project sourcing strategies to benefit from economies of scale. However, centralized functions often lack the understanding to buy the best product from a myriad of options, or to select the best source based on factors other than cost. The front end of the process is a primary source of problems, since procurement is often tasked with inaccurate and incomplete requirements. Wastage in raw materials and commodity products is routine, and frequently represents a significant expense that is simply built into the cost to the customer. Inefficient change management is a major source of problems in the procurement cycle. Timelines for rippling a design change to all points in the supply chain are long, and customers typically face exorbitant markups on change orders. Many suppliers intentionally lowball their initial bids to win the job, knowing that they will realize a healthy profit through the inevitable change orders. The ability of the project planning and procurement functions to finely sequence the flow of equipment, materials, tools, subcontracted labor on time from origin to point of need is sorely lacking. On- and offsite storage and staging impose significant time and cost penalties on the construction execution function and are a major cause of schedule delays, particularly with respect to long-lead items.

March 2003

31


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.4.3 The Goal The vision for Integrated Procurement and Supply defines a globally integrated supply network that will securely deliver stock and custom assemblies and materials as dictated by the master project schedule for respective construction steps, eliminating the need for on-site storage. Automated procurement systems will coordinate delivery in accordance with the evolving demands of the master schedule. Standardized construction items and hardware will become commodity products designed for rapid build. The principles of lean manufacturing and demand-based product pull that have transformed the manufacturing sector will become the underpinning of the procurement and staging functions for capital projects. The ultimate vision for the integrated supply network relies on accurate and complete electronic procurement packages including 3-D product definitions, material properties, and supporting analytical models. This product data will be output from the design system and delivered to the vendors and fabricators along with cost and schedule requirements. The global electronic procurement network will automatically identify and solicit qualified bidders and support evaluation of source capabilities and assured ability to deliver. The project management system will interface with the suppliers’ systems to maintain continuous visibility of progress, enabling the project managers to identify any schedule or quality issues as soon as they arise. This will also enable the project team to attack supplier problems before they impact the project schedule. The master schedule, linked to the master facility life-cycle model, will be continuously synchronized with the actual progress of the project. The site monitoring and tracking system will compare daily construction progress against the plan and coordinate the continuous flow of materials and assemblies to the point of need. The model will continuously update itself to reflect actual performance, while flagging any variances for management attention. The site asset tracking and control system will enable workers to instantly locate the resources they need and get them delivered for immediate use.

2.4.4 Solution Approach The solution approach for the integrated procurement and supply network recognizes that the supply network is far more complex than just the supplier companies that interact with a capital project. The approach (Figure 2.4.4-1) has two principal thrusts: 1) information standards for optimizing connectivity of the procurement function with the project design and planning functions; and 2) technologies and methods to integrate the multiple systems associated with procurement and supply. Technologies are not a critical barrier in achieving the vision in this area; numerous current commercial systems can and will be leveraged in the solution process. The challenge is one of system engineering and integration. Therefore, this program focuses on developing standards and optimized process models that support true integration of procurement systems with the supply network. In parallel, the project team will address integration issues with the front end of the system – the connection to the project design and project planning functions.

Figure 2.4.4-1. Integrated Procurement & Supply Network Project Thrusts

Figure 2.4.4-2 provides a top-level schedule for the proposed program.

March 2003

32


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 2.4.4-2. Program Schedule for Integrated Procurement and Supply Network

2.4.5 Statement of Work Task 1: Transformation of Supply Chains. This task is structured to address the significant problems encountered today in procurement for large construction projects. Detailed specifications for data formats, information content, user interfaces, transaction protocols, and linkage to different business systems will be developed and validated to enable a comprehensive systems engineering and operational model for an Internet-based global supply web. An additional consideration for improving the transactions and tracking of product flows are the implications for enhanced security including improved tracking and visibility of material across an international supply network. The activities to be conducted in this task are as follows: 1.1 Standards for Procurement and Supply Chain Transactions: Data interoperability in an open architecture environment will be enabled by developing naming conventions, communication and transaction protocols, common data representation standards, and interfaces between various classes of user. These standards will include methods for secure certification and transportation logistics for materials and product procured internationally to provide trusted capability/responsibility for inspection, certification, and product assurance. This will also reduce the requirement for the onerous receiving inspections typically performed when materials arrive at the job site. 1.2 Standardized Rules and Processes for Optimized Traffic & Logistics: This task will develop and implement standardized methods for procurement and transport of purchased items. Responding to the increasing problem of delivery uncertainties and delays of globally procured products, this task will establish expedited processes for the logistics of transporting items between locations and regions with different export, import, and border regulations. This task will investigate the ability to develop federally mandated traffic and logistics standards to help product flow domestically.

