2019Case11SheehanandCollinsConstruction

44 L EAN C ONSTRUCTION I RELAND A NNUAL B OOK OF C ASES 2019 beginning of the design process, which led to improved design through enhanced coordination. Adopting the approach of ‘the answer is in the room’, all parties played their part in developing a workable design at the early stages of the project. There was better coordination of design, leading to improved construction (safety, time, budget), reduced re- work, and less waste. Buildability and coordination challenges were dealt with via optioneering on exploring budgets, current technologies, materials and systems, service routes, and so on. All of this led to safer construction, improved productivity, and less waste. It helped establish a more collaborative environment for the project with less confrontation and a greater willingness to address the issues via collective effort. This helped foster the team environment where there was genuine interest and understanding of each other’s work and scope. The impact of each on the other became clearer with improved effort to make it all work. It enabled key trade partners to engage with their respective supply chains earlier and in focusing on procurement, material, and equipment options, thus resulting in better value for the project. Structured M&E Design Coordination Meetings While detailed M&E services coordination meetings are a standard process on construction projects, S&C and the team identified this as an area that required particular attention. Given the aforementioned challenges presented by the building structure (floor-to-floor height, block and core arrangement), the sizing and routing of M&E services throughout the floors and in the main plant rooms located in the basement required significant effort from all parties to make the M&E systems work. The architects and structural engineers used BIM for the building design, and this model was then shared with the M&E consultants and contractors for their systems to be inputted. This allowed sizing and routing of key services to be determined accurately, as well as locating key equipment in limited spaces. Front-end design and construction planning meetings were held by the project team where M&E services designs were worked through the project BIM model, with issues and clash detection worked through to avoid issues on site during the build. When the M&E contractors commenced on site, weekly team meetings were held on site to maintain the collective effort though design development and to also facilitate Gemba Walks to review and address any design, spatial, or buildability issues that presented. Whilst not unique in having these meetings on site, the starting of the process as early as possible, and continuing on throughout the project, created and fostered the integrated approach with shared responsibility for addressing any issues and finding workable solutions promptly. Implementation of Last Planner System® (LPS) for Schedule Management S&C engaged a Lean Construct ion Ireland (LCi ) commended consultant for introductory training on Lean Construction and LPS with the key trade partners on site. This was aimed at firstly giving background to Lean Construction to help the project team get an understanding of Lean thinking and processes, and secondly to put in place a structure and process to assist in the management of schedule and project delivery. Figure 1. Project Team Trained on Lean Construction and LPS The focus on LPS came from a combination of research on its implementation, traction within the local sector on its use and reported success, and a clear understanding by S&C that traditional Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling methods are limited due to the following: • Inadequate of input or buy-in by trade supervisors. • Lack of understanding of the project plan as presented on Gantt charts, etc. • Absence of clear tracking of progress on day-to-day or week-to-week as work is detached from the CPM schedule. S&C understood and implemented the following five elements of LPS: 1. Master scheduling – setting milestones and identification of long lead items (what should be done). 2. Pull Planning – specifies work handoffs and identifies conflicts that will impact work (what can be done). 3. Make Work Ready Planning – utilising lookahead planning to confirm work is ready for installation (what will be done). 4. Weekly Work Plan (WWP) – team makes commitments to perform defined work in a specific manner (what the team will do ). 5. Learning – measuring percent plan complete (PPC) and conducting root cause analysis of failure, and conducting lessons learned for future improvements. Figure 2. Pull Plan for Mock-Up Suite With considerable effort over the course of the project, the team realised the benefit of LPS with the process providing