Articles

Sustainability Expectations

FindArticles - As sustainable's profile rises, so do expectations Engineered Systems, Nov, 2004, by Howard McKew <PDF Version>

This is a must read for our consulting friends.This article discusses the importance of long term vision in designing sustainable buildings. It ponders the question whether designers can be held liable if their designs do not meet expectations, especially if LEED™ certification is brought into the equation.
 

CMMS and EAM

Here's an interesting article I was given regarding Computer Maintenance Management Software and Enterprise Asset Management Systems: Enterprise Asset Management.pdf

Comprehensive Building Automation Design

Comprehensive building automation system (BAS) design refers to the process of compiling request for proposal documentation or specification documentation through independent research based on overall design intent and end-user requirements, and evaluating submissions against the specified criteria (i.e. requirements). The alternatives to this include obtaining a pre-written BAS specification from a manufacturer or dealer; Creating a custom specification using a manufacturers online generation tool; Cutting and pasting from old specifications, or simply requesting proposals without any formal framework, all of which are so-called free. There are several issues with these alternative forms of procurement that actually add cost to a project.

Manufacturer Provided Specification
A manufacturers primary motive is to sell its products. Why would any manufacturer write a specification that benefits its competition, or even allows them a chance of winning a project? Further to this, writing a custom tailored specification, in fact a design document, takes a tremendous amount of time and effort. Anyone investing in something wants some sort of return on their investment Business 101. Nobody will provide such a document at no cost, unless of course they were guaranteed to be awarded the project, in which case the costs are likely to be built into the project. Therefore, the free specification received is generic in terms of scope (i.e. not specific to the project in question) and proprietary in terms of what is specified (not welcoming of competition).

When one of these specifications hits the street it forces other vendors to propose their products regardless of whether or not they meet the specification. After all, why would anyone turn away from a potential opportunity? As a result, the bids received are based on each bidders interpretation or perception of what is required. Even if each bidder interviews the facility manager, or consulting engineer in the case of a new construction project, the probability that proposals will be comparable is next to none. As a result, there is no means of comparing the bids and thus the process becomes a high stakes crap shoot. It is important to note that the problem here is not the bidder, rather the framework on which each party is basing their proposal.

An online specification generation tool provides an illusion that one is preparing their own custom specification. However, the specifications that are generated are not dynamic, and thus not tailored for a specific project. The verbiage is pre-determined. Static paragraphs are added as items are selected on a form. Essentially, this is the same sort of specification discussed earlier, but you chose what to include.
Some have argued that these specifications and online tools are based on ASHRAE Guideline 13-2000 and thus are completely generic. The ASHRAE guideline is meant to help navigate specification writers towards a complete specification. It is not a specification in itself. The writer can follow the format and include the headings suggested, but the core of the specification is still up to the writer.

Furthermore, those specifications that appear to be written for a particular facility because of the inclusion of drawings representing specific systems, they must be scrutinized for their content beyond system schematics in other words, the meat and potatoes.

The risks with choosing this alternative (manufacturer supplied or online) are threefold:

1) The BAS may be a bare bones system that does not meet even the most fundamental needs of the facility and its occupants;
2) The BAS partially meets the needs of the facility;
3) The BAS purchased does more than what is needed.

The first two are situations where additional investment is required to bring the system up to par. The downside being that the total (initial and future) costs of the upgrade are far greater than total costs of doing it right the first time: Energy waste, operational inefficiencies, and tenant discomfort, are some of the obvious consequences, not to mention the added fixed overhead costs of starting a new project. Taking into consideration the time value of money makes these even more critical. There are also those non-quantifiable costs associated with having to explain to management why their investment is not returning what was promised and the need to justify the additional expenditures. The third situation describes investment beyond what was needed, resulting in returns far less than attainable.

The possibility of purchasing a BAS that meets the needs of the facility was not included because it is unlikely that this would occur without any due process.

Essentially, these specifications are a marketing tool for the manufacturer. They are not based on any specific requirements because they are not written for a specific project. Essentially, it is the manufacturers, not the owners or managers needs that are satisfied by such a specification.

Cutting and Pasting from Previous Specifications
If this is a manufacturers specification from which paragraphs are cut and pasted into another specification, then the caveats are well documented above. Similarly, even if the previous specification was well written for an earlier project the situation is quite the same. Unless the requirements for both projects are identical it is not possible to have a design specific to the current requirements. Additionally, technology evolves quite rapidly, and as a result older designs are just that they are old and that much closer to obsolescence. Advances in building automation technology also facilitate meeting a variety of goals including cost control, increased comfort, improved tenant experience, building and enterprise systems integration, LEED certification, and many others. It is therefore prudent that short cuts are avoided and for due process to be undertaken for such an endeavor.

Oral RFP
This is simply a request for proposal without any formal written documentation. Unlike each of the aforementioned alternatives, this one lacks any guidance whatsoever. There are additional risks here that could be even more costly. The owner may end up purchasing a proprietary system, or much worse an out-dated system. Yes, these are still out there. The only protection is a well written RFP.

