AP225 Building Elements by Explicit Shape Representation
AP230 Building Structural Frame: Steelwork
Demonstration of Japanese Steelwork Software
Part 106 Building Construction Core Model
Position of WG3/T12 Building Construction Sub-Group towards AP Development
Future Possibilities and other contributions
Appendix - Position of WG3/T12 Building Construction Sub-Group towards AP Development (doc N557)
Robert Aish, Bentley Systems, USA.
Robert Anderson, BSI,UK.
Andrew Arnold, CIFE Stamford U,USA
Vladimir Bazjanac, LBNL / IAI, USA.
Andrea Frank, Haas & Partner/U of Michigan
Wolfgang Haas, Haas & Partner, Germany.
Seiichiro Hori, Daitec, Japan.
Juha Hyvaerinen, VTT Building Technology, Finland.
Richard Junge, CAB, Germany
Kari Karstila, EuroSTEP, Finland.
Howard Leslie, CSIRO, Australia.
Robert Los, TNO Building Construction, NL.
Yuichi Matsumoto, Taisei Corp, Japan
Patrice Poyet, CSTB, France.
Kent Reed NIST, USA.
Abraham Rokach, AISC, USA.
Raimar Scherer, TU Dresden, Germany.
Richard See, Autodesk, USA.
Graham Storer, Taylor Woodrow, UK.
Tatsuo Terai, Chiba Inst. of Tech, Japan.
Dana Varnier, University of Montreal, Canada.
Michael Ward, University of Leeds,UK.
Richard Wittenoom, AuSTEP, Australia.
Jeffrey Wix, Wix Consulting,UK .
Kees Woestenenk, STABU, NL.
WH gave an overview of the history of AP225 and its cycle of development. He reported that AP225 was due for imminent ballot for DIS. Documentation was being distributed by ISO in Geneva. The result should be available for the next meeting in Chester in March 1997. WH also demonstrated data exchange by AP225 including viewing models over the web using VRML. WH reported that Japan had indicated that reference grids were a requirement in AP225. WH had investigated this, and grids could easily be catered for. WH also circulated copies of a new single sheet AP225 descriptor, complete with cartoons!
MW began with a progress update for AP230 (and its industry-based parent-project: the CIMsteel Integration Standards). He reported the publication of a third WD version (successfully completing a British Standards Institution contract to produce an AP230 WD) and the successful uploading of the first two versions onto SOLIS. MW further reported that industry review of AP230 was underway (CDC under earlier regulations) and that issues (65 in total) had now been raised by Japan, Finland, UK, and USA. Products with CIS (ARM equivalent) translators were now commercially available and promised by a number of further software vendors. MW also gave an AP230 progress update to the process plant harmonization meeting. On the technical side, MW presented some details from the EXPRESS-G ARM and listed a number of planned scope extensions to the AP. He went on to seek feedback and suggestions relating to a number of proposed ARM extensions and modifications. By next Spring, the evolving CIS version 2.0 and AP230 should be coincident. He reported that funding for the interpretation and qualification process was a problem, without which AP230 could not proceed to a formal ISO standard. His own contract was due to terminate in March 1997. A pre Chester workshop was being considered to facilitate further detailed review of AP230. Past and present involved CIMsteel collaborators would be invited together with committed parties from Japan and USA.
Mr. Matsumoto presented a live demonstration of the SIRIUS 3 software suite used by his company (Teisei). This had been one of a number of software products which featured in the integrated software demonstration in Tokyo following the Kobe meeting. The future ability of such software to exchange information according to Open Systems standards like STEP was important to Japanese industry.
PP reported that progress on AP228 had paused. The IAI was providing the opportunity for greater industry involvement and critique. Resource was a problem, with CSTB looking for more participation from other countries. PP acknowledged receipt of a critique document from Japan, which would be studied by Gerard Source and Jean-Luc Monceyron on his return. The Kobe version of the draft AP228 document was available on CSTB web site.
JW reported that significant modification to the architecture of the BCCM as issued at the Kobe meeting was being undertaken. There would be a focus on a minimum kernel model with use of resources, and plug in points for business area models. It would retain, however, the characteristics of a project and product model with key concepts such as actors, activities and results. A new version would be available in January 1997 and a workshop would be planned to coincide with its release. JW will liaise closely in the next months with other BC AP leaders in determining fit of Part 106 with other APs. A prototype implementation of the BCCM was being developed by Building Research Establishment (BRE) in the UK funded project which is providing support to JW for development of the BCCM.
