What approaches do people know of for handling data needs for building renovation / disassembly?
I have some ideas but I'd like to hear what others think first.
This is definitely not my area of expertise, but I would imagine a well maintained FM database that adheres to standards would be really useful in determining the lifespan of assets which may be reused elsewhere. Just as 2D drawings are also useful to prevent unnecessary investigative drilling, BIM modules that have been updated to as-built scans / 360 photos would also really help in determining safe demolition and reuse.
Aside from those general things, I would imagine that there is a whole field out there about designing / detailing for disassembly, but sadly I have very rarely seen this as a high priority for architects.
My thoughts are that there are product description standard manufacturers & retailers use as well as the bSDD. My basic thought is that bSDD seems like an obvious framework for registering data about objects. It has the advantage that it fits neatly into the process of designing managing BIM data and can be extended / created at the time of building renovation / demolition. My only reason for bringing this up hear is to hear if there is an obviously better solution than bSDD or even other candidates. I know that https://www.solar.eu/ chose to use a product description system ( I forget the name but I'll find it soon ) common in the retail sector.
Another issue would be if a product description system has a workable mapping to bSDD.
I imagine a simple app could be made with a lookup in the bSDD database which a demolition worker can use to form the basic data for sorting objects for storage and reuse. Objects can be linked with barcode stickers / RFID to a company or national database and additional data can be added as needed by product experts. For example an onsite worker can classify something as an electrical motor with certain volt/output values printed on the product, and attach a barcode/RFID - a specialist later can add information when the motor is being put on a shelf in a warehouse. In this way companies / regions / states can link their databases across countries and sell on behalf of each other earning small commissions which make the whole process profitable for all parties.
Some countries are getting good at recycling / reusing simple things like flooring and cladding, that's great. But imagine the environmental gains if steel members were being reused and repurposed on a cross border basis instead of being melted down and shipped around the world! What about aluminum facade system? Imagine the revolution if there were incentives to build in standard dimensions designed for reuse!
I think bSDD only handles standardising properties, which probably always makes things easier further down the line... but I suspect more valuable for disassembly is tracking individual assets. For this, you're probably wanting to look at GTINs (like your barcode sticker example - but I guess it is agnostic of the label, it could equally uses RFID but probably too expensive to do that for every asset). I recall a case study where a pipe manufacturer (like large underground pipes) tracked every single length of pipe with a GTIN and used that to determine pipes that could be reused or recut whenever they were dug up. There is a buildingSMART pset (one of the COBie FM ones) that track GTINs. I have heard casual talk from some people involved in my local state's heavy rail system discussing that they may mandate GTIN tracking on all maintainable rail assets.
@Moult But isn't GTIN just the way to link objects to databases? Does it contain structured information? We need object properties to be well structured so they can be searched for an retrieved for a public facing sales portal.
The increasing problem in Denmark is that there are a few portal but because they have no shared data structure they cannot communicate. So they are almost useless for projects that need large numbers of specific things in a different location. They represent only one council or demolition company. We need a system like when you buy used car parts - they have a shared database.
@duncan to my knowledge, yes, GTIN is just an identifier. Yes, it should be coupled with the bsDD. However, GTIN is not just a regular identifier, I think it links to a manufacturer, and that's what makes it valuable. So you'd use the GTIN as your search keyword.
@Moult so if there is a GTIN attached to the object linked to some external system somewhere when you find it in the rubble of a demolition project 50 years old - how useful is that likely to be? What are the chances that the objects even have that sticker? It sounds like you're thinking of how data should be organized (EIR from ISO 196500) during the planning and construction. I'm working on the assumption that we're looking at projects built 50 years ago where there is as good as no data. I'm looking at ways to construct and store the data needed for adding the building elements back into circulation.
Well structured data into the BIM is great, I make no such assumption. Maybe you have colleagues who work with renovation projects who may have knowledge on this topic?
