Post by raihan110 on May 19, 2024 3:41:29 GMT -6
It is a coding structure originally designed to ensure that elements in construction documents appear once and only once and are always in the same location. For contractors bidding on jobs which is my main role the coding structure becomes a logical and reasonable way to organize costs because for every element in there has to be a cost. Roughly around various industries. Be organized and follow a more or less progressive approach Section is General conditions are existing conditions are concrete etc. realized that ordering by trade alone provided a limited perspective and a second way of organizing projects was therefore proposed.
Enable stakeholders to sequence project work not by industry but by component. This model has been tested and proven not only in court but also in practice. Fast forward to 2000 and the offshore Maldives Email List oil and gas industry liked the 1999 and 2012 concepts but found that the coding structure was limited and unable to address some of the unique aspects of offshore oil and gas. The Norwegian government created this 3D model by resource by component and by time. This same one has been around in recent years and has stood the test of time. Fast forward to 2008 and was born out of extensive research into the expectations of various stakeholders, driven by the widespread use of Building Information.
Modeling and Electronic Product Information Collaboration. Provides several different tables or methods for sequencing the work deliverables required for any construction project. So where does the disagreement between Josh and me lie? The key issue is the claim that software is different enough that standardization cannot be created. I disagree. My position is that software creation can be standardized only if the software creation is unique enough to require customization. So the question is considering the construction industry as a delivery system. I can trust the office to provide me with random assignments during my free time.
Enable stakeholders to sequence project work not by industry but by component. This model has been tested and proven not only in court but also in practice. Fast forward to 2000 and the offshore Maldives Email List oil and gas industry liked the 1999 and 2012 concepts but found that the coding structure was limited and unable to address some of the unique aspects of offshore oil and gas. The Norwegian government created this 3D model by resource by component and by time. This same one has been around in recent years and has stood the test of time. Fast forward to 2008 and was born out of extensive research into the expectations of various stakeholders, driven by the widespread use of Building Information.
Modeling and Electronic Product Information Collaboration. Provides several different tables or methods for sequencing the work deliverables required for any construction project. So where does the disagreement between Josh and me lie? The key issue is the claim that software is different enough that standardization cannot be created. I disagree. My position is that software creation can be standardized only if the software creation is unique enough to require customization. So the question is considering the construction industry as a delivery system. I can trust the office to provide me with random assignments during my free time.