KW presented some of the work he had undertaken in ISO TC59 related to a taxonomy for building classification. He had followed the evolution of the BCCM and felt that a taxonomy such as he presented would contribute to the sub-structuring of the BCCM. Jeff Wix expressed the view that there were a number of national and international classification systems and that the BCCM needed to be able to reference and accommodate any of them. It was agreed that the TC59 team and the STEP BCCM team would collaborate closely.
Following the pre-main STEP meeting of WG10 (STEP Architecture) on the Saturday at which (inter alia) I-ARMs and the role of bodies external to STEP was discussed and the follow-on Monday evening meeting to finalise the text of the WG10 comments and recommendations, the Building Construction sub-group met to discuss its position with respect to AP development in its domain. The Monday WG10 meeting was felt by representatives of the BC group who attended to have had unfortunate and hopefully unintended tones of criticism towards external bodies working in a STEP mode. The statement in the Appendix below was intended to clarify the BC position and was agreed unanimously. [The Friday SC4 meeting approved of the inclusion of EXPRESS ARMs as informative annexes in APs, and endorsed their implementation as an important validation of the industry requirement.]
Bernd presented an update on progress on the design and implementation of the Swedish Roads Project. Considerable progress had been made over the last 2 years. Robert Los issued a notification concerning the Dutch CROW Protocol for Civil Works. Activity had been underway for some time and an external Application Protocol for Uniform Road and Railway Data was available as a working draft. Wolfgang Haas raised the potential of German interest in the roads area. It was proposed that the parties should discuss and that a fuller discussion might be planned for Chester STEP meeting.
AA presented some of the work he was presently working on for his research at Stamford. Whilst he was not in a position to contribute on a regular basis into STEP developments, he was very happy for there to be some ongoing communications and welcomed knowing more about what individual countries were doing. Resulting from AA presentation there were suggestions that exchanges between Stamford/CIFE and elsewhere might be profitable.
Kent gave a brief overview of US /NIST activities. He referred to the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) and their involvement in AP230. Abraham Rokach was present again at this STEP meeting and the AISC Task Force was being chaired by Joe Bohinsky. NIST funded several research areas. Examples were the SEED Project at Carnegie Mellon University (Steve Fenves, Jim Garret et al), in which they were examining the interface between early design and the domain of the CIMsteel LPM, and the work of Peter Chang at the University of Maryland who were looking at steelwork constructability issues.
Dick Wittenoom discussed the work on what is now termed "General Case" Parametrics which is now part of WG12/Parametrics. To date, Parametrics had been interpreted mainly as parametric geometry, but there were many problems in the construction industry which were parametric in nature but involved more complex though prescriptive relationships. The new group was intended to pick up these requirements. A paper prepared for Toronto by a group including DW, Wolfgang Haas and Robin Dogemuller had looked at needs and capabilities in B&C as justification for this work. When this was presented in Toronto to PPC and WG10, examples of other industries needs were suggested. The Parametrics work would focus partly on extending the existing IRs to handle parametrics, and partly on a new framework for GCP (ISO 14959). It was likely that the ESPRIT FunSTEP project (see below) would work closely with the GCP initiatives.
DW reported that an Internet workshop to explore requirements of AEC applications for design information would be conducted in February 1997. This was a development of the AEC Libraries stream that had been pursued by Australia for some time as an activity in B&C. Successful implementation of GCP would allow design intent and previous project solutions to be encapsulated in libraries. Support for GCP and AEC libraries activities was confirmed by the group.
VB presented an overview of progress made by IAI (including details of the imminent release 1 of the IFCs) and the envisaged activities over the next year which will contribute to a release 1.5 in Spring and 2.0 towards the end of the year. Much hard work had been put in, and it was gratifying to see the collaboration between chapters being firmly established. There were also good prospects for collaborations with other initiatives and projects, for instance the European CIMsteel project which was driving the AP230 development in STEP. Also significant chunks of Wolfgang Haas AP225 had been borrowed. It was pleasing to see wide buy in from a whole range of industry organisations including clients, designers, contractors, suppliers, the major CAD vendors, and many specialist developers. On the other hand the task was large and required consistent support. All in all the first year had gone well and first implemented results would be shown at the Frankfurt ACS show. These will show to industry the potential of what can be achieved, although the first release will inevitably support only a limited range of business usage scenarios. The IAI had recently forwarded a letter requesting formal liaison with STEP.
