[Dan Rossiter]

Hi @Neil, you mentioned that the glossary is a part of the commons work-steam.  Does this mean that terminological entries hosted within the Glossary will be used by the other work streams?  For example, could an entry accepted within the Glossary end up in a future CDBB report?

[Dan Rossiter]

3 minutes ago, Michael Mulquin said:

I know it is an adjacent subject, but in our IEC Smart Cities Terminology Working Group, when developing definitions for terms, we initially searched through the IEC, ISO and ITU glossaries and captured whatever relevant definitions we could find there. Our preference was then to take an existing definition, if it was suitable, as this would help consistency with other standards work. If no existing definitions were quite right, the next stage would be to see if there was an existing definition which could be made appropriate by adding an explanatory note. Only when we couldn’t do any of these did we develop a new definition.

Hi @Michael Mulquin.  People are more than welcome to suggest terms and definitions that have been used elsewhere such as those within the ISO online browsing platform and  IEC electropedia.  However, these terms need to be carefully considered to ensure that they are fit for purpose for the DT Hub community.

[Dan Rossiter]

Hi @Neil, are there particular areas/domains/topics where you would like members to add to the Glossary (areas where you and the Commons team are specifically looking for input)?

[Dan Rossiter]

Welcome to the start of today’s Digital Twin Talk on #Twinfrastructure and a big thank you to @Neil from SNC-Lavalin’s Atkins and CDBB for joining us. We’re looking forward to your thoughts and questions related to Neil’s video – and maybe posing one or two of our own.

Please do start adding your thoughts by replying to the conversation thread.

[Dan Rossiter]

8 hours ago, Simon Evans said:

With data apparently the “new oil”, or maybe the “new asbestos”

Very interesting piece @Simon, thank you for sharing.  I’ll be honest, I struggle with the “data is the new oil” analogy; enjoying your “apparently” prefix.  My preference would be to say “data is the new solar”.  It has always existed, its clean, and we are talking about finally realizing value from it.

You mention that the ultimate aim is a single version of truth.  How does this apply within a design and construction context when there are at least two versions of the truth [1] existing version (e.g. site pre-intervention) and [2] potential version (e.g. designed solution).  Until the design has been constructed, aren’t we dealing with (at least) two versions of the truth?

[Dan Rossiter]

Hi Tanguy,

You mentioned the importance of Standards.  I’m sure you and @Michael will be aware of the smart city standards.  I wonder:

1. What standards have you utilized (or consider invaluable); and
2. What gaps to you believe currently exist in the standards landscape?

[Dan Rossiter]

Just now, Nicholas said:

Another question – for @Tanguy and all.

What are the most valuable/attractive use cases for digital twins in cities? 

(Maybe some of these might add more examples to help with the right time vs real time debate too)

Many thanks,

Nick

 

Hi Nick,

Yes, we recently hosted a webinar on Value where we looked at possible use cases for digital twins.  What seemed to resonate well as the idea that use cases was the application of “people”, “planet” and “profit” as domains for each use case. 

This also seems to have parallels with the Flourishing systems report (published this morning): https://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/files/flourishing-systems_final_digital.pdf  which focuses on economical infrastructure, social infrastructure, and natural environment.

[Dan Rossiter]

Hi Tanguy, 
Thank you for the video, very interesting.  You mentioned the need to manage the latency between the changes to the physical asset and its representation digitally.  What I wanted to ask if there are two distinct latencies:

1. The time from an intervention to when it is reflected physically (e.g. a planned intervention such as a road closure);
2. Time time from when the sensor data is collected to when it is reflected digitally (e.g.  to import, configure, review, and publish)

Please see image below (trying) to explain what I mean

[Dan Rossiter]

7 minutes ago, Guest Keith Deaney said:

We are creating building models as apposed to infrastructure generally.  As such this uses Uniclass2015 and COBie currently.  Also the formats required for models would be useful to understand.

Hi Keith, to confirm publications like Uniclass 2015 and COBie are under consideration.  Short Term, BEIS/CDBB are establishing a BIM interoperability steering group which is looking at the future on these and other aspects.  Mid term, we hope to see improvements and new developments such as a built environment taxonomy and other useful resources born from these activities.  Long term, we hope that this work will form a foundational element of the national digital twin; its purpose being to facilitate sharing between digital twins.

Access to the initial report (open for public consultation) can be found here:https://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/news/bim-interoperability-expert-group-report

[Dan Rossiter]

20 minutes ago, Lawrence Chapman said:

is there a meeting invite or registration page to join at 10:30?

Hi @Lawrence, Brian, Nick, others and I will be joining from 10 to facilitate questions/discussions within the chat log here.  People pose questions (as you have just done) and we ensure a rapid response to facilitate conversation.  Feel free to pose your questions here and I’m sure between Brian and the team we can ensure an answer is provided.

[Dan Rossiter]

4 minutes ago, Guest Luke O’Rafferty said:

This is bearing in mind that Uniclass2015 is 5 years in and still “dynamic”, so even if you had used that to name everything in your power plant 6 months ago, comparable components might not match mine today. 

Hi Luke.  While Uniclass has been dynamic recent changes have typically expanded the classes (i.e. added new sub-codes) as opposed to altering its structure and taxonomy.  In addition, Uniclass has been considered as part of a CIH, BEIS, CDBB, UKBIMA BIM interoperability report:https://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/news/bim-interoperability-expert-group-report

The report is currently out for public consultation, feel free to submit your views on its recommendations around Uniclass and other areas of interoperability.

[Dan Rossiter]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hughes said:

I’m interested in the point about the need for tools for a multi-decade vision. I agree that there is a long journey ahead to a connected eco-system of digital twins. Whose doing a good job at articulating this multi-decade vision and building tools that are open data/Gemini principles aligned?

Hopefully that is the role of the DT Hub. 

Members of the DT Hub include asset owners who will help shape the solution to suit their needs which will need multi-decade persistence to be achieved.  Personally it is my hope that a drive towards open data will negate the need for tool-dependency (value is in the nail, not the hammer you used!).  However, this’ll depend on what suits the members so that any solution developed will be one that is appropriate.

[Dan Rossiter]

2 minutes ago, olivierthereaux said:

This is incredibly important, and I agree that the first connections will need to be between similar twins and relevant sub-systems. The whole approach (and I hope what the talk conveys) is that over time, these connections will grow and scale up to be a whole web.

Yes, fully agree!  To develop these standards and protocols we need to first understand the use cases that these interconnected twins need to facilitate.  There may be a need, for example, for protocols to support different levels of aggregation to suit these different use cases.

[Dan Rossiter]

3 minutes ago, Guest Dr Max Mallia-Parfitt said:

Where is the live Q&A going to be held?

Have not received an email or link to zoom/goto/temas – please advise

Hi Max, the live Q&A is happening here, now.  This “Digital Jam” is a discussion thread where you can pose questions and get near-immediate responses from Olivier and the DT Hub facilitation team.  Please feel free to post your questions here as you have already started to do.

[Dan Rossiter]

Hi @RhettH  

CDBB had a research network looking into this called D-COMhttps://www.cdbb.cam.ac.uk/CDBBResearchBridgehead/Networks/Network_D_COM

It focused on adding enrichment to regulations and documentation to allow structured datasets to be tested against them.  The precursor was a BRE research project called regBIM that tested IFC data models against the approved documents as BREEAM as a proof of concept.

I’ve added the CDBB final report if you are interested

FinalReportAnon.pdf