March 2003

33


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE 1.3 Evaluation of Supply Chain Structures. This task will develop supplier and supply chain performance measures and metrics, and catalog, identify, and evaluate different procurement business models and supply chain structures for differing supply chain classes, including emerging webbased and E-commerce networks. Industry-wide shared reference models and databases of performance history and lessons learned about suppliers and products will be developed, with provision for validation of performance claims and adverse information. Standard, automated certification protocols and systems will be developed for all classes of construction project suppliers along with generic cost/performance models for each class. 1.4 Accessible Product Models. This task will develop on-line materials/parts/components catalogs that can be interrogated remotely by the project design system to determine applicability of products to the project design. Capabilities will be provided to ascertain pricing and availability data (quantity and schedule), and link this information along with comprehensive product models (providing CAD geometry, material char5acterization, performance attributes, and supporting analytical models) into the master facility life cycle model to support all early engineering and business/project management processes and thus streamline the procurement process. Task 2: Integration of Procurement Systems with Other Project Delivery Systems. This task builds from the common data representations and methods established in Task 1 and develops the technologies, models, and software to integrate the procurement systems with the project master model to link all of the functional elements of the design and build project. This integration of systems will optimize the cost, timing, and sequencing of procured materials and product to the Intelligent Job Site for the benefit of reduced indirect labor, increased effectiveness of supply network communications, reductions in cost and the compression of build time for the construction project. 2.1 Automated Inventory Management and Resource Feed. This task will develop methods to support optimized construction sequencing at each site using min-max or “pull� procurement strategies that have been applied effectively in manufacturing. Automated replenishment technologies to manage inventories of site-stored supplies and materials will be developed to remove the need for human inventory reconciliation. Min-max models and quantity triggers for auto-replenishment will be developed based on predictive understanding of resources needed by planned construction sequence. Smart labeling and sensor technologies that enable materials and product to notify the job site system model of its status and location when it arrives at site will be developed and deployed. Technologies that allow labor resource information such as location, capabilities, and certifications to be transmitted in real time and processed by the job site management system will be developed and demonstrated. 2.2 Design Change Integration and Propagation to Supply Chain. This task will develop the procurement system links to the master facility life cycle model such that validated design changes are capable of triggering responses and events to procurement of materials, products, labor, and equipment. Mechanisms for communicating requirements changes to the supply network will be developed, including feedback mechanisms to verify change acceptance 2.3 Smart Feedback Mechanisms and Data Brokering: This task will develop methods and project management system requirements to enable feedback information and data to be linked to the master project life cycle model through the procurement system, providing immediate visibility of schedule, cost, sequencing, and logistics impacts. 2.4 Integration of Procurement and Project Control Systems: This task will develop system interfaces to the project management and control system for monitoring and reporting of cost/schedule status and work progress based on the consumption levels of procured labor and materials, including automatic alerts for variances and trends. This effort will include developing the linkages to integrate procurement actions, specification, ordering, and delivery of materials to the planning and scheduling of construction operations in the intelligent job site. System functionality will include

March 2003

34


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE immediate and current access to site performance data including cost, availability, capacity, quality, production/shipping status, and other vendor/supplier data as needed to support all aspects of project management and execution. Appropriate means for protecting competitive data, authorizing access to the data, and tailoring of information for diverse users will also be addressed in this task. 2.5 Integration of Construction and Supply Chain with Regulatory Requirements: This task will develop the system links to integrate data on the status of procured materials and task sequencing with the required and planned inspections, certifications, and notification of other reporting requirements to satisfy local and government regulatory requirements.

2.4.6 Benefits And Business Case The integrated procurement function will deliver significant cost savings on every capital project through its ability to deliver exactly correct goods and services on time from the lowest-cost qualified source. Synchronizing deliveries to the job site at point of need in the build process will reduce construction site labor, space, wastage, and build time. Orchestrating the timely delivery of supplied material from multiple parallel sources will benefit from information flow to and from the supply base. Constantly changing construction site status and delivery requirements will be communicated outward while the change response and impacts are fed back to the site master schedule. Specific benefits to the typical capital program are highlighted in Table 2.4.6-1. Table 2.4.6-1. The Business Case for the Integrated Procurement and Supply Network Feature Integrated global supply chains Automated purchase order generation from specs and supplier-provided standard product models

Deliveries sequenced and continuously updated to master project schedule, with pull-based automated replenishment

Automatic generation of billing and invoicing based on work completion Real-time visibility into supplier performance, capacity, and progress Automated change propagation

March 2003

Direct Business Benefit • Lowers acquisition cost of procured items from expanded source base • Reduces indirect labor and shorter procurement timelines • Reduces mistaken orders through more highly standardized product definitions • Reduces multiple-data entry and data errors in input of supplierprovided data • Reduces build time 10%-30% through highly synchronized job site operations • Reduces 50%- 90% requirements for job site space storage, and staging • Up to 80% reduction for material inventory carrying costs • Reduces working capital requirements • Reduces indirect labor • Improves opportunity for prompt payment discounts • Reduces receiving inspection • Provides immediate visibility into delays and quality problems • Speeds resolution and protects master project schedule • Greatly reduces cost and schedule impact of design changes

35


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.5 PROGRAM 5: NEW MATERIALS, METHODS, PRODUCTS, & EQUIPMENT Contributors Erin Cassidy, Industry Canada Stephen Garnier, Fairfax County Govt. Ed Koch, Bechtel Systems William O'Brien, University of Florida John Osby, DuPont Mark Palmer, NIST Charles Poer, Zachry Construction Corp. Lucio Soibelman, University of Illinois Raymond M. Walker, IMTI, Inc. Richard Wallace, Zachry Construction Corp.