Graham Storer presented under the title STEP into Construction at the STEP industry workshop organised by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC.CNRC). There were other presentations from the areas of defence, automotive, aerospace and software (STEP) tools. Patrice Poyet of BC presented on the past and current work of CSTB in the tools area.
There are several new European Union projects. Brief details of these are presented.
CONCUR will draw on advanced technology and commercial software systems which are already evolving in order to design, demonstrate and deploy integrated systems in the 3 industrial companies. The life-cycle aspects covered include inception, design, specification, cost engineering and the project management process stretching from client briefing to tendering. The objective is to deliver integrated working environments for Management Contractors which will be used during the 4th year of the project. The first year is specification of the system and assembly of the tools, years 2 and 3 for development and testing and year 4 use. The project will be based on, and contribute to standards development, primarily towards ISO STEP and the evolving Industry Alliance for Interoperability (IAI).
Partners: SKANSKA S Industry, KTH S Research, IVO Int. Fi Industry, VTT Fi Research, Taylor Woodrow UK Industry, TNO NI Research, STABU NI Association
The VEGA project aims to integrate business and technical processes. It targets the Large Scale Engineering (LSE) industry (i.e. construction, process, shipbuilding and other one-of-a-kind sectors) particularly in communication and information supply. In these sectors, distributed teams carry out concurrent activities. VEGA will contribute towards solving some of the problems by developing models and tools within a Computer Integrated Construction (CIC) environment. In particular, the concept of a co-ordinated project database is retained, but it is decentralised through distribution mechanisms and workflow, facilitating information flow between computer systems. To implement CIC in virtual enterprises, distribution and workflow technologies are required for information sharing and to manage the sharing process.
Partners: CSTB F Research, Digital D IT, EPM N IT, Nemetschek D IT, TNO Nl, Taylor Woodrow UK Industry
In 1994 a group of European companies and organisations established the Global European Network (GEN) initiative in order to promote the vision of a Global Engineering Network. It is a response to European and international activities as described in the Bangemann report and the CEC action plan on "Europe's Way to the Information Society". GEN is seen as an information network opening up world-wide markets for users and suppliers of European engineering products and services. The vision fosters a working culture for large-scale collaborative engineering enabling enterprises to become "agile". The objective of the GENIAL project within the overall GEN initiative is to provide a substantial contribution to this vision by establishing a common semantic infrastructure enabling enterprises from different engineering sectors to combine internal knowledge with engineering knowledge accessed on-line and world-wide via GEN.
Partners: Led by Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems D, and covering several industry sectors. In Construction CSTB F, BIC Irl, BBRI B, Taywood UK
The ELSEWISE Project is a User Reference Project concentrating on the IT and Product Data Technology (PDT) needs of the European Large Scale Engineering (LSE) industry. ELSEWISE has a bias towards building and construction and is the pilot study phase of the ELSEWISE User Reference Project Concept. Future phases will monitor the results of the development projects, and establish a validation community in support of the implementation of new technologies. A wide range of construction partners mainly , but not exclusively, industry based.
TOCEE aims at developing a conceptual framework and support environment for concurrent engineering in building construction. It focuses on developing software prototypes of innovative techniques to coordinate product information, resources and document flow in order to achieve integrated design, construction and facility management.
Partners: Obermeyer Planen D Industry, BRE UK Research, TU Dresden D Research, DAEAppolonia I IT, General Construction Company Gr Industry, Ott SF Legal, Projekti-insinoorit Oy SF Industry, Sofistik Gr IT, VTT SF Research
FunSTEP objectives include Product Data models and CustomersAE Project Data models which will allow the common exchange of product and orders graphic and non-graphic information between furniture manufacturer and customer. The Product Model will support the product description, with parameters, design rules, and so on, while the Project Model will support the description of relationships between products in a decoration project, and the implied influences in the product structure i.e. instantiation of the product design.
Partners: UNINOVA (Portugal), TCP-Software House and Nobili (furniture industry D) AIDIMA-Industrial Association, ACA-Software House and ROS1(furniture industry Spain)
The Building Construction sub-group (BC group) adopts the following position with respect to AP development:
- The industry requirements for information exchange and sharing must be expressed in a thorough manner and be endorsed as widely as possible by industry practitioners. Within the STEP methodology this is best done by developing high quality fully attributed ARMs.
Agreed by Building Construction sub group
8th October 1996, Toronto
Minutes Graham Storer (& Mike Ward)
This page is maintained by M A Ward
Last updated 23 April 1997
To the STEP Home Page at Leeds