Choosing a Digital Building Platform: A Clear Guide

The Evolving Landscape of Smart Buildings

There is a growing interest, spanning from investors to general observers on professional networking sites, in understanding the advancements occurring within buildings. Historically, the property sector has been characterized by a cautious approach to technology adoption.

However, the introduction of innovative ideas and products into this market is currently happening at an accelerated rate.

This rapid proliferation of smart-building products presents a challenge for professionals aiming to integrate digital building platform (DBP) technologies.

Implementing these technologies, not just in single locations but across entire organizations, can be particularly complex.

Navigating the Complexity of Cloud Platforms

The situation becomes even more intricate when considering the role of cloud platforms and their influence on return on investment (ROI).

Specifically, understanding the impact on both energy consumption and routine operational efficiency is crucial.

Facility managers, energy specialists, and building operators are frequently tasked with evaluating new platforms designed for building management and operation.

Tips for Evaluating DBP Platforms

To assist decision-makers in navigating the often-overwhelming marketing materials and effectively assessing DBP platforms, consider the following guidance.

These tips will help to cut through the promotional content and facilitate a thorough evaluation process.

• Focus on core functionality and demonstrable results.
• Prioritize platforms that integrate seamlessly with existing systems.
• Carefully analyze the potential impact on energy usage and operational costs.

A strategic approach to platform selection is essential for maximizing the benefits of smart building technologies.

Understanding Technology Choices: A Practical Approach

Deconstructing complex technology decisions into manageable components, beginning with core functionalities, provides the most effective method for navigating marketing materials. Two key inquiries should be made: Which members of your team will utilize this technology, and what specific challenges will it address for them?

The responses to these questions will assist in upholding your primary goals, streamlining the process of reducing numerous possibilities to a select few. A clear understanding of needs is paramount.

Prioritizing Solutions Through Use Cases

A further strategy for prioritizing issues and solutions when selecting smart-building technology involves defining your use cases. Without a clear understanding of the necessity for a technology platform within your smart building, evaluating options effectively becomes challenging.

Moreover, after implementation, assessing its success will prove difficult without pre-defined objectives. We've observed that use cases establish the most direct connection between the rationale, the method, and the specific tools employed.

Illustrative Example: A Real Estate Developer's Perspective

Consider a real estate developer engaged in the construction or renovation of a commercial office building. Let's apply the 'why, how, and what' framework:

• Why will occupants be attracted? — The building will feature a comprehensive suite of amenities and advanced technologies designed to ensure tenants feel secure, comfortable, and connected within a thriving community.
• How will this be achieved? — By integrating cutting-edge tenant-facing technology that delivers services and capabilities exceeding those available in a typical home environment. Creating inviting indoor and outdoor spaces that promote well-being is also crucial.
• What specific tools, products, and technologies will be implemented?

The Final Stage: Technology Selection

Answering this final question often presents the greatest difficulty and is typically deferred until the final stages of the planning process. For building systems integrators, this represents the commencement of their core responsibilities.

Defining Desired Results in Smart Building Technology

As diverse groups of stakeholders initiate their assessment of smart building technologies, clearly articulating the anticipated outcomes for each application is paramount. A helpful approach during product evaluation involves categorizing solutions based on their core capabilities.

Several overarching objectives, including the facilitation of digital twin creation, data normalization, and robust data storage, are commonly sought across various system types. However, a comprehensive enterprise building management system (BMS) is uniquely positioned to deliver the fullest spectrum of these expected results.

Platforms like Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS), custom reporting and dashboarding tools, analytics as a service, and energy-optimization platforms offer a range of enabled and optional outcomes tailored to specific needs.

Outcome Alignment with Smart Building Platforms

The following table illustrates the alignment of key outcomes with different categories of smart building platforms currently available. Detailed explanations of each outcome are provided at the conclusion of this article.

• Digital twin enablement: Supported by Integration Platform as a Service, Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• Data normalization: Supported by Integration Platform as a Service, Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, and Enterprise BMS.
• Data storage: Supported by Integration Platform as a Service, Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, and Enterprise BMS.
• Single pane of glass: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service and Enterprise BMS; optional for Bespoke reports and dashboarding.
• Dashboard: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service; supported by Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, and Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• Mobile app: Optional across Integration Platform as a Service, Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• Mobile-first web design: Supported by Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• Operator command and control: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service and Enterprise BMS.
• Automated optimization strategies: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service and Energy-optimization platforms; supported by Enterprise BMS.
• Reporting: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service; supported by Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, and Enterprise BMS.
• Analytics: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service; supported by Analytics as a service and Enterprise BMS.
• Machine learning: Enabled by Integration Platform as a Service and Analytics as a service; supported by Enterprise BMS.
• Artificial intelligence: Not generally supported across the listed platforms.
• High availability: Optional for Analytics as a service, Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• Disaster recovery: Not generally supported across the listed platforms.
• Cloud connected: Supported by Integration Platform as a Service, Bespoke reports and dashboarding, Analytics as a service, and Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.
• On-premise: Optional for Integration Platform as a Service and Bespoke reports and dashboarding; supported by Enterprise BMS.
• GATEWay: Supported by Integration Platform as a Service, Analytics as a service, Energy-optimization platforms, and Enterprise BMS.

