BIM Level 2 Protocol

Tim76

Hi,

We are just about to start using BIM Level 2 Protocol in the office and I'm considering using the numbering system below so that the drawing stage is visible at a glance:

100-199 Prelim Design
200-299 Planning
300-399 Fire Cert
400-499 DAC
500-599 Tender
600-699 Construction

For example, xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0201 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D planning drawing prepared by the architect and xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0301 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D fire cert drawing prepared by the architect without actually opening up the file to view the title block.

Just wondering if anyone out there was using any alternative systems or what they think of the one proposed above.

Metric Tensor

There's one very large public sector body who insist that the "tender" drawings should be of a standard suitable for construction and hence should be the labelled as construction drawings.

I've seen them check that the tender documents say "construction" and not tender.

Provided your nomenclature is internal only or not explicitly explained I can't see this catching you here - but something to be aware of all the same if you are doing projects for a certain nationwide employer! ;-)

Jason_Arch

Tim76 wrote: »

Hi,

We are just about to start using BIM Level 2 Protocol in the office and I'm considering using the numbering system below so that the drawing stage is visible at a glance:

100-199 Prelim Design
200-299 Planning
300-399 Fire Cert
400-499 DAC
500-599 Tender
600-699 Construction

For example, xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0201 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D planning drawing prepared by the architect and xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0301 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D fire cert drawing prepared by the architect without actually opening up the file to view the title block.

Just wondering if anyone out there was using any alternative systems or what they think of the one proposed above.

That looks like a good enough system, I'm about to prepare a BIM plan for our office here too. Are you going to number H+S in its own separate section?

Metric Tensor wrote: »

There's one very large public sector body who insist that the "tender" drawings should be of a standard suitable for construction and hence should be the labelled as construction drawings.

I've seen them check that the tender documents say "construction" and not tender.

Provided your nomenclature is internal only or not explicitly explained I can't see this catching you here - but something to be aware of all the same if you are doing projects for a certain nationwide employer! ;-)

The naming convention he is suggesting is compliant to BS 1192:2007 so it should be suitable for whatever the client requires. If a public sector body rejects the use of the BS then there is something badly wrong.

Jason_Arch

Tim76 wrote: »

Hi,

We are just about to start using BIM Level 2 Protocol in the office and I'm considering using the numbering system below so that the drawing stage is visible at a glance:

100-199 Prelim Design
200-299 Planning
300-399 Fire Cert
400-499 DAC
500-599 Tender
600-699 Construction

For example, xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0201 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D planning drawing prepared by the architect and xx-yy-P1-GF-DR-A-0301 would be visible as a phase 1, ground floor, 2D fire cert drawing prepared by the architect without actually opening up the file to view the title block.

Just wondering if anyone out there was using any alternative systems or what they think of the one proposed above.

That looks like a good enough system, I'm about to prepare a BIM plan for our office here too. Are you going to number H+S in its own separate section?

Metric Tensor wrote: »

There's one very large public sector body who insist that the "tender" drawings should be of a standard suitable for construction and hence should be the labelled as construction drawings.

I've seen them check that the tender documents say "construction" and not tender.

Provided your nomenclature is internal only or not explicitly explained I can't see this catching you here - but something to be aware of all the same if you are doing projects for a certain nationwide employer! ;-)

The naming convention he is suggesting is compliant to BS 1192:2007 so it should be suitable for whatever any client requires. If a public sector body rejects the use of the BS then there is something badly wrong.

Metric Tensor

Jason_Arch wrote: »

The naming convention he is suggesting is compliant to BS 1192:2007 so it should be suitable for whatever any client requires. If a public sector body rejects the use of the BS then there is something badly wrong.

I agree!

I too disagree with Tender drawings being labelled as construction ones - just relaying an experience I have had. Not directly in this context though.

Jason_Arch

I've been playing around with Revit trying to tie the naming conventions from the BS into our existing title block, I've had to set up some Shared Parameters in my title block family but its not too difficult once you get going.

In doing it I've had a think about the numbering system you've proposed and although it would seem fairly useful I don't think in practice dividing the different stages up would be all that useful. For instance, Prelim Design drawings will be in a completely different folder location to Tender drawings therefore setting your file limits to 100 files for each stage would be prohibitive (remember, ALL file types have to follow the file naming protocol, not just drawings).

I think the suitability field could be used to help differentiate between the stages and of course you can append the drawing number with a description using the _description field.