November 2006
  
AutomatedBuildings.com

Babel Buster Network Gateways: Big Features. Small Price.
Control Solutions, Inc. - Minnesota

(Click Message to Learn More)


The Roadblocks and How to Overcome
Benefits need to be made clear to the financial community and a big change needs to occur across the whole world construction community, for and on behalf of the Clients.
The necessary way for energy efficiency is through control.

Paul Mason 
Designer
i2design international

BuilConn Europe 3-5th October 2006 CONNECTIVITY WEEK included an IBX forum where the final session was
“The Roadblocks and How to Overcome”

The concept of intelligent buildings, (maybe now we can term them “i.p.-buildings”? or 3G intelligent buildings), has been around for many years.

However the application of intelligence in buildings has yet to deliver its true potential. It is still the case that the Funders of projects and the Developers of projects still do not see the benefit of i.p.-buildings, they have hardly heard of them!

Articles
Interviews
Releases
New Products
Reviews
Forums
Sponsors
Archives
Past Issues
AutomatedBuildings.com

Securing Buildings News

This roadblock session of the IBX forum, CONNECTIVITY WEEK, looked at some effective implementations of intelligent building solutions and the session discussed the strategy to overcome the roadblocks. The session looked at some technologies required to deliver truly integrated ICT / BAS intelligent building solutions.

A general case study on roadblocks was the brief given to Paul D.J. Mason who presented some projects in technical terms and then reviewed the benefit/value propositions for each of the main stakeholders of those projects.

Paul D.J. Mason first attempt at an I.P.-building was BA Waterside, this building was opened in 1998. The building automation and ICT design of this project was first considered in 1993, DEC and their solution was considered along with the market at that time. The I.P. building automation solution that was considered was with the Company CDC and using PC motherboards in the risers. This i.p.-building attempt failed on the principle that the employer’s top motivation was no lock-in to any particular service provider, general inter-changeability / inter-operability was the goal, as well as cost benefit of course.

Since and including BA Waterside there have been 10 years of finished buildings by Paul D.J. Mason and his staff, the value in fees has been in the order $22.8m and with a project value in the order of $1.52b total which was used to build out some 456,000m2 area overall. The proportion of building automation systems executed by Paul and staff over the last 10 years can be divided into proprietary systems and open systems and this splits as 61% proprietary to 39% open systems.

Pie Chart 1The analysis by building area (179,000m2 open systems over the 456,000m2 total) installed last 10 years by Paul and Staff reveals 4 beneficiaries:

1.

contractor cost benefit

15%

2.

employer cost benefit

6%

3.

funder/developer benefit

0%

4.

end-user no-lock-in / flexibility benefit

18%

5.

no intelligent building benefits (simple conventional) proprietary systems

61%.

The data, top ten buildings listed by way of example of the buildings in the sample:

BA Waterside

1998

50,000m2

opened by the Prince of Wales July 1998, End user, British Airways HQ

Ibex House

1999

20,000m2

Refurbish in-situ floor by floor, various

18 Bevis Marks

2000

3,500m2

End user, Re-insurance Co. HQ

48 Warwick St

2001

3,500m2

Speculative Development, The Crown Estate

Lunar House

2002

40,000m2

End user, Immigration Dept. HQ

21 Tudor St

2003

9,000m2

Pre-let, Int’l Lawyers Jones Day UK HQ

Clive House

2004

10,000m2

End user, Justice Department HQ

2 Marsham Street

2005

75,000m2

Proprietary Systems, Interior Department HQ

16 N.Burlington Pl.

2006

4,000m2

opened by the Prince of Wales June 2006, End user, The Crown Estate HQ

SuperYachts

2008

20,000m2

Many designs and global locations, First: West India Dock, London

Pie Chart 2Proprietary Systems 61% by building area

    Open Systems Building Automation by building area and split into
    Public and Private Sectors and hew or refurbishment
    Private New Build 18%
    Private Refurbishment 10%
    Public New Build 0%
    Public Refurbishment 11%

