[Richard Stirland]

17 minutes ago, Andrew Myers said:

That was a really interesting talk. 

Northumbrian Water explored some similar themes at our Innovate East event last year.

Some of the outcomes/discussions points are below:

Standards need to be simple and broadly applicable. We don’t want a high barrier for adoption 

• Core mandatory data items (as few and simple as possible)
• Optional but standardised data items (e.g. BIM/Uniclass)
• Any other data items (flexible and extendable standards)

Aim to keep the data sharing as simple as possible – how many types of data do we need? What level needs to be shared?

• Time Series Data – e.g. temperature sensor readings
• Event Data – e.g. an engineer visit, a status change
• Configuration or Meta Data – e.g. date of manufacture

Agree with this also. One of the things we’ve been doing within BIM4Water is using Uniclass as a common classification for data items at an equipment level (pump, valve) – but one of our groups run by a colleague David Bell, has started to look at how we can apply this common classification at higher levels of our Water Industry data hierarches, so facilitate potential standardisation at higher levels. It would be interesting to look at how this approach could be applied at a cross-sector leve. 

[Richard Stirland]

Hi Ian,

Thanks for sharing this, I would be really interested in seeing what you’ve been working on also. As well as working at Anglian Water, I am part of the BIM4Water group in the water sector, and we’ve been doing a lot of work to understand how we drive data standardisation and hiearchies, would be great to understand how we can connect on this.

My username is ‘Richard Stirland’.

Many thanks

Richard