Southampton Solent University
Coursework Assessment Brief
Assessment Details
| Unit Title: | BIM Frameworks |
| Unit Code: | ADP701 |
| Unit Leader: | Dr Masoud Sajjadian |
| Level: | 7 |
| Assessment Title: | BIM Portfolio |
| Assessment Number: | 1 |
| Assessment Type: | Portfolio |
| Restrictions on Time/Word Count: | NA |
| Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit: | NA |
| Individual/Group: | Group |
| Assessment Weighting: | 75% |
| Issue Date: | September 2019 |
| Hand In Date: | 13/12/2019 |
| Planned Feedback Date: | Within 4 weeks of submission |
| Mode of Submission: | Online |
| Number of copies to be submitted: | 1 |
| Anonymous Marking | This assessment is exempt from anonymous marking. |
Assessment Task
The aim of this assignment is to integrate Building Information Modelling (BIM) frameworks into a multi-story prefabricated residential building for a holistic sustainable approach. The unit will facilitate, through design work, engagement with issues of BIM using an Autodesk product, prefabrication methods in construction and sustainability.
The task is to design a residential building using a BIM program. The design should be primarily prefabricated, minimising site work and construction waste. The final product should be mass customisable and capable of becoming amendable according to the site and user preferences.
You are to produce 32 unit homes (8 one bed, 8 two bed, 8 three bed and 8 four bed), which outperform the current norm in designing prefabricated houses/flats as far as possible, spatially and technically. The challenge is to utilise BIM understanding and application to design homes in order to reduce cost, improve construction process and lower energy consumption. The resultant design/products should be sensitive, aesthetically sound and at the same time celebrate full integration of level 2 BIM in architecture and construction.
You should make every effort to explore/experiment and produce creative, high quality presentations. An emphasis is placed on making use of digital tools to communicate ideas. This should also include environmental simulations and cost estimations. You are required to use 6 A3 drawings to show your 3D visuals, floor plans, elevations and detail drawings.
Site Location:
6B Tufnell Park Rd, London N7 0DP
Dimensions are in meters.
Assessment criteria
| Criteria | A1 – A4 | B1 – B3 | C1-C3 | D1-D3 | F1-F3 |
| BIM Software Utilization | Outstanding utilization of BIM software showing full comprehension of all the concepts covered. Additional work beyond the requirements, expanding on the topics covered in class. | Effective utilization of BIM software showing comprehension of the concepts covered in a wide range of topics. Some additional work beyond the requirements. | Satisfactory utilization of BIM software showing comprehension of the main concepts in a range of topics. Some omissions or small errors in the output. | Limited success in the utilization of BIM software showing only partial comprehension of the main concepts. Omissions and/or errors in the output. | Limited or no success in the utilization of BIM software showing inadequate comprehension of the main concepts. Major omissions and/or errors throughout. |
| Design Quality, appropriation and inhabitation | Outstanding or excellent design output showing a strong understanding of the possibilities BIM provides. Utilization of a range of features, including beyond those covered in class to highlight the strong points of the design. | Highly satisfactory design output showing an understanding of the possibilities BIM provides. Utilization of a range of features to highlight the strong points of the design. | Satisfactory accuracy in the calculations, with some errors that do not interfere with the general validity of the results. Satisfactory notation and referencing to the design code. | Adequate accuracy in the calculations, but with errors that interfere with the validity of the results. Adequate notation and referencing to the design code. | Problematic or inaccurate calculations leading to false results, with few or no links to the methodology. Problematic notation and referencing to the design code. |
| Collaboration and integration with sustainability ideas | Excellent teamwork with excellent collaboration throughout. Outstanding or excellent common design output covering most of the BIM topics, with excellent links to the individual work indicating excellent utilization of BIM for collaboration. | Effective teamwork with strong collaboration and covering some of the BIM topics. Strong common design output, with strong links to the individual work indicating effective utilization of BIM for collaboration. | Satisfactory teamwork with collaboration throughout with very limited coverage of BIM topics. Satisfactory common design output, with links to the individual work indicating utilization of BIM for collaboration. | Adequate teamwork with collaboration throughout. Adequate common design output, with some links to the individual work indicating an appreciation of the BIM potential for collaboration. | Problematic teamwork with limited collaboration and uneven contributions. Problematic or no common design output, with limited or no links to the individual work indicating limited or no appreciation of the BIM potential for collaboration. |
| Presentation | Outstanding or excellent presentation of the project with full communication of ideas. | Highly satisfactory presentation of the project with clear communication of ideas. | Satisfactory presentation of the project with limited communication of ideas. | Adequate presentation of the project with very limited communication of ideas. | Inadequate presentation of the project with poor communication of ideas. |
Assessment Details
| Unit Title: | BIM Frameworks |
| Unit Code: | ADP701 |
| Unit Leader: | Dr Masoud Sajjadian |
| Level: | 7 |
| Assessment Title: | BIM Report |
| Assessment Number: | 1 |
| Assessment Type: | Report |
| Restrictions on Time/Word Count: | 2000 words |
| Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit: | There is no penalty for submitting below the word/count limit, but students should be aware that there is a risk they may not maximise their potential mark. It is essential that assignments keep within the time/word count limit stated above. Any work beyond the maximum time/word length permitted will be disregarded and not accounted for in the final grade. |
| Individual/Group: | Group |
| Assessment Weighting: | 25% |
| Issue Date: | September 2019 |
| Hand In Date: | 13/12/2019 |
| Planned Feedback Date: | Within 4 weeks of submission |
| Mode of Submission: | Online |
| Number of copies to be submitted: | 1 |
| Anonymous Marking | This assessment will be marked anonymously |
The second part of the submission is focused on data visualization in demonstrating how BIM tools assist you in decision making process from early design stage. The second part should also reflect each group’s research and investigation to find an optimal prefabricated system for construction of the homes. The report should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of design options at the early design stage to the technical stage.
