Why is there a need for #PAS1192-3 and the Asset Information Model (#AIM)?

A summary of the questions within this post include; Why is there a need for PAS 1192-3 and the Asset Information Model (AIM)?  Why was there a need to develop 1192-3?  Why is PAS 1192-3 crucial to achieving Building Information Modelling (BIM) Level 2?  How is PAS 1192-3 limited?  It is argued that the specific government funding arrangements contribute to the structure of the documents as well as how all of the standards link together to form the documentation for BIM Level 2, and beyond to established standards.  The requirement for the AIM is discussed briefly as well as some of the limitations of PAS 1192-3 to broaden the understanding of how this document may be used on future assets.

Why is there a need for PAS 1192-3 and the Asset Information Model (AIM)?

PAS 1192-3 Specification for information management for the operational phase of assets using building information modelling (BSI, 2014) is a companion document to PAS 1192-2 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling (BSI, 2013).  The titles of these documents define the differences between the two documents; PAS 1192-2 is for capital delivery (design and construction) and PAS 1192-3 is for the operational phase (asset management).  PAS 1192-3 is seeking to consolidate the documentation of the whole life cycle of an asset by creating an AIM, this is proposed to be achieved by reducing cost with more accurate information, greater understanding of asset needs, higher quality decision making processes, measurement of performance of assets and higher quality information due to automation.  Saxon (2013) states that the digitisation of the UK asset base is required to bring this in line with other modern technologies (such as the aviation industry) and argues that this will facilitate the construction industry becoming part of a ‘Smart’ economy (Saxon, 2013, p. 9).  Saxon goes on to illustrate that the Built Environment consists of Property, Construction and Facilities Management and that the Government Construction Strategy (Cabinet Office, 2011) and BIM Strategies were created to support specifically public clients (2013, p. 47).  This means that when assessing PAS 1192-2 and PAS 1192-3 the two documents describe existing government practices and organisational needs.

The documents specifically represent guidance for government projects and therefore relate to the specific way that government departments operate, in particular how funding to government departments and Local Authorities is split into two revenue streams; Capital Expenditure (Capex) and Operational Expenditure (Opex). Capex is an expense that is incurred to create future benefit (e.g. the creation of a new school) but can also include acquisitions of assets to have a use beyond the tax year.  In contrast to this, Opex describes expenditure needed on a daily basis for the functioning of a business or organisation (e.g. wages of teachers, maintenance and repairs of a school, etc.)  Opex can be described as “the money the business spends in order to turn inventory into throughput” (Diffen.com, 2015).  Therefore, this split in funding streams is one of the reasons that the two documents have been created, as it ensures that the two financial mechanisms can be taken into account in relation to an asset.  Very often there will be two separate departments within a government organisation that will manage the asset creation and asset management once completed.  For this very reason, guidance is required to allow a link to be made between the two stages in an asset’s life.  At Hampshire County Council there is a team to develop a project, a new school project for example, which is called Design and Implementation (D&I), and will be funded by Capital funding.  However, once the project is completed, this will then transfer to the Asset Management team and the funding for this will be transferred to revenue structure for the maintenance and asset management, funded by a Service Level Agreement (SLA) with the school itself to finance on a yearly basis (www3.hants.gov.uk, 2015).

Additionally, it could be argued that PAS 1192-3 is required to be a separate document as an asset may be acquired and then the information within this asset may be transferred to an Asset Information Model (AIM) without going through the PAS 1192-2 process.  PAS 1192-3 states that the document could relate to an asset that could be “commissioned though major works, acquired through transfer of ownership or already existing in an asset portfolio” (BSI, 2014, p.iv).

PAS 1192-3 states that it is also heavily influenced by, and should be read in conjunction with, ISO 55000 (BSI, 2014) which is a document that is aimed at an organisations that may wish to improve the value they gain from an asset, as well as those who establish, implement, maintain or improve assets, and those who plan, design, implement and review asset management activities (BSI, 2104, p. v).  Therefore, this particular ISO standard is not linked to BIM intrinsically and therefore it can be argued that PAS 1192-3 performs the role of a linking this standard between the design and construction phase and the asset management phase, as without this there would be no clear way of extracting all the graphical information, non-graphical information and documents into the asset management phase.

An additional question proposed is whether the title for PAS 1192-2 should be altered to provide a document that can include both the Capex and Opex stages.  This would appear to be difficult with the current system of funding for Local Authorities; however it does pose the interesting concept that in an ideal funding situation could be combined with a model of Total Expenditure (Totex).  There are arguments that BIM supports the concept of Totex as it moves away from the short term project planning of Capex in favour of the benefits of the longer term Totex project planning (Infrastructure Intelligence, 2015).  The aim of this would be to assess if life cycle costs can be better planned to bring greater value for the client/owner.

