A brief history of the CPI conventions - Revision history

Designing Buildings at 08:01, 14 October 2025

2025-10-14T08:01:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 14 October 2025
Line 380:		Line 380:
	* [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_2\|A brief history of the CPI conventions Appendix 2]].		* [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_2\|A brief history of the CPI conventions Appendix 2]].

−	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]	+	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]] [[Category:CPIc]]

Designing Buildings at 10:49, 11 March 2025

2025-03-11T10:49:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:49, 11 March 2025
Line 375:		Line 375:
	* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.		* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.

−	~~Click here for~~ [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|Appendix 1]].	+	= Related articles on Designing Buildings =
		+
		+	* [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|A brief history of the CPI conventions Appendix 1]].
		+	* [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_2\|A brief history of the CPI conventions Appendix 2]].

	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]		[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]

Designing Buildings at 10:45, 11 March 2025

2025-03-11T10:45:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:45, 11 March 2025
Line 5:		Line 5:

	Click here for [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|Appendix 1]].		Click here for [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|Appendix 1]].
		+
		+	Click here for [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_2\|Appendix 2]].

	= Prologue =		= Prologue =

Designing Buildings at 09:36, 10 March 2025

2025-03-10T09:36:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:36, 10 March 2025
Line 3:		Line 3:
	A brief history of the CPI conventions<br />		A brief history of the CPI conventions<br />
	1986 (1979) – 2013 (2024) - with anecdotes.		1986 (1979) – 2013 (2024) - with anecdotes.
		+
		+	Click here for [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|Appendix 1]].

	= Prologue =		= Prologue =
Line 370:		Line 372:
	* [7] In 2018, it was confirmed that BS 1192 2007 (and the later PAS 1192-2) would be replaced by international standard BS EN ISO 19650 which was essentially based on and developed from the existing suite of UK BIM standards and introduced in 2019.		* [7] In 2018, it was confirmed that BS 1192 2007 (and the later PAS 1192-2) would be replaced by international standard BS EN ISO 19650 which was essentially based on and developed from the existing suite of UK BIM standards and introduced in 2019.
	* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.		* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.
		+
		+	Click here for [[A_brief_history_of_the_CPI_conventions_Appendix_1\|Appendix 1]].

	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]		[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]

Designing Buildings: Protected "A brief history of the CPI conventions" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

2025-03-07T09:32:29Z

Protected "A brief history of the CPI conventions" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

← Older revision

Revision as of 09:32, 7 March 2025

Designing Buildings at 09:32, 7 March 2025

2025-03-07T09:32:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 7 March 2025
Line 61:		Line 61:
	This very specific, objective, rigorous and lengthy research confirmed and quantified the trends shown from many earlier studies of the role that unclear information played in the poor performance. It is included here as it is the most graphic illustration of the problem previously expressed in the anecdotal words from the Lutyens quote and in the more general statements from many independent reports on the performance of the construction sector such as the ‘Banwell Report’ 1964 and ‘Tavistock report’ 1966. Later, the ‘Latham report’ 1994 and ‘Egan report’ 1998 both cited the lack of collaborative working as continuing to cause issues and both also recommending the use of the CPI conventions with Latham proposing that they be made mandatory, which of course did not happen.		This very specific, objective, rigorous and lengthy research confirmed and quantified the trends shown from many earlier studies of the role that unclear information played in the poor performance. It is included here as it is the most graphic illustration of the problem previously expressed in the anecdotal words from the Lutyens quote and in the more general statements from many independent reports on the performance of the construction sector such as the ‘Banwell Report’ 1964 and ‘Tavistock report’ 1966. Later, the ‘Latham report’ 1994 and ‘Egan report’ 1998 both cited the lack of collaborative working as continuing to cause issues and both also recommending the use of the CPI conventions with Latham proposing that they be made mandatory, which of course did not happen.

−	[[File:~~Number of quality related events~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:Number_of_quality_related_events.jpg\|link=File:Number_of_quality_related_events.jpg]]

	{\|		{\|
Line 227:		Line 227:
	Bringing the research together and presenting the results to the sector created the guidance documents which allowed project information to be logically compiled and used with each document referencing each other.		Bringing the research together and presenting the results to the sector created the guidance documents which allowed project information to be logically compiled and used with each document referencing each other.