Key: E = Enabled, O = Optional, X = Expected.

Understanding these outcome alignments is crucial for selecting the right smart building platform to meet specific organizational goals. Careful consideration of these factors will ensure a successful technology implementation.

The Vendor Evaluation Process: A Comprehensive Approach

Once agreement is reached regarding the Digital Building Platform (DBP) category, the vendor selection process can commence, shifting the emphasis from marketing materials to core functionalities. This approach fosters a more equitable evaluation environment for competing vendors and empowers facility managers to make well-informed choices. While scorecards are frequently employed during vendor selection, the precise definition of each evaluation factor is often poorly understood by those conducting the assessments.

This lack of clarity is readily apparent to experienced smart-buildings consultants. However, for property owners, developers, general contractors, or facility managers tasked with this decision, a thorough understanding of the requirements is crucial for assembling a capable evaluation team. Consultants can provide valuable input, but the ultimate decision shouldn't rest solely with them, as their involvement may not extend throughout the building’s operational lifespan.

A robust evaluation team should encompass:

• Individuals with extensive industry experience and a broad understanding of diverse software and hardware solutions.
• A cross-functional group of individuals representing various disciplines, who are actively engaged and accountable throughout the process.
• Representatives from both the construction phase and those responsible for ongoing building operations after occupancy.
• Personnel capable of addressing the current needs of building occupants and operators, while simultaneously anticipating requirements over a 5- to 10-year horizon.

The process of choosing a DBP to support employees, partners, and vendors in managing a high-performing facility closely resembles selecting an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, rather than a traditional Building Management System (BMS). This is a key consideration often overlooked until it’s too late. Successful building operations platforms will be utilized frequently by a wide range of personnel.

Unlike a BMS, which is predominantly used by those working in mechanical spaces, the DBP will be accessed by teams focused on sustainability, IT, external service providers, and those in mechanical rooms. The selection of a suitable partner is just as vital as the technology itself, particularly when considering the long-term success of the project.

This partner selection can be challenging, given the rapid evolution of the industry and the novelty of many technologies. It’s essential to investigate the history and track record of the team responsible for installing, servicing, and supporting the systems throughout the platform’s lifecycle. Often, the partner ultimately determines whether implementation and ongoing support are successful.

Many organizations are currently undergoing digital transformations, seeking strategies to encourage employees to return to the workplace, prioritize health and well-being, and cultivate environments where people genuinely want to spend their time. While remote work has proven effective for many, the value of in-person interaction and shared experiences remains significant.

Creating comfortable, healthy, and engaging built environments necessitates the adoption of innovative tools. Choosing a reliable DBP is a pivotal decision. Furthermore, it’s important to gain a clear understanding of the specific outcomes or features offered within different categories of smart-building platforms. While data storage is a commonly understood concept, others, such as data normalization or digital twin enablement, may require further exploration for facilities managers considering technology upgrades.

Definitions

Digital twin enablement involves the creation of a digital twin by numerous platforms and organizations, specifically to facilitate the development of digital buildings.

Following digital twin creation, functionalities such as a unified interface, HVAC analytics, and energy optimization strategies can be implemented.

Key Concepts

Data normalization, within the realm of digital buildings, is the process of integrating diverse data sets originating from similar or interconnected building systems.

This integration involves the application of ontology to the data, ensuring consistency and meaning.

Data storage encompasses both the storage of relationships and metadata essential for the digital twin process.

It also includes the storage of building system data within a data lake environment.

User Experience & Control

A single pane of glass typically describes a user experience (UX) that consolidates information from multiple building systems into a single view.

For instance, a graphical interface might integrate lighting controls, HVAC controls, and power metering data.

Operator command and control refers to a collection of interface elements that empower users to adjust setpoints and schedules.

These elements also allow for overrides of specific outputs, such as lighting commands, pump controls, economizer dampers, and control valves.

Automation & Reliability

Automated optimization strategies, often executed from the cloud, represent software-based automation capable of modifying setpoints or outputs.

The primary goal of these strategies is typically energy reduction, demand management, or plant optimization.

High availability is a system characteristic focused on maintaining an agreed-upon level of operational performance, particularly uptime, for extended periods.

Disaster recovery comprises the policies, tools, and procedures designed to ensure the recovery or continuation of critical technology infrastructure and systems.

This ensures business continuity in the face of unforeseen events.