2.5.1 The Opportunity There is a significant opportunity to reduce the time and cost of constructing facilities and structures by compressing time, reducing labor content, and reducing the cost and amount of materials. New, lightweight, high-strength materials and components that are fabricated, assembled, and applied by intelligent automated construction systems will radically reduce these primary elements of cost. These new resources will also greatly extend the life span, performance, and flexibility of both facilities and structures including resiliency to accidents and catastrophic events. Flexible and “programmable� properties will enable materials to be easily transported, placed, formed, and attached with little or no cure times or temporary support structures. Improved strength-to-weight ratios, thermal properties, and other properties will enable the design and construction of facilities that radically extend the envelope of what is possible to build. These improvements will greatly expand capacity, performance architectural creativity, and functionality for all types of facilities.

2.5.2 The Problem There has been little change over the past few decades in basic materials and methods used in capital construction. The industry remains dominated by concrete, steel, and the labor-intensive methods required to place and assemble them. Advances in construction equipment and secondary systems such as windows, interior surfaces, exterior finished surfaces, and roofing have led to better safety, energy efficiency, lower environmental impact, reduced maintenance, and improved durability. However, the basic methods of constructing primary structures have changed little since the advent of electricity, and remain the largest barrier to reducing construction span times. A highly fragmented and inherently small-company industrial base inhibits advances in alternate materials, production, and delivery methods. Innovative ways to apply technologies such as lightweight, prefabricated aerated concrete structures and steel-free concrete decking systems are expanding the use of traditional materials, but are not making significant inroads as standard practice. There is little incentive for innovation, testing, and certification of new materials and processes by individual companies.

2.5.3 The Goal The goal for this program is to enable the rapid, low-cost construction of modularized, lightweight structures in a fraction of current time spans. This capability will be supported by applying automated equipment and highly engineered assembly methods with zero waste and zero rework. Advances in protectants and coatings will extend the life of many material systems. New high-performance material systems will be rapidly inserted into use and application via expedited testing, certification, and approval processes.

March 2003

36


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.5.4 Solution Approach The approach for new materials and methods will require further investigation to develop a comprehensive plan to address the priority needs of industry. A broad base of materials needs has been identified, including: • More comprehensive testing over the product life cycle to better understand long-term failure and degradation modes • Incentives for development, piloting, and introduction of new and enhanced materials • Increased interaction with other industry sectors (e.g., aerospace and manufacturing) to leverage commonalties and innovations • Strategies for disaster recovery and mitigating the impact of widespread product failures with disastrous impact, including financial, health, and safety aspects • Liability reforms based on better product knowledge and improved testing methods • Emphasis on new materials and methods to reduce costs. The recommended next step is to conduct a needs assessment that extends the Capital Projects Technology Roadmap to address specific materials requirements to support present roadmap goals as indicated in Figure 2.5.4-1. This activity will convene construction experts, users, and materials experts from the academic and research community to further define materials needs from the future facilities and construction perspective, augmenting and supporting present roadmap goals for extended-life, low cost, reconfigurable, and more resilient facilities and structures. Failure modes and similar issues pertinent to Homeland Security also will be addressed.

Figure 2.5.4-1. Suggested Scope of Materials Needs Assessment Task

March 2003

37


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Based on these definitions of what is needed, the group will develop and prioritize a range of projects, tasks, and requirements to guide the research and application communities. The results of this activity will provide the basis for industry collaboration to secure funded programs to develop new capabilities. A summary-level program plan for the next-step activities is shown in Figure 2.5.4-1.

Figure 2.5.4-1. Program Schedule for New Materials, Methods, Products, and Equipment

2.5.5 Statement of Work A detailed statement of work will be developed for specific program plans as defined by the Needs Assessment activity.

2.5.6 Benefits And Business Case Specific business benefits of this program cannot be defined until a detailed R&D plan is created. However, it is clear that lighter, stronger, more durable, and lower-cost materials, coupled with more efficient joining technologies and automated construction processes, will: 1) Reduce traditional build times to a fraction of today’s norms 2) Reduce the direct labor required to manufacture and assemble 3) Eliminate a significant amount of non-value-added indirect labor content 4) Greatly extend the life of constructed facilities as well as their immunity to accidents, natural disasters, and hostile acts.

