It's time to make a change
Progress and innovation in the BMS industry are limited by the disconnect between the specifying engineers, mechanical contractors, BMS contractors and facility managers. Each individually providing value, but in isolation of understanding the priorities, requirements and constraints of the other stakeholders.
Our mission is to tie together the various stakeholders in the building automation industry to create a scalable change to enable consultants, engineers and owners to form a coordinated unified approach.
… a coordinated unified approach: this is the change we desperately need!
Phase one is to coordinate the control strategies in the mechanical specification with what the contractors are delivering. How are we going to do this?
I am currently delivering full day control strategy optimisation training courses with the BMS companies in Australia. Within a year, the majority of BMS engineers will be delivering the same or at least similar control strategies on new construction, end-of-life upgrades and energy efficiency projects.
This is going to be awesome, but, to maximise the effectiveness of this change we need the consultants to specify the same control strategies.
This is where it gets exciting. In business, we all guard our IP (intellectual property), and for good reason, we want to differentiate from our competitors and prove value to our clients.
Well, it’s 2019 and it’s time for change.
I am making the ‘Lifecycle Controls Library of Control Strategies’ available to the mechanical consultants to incorporate into their specifications.
Imagine this, it’s much bigger that you first realise.
Currently the issue is that BMS companies cannot standardise on their design and software because every project has different specified control strategies. Sometimes, even within the same mechanical consultancy different engineers are specifying slightly different control strategies.
What difference would it make if we had standardised control strategies?
Lets assume that the control strategies in the specification are the same that the BMS companies have built templates for. The consultant will have significantly reduced time reviewing the BMS Functional Description, because it says what the specification says.
Because less customisation is required, more engineering support can be leveraged from offshore engineering facilities. This reduces time pressure on local engineers who can now focus their time on meeting that impossible handover date that has been compressing over the past six months.
There will be less rework in the weeks approaching handover as some of these funky control strategies need tweaking.
Less distraction and rework will be introduced from the builders Independent Commissioning Agent, the clients Independent Commissioning Agent, the Facility Manager and the primary design consultant as changes are requested during the design phase or worse during witnessing. We need to limit personal opinions and having the right design first helps.
Witnessing will be less stressful because what was specified was delivered, rather than the usual compromising at the last minute.
The bottom line is, when we have power on, we need all hands on deck focusing on commissioning, not still fart arsing around with software, database, graphics, alarms and trends etc.
Who cares about making the BMS companies’ life easier? I am the consultant, it doesn’t affect me if it takes them an extra 100 hours to build custom control strategies.
But, this collaboration between the consultants and the BMS contractors isn’t about making the BMS contractors’ life easier. It’s about making us all more efficient so that we have more time to focus on the stuff that really makes a difference.
BMS training is underway, mechanical consultants please reach out to discuss the best way forward to copy the new standardised control strategies into your specifications.
See more on the HOME page.