Qcodes can contain basic info. I wonder if they could be used to add basic data at the point of sorting? "This is an electrical motor with this basic data and this GTIN/database key"
@duncan said: @Cyril do you have anything to add to this topic?
Not really. After reading the rest of the topic I am not sure to understand the question. Why do mean by handling ? Because from your first question I would have just answered store it in IFC.
@duncan said: @Cyril@JanF I'm thinking that IFC is not really suited to storing data about construction elements once they're not part of a building any more.
Why ? Every element has its own GlobalId. You can mark it as demolished. Let say that you do not consider it anymore as part of spatial container building. It can still exist and carry same data.
@duncan Sorry I am also still lost as to what your question is. We do some renovations in the office, two of our projects are houses over 100 years old. We simply build a bim model (archicad) based on the surveyors model and fill it with data as we learn it. The model obviously contains also all the demolished parts.
It is not uncommon to sell aged timber for example to be used on renovations or design stuff, you could easily do that based on our model.
One general issue here is that the bim 3d model is not that detailed usually, so you can't easily mark parts of elements or subelements as demolished, but I see no reason why you couldn't simply model the additional sub parts and mark them.
I'm guessing this is about circular building?
In the Netherlands they use a "material passport" for identification and storing information about a construction element. This contains all info that is considered useful for the future. Access can be regulated via blockchain (search for the ABN-AMRO CIRCL pavillion circular building in Amsterdam).
A "material passport" contains info about the circular potential (deconstruction potential score, circular score, date of availabilty, financials), technical information (user manuals, installation guides, deconstruction/extraction guidelines and so on), history of the building element (logbooks of maintenance, connections, finishing, as-built construction, defects and failures, all during the time of use of the building), and of course specifications, like technical info, size, weight, code, supplier, certificates, location in the building, delivery info, ownership, technical life span, dangers and hazards, how much of it is already secondhand, and so on.
The goal is to preserve this information for the future, when the building part will be extracted from the building, and re-used in the next building.
In a sense, you communicate with the future...;-)
All this info is necessary, because in the future, when you re-use a building element, you'll have to check (and to prove) that it meets the standards of that moment in time. Same again if you re-use it again after that. And again and again...;-)
@Humba very interesting - where can I read more about this (before I start searching myself) @ReD_CoDE isn't this something you have some knowledge about? You've mentioned material passports.
If someone with experience with material passports (i.e. has used it themselves) can help point me to some tech specs about storage, or if not, can act as an OSArch representative to lead an initiative to contact these organisations and collaborate to create real working proof of concept workflows using open source tools like FreeCAD, Blender, OpenProject, that would be awesome! Anyone up for it? I'm happy to help on the BlenderBIM Add-on side of things!
If we can do anything to help @Moult get this going in BlenderBIM I can probably get it mentioned at the Harvard Circular Economy Symposium - of course along with other relevant software.
@KasperMiller you're pretty tuned in to EU projects - do you know who to talk to from bS or bamb2020 ?
@Cyril I have an idea that because I'm not sure what is needed to make a IFC I'm not sure what it can be used for. I also haven't understood how it fits in with bSDD which I understand are designed to hold much more specific information about actual products. Can you maybe help me understand some of this better?
Including "material passport" information for a building element in a BIM/IFC-model makes sense for the duration of use of that building.
But if you extract that building element from that building, and store it elsewhere or use it in another building, will that IFC-information or part of it stay with the element? And can the IFC-information then be used for the next building (or its IFC model at least?).
With other words: can IFC-information/BlenderBIM information "stick" to a building element outside of the original building/IFC-model?
Because that's what a material passport does. I'm not sure IFC can replace that?
@Humba yes, it is possible for that IFC information to stay with the element, leave buildings, be without a building, move to a new building, etc. In fact, we already do this with property set templates (which stay outside buildings), classification libraries (reused across buildings), and project libraries.
Finally starting to find some concrete projects looking at this issue. Here is a company in Holland https://madaster.com/ with a product on the way and a whole bunch of good links to articles about this issue. Still more reading to go ....