Design Process
Objectives provide a foundation for a building automation design. These objectives need to be developed in cooperation with all stakeholders in order to ensure maximum return on investment. For example, if the tenant experience can be enhanced it may provide a means of attracting and retaining high profile tenants, as well as increase lease revenues. Further to this, if management can easily access multiple building data into a single database, comparative analysis can be performed to assist in identifying cost drivers and thus areas requiring improvement.

In the retrofit project case, the designer and owner need to conduct interviews, focus group sessions, or meetings in order to determine requirements as well as identify stakeholder concerns. It is important to obtain buy-in prior to implementation to avoid any delays. For a small, single tenant facility this may be a couple of meetings, whereas large multi-function facilities or even multi-site facilities may require several focus group sessions to ascertain what is needed.

For retrofit projects, assumptions must not be made with respect to existing equipment. The designer must commission an examination of the existing system and clearly convey what is to be reused, discarded, verified, repaired, etc Building staff are an excellent resource for information regarding the existing system. What must be avoided is a proposal that reuses existing defective devices, and then having to pay extra to replace them shortly down the road.

In the case of a new project, the initial design intent, engineering documents, and other sources of relevant data need to be consulted. It is also critical that the designer meet with the owner, owners representative, consulting engineers, and other key project design personnel to assure a clear understanding of the project requirements. Further to this, the designer must collaborate with those involved with other systems which will affect the BAS component of the project. This may include IT personnel, fire alarm and security system designers, database engineers, and others. Of course, the BAS designer must be brought on board early enough in the project to allow for all this to occur.

Certainly a cost benefit analysis is needed to ensure that there is justification for each objective. Often, simple payback calculations are enough to accomplish this. In other cases, management may require a more detailed risk return analysis which will involve corporate finance personnel Net present value, payback accounting for time value of money, and internal rate of return are better methods than simple payback. In any case, it is important that research includes the financial implications (costs, savings, additional revenue, etc) of each objective and not only the technical portion of the project. The designer must consult with the owner to determine what is needed to obtain financing for the project. Time, effort, and money could be wasted if adequate financing isnt available.

Once all the research is complete, the design documentation must be written to clearly communicate the project objectives in terms of requirements to all potential vendors. The design documents must be detailed while avoiding anything that unnecessarily filters out bidders. In other words, steer clear of technical specifications that do not impact the project (i.e. must have a 12 bit A/D converter). Unless of course the specific item included is an absolute must to meet any single objective. It is important that project requirements be conspicuous, and anything that is not a requirement be left out of the document. Any optional items or questions must be in a separate section labeled as such to avoid confusion.

The specification must contain current products and technologies, yet not anything unproven. Technology is evolving at a torrid pace and there are a lot of products that can add value to any projects. Traditionally the BAS manufacturers were the sole source for related components. Today, there are many companies offering sensors, actuators, network components, controllers, and other BAS devices that can make the designed solution that much better. All it takes is a little bit of research.

Finally, the design must provide a means of evaluating the RFP responses against each other, beyond the final price. Price is something but not everything! Marketing material from each vendor clearly proves that there are differences between companies, both from a capabilities and products standpoint. The fatal assumption that everyone can meet the specification in its entirety must not be made. Essentially, the evaluation mechanism needs to tell you what each vendor can and cannot do, thus allowing you to make an informed decision based on what weightings you assign to each requirement and how well objectives are met. Without such a measure how is it that you know exactly what you are buying compared to what you are turning away?

Unlike retrofit projects where submissions are sent to the owner and then evaluated by both the owner and the consultant, in most if not all new construction projects BAS bidders submit a price to the mechanical contractor as per plans and spec without any supporting documentation, nor an opportunity for the owner or consultant to evaluate each vendor. It is unreasonable to ask for the mechanical contractor to evaluate submissions, after all that is not their specialty. The work around for owners and consultants in this case is an RFI stage to pre-qualify vendors based on the actual project requirements. The RFI stage would require each vendor to provide responses and submissions that provide a basis for comparison. This would mitigate any post construction surprises. Certainly, the RFP must incorporate the RFI to assure that the requirements carry forward.

The Designer
If you do not have internal expertise within your organization, it is important to obtain unbiased expertise from a third party. It is obvious that BAS manufacturers are experts in their field, but they also have a mandate. When undertaking such a project it is important to select a company whose core business is building automation consulting.

Hiring a small boutique firm that specializes in building automation means that you are dealing with people who live, eat, drink, and breathe building automation systems. Typically, large multi-disciplinary firms offer BAS consulting as an add-on service, but do not necessarily specialize in this area. Some offer these services by sub-consulting to the boutique firms. However, there are some multi-disciplinary firms that do have a BAS specialty department.

Finally, you should meet the individual(s) that will be involved on your project to ensure that you have confidence in their abilities and you are comfortable in dealing with them. If you dont strike the right chord immediately, chances are that you wont get along later on when it really counts.

Final Thought
Prior to any such endeavor, think about what you would do if you were in a situation where you had to make a large purchase for yourself. For example, when you are in the market for a new home, how do you decide what to buy? It obviously makes no sense to buy a house that doesnt meet your needs. You will also not let the sellers agent push you in a specific direction, nor will you buy the first home you see. You pour over house listings, tour many houses, consult those affected by the decision and your real-estate agent, and finally make a decision based on all of your findings. The same holds true for a building automation system purchase. So, why then do so many decide on the free spec?

 

Article Archive

• None