March 2003

38


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.6 PROGRAM 6: INTELLIGENT JOB SITE Contributors Erin Cassidy, Industry Canada Stephen Garnier, Fairfax County Govt. Ed Koch, Bechtel Systems William O'Brien, University of Florida John Osby, DuPont Mark Palmer, NIST Charles Poer, Zachry Construction Corp. Lucio Soibelman, University of Illinois Raymond M. Walker, IMTI, Inc. Richard Wallace, Zachry Construction Corp.

2.6.1 The Opportunity Although the engineering and design environments of the capital projects industry have maintained pace with other industry sectors, fundamental construction processes and build techniques have changed little. In fact, the capital projects industry is a distant follower in adopting the kinds of transformations that have revolutionized other sectors such as manufacturing. By applying the principles of lean thinking, synchronous product flow, and six sigma, opportunities abound to dramatically reduce project cycle time, eliminate redundant material and component handling, improve quality control and on-site safety, reduce loss and waste, and increase both the efficiency of site space management as well as the overall productivity of the construction site workforce. These opportunities are directly related to the capital cost as well as the profitability and competitiveness of all entities in the enterprise. The Intelligent Job Site is one of the key enablers to significantly reducing the cost and time to construct a large facility.

2.6.2 The Problem The construction segment of the capital projects industry is in a state of flux as it responds to dramatic changes brought on by the Information Age. Companies are having to do more and better work with fewer resources in response to increasingly tighter margins. Technology-augmented systems handle many construction-related tasks in new ways. However, these systems have limited benefit because they automate existing processes rather than reengineer them for optimized performance. Also, the multiplicity of new tools and the fact that few of the tools “talk� to each other adds an element of chaos to businesses trying to streamline their work processes. Much of this new technology is not designed for the unique and demanding environment of construction sites. The transient, craft-centric nature of the construction workforce is also major barrier to change.

2.6.3 The Goal The vision for the Intelligent Job Site is of a fully sensed and responsively controlled work site. The master facility life-cycle model will define what materials, equipment, tools, labor, and inspections will be needed on what schedule, define the work processes and build plan, and provision the required resources. The site management system, enabled by comprehensive sensing assets, will track the progress of every task against the plan and provide continuous visibility of the status and location of all workers and assets on site. This will dramatically improve site security and safety as well as assure efficiency in coordination of operations. Wireless devices will provide continuous communication across the site and the supply chain, enabling workers to instantly access requirements for the task at hand and draw on the entire supply chain knowledge base for detailed instruction or training. The communications network will support continuous monitoring of progress and performance and enable problems to be immediately identified for corrective action. The site management system will provide automatic resource monitoring and reordering capabilities;

March 2003

39


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE the system will also provide continuous reporting of progress against the plan, thus freeing construction engineers of non-value-added data entry tasks. Workforce efficiency, quality of work, and safety will be enhanced by technological advances in construction processes and equipment. Structures will be designed for minimal site excavation and preparation such that structures can be rapidly erected. On-site power generation using high-efficiency solar conversion technology and other alternative energy sources, zero-discharge water recycling, and all-wireless communications will greatly reduce the need for external utility connections as well as enhance site security. Automated processes and rapid-erecting structures that are engineered for easy placement, joining and assembly will greatly reduce build time and cost as well as reduce craft labor skill requirements.

2.6.4 Solution Approach Creating the intelligent job site will require a balance between improving three critical components that must work together for effective construction operations (Figure 2.6-1): • The workforce and management of people • Work processes • Delivery of the proper information to point of need. The proposed Intelligent Job Site program involves three major tasks (Figure 2.6.4-2) as discussed below. The strategy uses initial demonstration pilots based on off-the-shelf technologies to demonstrate the fundamental integration of the needed information and systems, identify gaps in technologies for further development, and support refinement of soluFigure 2.6.4-1. The Intelligent Job Site tion approaches. In addition, business justification for the inintegrates people, processes, and data. telligent job site will be quantified to support the needed investment. This strategy will provide the foundation for additional programs to develop and implement data capture and delivery technologies and guide the transformation of today’s craft-based workforce into a multi-skilled adaptable workforce capable of effectively exploiting technologies and reengineered work processes. A top-level schedule for the proposed program is provided in Figure 2.6.4-3. Integration Pilot for Work Process Transformation The objective of this task is to demonstrate the ability to integrate existing technologies via an open architecture system and real-time information and communication exchange to execute an intelligent construction project. This initial activity is critical for defining detailed requirements for the Workforce Transformation and Enabling Technologies tasks. A basic project simulation model for the intelligent job site will be developed to integrate participating systems in realistic job site conditions. The output from this program will be an understanding of the opportunities, barriers and risks for implementing an intelligent job site. The program will integrate different independent systems including cost and scheduling requirements. A first action will be to define standards for linkages among the multitude of existing systems, and proFigure 2.6.4-2. Program Structure for Intelligent Job Site Initiative. March 2003

40


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

Figure 2.6.4-3. Program Schedule for Intelligent Job Site

vide those standards for subsequent incorporation in emerging systems. The systems that control work processes to be integrated in the initial pilot would include: • • • • • • • • •

Planning and scheduling Supply chain management Material management and equipment tracking CAD Accounting and cost control (quantity and progress tracking) Document management Permitting, inspection and approval Personnel management including training, human resources and safety Collaboration, including vendors and subcontractors.

