91视频

Handing over a building information modeling platform can be sort of like handing over keys to a company car. If an accident were to occur, who would be responsible: the driver or the owner?

鈥淲hen we hand out drawings or the electronic media of those to the contractor, we’re essentially giving them the keys to our legal foundation in a way,鈥� said Kurt Haapala, a principal at in Portland.

BIM technology lets architects and contractors vet design details across all trades in virtual, three-dimensional models. In general, it delivers more detail and fewer opportunities for mistakes in the field.

As a result, the use of BIM is growing across the nation. But as lines are increasingly sketched in virtual environments, questions are arising over where they’re drawn legally. For instance, what would happen if information were interpreted incorrectly?

鈥淚f they no longer ask the questions and just figure it out incorrectly in the field, and something happens, we’re still liable,鈥� Haapala said. 鈥淪o it gets really muddy, really quick.鈥�

For example, an architect once used BIM to fit the mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems of a major university’s building into the ceiling plenum. The design was so tight that systems could fit only if they were installed in a particular order 鈥� a detail the contractor didn’t understand until assembly was 70 percent complete.

The unnamed parties settled for millions of dollars out of court because the subject was deemed too complicated for a jury, said Randy Lewis, vice president of loss prevention and client education for the design professional group of XL Insurance. At the heart of the matter was a breakdown in communication 鈥� a key element in navigating the new virtual frontier.

Lewis said 40 percent of the claims that XL Insurance handled in 2012 came from situations arising out of communication failures.

鈥淲e have this new technology available to us, and just using this new technology with the old processes can potentially set up problems, but also prevent the team from fully leveraging the power of that technology,鈥� he said.

And as roles evolve (such as when an architect dictates construction sequencing), so do responsibilities. So far, the legal industry has been slow to catch up.

鈥淚t has become a big question mark as to how this collaborative process affects the traditional allocation of responsibility,鈥� said Darien Loiselle, a shareholder and attorney specializing in construction law at .

Loiselle said the onus is on project teams to identify roles and responsibilities early in a project, especially since no precedents have been established in a courtroom. That could change as BIM gains a firmer industry foothold.

According to , the use of BIM has grown from 28 percent to 71 percent in the past six years. Use among contractors, in particular, has increased from 50 percent to 74 percent since 2009.

Jan Willemse, a partner at in Portland, said his company is weaning itself entirely off of AutoCAD in favor of BIM.

He acknowledged that contracts are behind the technology curve, but added that approaches like integrated project delivery (a legal arrangement in which the owner, architect and contractor work together as one entity) and the Big Room (a virtual or physical construction command center of sorts) have helped teams respond.

Willemse said BIM should not be viewed as legally binding, but rather as a supplemental tool to help parties interpret design intent. Shop drawings may have given way to clash detection, but the contract drawings are still the bottom line.

Dale Stenning, a manager with , agrees. He said that while contracts are still somewhat 鈥渟quishy鈥� in terms of BIM and liability, they are no more ambiguous than they were before the technology emerged. That’s partly because a divide has always existed between contract documents and evolving shop drawings.

鈥淥ur industry doesn’t really have a mechanism for merging those two efforts into a cohesive agreement,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he dysfunction isn’t new; it’s just got a new wrapper on it and a new vocabulary built in.鈥�

Stenning thinks that as the industry moves forward, design-build agreements will replace hard-bid, lump-sum contests. Lewis agrees, because he believes collaborative processes are better able to harness BIM’s potential.

鈥淲e haven’t changed how risk gets allocated or adjudicated,鈥� Stenning said. 鈥淏ut we have changed the conversation about where the risks are (and) what can be done. And most importantly, we can find the problems much earlier in the process. As they get discovered earlier, more solutions are available for weighing the best options.鈥�

Rob Fallow, a senior project manager, said the firm now uses BIM on virtually every one of its projects. The company, like Hoffman, has created new positions for BIM experts who can help teams manipulate models in the field.

IPD processes, Fallow said, also are playing a big role in the company’s adoption of the technology. Communication, however, is still the most important tool for risk mitigation.

鈥淚f we’re making a change to the model 鈥� it’s really the contractor’s responsibility to keep the designer in the loop,鈥� he said. 鈥淪o it takes a little extra care to make sure you’re looking out for your team members. You don’t want anyone to fall behind.鈥�

Meanwhile, the legal implications of BIM are being discussed in industry circles. The American Bar Association, for instance, has added a BIM addendum to its library of ConsensusDOCS. Also, the American Institute of Architects has updated its standard forms for the technology.

Haapala said that ultimately, trust is a critical component in a successful BIM project, but a legal foundation is smart.

鈥淒o I have a contract at Mahlum that has been renovated and polished? No,鈥� Haapala said. 鈥淏ut I can tell you that our contracts are under review with our attorney.鈥