−	[[File:~~CPIc documents~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:CPIc_documents.jpg\|link=File:CPIc_documents.jpg]]

	= From CCPI to BPIc and CPIc – a time-line of publications and major events 1987 =		= From CCPI to BPIc and CPIc – a time-line of publications and major events 1987 =
Line 286:		Line 286:

	It included the CPI CAWS tables amended and added-to and presented as “Table J Work sections for buildings” and “Table K Work sections for Civil Engineering works” and used both concise and full tables to apply to required levels of detail. It was based on ISO Technical Report 14177 Classification of information in the construction industry (1994) and also provided guidance on using the system.		It included the CPI CAWS tables amended and added-to and presented as “Table J Work sections for buildings” and “Table K Work sections for Civil Engineering works” and used both concise and full tables to apply to required levels of detail. It was based on ISO Technical Report 14177 Classification of information in the construction industry (1994) and also provided guidance on using the system.
−
−	~~[image]~~

	{\|		{\|
Line 293:		Line 291:
	Anecdote: Uniclass was the first CPI document to use the jigsaw puzzle motif on its cover. The basis for this was presentations about the CPI conventions given by CPI representatives at conferences, in education and similar. To illustrate the notion of information falling through gaps or being duplicated one of the presenters used the notion of the Olympic rings with its gaps and overlaps. The objective of Uniclass aspired more to the jigsaw shapes with no such gaps through which information could fall or overlaps to introduce duplication and so possible discrepancy as well as inefficiency. Also, as a reminder of the technology of the time - they were not pre prepared Over Head Projector slides but drawn freehand on the OHP acetate roll as it was felt that gave better lecturing impact. Whilst the rings are easy, it is no mean feat to draw a jigsaw shape convincingly and quickly whilst lecturing!		Anecdote: Uniclass was the first CPI document to use the jigsaw puzzle motif on its cover. The basis for this was presentations about the CPI conventions given by CPI representatives at conferences, in education and similar. To illustrate the notion of information falling through gaps or being duplicated one of the presenters used the notion of the Olympic rings with its gaps and overlaps. The objective of Uniclass aspired more to the jigsaw shapes with no such gaps through which information could fall or overlaps to introduce duplication and so possible discrepancy as well as inefficiency. Also, as a reminder of the technology of the time - they were not pre prepared Over Head Projector slides but drawn freehand on the OHP acetate roll as it was felt that gave better lecturing impact. Whilst the rings are easy, it is no mean feat to draw a jigsaw shape convincingly and quickly whilst lecturing!

−	[[File:~~Olympic rings cpic 2~~.png]]	+	[[File:Olympic_rings_cpic_2.png\|link=File:Olympic_rings_cpic_2.png]]
−	\|width="50%"\| [[File:~~Uniclass cpic 2~~.png]]	+	\|width="50%"\| [[File:Uniclass_cpic_2.png\|link=File:Uniclass_cpic_2.png]]
	\|}		\|}

Line 351:		Line 349:
	= Epilogue =		= Epilogue =

−	[[File:~~Cpic sketch 2~~.jpg]]	+	[[File:Cpic_sketch_2.jpg\|link=File:Cpic_sketch_2.jpg]]

	The promotional video prepared for the launch of the first CPI documents in 1987 amusingly starts with the well known anecdote of the message from the war trenches being corrupted down the line of messengers: At the battle front the message clearly starts “send reinforcements – we’re going to advance” and through various stages of miss-hearing and interpretation it arrives at battalion HQ as “sent three and fourpence (three shillings and four pence) we are going to a dance”. It very neatly sums up the problems CPI was trying to address – and explains the title of this brief history.		The promotional video prepared for the launch of the first CPI documents in 1987 amusingly starts with the well known anecdote of the message from the war trenches being corrupted down the line of messengers: At the battle front the message clearly starts “send reinforcements – we’re going to advance” and through various stages of miss-hearing and interpretation it arrives at battalion HQ as “sent three and fourpence (three shillings and four pence) we are going to a dance”. It very neatly sums up the problems CPI was trying to address – and explains the title of this brief history.
Line 373:		Line 371:
	* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.		* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.