The efforts and activities associated with the integration of systems in this task will be valuable in pinpointing gaps and solution strategies. In addition, identification of the economic benefits and business justification for stakeholders will be critical to gain corporate and government support and gain resources and momentum to carry the program forward. Framework for Workforce Transformation The objective of this task is to develop a new workforce paradigm that optimizes the ability of different types of workers to make full use of captured knowledge, advanced information delivery mechanisms, and next-generation automated systems. The program will establish a collaborative industry think-tank dedicated to defining the skill sets associated with current and envisioned technologies. Another standing team will be established to define current and emerging knowledge-based tools that will be used by the workforce, to frame needed training and educational initiatives. Developing industry-wide consensus for

March 2003

41


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE on-demand training tools that reward the self-development of the knowledge-based workforce is a priority. This team could charter sub-teams of specific industry specialists, or they could enlist assistance from standing industry task teams to forge specific objectives associated with evolving the workforce. The program will also address incentives at all levels of the workforce. An industry task team will be created to specifically address the issue of defining various innovative strategies for compensating workers that pursue and acquire knowledge-based skills. These incentives will be critical for the development of “professional” construction workers with the necessary skills, education, and training to be an effective knowledge worker for the future intelligent construction environment. Enabling Technologies for Enhanced Data Capture and Utilization The objective of this sub-project is to develop and deploy tools for automated data collection, information capture, and feedback from the job site to eliminate manual data entry tasks while improving data integrity. Some of the needed technology exists to link different systems, but real-time data feeds from the job site (such as robust wireless communications) are needed to enable true integration. Providers of software and technology for wireless, automatic, and remote data gathering will be given guidance and specifications by the construction industry based on the realities of both the complexity of construction operations and the rugged environment in which inherently fragile technologies must robustly perform. While computer-integrated construction sites offer high potential to improve productivity and reduce build time, the accompanying transformation of work processes and the workforce must be a critical consideration in the requirements, preferences, and specifications communicated to the technology provider community. The strategy for this task is based on developing an understanding of the data and information utilization patterns and criteria of the current job site environment, and projecting those uses to a future transformed intelligent site. Benchmarking current technologies and best-practice uses of data gathering in other industry sectors will support development of a requirements prospectus. As part of the direction to technology providers, common data standards would be developed to support the open architecture for the myriad of systems and sensors in the intelligent job site.

2.6.5 Statement of Work Task 1 – Integration Pilot for Work Process Transformation. This task will integrate existing technologies to execute an intelligent construction project as a testbed for defining detailed requirements for the Enabling Technologies and Workforce Transformation sub-projects. Task 2 – Framework for Workforce Transformation. This task will develop a new workforce paradigm that transforms and optimizes the ability of different types of workers to make full use of advanced information delivery mechanisms and next-generation automated systems. The focus of this effort will be on restructuring the skill sets, training mechanisms, and labor business models needed for future construction operations. The workforce must be capable, near-term, of performing more operations simultaneously, and closing the typical gaps between sequential tasks. This higher degree of site workflow orchestration will require the workforce to function in an integrated and coordinated manner. Task 3 – Enabling Technologies for Enhanced Data Capture and Utilization. This task will develop and deploy tools for automated data collection, information capture, and feedback from the job site to eliminate manual data entry tasks while improving data integrity. Much of the needed technology exists to link different systems, but real-time data feeds from the job site are needed to enable true integration. The strategy for this sub-project is based on developing an understanding of the data and information use patterns and criteria of the current job site environment, and then developing specific requirements for the intelligent site. Common data standards will be developed to support an open architecture for integration of sensing, monitoring, and reporting functions.

March 2003

42


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.6.6 Benefits And Business Case The primary benefits of the intelligent job site will be significantly reduced construction time and cost, high-fidelity documentation of the as-built facility, reduced errors and rework, improved safety and security, and highly efficient supply of materials and product to the job site. The capabilities delivered also will yield significant benefits to upstream engineering and planning functions and the downstream activities associated with startup, commissioning, and O&M of the capital facility. Specific benefits that impact nearly all business and site operations are cited in Table 2.6.6-1. Table 2.6.6-1. The Business Case for the Intelligent Job Site Feature