The type of systems installed, showing the development from no co-existence to BAS convergence and IP backbones and incorporation of fire alarm systems

BA Waterside

1998

BMS, Lighting

and Access Control all LonWorks and 1.2Mbs LON backbones in parallel, no in-op or co-ex

Ibex House

1999

BMS only

multi-product, shell and core with LON backbone arranged for floor by floor refurbishment

18 Bevis Marks

2000

BMS, Lighting

and Access Control all LonWorks and inter-operation with BMS and Lighting, Co-ex with Access Cntrl

48 Warwick St

2001

BMS, Lighting

and Access integrated also with DPT, Lift controls, WEB service

Lunar House

2002

BMS, Lighting

fibre optic backbone arranged for in-op but lighting opted to run standalone

21 Tudor St

2003

BMS, Lighting

shell and core. Tenant opted for Trend in their fit out on BMS connecting into hubs, 3 per floor & 5 floors

Clive House

2004

BMS, Lighting

with Fire / PIR / Temp interoperating (Zytron)

2 Marsham Street

2005

Proprietary BAS

BUT very modern ICT, highly converged ICT

16 N.Burlington Pl.

2006

BMS, Lighting

and Access with Fire / PIR / Temp integrated also with metering, stair vent, DPT, Bomb alert, Lift controls, WEB

SuperYachts

2008

BMS, Lighting

IP to controllers, one per room, cross connects to Fire on LON, LonMark System inter-operability

The system strategy installed all open systems:

Tier with commonality of the systems and interoperation

web services and the network boxes, I.P., Ethernet
the 2nd layer,
logical

cable infra-structure, standards compliant throughout
the 2nd layer,
physical

standardised products c/w with s/w ready for customisation
the 1st layer, commonality and interoperability

The proprietary system installation strategy, any management network or inter-operation was installed post-contract.

tier proprietary with interoperation

List of benefits, arranged appropriate to the class of beneficiaries:

Owner / End,

 user Freedom of choice, no extra cost, better value, future proof

Investor,

 None established or proven

Developer,

 None established or proven

Cost Consultant,

 Capital Cost is same or lower, running cost is lower

Manufacturer,

 Standards best for manufacturer, OEM commodity market

Manufacturer & Contractor,

 None established or proven

Designer,

 Simple modular, scalable, standards based, best for Clients

Contractor,

 None established or proven

Facilities Manager,

 Freedom of choice, running cost is lower, future proof

Government,

 Building Regulations require working controls / documented

CatNet Systems List of roadblocks with respect to the class of beneficiaries:

Owner / End,

Investors /Developers /Cost Consultant /Manu.&Contract. / Designer /Contractor will not “champion” ip-buildings for Owners

Investor,

Never “heard” of ip-buildings

Developer,

Never “heard” of ip-buildings except do they cost more?

Cost Consultant,

Not their responsibility, understand but not their risk to take

Manufacturer,

Will prefer to provide solutions that require higher lock-in cost

Manufacturer & Contractor,

No preferential lock in to up to 10% p.a. service deal and no knowledge about maintaining other companies products

Designer,

Will not learn, do not want to learn, not their problem ? (Yet) Except for a few Designers who get it ( but need interoperability)

Contractor,

Most do not care/understand / not their problem, they prefer low technology, Except for a very very few Contractors who get it

Facilities Manager,

Not powerful at the CapEx stage, too expensive to fix at OpEx

Government,

Education in all matters science / technology / construction

 