−	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]	+	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:Do_not_autolink]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]

Designing Buildings at 09:29, 7 March 2025

2025-03-07T09:29:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:29, 7 March 2025
Line 61:		Line 61:
	This very specific, objective, rigorous and lengthy research confirmed and quantified the trends shown from many earlier studies of the role that unclear information played in the poor performance. It is included here as it is the most graphic illustration of the problem previously expressed in the anecdotal words from the Lutyens quote and in the more general statements from many independent reports on the performance of the construction sector such as the ‘Banwell Report’ 1964 and ‘Tavistock report’ 1966. Later, the ‘Latham report’ 1994 and ‘Egan report’ 1998 both cited the lack of collaborative working as continuing to cause issues and both also recommending the use of the CPI conventions with Latham proposing that they be made mandatory, which of course did not happen.		This very specific, objective, rigorous and lengthy research confirmed and quantified the trends shown from many earlier studies of the role that unclear information played in the poor performance. It is included here as it is the most graphic illustration of the problem previously expressed in the anecdotal words from the Lutyens quote and in the more general statements from many independent reports on the performance of the construction sector such as the ‘Banwell Report’ 1964 and ‘Tavistock report’ 1966. Later, the ‘Latham report’ 1994 and ‘Egan report’ 1998 both cited the lack of collaborative working as continuing to cause issues and both also recommending the use of the CPI conventions with Latham proposing that they be made mandatory, which of course did not happen.

−	[~~image~~]	+	[[File:Number of quality related events.jpg]]

	{\|		{\|
Line 227:		Line 227:
	Bringing the research together and presenting the results to the sector created the guidance documents which allowed project information to be logically compiled and used with each document referencing each other.		Bringing the research together and presenting the results to the sector created the guidance documents which allowed project information to be logically compiled and used with each document referencing each other.

−	[~~image~~]	+	[[File:CPIc documents.jpg]]

	= From CCPI to BPIc and CPIc – a time-line of publications and major events 1987 =		= From CCPI to BPIc and CPIc – a time-line of publications and major events 1987 =
Line 290:		Line 290:

	{\|		{\|
−	\| Anecdote: Uniclass was the first CPI document to use the jigsaw puzzle motif on its cover. The basis for this was presentations about the CPI conventions given by CPI representatives at conferences, in education and similar. To illustrate the notion of information falling through gaps or being duplicated one of the presenters used the notion of the Olympic rings with its gaps and overlaps. The objective of Uniclass aspired more to the jigsaw shapes with no such gaps through which information could fall or overlaps to introduce duplication and so possible discrepancy as well as inefficiency. Also, as a reminder of the technology of the time - they were not pre prepared Over Head Projector slides but drawn freehand on the OHP acetate roll as it was felt that gave better lecturing impact. Whilst the rings are easy, it is no mean feat to draw a jigsaw shape convincingly and quickly whilst lecturing!	+	\|width="50%"\|
		+	Anecdote: Uniclass was the first CPI document to use the jigsaw puzzle motif on its cover. The basis for this was presentations about the CPI conventions given by CPI representatives at conferences, in education and similar. To illustrate the notion of information falling through gaps or being duplicated one of the presenters used the notion of the Olympic rings with its gaps and overlaps. The objective of Uniclass aspired more to the jigsaw shapes with no such gaps through which information could fall or overlaps to introduce duplication and so possible discrepancy as well as inefficiency. Also, as a reminder of the technology of the time - they were not pre prepared Over Head Projector slides but drawn freehand on the OHP acetate roll as it was felt that gave better lecturing impact. Whilst the rings are easy, it is no mean feat to draw a jigsaw shape convincingly and quickly whilst lecturing!
		+
		+	[[File:Olympic rings cpic 2.png]]
		+	\|width="50%"\| [[File:Uniclass cpic 2.png]]
	\|}		\|}