Direct Business Benefit

Model-driven, highly sensed and wired job site environment

• Dramatically improves communication between constructors and engineers • Real-time problem identification and fast resolution • Streamlined workflows reduces build time and cost by 30%-60% • Elimination of lost/stolen materials, products, tools, and equipment • Elimination of redundant data entry and entry errors • Fast identification and accurate scoping of changes and variances • Accurate capture of costs to improve planning and competitiveness for future projects • Reduces schedule slips due to continuously current visualization aids used for engineering constructability issues in-process • Eliminates cost of “unpleasant surprises” during operational startup • Shortens handover and startup timelines • Enables increased concurrency of activities to reduce build time by 30%-60% • Reduces downtime by up to 90% • Reduces time and space requirements for staging and storing material on site • Reduces working capital requirements for held inventory • Greatly increases productivity

Continuous visibility of performance vs. plan Automated, highly accurate capture of asbuilt data fed to master facility model

Highly visible sequencing and schedules from multiple parallel activities Automatic generation of work orders, resource allocations, and schedule with highly integrated material flow Technology-enabled workers

March 2003

43


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE

2.7 PROGRAM 7: INTELLIGENT FACILITY LIFE-CYCLE OPTIMIZATION Contributors James Dempsey, U.S. Coast Guard William Iler, Bentley Systems Chris Norris, National Research Council of Canada Kenneth Olmsted, Smithsonian Institution Mark Owens, BWXT Y-12 Judith W. Passwaters, DuPont Sylvia Rappenecker, Dow Chemical Jack Snell, NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory Jorge Vanegas, Georgia Tech

2.7.1 The Opportunity This program will integrate emerging technologies to improve industry’s ability to operate and maintain capital facilities more effectively, affordably, and responsively from their first day of operation to the end of their useful life. Modeling and simulation tools offer the capability to optimize operations for longterm performance and sustainability – and the capability to use the design models to manage facilities with far greater effectiveness. Intelligent sensing, intelligent control, and information integration technologies offer continuously improving capabilities to predict and monitor facility and process health and performance. This will enable owner/operators to make better decisions in all aspects of facility management. These technologies also offer the potential to capture a wealth of operational performance data that can be fed back to planning and design functions to benefit future programs.

2.7.2 The Problem Operation and maintenance of capital facilities is overwhelmingly focused on day-to-day performance and responding to problems and changes in business demands. Incorporation of new technologies is done only where the investments are justified by near-term, bottom-line return on investment. Design of new facilities and major upgrades tends to follow the same pattern. Issues such as aging of structures and equipment, long-term maintenance, and eventual facility decommissioning receive only limited attention in the program planning and design stage. Feedback from the O&M function to the planning and design functions is limited in terms of useful data. Risk aversion and strong pressure to limit costs often drive facility designers and owner/operators to emphasize near-term needs ahead of long-term performance. Billions of dollars of assets are on the ground today that are completely lacking in tools for real-time facility condition assessment. Current generations of process system/equipment upgrades provide capabilities for monitoring, control, and performance prediction. However, those capabilities are limited to the specific systems, and integration of legacy systems to make use of historical data is impractical a best. Technologies for sensing and intelligent control are evolving rapidly, but their high cost limits application to processes with critical requirements for quality, safety, and similar factors. Sensing methodologies are needed that provide the broad base of measurements necessary for truly understanding the state of the facility down to the level of individual systems, processes, equipment, and structures. In addition, a deeper understanding of the physics of a given facility – material properties, process dynamics, etc. – must be developed to enable accurate interpretation of sensor data by both monitoring systems and human overseers. Pressing needs also exist for facility assessment tools, facility performance modeling capabilities, capture and management of life-cycle data, and predictive maintenance. Changes in the market, regulations, liabilities, and new requirements in response to Homeland Security needs add to the complexity owner/operators face in assessing requirements for facility maintenance, modification, and other life-cycle actions. The information required to accurately assess the current land-

March 2003

44


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE scape is often missing, inaccurate, and difficult to translate to useful forms. Owner/operators have a wealth of information, but no protocols for interoperability to support integrated decision making. Universal and open standards are needed to enable industry-wide efficiencies.

2.7.3 The Goal This program will deliver cost-effective solutions, adaptable to specific operations, to determine optimum facility operating conditions, maintain operations within the performance envelope, provide realtime condition assessment, predict problems before they arise, and enhance performance of the asset over its life cycle. These technologies directly support FIATECH’s vision of facilities equipped with intelligent equipment and systems that continuously monitor their own performance against defined parameters. These systems will autonomously invoke needed actions, using built-in mechanisms to perform maintenance or Figure 2.7-1. Requirements for optimizing O&M functions center on developing technologies that communicate requirements to support systems. A enable capture and use of critical facility data. comprehensive network of sensors and processors will provide continuous visibility of operational status and performance, flagging problems and trends for system or human attention (Figure 2.7-1). O&M activities and decisions will be based on a fully integrated consideration of all life-cycle, environmental, cost, and performance factors based on accurate, current, and complete data. Self-maintaining, self-repairing facilities, systems, and equipment will enable safe, secure, continuously optimized operations with near-zero downtime and with no undue effects to health, safety, or the environment. These systems will feed information into the enterprise knowledge base and master facility simulation model to enable better decisions in every phase of the life cycle. Capital facilities will be managed using accurate simulation models of processes, physical structures, and functional operations continuously updated with current data. These models will enable a full understanding of technical and business issues associated with every aspect of life-cycle performance. The master facility simulation model, created in the project planning phase, enriched in the design phase, and verified to-the-as-built configuration produced in the construction phase, will serve as the controller for operation and maintenance of the facility, continuously reporting operational status and identifying deviations and trends for automated and human-directed corrective action.