Yes, Madaster is among the pioneers of material passports.
Their problem: the actual format of a material passport is not defined by law. Anyone can make their own material passports. So it may be possible that different material passports are incompatible, or that a different format will become obligatory. Or it may be that different countries impose different formats. That's a risk you'll always have to take as a pioneer of course.
An open source version in a widely shared format would definitely be a good thing, preferably sooner than later...
@duncan I'm also aware of https://rotordc.com/ in Belgium and https://www.enviromate.co.uk in England. But I don't know if they are using material passports. I think Madaster was connected to the BAMB2020 project. Last week I tried to request access to the BAMB material passports platform but I didn't get a reply. Also their platform seems to be offline: https://passports.bamb2020.eu
@filipejsbrandao said:
Last week I tried to request access to the BAMB material passports platform but I didn't get a reply. Also their platform seems to be offline: https://passports.bamb2020.eu
@duncan If you look at the bottom of that page there are some links to videos on vimeo showing someone adding materials to the said platform. There is also a link to visit the platform as a guest, but it is not working.
I was searching for a paper on Scan-To-BIM that I watched on eCAADe2020 and bumped into this: Design Optimisation via BIM Supported Material Passportshttp://papers.cumincad.org/data/works/att/ecaade2020_229.pdf. The methodology contains informations that might be useful.
Comments
This is definitely not my area of expertise, but I would imagine a well maintained FM database that adheres to standards would be really useful in determining the lifespan of assets which may be reused elsewhere. Just as 2D drawings are also useful to prevent unnecessary investigative drilling, BIM modules that have been updated to as-built scans / 360 photos would also really help in determining safe demolition and reuse.
Aside from those general things, I would imagine that there is a whole field out there about designing / detailing for disassembly, but sadly I have very rarely seen this as a high priority for architects.
@Cyril do you have anything to add to this topic?
My thoughts are that there are product description standard manufacturers & retailers use as well as the bSDD. My basic thought is that bSDD seems like an obvious framework for registering data about objects. It has the advantage that it fits neatly into the process of designing managing BIM data and can be extended / created at the time of building renovation / demolition. My only reason for bringing this up hear is to hear if there is an obviously better solution than bSDD or even other candidates. I know that https://www.solar.eu/ chose to use a product description system ( I forget the name but I'll find it soon ) common in the retail sector.
Another issue would be if a product description system has a workable mapping to bSDD.
I imagine a simple app could be made with a lookup in the bSDD database which a demolition worker can use to form the basic data for sorting objects for storage and reuse. Objects can be linked with barcode stickers / RFID to a company or national database and additional data can be added as needed by product experts. For example an onsite worker can classify something as an electrical motor with certain volt/output values printed on the product, and attach a barcode/RFID - a specialist later can add information when the motor is being put on a shelf in a warehouse. In this way companies / regions / states can link their databases across countries and sell on behalf of each other earning small commissions which make the whole process profitable for all parties.
Some countries are getting good at recycling / reusing simple things like flooring and cladding, that's great. But imagine the environmental gains if steel members were being reused and repurposed on a cross border basis instead of being melted down and shipped around the world! What about aluminum facade system? Imagine the revolution if there were incentives to build in standard dimensions designed for reuse!
Thoughts?
I think bSDD only handles standardising properties, which probably always makes things easier further down the line... but I suspect more valuable for disassembly is tracking individual assets. For this, you're probably wanting to look at GTINs (like your barcode sticker example - but I guess it is agnostic of the label, it could equally uses RFID but probably too expensive to do that for every asset). I recall a case study where a pipe manufacturer (like large underground pipes) tracked every single length of pipe with a GTIN and used that to determine pipes that could be reused or recut whenever they were dug up. There is a buildingSMART pset (one of the COBie FM ones) that track GTINs. I have heard casual talk from some people involved in my local state's heavy rail system discussing that they may mandate GTIN tracking on all maintainable rail assets.