Line 345:		Line 349:
	Work on Uniclass 2 came to (virtual) fruition under a contract between NBS and CPIc in 2012. Uniclass 2 was significantly different from Uniclass(1) within which most of the tables had been familiar in the sector albeit not all or in every part. Uniclass 2 aspired to be a true classification system (rather than a linked collection of existing, albeit modified, tables) and necessarily used both very precise terminology that was less familiar and numbering that was less (human) memorable or recognisable but far more suitable for computing purposes. Whilst in its creation the process and tables attracted much discussion, deliberation and comment, under the name ‘Uniclass 2’ it had little penetration in the sector and fell foul of the period of the demise of CPIc activity and rise of other interests able to respond more expeditiously to the demands of the government ‘BIM initiative’ (2011 -2016 funded). Under that initiative and with funding provided by government, and by then out with the input of CPIc, Uniclass 2 morphed into Uniclass 2015 following further development but no conceptual change. CPIc had provided the foundation for the system now adopted and operated by the NBS.		Work on Uniclass 2 came to (virtual) fruition under a contract between NBS and CPIc in 2012. Uniclass 2 was significantly different from Uniclass(1) within which most of the tables had been familiar in the sector albeit not all or in every part. Uniclass 2 aspired to be a true classification system (rather than a linked collection of existing, albeit modified, tables) and necessarily used both very precise terminology that was less familiar and numbering that was less (human) memorable or recognisable but far more suitable for computing purposes. Whilst in its creation the process and tables attracted much discussion, deliberation and comment, under the name ‘Uniclass 2’ it had little penetration in the sector and fell foul of the period of the demise of CPIc activity and rise of other interests able to respond more expeditiously to the demands of the government ‘BIM initiative’ (2011 -2016 funded). Under that initiative and with funding provided by government, and by then out with the input of CPIc, Uniclass 2 morphed into Uniclass 2015 following further development but no conceptual change. CPIc had provided the foundation for the system now adopted and operated by the NBS.

−	~~[image]~~	+	= Epilogue =

−	~~= Epilogue =~~	+	[[File:Cpic sketch 2.jpg]]

	The promotional video prepared for the launch of the first CPI documents in 1987 amusingly starts with the well known anecdote of the message from the war trenches being corrupted down the line of messengers: At the battle front the message clearly starts “send reinforcements – we’re going to advance” and through various stages of miss-hearing and interpretation it arrives at battalion HQ as “sent three and fourpence (three shillings and four pence) we are going to a dance”. It very neatly sums up the problems CPI was trying to address – and explains the title of this brief history.		The promotional video prepared for the launch of the first CPI documents in 1987 amusingly starts with the well known anecdote of the message from the war trenches being corrupted down the line of messengers: At the battle front the message clearly starts “send reinforcements – we’re going to advance” and through various stages of miss-hearing and interpretation it arrives at battalion HQ as “sent three and fourpence (three shillings and four pence) we are going to a dance”. It very neatly sums up the problems CPI was trying to address – and explains the title of this brief history.

Designing Buildings at 10:14, 6 March 2025

2025-03-06T10:14:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:14, 6 March 2025
Line 47:		Line 47:
	e. not distributed – information available but not sent to site.		e. not distributed – information available but not sent to site.

−	Work by the Building Research Establishment (BRE)~~[[#ftn1\|~~[1]]] has shown that a high proportion of site supervision time is spent in sorting out technical problems due to unreliable and incomplete information; this can result in the site staff becoming frustrated and a consequent reduction in the quality of the work and a general disinterest in the project.	+	Work by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) [1] has shown that a high proportion of site supervision time is spent in sorting out technical problems due to unreliable and incomplete information; this can result in the site staff becoming frustrated and a consequent reduction in the quality of the work and a general disinterest in the project.