2.7.4 Solution Approach Achieving the vision of totally sensed, monitored, and intelligently operated, controlled, and maintained facilities requires the development of a broad spectrum of technologies tailorable to different types of facilities. The program will therefore develop and demonstrate a “toolbox” of technologies and capabilities enabling: •

Operational performance monitoring and condition assessment of different types and classes of capital facility

Modeling of the performance and condition of a capital facility across its entire life cycle. This includes 4-D simulation for accurate forecasting of O&M requirements and evaluation of the impact of planned or potential actions/events

Low-cost, reliable sensing to enable comprehensive facility monitoring and command/control

March 2003

45


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE •

Integration of equipment, systems, and processes with the master facility life-cycle model.

The Intelligent Facility Life-Cycle Optimization program will demonstrate a broad slate of technologies to realize the visions of real-time facility performance optimization. The demonstrations will include modeling and simulation to support O&M decision processes for planning, contingency assessment, and response to problems. The initial program strategy focuses on evaluating and demonstrating best-in-class technologies that companies can put to use in the near term, while gradually building up an integrated suite of tools and processes that support the ultimate vision.

Figure 2.7.4-1. Program Schedule for Intelligent Facility Life-Cycle Optimization

2.7.5 Statement of Work Task 1: Facility Assessment System. The objective of this task is to develop a “toolbox” of technologies, products, and systems to support operational performance and condition assessment of different types and classes of capital facility. This effort will include baselining and evaluation of existing tools and technologies, identification of currently unsupported needs, development of application concepts and

March 2003

46


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE specifications for individual and integrated systems, technology demonstrations, and documentation of resulting benefits and additional technology needs. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 1.1 Technology Survey: Survey and document, in the form of a capability matrix, existing products and technologies with applicability to facility assessment needs for various classes of capital facilities and different kinds of facility operations. 1.2 Facility Assessment Methodologies: Develop standard methodologies and related performance measures for different types of capital facilities and facility processes. Document information acquisition and processing requirements for each facility scenario and perform a gap analysis against the capabilities matrix developed in Task 1.1, to define requirements for evolution of existing tools and development of new tools. Disseminate the results to the technology developer community to influence R&D planning and direction. 1.3 Industry Pilots: Conduct a series of pilot implementations at a selected set of industry facilities representing a wide range of facility types. Document the results and perform cost/benefit analyses to guide further definition of technology requirements and assessment methodologies. 1.4 Facility Assessment Training: Develop a standard toolkit of training in facility assessment methods and technologies to support widespread, cost-effective implementation across industry. This will include both generic and facility type-specific training. 1.5 Facility Assessment Standards: Develop a baseline of standards for facility assessment processes and technologies, leveraging and influencing ISO, U.S., and other applicable standards to provide comprehensive coverage of all facility assessment needs. Task 2 : Life-Cycle Facility Performance Modeling Capability. The objective of this task is to develop and demonstrate a comprehensive capability to model the performance and condition of a capital facility across its entire life cycle, from inception of operations to eventual decommissioning. . Many facilities use similar classes of equipment that can be analyzed for common parameters and methods for monitoring, trending, and corrections that can be integrated into the overall plant condition monitoring strategies. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows 2.1 Data Requirements Definition: For a selected facility type or types, develop a comprehensive definition of the types of data required to support modeling of operational performance, the formats required to make the data useful in modeling, and interface requirements for acquiring the data from its source(s) and providing it to the modeling function. 2.2 Performance Metrics Definition: For the data sets developing in Task 2.1, develop and validate facility/operations performance metrics (including boundary conditions) that enable the acquired data to be evaluated against historical data and enterprise needs. Models that analyze the rate of performance or condition degradation to calculate the optimum timing of corrective action to minimize overall cost will be developed. 2.3 Predictive Model Suite: Develop a suite of predictive models of degradation mechanisms, failure modes, reliability, and vulnerability for a wide range of facility assets, including structures, process systems/equipment, and materials, focusing on assets widely used across the industry. 2.4 Condition-Based Maintenance Strategies and Methods: Develop concepts for integration of facility systems and cells of equipment to work within the context of an intelligent condition-based maintenance program. Develop supporting detection methods, analytical models, and timing for condition surveillance for specific classes of capital facility systems and equipment 2.5 Demonstration and Validation: Make the model suite developed in Task 2.3 widely available to industry and support demonstration and evaluation to verify model accuracy and utility. Collect feedback to support model evolution and extension to a comprehensive range of facility types.