@Moult But isn't GTIN just the way to link objects to databases? Does it contain structured information? We need object properties to be well structured so they can be searched for an retrieved for a public facing sales portal.
The increasing problem in Denmark is that there are a few portal but because they have no shared data structure they cannot communicate. So they are almost useless for projects that need large numbers of specific things in a different location. They represent only one council or demolition company. We need a system like when you buy used car parts - they have a shared database.
@duncan to my knowledge, yes, GTIN is just an identifier. Yes, it should be coupled with the bsDD. However, GTIN is not just a regular identifier, I think it links to a manufacturer, and that's what makes it valuable. So you'd use the GTIN as your search keyword.
@Moult so if there is a GTIN attached to the object linked to some external system somewhere when you find it in the rubble of a demolition project 50 years old - how useful is that likely to be? What are the chances that the objects even have that sticker? It sounds like you're thinking of how data should be organized (EIR from ISO 196500) during the planning and construction. I'm working on the assumption that we're looking at projects built 50 years ago where there is as good as no data. I'm looking at ways to construct and store the data needed for adding the building elements back into circulation.
Well structured data into the BIM is great, I make no such assumption. Maybe you have colleagues who work with renovation projects who may have knowledge on this topic?
Qcodes can contain basic info. I wonder if they could be used to add basic data at the point of sorting? "This is an electrical motor with this basic data and this GTIN/database key"
Not really. After reading the rest of the topic I am not sure to understand the question. Why do mean by handling ? Because from your first question I would have just answered store it in IFC.
@Cyril @JanF I'm thinking that IFC is not really suited to storing data about construction elements once they're not part of a building any more.
Why ? Every element has its own GlobalId. You can mark it as demolished. Let say that you do not consider it anymore as part of spatial container building. It can still exist and carry same data.
@duncan Sorry I am also still lost as to what your question is. We do some renovations in the office, two of our projects are houses over 100 years old. We simply build a bim model (archicad) based on the surveyors model and fill it with data as we learn it. The model obviously contains also all the demolished parts.
It is not uncommon to sell aged timber for example to be used on renovations or design stuff, you could easily do that based on our model.
One general issue here is that the bim 3d model is not that detailed usually, so you can't easily mark parts of elements or subelements as demolished, but I see no reason why you couldn't simply model the additional sub parts and mark them.
I'm guessing this is about circular building?
In the Netherlands they use a "material passport" for identification and storing information about a construction element. This contains all info that is considered useful for the future. Access can be regulated via blockchain (search for the ABN-AMRO CIRCL pavillion circular building in Amsterdam).
A "material passport" contains info about the circular potential (deconstruction potential score, circular score, date of availabilty, financials), technical information (user manuals, installation guides, deconstruction/extraction guidelines and so on), history of the building element (logbooks of maintenance, connections, finishing, as-built construction, defects and failures, all during the time of use of the building), and of course specifications, like technical info, size, weight, code, supplier, certificates, location in the building, delivery info, ownership, technical life span, dangers and hazards, how much of it is already secondhand, and so on.
The goal is to preserve this information for the future, when the building part will be extracted from the building, and re-used in the next building.
In a sense, you communicate with the future...;-)
All this info is necessary, because in the future, when you re-use a building element, you'll have to check (and to prove) that it meets the standards of that moment in time. Same again if you re-use it again after that. And again and again...;-)
@Humba very interesting - where can I read more about this (before I start searching myself)
@ReD_CoDE isn't this something you have some knowledge about? You've mentioned material passports.
https://bim4ren.eu/
@duncan The BAMB EU project was also working with all of those issues you mentioned, including material passports
https://www.bamb2020.eu/topics/materials-passports/
If someone with experience with material passports (i.e. has used it themselves) can help point me to some tech specs about storage, or if not, can act as an OSArch representative to lead an initiative to contact these organisations and collaborate to create real working proof of concept workflows using open source tools like FreeCAD, Blender, OpenProject, that would be awesome! Anyone up for it? I'm happy to help on the BlenderBIM Add-on side of things!