	1.2 Better project documentation would bring other benefits. A clearer method of arranging drawn information would bring about more efficient working between members of the design teams and enable more positive communication with the client. By providing the contractor with project documents subject to less of the deficiencies in (a) to (e) above, the designers and quantity surveyors would find themselves freed of many of the time consuming disruptions whilst errors and omissions were dealt with.		1.2 Better project documentation would bring other benefits. A clearer method of arranging drawn information would bring about more efficient working between members of the design teams and enable more positive communication with the client. By providing the contractor with project documents subject to less of the deficiencies in (a) to (e) above, the designers and quantity surveyors would find themselves freed of many of the time consuming disruptions whilst errors and omissions were dealt with.
Line 55:		Line 55:

	<br />		<br />
−	Other BRE research at about the same time came up with startling data, particularly taking account of the objective veracity of its collection methods. The work was not referenced by PIG as it was a separate and independent study, into achieving quality, that was still on-going. At its start it had no preconceived ideas of what may be found and was based entirely on observations from full-time observers~~[[#ftn2\|~~[2]]] blended into the backdrop of normal site activities for lengthy periods so as not to affect any outcome while they passively followed the resolution of what became called ‘quality related events’. The first results from the quality work were published in 1981 by BRE as Current Paper CP 7/81~~[[#ftn3\|~~[3]~~]],~~, read mostly, one presumes being a BRE paper, by those from the sector. Later, after a second phase targeting a wider range of procurement methods and client types the full work was published by government (by the then National Economic Development Office). The NEDO paper “Achieving Quality on Building Sites” targeted influential readership of business leaders that used the services of the sector as well as those from the sector itself – effectively clients and mostly knowledgeable repeat clients.	+	Other BRE research at about the same time came up with startling data, particularly taking account of the objective veracity of its collection methods. The work was not referenced by PIG as it was a separate and independent study, into achieving quality, that was still on-going. At its start it had no preconceived ideas of what may be found and was based entirely on observations from full-time observers [2] blended into the backdrop of normal site activities for lengthy periods so as not to affect any outcome while they passively followed the resolution of what became called ‘quality related events’. The first results from the quality work were published in 1981 by BRE as Current Paper CP 7/81 [3], read mostly, one presumes being a BRE paper, by those from the sector. Later, after a second phase targeting a wider range of procurement methods and client types the full work was published by government (by the then National Economic Development Office). The NEDO paper “Achieving Quality on Building Sites” targeted influential readership of business leaders that used the services of the sector as well as those from the sector itself – effectively clients and mostly knowledgeable repeat clients.

	That research showed that for all quality problems studied real time on sites over a 7 year period, by far the largest proportion were caused by missing or inadequate project information. Furthermore, when serious quality problems (defined as potential severe compromise to the integrity of the construction) were separated out, whilst not quite so dramatically larger than all other causes, it still was the largest by a significant amount.		That research showed that for all quality problems studied real time on sites over a 7 year period, by far the largest proportion were caused by missing or inadequate project information. Furthermore, when serious quality problems (defined as potential severe compromise to the integrity of the construction) were separated out, whilst not quite so dramatically larger than all other causes, it still was the largest by a significant amount.
Line 72:		Line 72:

	{\|		{\|
−	~~\|width="100%"~~\| "that information concerning a specific building project (e.g. the survey of the site, the proposed design solution and the information required to carry out the construction phase) which passes between members of the design team and other bodies, in particular the client, statutory bodies and contractors. It does not include General Information (e.g. byelaws, regulations, manufacturers' catalogues etc)" common to many projects" NB Later, in the detailed work, it became clear that there could be some confusion between pre and post tender Project information so the term ‘Production information’ to describe post contract was also used. Also that it was independent of contractual relationships and so reached beyond the classical definition of ‘the professional design team’ to include contractor and specialist design.	+	\| "that information concerning a specific building project (e.g. the survey of the site, the proposed design solution and the information required to carry out the construction phase) which passes between members of the design team and other bodies, in particular the client, statutory bodies and contractors. It does not include General Information (e.g. byelaws, regulations, manufacturers' catalogues etc)" common to many projects" NB Later, in the detailed work, it became clear that there could be some confusion between pre and post tender Project information so the term ‘Production information’ to describe post contract was also used. Also that it was independent of contractual relationships and so reached beyond the classical definition of ‘the professional design team’ to include contractor and specialist design.
	\|}		\|}