March 2003

47


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Task 3: 3D/4D Simulation Technologies: The objective of this task is to advance modeling capabilities for capital facility simulations to include a high-fidelity time element, enabling accurate forecasting of future O&M requirements and evaluation of the impact of planned or potential actions/events. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 3.1 4D Data Structures: Evaluate and identify data requirements and supporting data structures to enable incorporation of time-based data accurately into facility simulations. 3.2 4D Demonstrations: Conduct or sponsor demonstrations of 4D facility simulation capability to validate the value of the technology in facility O&M planning. Include demonstrations of catastrophic event scenarios to highlight the value of the technology in support of facility security and emergency response planning as well as business contingency evaluation. 3.3 Business Case for Implementation: based on the results of Task 3.2, develop a business case assessment to support and promote the integration of 4D simulation technologies in capital facility enterprises. Task 4: Sensing Technologies. The objective of this task is to develop and integrate low-cost, reliable sensing technologies and supporting information processing technologies to enable comprehensive monitoring and command/control of capital facilities. Sensors will be developed that are capable of self-testing and self-certification for reliability and assurance of data integrity. Specific tasks to be performed are as follows. 4.1 Sensor Technology Awareness: Conduct open industry workshops on state-of-the-art developments in sensing technologies with the national laboratories and other developers, to provide both wide industry awareness of current and emerging capabilities (and costs) and to challenge the developer community to develop sensors to meet aggressive affordability targets, industry needs, and priorities. 4.2 Technology Benchmarking: Conduct demonstrations and evaluations of current industry measurement capabilities to assess applicability, economics, and gaps in support of fully instrumented facilities. 4.3 Sensor Standards: Develop a unified set of sensing and measurement systems standards for different types and classes of capital facilities. 4.4 Emerging Technology Demonstrations: Conduct demonstrations of specific new measurement technologies in existing facilities to evaluate performance, affordability, and cost-effectiveness. 4.5 Calibration Capabilities: Develop the capability for sensors to be self calibrating and self certifying, with low-cost calibration capabilities enabling different types of sensors to be quickly and easily “tuned� for use across a wide range of facility sensing requirements. 4.6 Sensed Data Translation Tools: Develop algorithms and models for acquiring, analyzing, and developing actionable output from sensed data in facility systems to control processes and systems for optimum reliability-centered facility performance. Develop prognostic models to project and forecast health and condition of the facility systems based on historical and future usage profiles for use in decision advisory systems and other O&M management functions. 4.7 Decision Advisors: Develop decision advisors tailored to respond to prognostics, trends, changes, or forecasted failures for facility systems for guidance to the appropriate functional organizations in the facility. Develop intelligent responses to varying performance or condition states to enable actions such as modification of system operational profiles to achieve production completion or the scheduling of a repair event. 4.8 Threat Detection Capabilities: Conduct specific demonstrations of sensing technologies for detection of terrorist threats including radiological/nuclear, explosives, chemicals, and bioweapons.

March 2003

48


CAPITAL PROJECTS TECHNOLOGY ROADMAPPING INITIATIVE Task 5: Integration with Master Facility Life-Cycle Model. This level-of-effort task will support integration of the life-cycle O&M tools with the master facility model developed under Program 1 to assure compatibility of information and application interfaces. Specific tasking will be defined as the respective project plans are finalized.

2.7.6 Benefits And Business Case The proposed program will enable owner/operators to significantly reduce the cost of operating and maintaining existing capital facilities; improve operational availability and reliability; reduce liability; and enhance responsiveness to changes in the business environment. It will also provide the means for capturing the critical information needed to engineer future facilities for radically improved performance. The ability to make O&M decisions on the basis of a truly accurate and complete understanding of all factors will enable owner/operators to optimize facility service life, reduce the risk of business disruption and failure, and significantly reduce cost of ownership. Specific benefits of the program are outlined in Table 2.7.6-1. Table 2.7.6-1. The Business Case for Intelligent Facility Life-Cycle Optimization Feature Totally sensed and wired equipment, processes, systems, and facilities

Enhanced processes and tools for extrapolating current facility state data to evaluate expected future state Accurate modeling and high-fidelity visualization of options and issues in support of life cycle actions Comprehensive capture of O&M performance data

March 2003

Direct Business Benefit • Reduces and prevents failures and performance degradation with most judicious use of O&M resources • Real-time visibility and control of performance in response to changing business requirements • Fast, automatic, effective responses to problems, trends, and emergencies • Reduces cost/increased profitability through improved ability to identify and address problems before they impact performance • Reduces cost/increased profitability through improved accuracy and effectiveness in planning for facility upgrades, refurbishment, reengineering, or conversion • Improves design of new and modified facilities that are more costefficient to operate and more effective in fulfilling their purpose

49


http://fiatech.org/images/stories/techroadmap/deliverables/march2003/TacticalPlan