Each group is required to carry out performance optimisation tasks in terms of energy usage in a BIM authoring program with the chosen construction systems and quantify the suggested improvement in the report. It is also required to include cost in the analysis and find a balance between environmental performance and economical barriers. The cost and environmental analysis are to be taken in the BIM tool and development toward an optimum solution needs to be recorded and presented in the report. Identification of potential replacement materials as well as technological and innovation aspects should also be included.
The report should give reference to the drawings and illustrations in the portfolio. Appendices can also be used for any relevant information referred to in the main body of the report. At the end of the report, each group needs to include an additional page clearly highlight each member’s contribution to the project as shown in the table below:
| Group members | Contribution to the report | Contribution to the portfolio |
| 1. | ||
| 2. | ||
| … |
Assessment criteria
| A1-A4 | B1-B3 | C1-C3 | D1-D3 | F1-F3 | |
| The project’s goals and approach. | Excellent, clear and practical strategy to achieve goals and the overall theme comprehensively responds to the BIM frameworks. | Clear and sensible strategy to achieve goals and the overall theme completely responds to the BIM frameworks. | Mostly clear and adequate strategy to deliver the aims and the overall theme mostly responds to the BIM frameworks. | Limited clarity on strategy but largely fail to achieve goals. The overall theme has limited demonstration of BIM frameworks understanding. | No clarity on aims, unfeasible and vague strategy to achieve goals. The overall theme has very limited demonstration of BIM frameworks understanding. |
| Justification of design decisions using BIM | Thorough and insightful application of relevant evidence and theory establishes a compelling rationale and programme for using BIM in design, likely to lead to innovative and original changes to practice. Research and evidence representing supporting a very convincing rationale | Critical application of theory demonstrates a sophisticated understanding for using BIM in design process and supports robust and purposeful approaches to key areas of project planning and activity. | Relevant evidence and theory is analysed and interpreted effectively, such that it is able to inform planning, implementation and evaluation in constructive ways. | The project is directly supported by the selection and accurate application of theory and published research, which demonstrates an understanding of its relevance to BIM. | The project is not directly supported by the selection and accurate application of theory and published research, which demonstrates a limited understanding of its relevance to BIM. |
| Reflection on research impact and regular, visible development of the project through tutorial sessions | The reflective process is integrated into the project such that it drives the development of ideas and informs the decision-making process in significant ways. | Decisions and choices are presented in a sustained and highly reflective analysis that considers project outcomes and the impact on planned objectives and approaches. | The discussion of benefits and implications highlights key decisions and choices. | The intended outcomes of the project are clear and explained but not in comprehensive and is largely failed to consider all aspects. | Critical analysis not always sustained, synthesis or evaluation occasionally superficial or not apparent. |
| Professional and academic standards of presentation. | The work is elegantly crafted, carefully proof-read and written to a publishable standard, being entirely accurate. The work is highly readable, benefiting from high standards of accuracy and a structure that supports the argument and assists comprehension and digestion. | Spelling, grammar and referencing is almost completely accurate and the work follows a structure and standard of presentation that positively enhances its readability. | Spelling, grammar and referencing is mostly accurate and the work is structured and organised so that meaning is conveyed clearly and in a readable fashion. | Spelling, sentence construction and referencing is generally accurate although errors of this sort and overall structure is occasionally a barrier to understanding and interpretation. | Lack of structure and organisation compounds consistently poor spelling and sentence construction. Meaning is often ambiguous and referencing deviates from expected standards of academic practice. |
Learning Outcomes
This assessment will enable students to demonstrate in full or in part the learning outcomes identified in the unit descriptors.
Late Submissions
Students are reminded that:
- If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 5 working days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved;
- If this assessment is submitted later than 5 working days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero;
- If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work (second or third attempt) then it must be submitted by the deadline date; any Refer assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.
Extenuating Circumstances
The University’s Extenuating Circumstances procedure is in place if there are genuine circumstances that may prevent a student submitting an assessment. If students are not ‘fit to study’, they can either request an extension to the submission deadline of 5 working days or they can request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity (Defer). In both instances students must submit an EC application with relevant evidence. If accepted by the EC Panel there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested. Students are reminded that EC covers only short term issues (20 working days) and that if they experience longer term matters that impact on learning then they must contact a Student Achievement Officer for advice.
A summary of guidance notes for students is given below:
Academic Misconduct
Any submission must be students’ own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The University’s Academic Handbook includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct. Students should check this link before submitting their work.
Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:
Ethics Policy
The work being carried out by students must be in compliance with the Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then students will need an ethics release or an ethical approval prior to the start of the project.
The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:
Grade marking
The University uses a letter grade scale for the marking of assessments. Unless students have been specifically informed otherwise their marked assignment will be awarded a letter grade. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook.
Policy: http://portal.solent.ac.uk/documents/academic-services/academic-handbook/section-2/2o-assessment-policy.pdf
Guidance for online submission through Solent Online Learning (SOL)