Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Rod Bunn provides a case study on how to succeed with a Soft Landings project
Citation preview
Once upon a time…
There was a project …
And this project had a visionary client . . .
Visionary client
…who pulled together a great team of designers to devise a low carbon, award-winning building.
3 Making buildings better
Visionary client
The architect had loads of experience with passive solar design…
The engineers had loads of experience with renewable energy systems
Architect who knows the
importance of a North symbol
Low Carbon Consultant
4 Making buildings better
The client appointed a sustainability consultant…
…And an external BREEAM assessor….
Many of the right ingredients for a sustainable building were in place…
5 Making buildings better
The consultants helped the client get grants for renewables
The scheme design specified low-energy heating and cooling systems
Scheme design modelling suggested an A-rated EPC and BREEAM Excellent
With one of these for back-up
6 Making buildings better
The budget was tight…
The client chose a design and build procurement on a guaranteed price
The scheme design was passed to the contractor and the contractor’s design team did the detail design..
7 Making buildings better
The tender returns were too expensive by about £500K. This affected some key design details
Value engineering cut out non-critical items, and brought the project back on budget
Cost of Unnecessary
design
Unnecessary costs of
components
Unnecessary costs of
materials
Unnecessary cost of
buildability
Unnecessary life cycle cost
The VE vision
8 Making buildings better
Negative consequences of VE saw the controls system re-engineered to a cheaper system
Cost of Unnecessary
design
Unnecessary costs of
components
Unnecessary costs of
materials
Unnecessary cost of
buildability
Unnecessary life cycle cost
Systems that lost critical components, or which needed some re-design, were never checked for integrity…
Design subtleties
engineered out
Cheaper components sourced by contractors
Loss of robustness in
fittings
Not enough attention to
commissioning
Life-cycle considerations abandoned for
lowest price
The VE vision The VE reality
9 Making buildings better
Time and cost issues trumped quality…
The lack of a commissioning strategy saw commissioning rushed and unfinished at PC
Stresses and strains in the project team led to a break down in communication and trust
Commissioning
Practical completion and
move in
10 Making buildings better
Client left the contractor and project manager in
charge and didn’t provide leadership
Client-side designers watched from afar and couldn’t influence what they couldn’t see or be
invited to comment upon
Packaged sub-contractors often
in charge of critical details
M&E contractor and novated design team
reported to main contractor
Occupants wait for the move in date, but had
minimal support, training and
guidance
11 Making buildings better
Design detailing was poor, and the controls unmanageably complex
12 Making buildings better
When the building opened, the staff were ill-prepared, the energy metering didn’t work properly, and the energy use was much higher than the client expected
The contractors only attended site to deal with
defects
It took 9 months to get the O&M manuals…
The gas boilers were set up on the BMS to take the lead on heating, not the GSHP….
13 Making buildings better
The as-built EPC was a B…but the DEC became an E
14 Making buildings better
A BUS occupant survey 12 months later showed the occupants didn’t like the building
Although it won an architectural award and
occupants thought it looked quite good…!
15 Making buildings better
Everyone set out with great intentions, but they foundered on over-ambitous targets, poorly informed cost-cutting, over-complex systems, inadequate commissioning, rushed handover, minimal end-user training, and a lack of post-handover support.
That would normally be
~THE END ~
But the client had another project planned, and the
consultants said “we need to learn from experience…”
16 Making buildings better
…So they said… ….why don’t we adopt the BSRIA Soft Landings process to make the next building better…?
So they did…
17 Making buildings better
• The lead designers gave the client a copy of the Soft Landings Core Principles
• The client liked what it read
• “Will it cost me more, it asked?”
• “Much less than the cost of failures, time wasted, and energy bills being far higher than you intended,” said the designers
• “OK, I’m interested, said the client…”
• …What do we do next?
18 Making buildings better
• Adopt the Soft Landings Framework as the primary approach to managing the project
• Use the BSRIA guidance How to procure Soft Landings to embed Soft Landings in the Client’s Requirements and the contract using the proposed clauses
• Invite tenders on willingness to do Soft Landings (not their price)
• Make sure at least one of the primary designers joins the BSRIA Soft Landings User Group to gain insights
• Commit to a period of professional aftercare and POE
19 Making buildings better
Everyone on the project team focused on actual operational outcomes
20 Making buildings better
• Existing programme management processes were developed to accommodate Soft Landings
• There was no need to reinvent the wheel. They made use of existing meetings and tools
• They found what they could for free, what could be achieved from modifying existing project activities, and what was extra and needed to be paid-for
• Soft Landings Champions were appointed on the client and project teams
21 Making buildings better
Soft Landings Process Map – stage-by-stage
22 Making buildings better
23 Making buildings better
• The project team adopted reality-checking at key stages of the project
• They checked energy, usability and maintainability issues
• This informed commissioning, training, fine-tuning and a CIBSE TM54 energy model
• It ensured risky and innovative systems got more attention beyond design reviews
24 Making buildings better
25 Making buildings better
More attention to performance metrics – energy and occupants
26 Making buildings better
27 Making buildings better
A through commissioning plan was set early on
Staged commissioning proved insightful: thermography surveys and pressure tests
28 Making buildings better
29 Making buildings better
The move-in, and training and support was well-planned
30 Making buildings better
User guides were simple, updatable, and accessible
31 Making buildings better
Far more effort was put into end-user guidance
32 Making buildings better
Professional support in the aftercare period paid dividends
33 Making buildings better
34 Making buildings better
The occupants liked this building a lot more
35 Making buildings better
A process that focuses on identifying operational risks before they become ingrained
and irredeemable problems
A method of managing those risks during briefing, design, construction, handover and
initial operation
Support for those risks during the first few operating seasons
The application of experience and feedback from earlier projects to eliminate or
reduce risks, and focus on ways to enhance performance
Soft Landings help you manage performance risks
36 Making buildings better
Final observations
37 Making buildings better
What clients and industry need now is a helpful degree of convergence
On processes and procedures On training and technical support On terminology, on the cost benefits, on the contractual requirements In reporting procedures and risk management methods (in BIM) On definitions of operational outcomes and performance requirements On metrics for measuring success – both quantitative and qualitative
Government Soft Landings and BIM
from 2016
38 Making buildings better
Technical criteria
…To many clients, the CONTEXTUAL CRITERIA are much more important than the technical criteria in judging the success of a building
Which means we need to find ways of assessing them – a big challenge
Contextual criteria
Quality of work
environment, space use, resource efficiency,
health and well-being, productivity – zero FM
complaints
?
39 Making buildings better
Soft Landings Challenges and opportunities
Q: How can you make Soft Landings work on your projects?
Is there really any alternative?
40 Making buildings better
The Soft Landings Framework Includes all the procedures for applying Soft Landings, plus checklists and generic work plans Soft Landings Core Principles The main requirements for defining a full Soft Landings project Soft Landings for schools The case for Soft Landings 1: Energy cost variations BREEAM 2011 and Soft Landings
Download from www.softlandings.org.uk
Free guidance to get you started
