CAFM (computer-aided facility management) and CMMS (computerised maintenance management system) are the systems operations teams use to run buildings: asset registers, work orders, planned maintenance, helpdesk, space and compliance. They are where BIM handover data ends up. If the data doesn't fit their structure, it is re-keyed by hand, or not at all.
At a glance
| CAFM | CMMS | |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Space, occupancy, moves, helpdesk, room bookings, often maintenance too | Maintenance: assets, work orders, planned maintenance, spares, labour |
| Typical users | Facilities managers, workplace teams, helpdesk | Maintenance managers, engineers, contractors |
| Overlap | Many products do both; the names are used loosely | |
| Related systems | BMS (building controls), EAM/ERP (enterprise asset management), document systems |
What these systems need from BIM
| Data | Why it's needed | Typical source |
|---|---|---|
| Location hierarchy (site, building, floor, space) | Every asset and job is located | Model spaces and levels, COBie Facility/Floor/Space |
| Asset register (tag, type, location, system) | What's there | Model elements, COBie Type/Component |
| Product data (manufacturer, model, serial, warranty) | Spares and claims | Installer records, submittals |
| Maintenance regimes (tasks, frequency) | Planned maintenance | Maintenance standards (such as SFG20 in the UK), O&M manuals |
| Documents (manuals, certificates, drawings) | Reference on the job | O&M information, linked by asset |
| Space data (area, use, department) | Space management, cleaning, charging | Model spaces and room data |
Why handover data fails to load
- Different structure: the CMMS expects its own asset classes and fields; the handover file uses another classification.
- Wrong granularity: the model has every light fitting; the CMMS wants "lighting circuit, Level 2".
- Missing links: components without a space, or types without components.
- Placeholder values: "TBC", "n/a" or copied defaults in required fields.
- No one to receive it: the operator wasn't involved, so nobody tests an import before handover.
A better route
- Get the CAFM/CMMS team to describe their import format at the start.
- Map BIM classification and fields to theirs, and agree it in the AIR.
- Test-import a data drop from technical design (even half-complete) into a test copy of the system.
- Check every later drop with the same rules.
- At handover, import, then fix in the system, not in spreadsheets.
Worked example
A local authority hands over a leisure centre with a COBie file that passes a schema check. Importing it into the CMMS fails: the CMMS needs each asset to have one of its 140 asset classes and a parent system. The project team adds a mapping table (Uniclass product code to CMMS class) and a System sheet. On the next project, the mapping is in the AIR from day one and the test import happens at RIBA Stage 4.
Common mistakes
- Assuming "COBie compliant" means "loads into our system".
- Choosing or changing the CAFM after handover requirements were written.
- Handing over every element as an asset.
- Fixing data in spreadsheets after import instead of at the source.
Where to read more
Vendors' import guides describe their data models. ISO 19650-3 covers the asset information model in operation; BS 8536:2022 covers operator involvement. Facilities management bodies publish guidance on CAFM selection and data.