  • If a solution were to provide lower life cycle costs with increased functionality and with no extra expenditure on capital cost then it should be put at the disposal of the Client body.
  • The Open Systems solution provides lower life cycle costs and increased functionality but with no extra expenditure on capital cost. Open Systems bought in the right way gives the full opportunity for the best price to be realised by the Client.
  • Whereas concept and design maybe understood by specialist engineers it needs to be the case that a much wider audience needs to know how to buy Open Systems and the manufacturers need to make Open Systems easily available. A formula approach would be appropriate, the approach required needs to be modular, scalable and easy to use such that the full opportunity for the best price may be realised by the Client.
  • A formula approach that aims to translate across the whole construction industry from property professionals and Clients / developers to contractors and professional teams. The approach also needs to work for the existing stock of buildings and this includes the maintainers and the facilities managers.
  • The efficient use of buildings, space and business systems to support staff in the effective operating of the business is a reasonable position to adopt in the design of buildings. (Acknowledgement: BCO Occasional Paper September 1992 “The Intelligent Building in Europe” by DEGW (London) and Technibank (Milan).)
  • Building Automation Systems (B.A.S.) have their part to play in the efficient sustainable use of buildings. The intelligent use of Building Automation can enhance the effective operating of the business; this must be good for the business and the suppliers.
  • The drivers, service and quality stems from:

 flexibility of choice
 optimum price / performance (openness cost no more than standalone systems)
 variety of vendors
 customised future-safe buildings (opportunity for improved quality of service through better and connected information)
 lower ownership costs through the life of the building and IT style allows intra-net ready
 interoperability standardisation

  • The inhibitors

 interoperability standardisation, procurement, politics, risk, leadership, conservatism, benefit to the funders/ developers / property agents


The solution:

  1. disruptive change is necessary over the whole globe/planet, i.e. all BAS/ICT systems to be supplied by large ICT systems integrators, bought by the main contractor (new build) or FM departments (in-situ refurbishment), procurement change is necessary, buy all ELV from one source, cables / duct / pipes from others (buying higher technology services from low tech people is expensive and very risky (they can not make it work / do not understand).

  2. disruptive change is necessary, go to all IP backbones, 4th utility strategy, all package plant to be inter-operable, inter-operability is the key requirement, always was always will be – on common media and transport systems e.g. Cat 6, Ethernet, TCP/IP, suggest oBiX2 at the higher end of inter-operability.

  3. funding agencies, developers and property agents all need to be convinced of that there is class A*star building and that these are i.p.- buildings and that the current crop of so-called class A developments are in fact less valuable to the End-users. i.p.- buildings have the 4th utility plumbed in and are converged as a matter of normality and that by design they cost no more than last year’s “Class A” building but provide great adaptability to End-users.

The SuperYacht project, http://www.aquiva.co.uk is one such i.p.- building project, a 3rd Generation intelligent building. The first is located in West India Dock, London, this is a 5-star LUX hotel making great use of the quayside site available.

I.P. down to room automation controller, to TV and AV, to high-speed internet, to phones and WiFi Access points, to guest digital assistants, to RFID and EPOS, and to each plant room as arranged as an I.P. node. Inter-operability uses the LonMark System profiles, Lighting sub-net work is DMX for the all LED low energy system.

Built on a global manufacturing strategy for best cost and quality materials and performance.


PlantPROCORE About the Author
Paul D.J. Mason
“Designer”

Paul D.J. Mason, B.Eng (Hons), is a consultant for i.p.-buildings and a MEP designer, currently the designs being pursued by Paul are all innovative solutions in the marine engineering environment with floating structures, pier structures and shore-side infrastructure projects around the world.

Mr. Mason’s career encompasses Marine Engineering Royal Navy 1975-81; the Property Services Agency of the UK Department of Environment 1982-86; University as a mature student 1986-89; then MEP design and associate director at CJP 1989-97, MEP design and CEO at BWP plc 1997-2005, then 2005-06 CTO at I2S assisting the merger ESL/ITM/Massa Solutions into I2S.

Mr. Mason is now working directly with the Owners and Partners of Aquiva Developments Ltd.  Mr. Mason has been a contributing editor of AutomatedBuildings.com, he authored the LonMark virtual building headquarters cost comparison model and is honorary life vice-president of LonMark UK.

footer

The S4 Group
[Click Banner To Learn More]

[Home Page]  [The Automator]  [About]  [Subscribe ]  [Contact Us]

Events

Want Ads

Our Sponsors

Resources