Integrating Technology with Lean ConstructionNWCCC

November 17, 2010

Agenda

Lewis Lean Case Study: Modeled Work Packages Case Study: Bluebeam Case Study: SharePoint Q & A

Minimize Waste

Optimize Delivery

Minimize Waste

1. Reduce worker idle time2. Prevent accidents3. Avoid over/under design4. Optimize just in time delivery5. Eliminate unnecessary steps6. Prevent defects7. Shorten learning curve

Minimize Waste

Optimize Delivery

1. Align goals2. Foster trust3. Establish accountability4. Ensure peak performance

Optimize Delivery

Checklist

Modeled Work Packages

Case Study

Modeled Work Packages

The Project: UW Housing Concrete Self-performed concrete work Design-bid-build delivery Lump sum, down-market bid

The Challenge: Accomplish tight schedule Prevent injuries and accidents Eliminate impacts and rework Beat aggressive labor budget

The Approach: Put the Model in Our Crews’ Hands

Approach Technology Lean Objectives Fulfilled

1. Identify conflicts Revit Prevent defects

2. Visualize the work Revit Eliminate unnecessary steps

3. Segment the work Revit Ensure peak performance

4. Remove obstacles Last PlannerTM

Prevent defects

Prevent accidents

Foster trust

5. Set goals Lewis TC/WP Program Reduce worker idle time

Establish accountability

6. Provide feedback Lewis TC/WP Program Shorten learning curve

The Approach: Combine the Model with Work Packages

Identifying Document Conflicts Virtually, Not in the Field

Using the Model’s Visualization to Plan the Work

Plan Forming and Pours

Identify Repetition for Prefab

4D to Fine-Tune Schedule

G2 – East: Conc: 52 CY Form: 3,062 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G1 – East: Conc: 75 CY Form: 4,356 SF

G1 – West: Conc: 72 CY Form: 4,076 SF

Quantities to Prorate Budgets

Breaking Down the Model into the Work Segments

Using Modeled Assembly Drawings to Execute the Work

Many Types of Activities to Build

Shear Walls: One Type of Activity

G1 - West

Shear Walls: Broken into Segments

G1 - East

Shear Walls: Broken into Segments

G2 - West

Shear Walls: Broken into Segments

G2 - East

Shear Walls: Broken into Segments

G1 - West G1 - East

G2 - West G2 - East

Shear Walls: Broken into Segments

Assembly Drawing for Each Segment

Planning Work Packages to Remove Obstacles

Coupling Modeled Assembly Dwgs with Work Packages

Sharing the Budget with Our Crews for Goal Setting

Shear walls total: Conc: 255 CY = 89 Hrs Form: 14,616 SF = 1,169 Hrs

Breaking the Budget into Segments

Shearwalls

G2 – East G2 – West

G1 – East G1 – West

Shearwalls

G2 – East: Conc: 52 CY Form: 3,062 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G1 – East: Conc: 75 CY Form: 4,356 SF

G1 – West: Conc: 72 CY Form: 4,076 SF

Shearwalls

Conc. Placing = 0.35 MH/CY Wall Forming = 0.08 MH/SF

G2 – East: Conc: 52 CY Form: 3,062 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G1 – East: Conc: 75 CY Form: 4,356 SF

G1 – West: Conc: 72 CY Form: 4,076 SF

Shearwalls

Conc. Placing = 0.35 MH/CY Wall Forming = 0.08 MH/SF

G2 – East: Conc: 52 CY = 18 Hrs Form: 3,062 SF = 245 Hrs

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY = 19 Hrs Form: 3,122 SF = 250 Hrs

G1 – East: Conc: 75 CY = 26 Hrs Form: 4,356 SF = 349 Hrs

G1 – West: Conc: 72 CY = 25 Hrs Form: 4,076 SF = 326 Hrs

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

Providing Feedback to Optimize Performance

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

G2 – West: Conc: 55 CY Form: 3,122 SF

Tracking the Work Segments to Optimize Productivity

The Results: Exceeded budget goals Empowered crews Promoted safety Eliminated waste Promoted learning culture Ensured peak performance

Bluebeam

Case Study

Bluebeam

The Projects: 362,000 Amazon Headquarters TI 5,000 SAM TI 250,000+ First & Main GSA

The Challenge: Efficient and timely drawing updates Multitude of Subcontractors

including owner subs Large open floor plans

The Approach: Hyperlinked as-builts Electronic overlays Electronic punch list

The Technology: Bluebeam .pdf software

SharePoint

Case Study

SharePoint

The Project: Shorenstein property 250,000+ First & Main GSA LEED gold TI 5 month duration 6 agencies over 12 floors

The Challenge: 6 contracts with 6 separate

document streams 5 architects, 4 engineers 24hr turn on submittals and RFIs

GSA

Bldg Owner

Lewis

Subcontractors

A/E

VBACorporate

VBALocal

DEA Corporate

DEALocal

OIG Corporate

OIGLocal

AFRCorporate

AFRLocal

IRS-P Corporate

IRS-PLocal

IRS-TCorporate

IRS-TLocal

Project Tenants

Traditional Approach: 6 couriered hardcopies Email / FTP sites Separate tracking/Log comparison

Waste: Delivery time Lost or inadvertent deletion of

Email Time spent tracking documents Working with the wrong file Confusing FTP sites

The Approach: Go digital

The Technology: Utilize SharePoint to organize,

distribute and track project documentation

Sub

•Submit to Lewis

Lewis

•Review

•Submit to Architect

Arch

•Review

•Return to Lewis

Lewis

•Return to Subcontractor

Team

•Review

•Respond

SharePoint

Project Main Page

User Specific Views

Owner View

Owner View

Architect View

Email Notifications

Architect View

Subcontractor View

Subcontractor View

Subcontractor View

Subcontractor View

Subcontractor View

Live Shared As-builts

The Result: Faster document review Reduction in Cost Report turnaround time Effective Meetings Less paper use

“Using Lewis’ SharePoint as a portal between the design team and contractor really helped to streamline the document exchange process.  Given the compressed timeline of the GSA projects, I don't think we could have been able to meet the schedule without SharePoint.  I would gladly use it again and would look for ways to implement a similar technology in my own organization.”

Whit Middlecoff, AIAGBD ARCHITECTS Incorporated

“