If we can do anything to help @Moult get this going in BlenderBIM I can probably get it mentioned at the Harvard Circular Economy Symposium - of course along with other relevant software.
@filipejsbrandao @lukas I can see I have a lot of reading to do.
@KasperMiller you're pretty tuned in to EU projects - do you know who to talk to from bS or bamb2020 ?
@Cyril I have an idea that because I'm not sure what is needed to make a IFC I'm not sure what it can be used for. I also haven't understood how it fits in with bSDD which I understand are designed to hold much more specific information about actual products. Can you maybe help me understand some of this better?
Including "material passport" information for a building element in a BIM/IFC-model makes sense for the duration of use of that building.
But if you extract that building element from that building, and store it elsewhere or use it in another building, will that IFC-information or part of it stay with the element? And can the IFC-information then be used for the next building (or its IFC model at least?).
With other words: can IFC-information/BlenderBIM information "stick" to a building element outside of the original building/IFC-model?
Because that's what a material passport does. I'm not sure IFC can replace that?
@Humba yes, it is possible for that IFC information to stay with the element, leave buildings, be without a building, move to a new building, etc. In fact, we already do this with property set templates (which stay outside buildings), classification libraries (reused across buildings), and project libraries.
Finally starting to find some concrete projects looking at this issue. Here is a company in Holland https://madaster.com/ with a product on the way and a whole bunch of good links to articles about this issue. Still more reading to go ....
Yes, Madaster is among the pioneers of material passports.
Their problem: the actual format of a material passport is not defined by law. Anyone can make their own material passports. So it may be possible that different material passports are incompatible, or that a different format will become obligatory. Or it may be that different countries impose different formats. That's a risk you'll always have to take as a pioneer of course.
An open source version in a widely shared format would definitely be a good thing, preferably sooner than later...
@duncan I'm also aware of https://rotordc.com/ in Belgium and https://www.enviromate.co.uk in England. But I don't know if they are using material passports. I think Madaster was connected to the BAMB2020 project. Last week I tried to request access to the BAMB material passports platform but I didn't get a reply. Also their platform seems to be offline: https://passports.bamb2020.eu
germany has its AVV: Abfallverzeichnisverordnung. Material numbers at demolition, so that a recycling can be organised.
https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/topics/waste-resources/waste-management/waste-types/waste-classification
BIM_as_a_tool_to_implement_circular_economy_into_construction_projects__life_cycle
https://projekter.aau.dk/projekter/files/294311131/BIM_as_a_tool_to_implement_circular_economy_into_construction_projects__life_cycle.pdf
I see that S-878 which is a Danish ISO project is looking at Material Passports https://www.ds.dk/da/udvalg/kategorier/byggeri-og-anlaeg/cirkulaer-oekonomi-i-byggeri-og-anlaeg
I am currently trying to find out how open and cross border this effort is and how it relates to existing standards and related projects.
They must have gone to the same website design school as Autodesk - the link has changed: https://www.bamb2020.eu/topics/materials-passports/
@duncan If you look at the bottom of that page there are some links to videos on vimeo showing someone adding materials to the said platform. There is also a link to visit the platform as a guest, but it is not working.
I was searching for a paper on Scan-To-BIM that I watched on eCAADe2020 and bumped into this: Design Optimisation via BIM Supported Material Passports http://papers.cumincad.org/data/works/att/ecaade2020_229.pdf. The methodology contains informations that might be useful.
Very interesting to read as to how BIM and Material Passports could interact.
the AVV is the German implementation into law based on the European Waste Catalog as per the EU Commission decision found here https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/239a2785-9115-4e06-adae-66c8e08a5a42
this sounds like a decent basis to develop a open standard to develop material passports which could be linked into BIM models.