Today, project efficiency is the main driver of the profitability of a construction company. One of the biggest changes over the recent years has been the delineation of traditional coordination techniques and BIM-based workflows. When evaluating costs, it’s important to look beyond initial expenses and consider long-term savings. Many project teams currently use fabrication drawing services combined with BIM coordination to facilitate the elimination of rework, accuracy improvement, and communication across disciplines.
Understanding Traditional Coordination
Traditional coordination is still strongly dependent on 2D drawings, manual overlays, and communication via emails or meetings. Architects, structural engineers, and MEP consultants usually work independently, and the conflicts are hardly ever found until after the drawings are combined or, in many cases, during construction.
Cost Challenges in Traditional Methods
Traditional coordination may initially appear as the less expensive design option; however, it leads to hidden expenses, which include:
- Multiple design changes
- On-site conflicts among different trades
- Materials wastage through misinterpretation
- Delays due to change orders
- More labor hours for adjustments
Such unexpected costs keep escalating further over time. Even minor clashes, when detected late, can lead to significant financial and scheduling setbacks.
How BIM Coordination Changes the Equation
BIM allows the whole project team to stay in the loop by working in a shared digital environment. The coordination of multidisciplinary models provides the team with the opportunity to identify clashes and other issues early enough before the actual construction.
The cost variances between prevention and correction are obvious if one takes into account the former. The difference in cost between the detection of a conflict in modeling and the correction of the same conflict onsite is very high. Besides that, BIM coordination through better visualization facilitates clients and contractors to have a better understanding of the project before its execution.
In the middle phases of the project planning, fabrication drawing services are extremely important in BIM workflows. These highly detailed model-based drawings are a great way of ensuring that the components get manufactured correctly and that the installation is without any ambiguities. If the fabrication-level accuracy is combined with coordination, the potential problems of misfits, redesign, and last-minute changes are greatly reduced.
Direct vs Indirect Cost Impact
A proper comparison between BIM and traditional coordination should include both direct and indirect costs.
1. Direct Costs
Traditional coordination:
- Lower initial drafting costs
- Minimal software investment
- Limited training expenses
BIM coordination:
- Investment in software and skilled professionals
- Higher upfront modeling cost
- Structured coordination meetings
2. Indirect Costs
Traditional coordination:
- Higher risk of construction delays
- Increased RFIs and change orders
- Greater risk of disputes between trades
BIM coordination:
- Reduced site errors
- Improved project scheduling
- Better quantity take-offs and cost estimation
Throughout the entire duration of the project, BIM coordination usually leads to significant cost savings due to fewer disruptions and higher accuracy of planning.
Efficiency, Time, and Value
There is a close relationship between time and cost. BIM coordination helps to increase the efficiency of workflow by:
- Automating clash detection
- Enhancing communication through 3D visualization
- Providing accurate material quantities
- Supporting prefabrication and modular construction
Traditional coordination largely depends on manual checking and interpretation. This not only results in increased work but also makes room for human errors.
A Long-Term View on Coordination Investment
When one considers how BIM coordination is different from traditional methods, it is rather interesting to note that, while traditional methods may be thought to be cost-effective, they subject future phases to a greater amount of risk, whereas BIM subjects them to the current phase.
As project teams become more engaged with digital workflows, the integration of coordination with fabrication drawing services will lead to improved constructability and project execution. From our viewpoint at Designs Mosaic, projects using best practices for coordination within BIM software can help improve collaboration and cost control over time.
Ultimately, in a competitive construction world, the true comparison of the actual cost is not one centered on fees related to design; the actual question is one of minimizing uncertainty, reducing rework, and building with clarity from the very beginning.