| |
| Wednesday 15th November
2006 |
| |
|
|
| 15:30 |
Registration |
|
| |
|
|
| 16:00 |
Welcome,
Introduction & Progress Report
|
|
| |
Marek
Suchocki, Construct IT
Prof.
Farzad Khosrowshahi, Director of Construct IT
Dr.
Jason Underwood, Manager of Construct IT
|
|
| |
|
|
| 16:15 |
Facilitated
Workshop: Building Regulations Part L - What Does Compliance Mean?
|
|
| |
Stuart
Holt, Property Tectonics |
 |
| |
Nick
Nisbet, AEC3/IAI/buildingSMART |
|
| |
Paul
Carey, Zero Energy Design Ltd |
|
|
This facilitated
workshop focused on 'Building Regulations Part L'. Stuart will provided
an introduction to Part L1 and L2 and the practicalities of how compliance
will impact on the industry. Nick then presented an international perspective
on energy regulations, which was followed by Paul discussing how the compliance
complexities Part L raises will need to be facilitated through technology.
Following the presentations, the workshop will provided delegates
the opportunity to
discuss and reflect on the issues surrounding the Building Regulations
Part L presented and explore the implications further.
|
|
| |
|
|
| 18:45 |
Close
|
|
| |
|
|
| 19:30 |
Dinner |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thursday 16th November 2006
|
| |
|
|
| 09:30 |
Welcome,
Summary of Day 1 and Introduction |
|
| |
Marek
Suchocki, Construct IT
Christopher
Groome, Business Manager, IAI/buildingSMART
|
|
| |
|
|
| 09:45 |
Building
on US National BIM Standard |
|
| |
Nick
Nisbet, AEC3/IAI/buildingSMART |
|
The
US National BIM (building information model) Standard aims to improve
the performance of facilities over their full life-cycle by fostering
a common, standard and integrated life-cycle information model for the
AEC & FM industry. The initial standard will define the scope of BIM,
key business processes, business rules and implementation guidance covering
early stage design, technical submissions and code-compliance. Nick provided
an update on what is happening in the US in terms of their National BIM
Standard and discuss how the UK may build on this.
|
|
| |
|
|
| 10:30 |
Tea
& Coffee |
|
| |
|
|
| 11:00 |
Panel
Session: How Do We Make Interoperability More Effective? |
|
| |
Chair:
|
Miles
Walker, HOK International Ltd. |
 |
| |
Panel: |
Sue
Pavey, EDSL |
|
| |
|
Brendan
McFarlane, DDS |
|
| |
|
Volker
Thein, Bentley Systems |
|
|
With
a panel of leading energy analysis software vendors, discussion focused
on the interoperability of how they can get models into their systems
for analysis along with what do users have to include in their models,
and to what level of detail so that the models can be imported into the
energy analysis system. This panel session chaired by an industry representative
enabled delegates to explore how we get information into the energy tools,
how we get results out and how we make their use more effective.
|
|
| |
|
|
| 12:15
- 13:15 Lunch |
|
|
|
|
| 13:15 |
Virtual
Environmental Planning: Improving the Planning Process |
|
| |
Andy
Hamilton, University of Salford |
|
Andy
presented a step towards an alternative approach to planning consultation
that aims to demonstrate the use of interactive three-dimensional (3D)
virtual reality visualisations allowing viewers to experience highly complex
information without the need for training. The impacts of a planned development
can be seen and experienced and the visual and environmental consequences
understood in a simple and easy-to-use format, while allowing comment
and participation.Whether delivered in-house or through sub-contractors,
effective maintenance is the key to long term revenues and profitability.
|
|
| |
|
|
| 14:00 |
The
Benefits of 3D Thematic Mapping in Site Risk Management |
 |
| |
Andrew
Sullivan, Industrial Interfaces Ltd. |
| In
any built environment failure to present a clear mental model of the building
will result in disorientation and confusion. Most building users do not
have a clear, informed mental model of the built environment because they
cannot read 2D plans. In the area of pre-emergency planning & response,
reliance on the 2D plan format undermines spatial awareness, wastes critical
time and often provides a false sense of preparedness. Dependence on the
2D format greatly reduces operational efficiency and increases the threat
to property, the public and emergency services personnel. It is difficult
to conceive of another situation where vital, high value assets and the
people who interact with them are put at risk through the application of
an inappropriate, unregulated technology. Working closely with the emergency
services, industry and the insurance sector Andrew will discuss redressing
this situation through the development of intuitive 3D Thematic Mapping
systems. |
|
| |
|
|
| 14:45 |
Tea
& Coffee |
|
| |
|
|
| 15:15 |
Debate:
BIM Will Only Be Adopted If The Building Regulations Insist On It? |
|
| |
Motion
Proposer: Christopher Groome, IAI/buildingSMART |
| Christopher
will set the theme for the debate by proposing the motion that building
regulations checking can be automated through the provision of data within
a BIM and that a statutory requirement to provide such data is the only
means by which the adoption of BIM by industry can be driven forward. |
|
| |
|
|
| 16:15 |
Summary
& Close |
|