Line 138:		Line 138:
	\| 3		\| 3
	\| Element code		\| Element code
−	\| a code e.g., SfB~~[[#ftn4\|~~[4]]] element code (21) say, for external walls led generally to the next piece of information (a code but with more specificities was usually a part of a direct reference)	+	\| a code e.g., SfB [4] element code (21) say, for external walls led generally to the next piece of information (a code but with more specificities was usually a part of a direct reference)
	\|-		\|-
	\| 4		\| 4
Line 235:		Line 235:
	CCPI approved the research reports and recommendations in the period 1980-85 and signed off publication drafts at the end of 1986 and, apart from sanctioning a programme of implementation of the ‘codes’ in its own (PSA - Property Services Agency) design offices, this was also the end of direct government involvement. With seed funding of £16000 (£58k in 2024) from the sponsoring bodies the Building Project Information Committee (BPIc) was set up on 17 February 1987. The seed funding was covered and repaid in the first 9 months of operation with a further £32000 (£117k) of net income from sales accrued in the first 4 years resulting in BPIc redistributing a proportion back to each of the sponsoring bodies.		CCPI approved the research reports and recommendations in the period 1980-85 and signed off publication drafts at the end of 1986 and, apart from sanctioning a programme of implementation of the ‘codes’ in its own (PSA - Property Services Agency) design offices, this was also the end of direct government involvement. With seed funding of £16000 (£58k in 2024) from the sponsoring bodies the Building Project Information Committee (BPIc) was set up on 17 February 1987. The seed funding was covered and repaid in the first 9 months of operation with a further £32000 (£117k) of net income from sales accrued in the first 4 years resulting in BPIc redistributing a proportion back to each of the sponsoring bodies.

−	The initial sponsoring bodies were RIBA, RICS, BEC and ACE which represented both CIBSE and ICE. ACE~~[[#ftn5\|~~[5]]] resigned in 1992 and engineering interests became represented by CIBSE and ICE. After the arrival of ICE the committee became the Construction Project Information Committee (CPIc) to better recognise the inclusion of civil engineering works as a part of construction and between then and the cessation of operations BEC was superseded by first the Construction Confederation and then the UK Contractors Group (though the representatives remained the same) and the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists (CIAT), the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and the Landscape Institute (LI) also joined the committee.	+	The initial sponsoring bodies were RIBA, RICS, BEC and ACE which represented both CIBSE and ICE. ACE [5] resigned in 1992 and engineering interests became represented by CIBSE and ICE. After the arrival of ICE the committee became the Construction Project Information Committee (CPIc) to better recognise the inclusion of civil engineering works as a part of construction and between then and the cessation of operations BEC was superseded by first the Construction Confederation and then the UK Contractors Group (though the representatives remained the same) and the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists (CIAT), the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and the Landscape Institute (LI) also joined the committee.

	Under more lengthy and detailed terms of reference the principal role of BPIc was to promote and maintain the initial publications and to respond to the need for further publications on the subject of project information with the aim of reducing disputes and improving the efficiency of the construction process.		Under more lengthy and detailed terms of reference the principal role of BPIc was to promote and maintain the initial publications and to respond to the need for further publications on the subject of project information with the aim of reducing disputes and improving the efficiency of the construction process.
Line 367:		Line 367:
	* [6] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011		* [6] Main hypothesis of A Report for the Government Construction Client Group – BIM working strategy Client Group 2011
	* [7] In 2018, it was confirmed that BS 1192 2007 (and the later PAS 1192-2) would be replaced by international standard BS EN ISO 19650 which was essentially based on and developed from the existing suite of UK BIM standards and introduced in 2019.		* [7] In 2018, it was confirmed that BS 1192 2007 (and the later PAS 1192-2) would be replaced by international standard BS EN ISO 19650 which was essentially based on and developed from the existing suite of UK BIM standards and introduced in 2019.
		+	* “Bricks” and Table 4 – Administration such as “Building Regulations” . Although used extensively and in full in product libraries, until the much later development of Uniclass the CPI interests in CI/SfB referenced only table 1.

	[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]		[[Category:DCN_Commentary]] [[Category:History]] [[Category:Organisations]]

Designing Buildings at 10:04, 6 March 2025

2025-03-06T10:04:01Z

Show changes

Designing Buildings at 09:51, 6 March 2025

2025-03-06T09:51:10Z

Show changes