Report assesses how BIM adoption sharpens crews, improves jobsite safety

Thanks to increased use of Building Information Modeling technology, contractors are able to reduce overall schedules and onsite injuries, according to “Safety Management in the Construction Industry.” When incorporated in a project, the new McGraw Hill Construction SmartMarket Report finds, BIM helps increase crew members’ safety awareness by:

  • Providing an easy-to-understand visual representation of where they are working, mapping out location of prospective hazards along with each day’s work phases;
  • Identifying potential hazards with 4D scheduling, which makes it easier to plan construction activities around maximum safety measures; and,
  • Identifying individual tasks within the model, making it easy for workers to understand what is happening in their assigned area versus the whole building.

The report also finds that, in many cases, implementing BIM and reducing injuries results in up to three weeks or more cut from the estimated construction schedule.


A Cook County, Ill., jury has returned a $10,875,622 verdict against a concrete sealer manufacturer, and in favor of a plaintiff who was severely burned in a household explosion while using the company’s product on his basement floor. According to the complaint, entered in the Circuit Court of Cook County by Chicago-based Passen Law Group, vapors of the sealer migrated to a utility room, where they were ignited by a water heater pilot light, causing a large explosion.

Plaintiff Andrzej Plizga sustained severe burns to approximately 67 percent of his body, although there were no facial burns; was hospitalized for several months, undergoing hand, arm and leg skin grafts; and, attorneys allege, is unable to return to work as a bricklayer due to extensive hand injuries. Counsel filed a “strict product liability” action, alleging that the sealer was formulated too flammable for indoor, household use, and labeled in violation of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act and equivalent Illinois law. Defense attorneys countered that Plizga misused the product and assumed the risk of injury by failing to turn off ignition sources or read the Material Safety Data Sheet, as instructed in product warning labels.