Why is PAS 1192-3 crucial to achieving BIM Level 2

There are a set of standards that form what is considered to be BIM Level 2 (Bre.co.uk, 2015) and these provide the foundation for BIM Level 2 as they confirm the procurement, production and management that encompasses all activities throughout an asset lifecycle.  These include client need, design, construction activities, aftercare and handover and asset management, and then back to refurbishment or disposal.  PAS 1192-3 is therefore a crucial link that enables the transfer of all of the information from the design stage into the management and asset use stage, without this there would be no standardised way to formally use all of the valuable BIM data created by the project and contractor team.  At the completion of a construction project, PAS 1192-3 states that a Project Information Model (PIM) should be transferred to the client which then becomes the Asset Information Model (AIM).  The AIM is a “single source of approved and validated information” (BSI 2014, p. ix) and will include all the geometry and data in relation to the asset.  The need to develop an AIM is affirmed as allowing the client/owner to use data from the asset to understand how to leverage the performance of the asset.

How is PAS 1192-3 limited?

PAS 1192-3 covers specifically the following areas; data transfer processes to create an AIM for new or existing assets, exchange of information with a PIM and provides a record of information if disposal or demolition is required. Also, the AIM supports the Organisational Information Requirement’s (OIR) ability to revise the AIM as the asset changes, and is a resource for an organisation (BSI 2014, p. 1).  One limitation of the document is that data content is not covered as it is purely defining processes, actions and organisation responsibilities to define what an organisation needs.  In order to overcome this, the document links to the other BIM Level 2 documentation such as PAS 1192-4 (BSI 2014) that does provide this guidance (BSI 2013, p. 1).  Also, as BIM Level 2 projects are required to produce Construction to Operations Building information exchange (COBie) data and this data is a change for those who usually receive project information in Local Authorities, there is a risk that existing asset management systems cannot link to this easily and it is untested at a broad scale.  Therefore one of the limitations of PAS 1192-3 is that it cannot confirm that this process will be as seamless as it suggests due to existing IT database infrastructure limitations.

Fig. 1 illustrates that Richards makes the assumption that the AIM will make use of the latest immersive and augmented reality systems, and it is argued that this in many Local Authorities will be a challenge to establish (Richards, 2015) based on current systems employed in the short term.  Also, Richards (2015) argued that some of the limits of PAS 1192-3 are because it is based on the content of the international ISO 55000 standard, therefore this additional document will be required to confirm in detail the standard for asset management itself.


Fig. 1, Richards (2015)

Richards (2015) also confirmed that PAS 1192-2 and PAS 1192-3 end at different points, and it is not clear within the document how these align, therefore clarification required.  At end of the Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) stage the information will be restructured into the AIM to answer the OIRs and EIRs.  At this stage validation of the information from the PIM to the AIM is required and this will be challenging as it will have to be assessed against the original requirements in the EIR and OIR.  PAS 1192-3 does not go into detail to explain how this will happen, partly as this will be different from organisation to organisation.  Therefore greater guidance and in practice case studies will be required to share this knowledge across the industry.


Figure 8, (BSI 2014, p.15)

Another limitation of PAS 1192-3 is that it has not confirmed who should or will analyse the PIM.  Richards (2015) confirmed that he had been asked to write an article on the validation of information. He contended that the employer’s representative will be the person who should be confirming the acceptance criteria and the validation methodology.  However, again PAS 1192-3 is not clear and therefore it is open to interpretation and therefore misunderstanding.

In conclusion, it appears that PAS 1192-3 is a document that provides a valuable link between the construction and asset management stage, it exists to help manage how government clients are funded currently and provides a valuable source of information to assist the transition from construction to asset management.  It has been seen that there are some limitations to the document and further clarification is to be provided on some aspects to allow clients and facilities manager ease the transition and gain the most value from the data within the AIM.


Bre.co.uk, (2015). BRE Group: BIM Level 2 Documents and Standards. [online] Available at: http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3508 [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015].

British Standards Institute, (2013). PAS 1192-2:2013 Specification for information management for the capital/delivery phase of construction projects using building information modelling. London: BSI

British Standards Institute, (2013). PAS 1192-3:2014 Specification for information management for the operational phase of assets using building information modelling. London: BSI

British Standards Institute, (2014). BS 1192-4:2014 Collaborative production of information Part 4: Fulfilling employers information exchange requirements using COBie – Code of practice. London, BSI

British Standards Institute ISO 55000, (2014). BS ISO 55000 Asset management. Overview, principles and terminology. London: BSI

Cabinet Office, (2011). Government Construction Strategy. London: Cabinet Office.

Department for Business Innovation and Skills, (2013). UK CONSTRUCTION – An Economic analysis of the sector. London: BIS.

Diffen.com, (2015). Capex vs. Opex – Difference and Comparison | Diffen. [online] Available at: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Capex_vs_Opex [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015].

Infrastructure Intelligence, (2015). Collaborate to innovate, the opportunities of BIM. [online] Available at: http://www.infrastructure-intelligence.com/article/mar-2015/collaborate-innovate-opportunities-bim [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015].

Richards, M. (2015). Organisational Information Requirements and Security.

Saxon, R. (2013). Growth Through BIM. London: CIC

Www3.hants.gov.uk, (2015). Repair and maintenance services. [online] Available at: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/propertyservices/management/maintenance.htm [Accessed 21 Nov. 2015].


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s