First my weekly quote:
"Object-based parametric modeling is a major change for the building industry that is greatly facilitating the move from a drawing-based and handcraft technology to one based on digitally readable models that can be exchanged with other applications."
- BIM Handbook, Chapter 2, pg. 63
A little bit about the handbook before I get into my articles for this week. I was surprised to see how many different BIM software packages there are available. It really puts into perspective my naivety on the subject; here I was aware of Revit, Bentley, and... that's it. I have never heard of any of the other 4 or 5 odd programs that the handbook elaborated on. Surprising. Disappointing too. Some thoughts on the different options:
- The more uses and interfaces the software provides, the steeper the learning curve. DUH. I'd say this is pretty obvious, but still, recognizing this does have some value. For people looking to get into BIM, starting with the more complex software may be a good route. Learning the program will be a struggle, but once you master the program, you'll likely appreciate the hardwork.
- Consistency. This goes tandem with the previous comment. Unfortunately, it seems to me like proficiency in BIM is a one way street; being good at one means neglecting the others. This is both good and bad. Bad news first: focusing on one will limit your expertise and cut you off from the potential uses that the other packages have to offer, where your preferred program might be lacking. There is no ultimate BIM tool as of yet, and different programs a good for different things. Knowing several of the programs would be quite a valuable skill; however, proficiency is hard to achieve. On the other hand, there is something to be said for picking one and sticking with it. Many of these software developers continuously work on updating their packages, and maintain many of the same functionalities, shortcuts and interfaces as they progress. This is no different than the current debate regarding 2D modeling programs: AutoCAD vs. Microstation (Bentley). Most people you ask like one and hate the other; its like Yankees/Redsox. Few people like both, and I wouldnt expect BIM to be any different.
The second article that I read (Reading #2 below) offers a good perspective on the current transition from 2D modeling to parametric BIM practices. The article clears up some of the misconceptions about BIM, as reported in other articles. I wont go into too much detail about the article, mostly because I wont do it justice. Its a wonderfully written article that I strongly encourage everyone to read for themselves. Rather, I want to briefly discuss something that occured to me while reading it. The article references several other articles that attempt to discredit BIM software as difficult, un-useful as well as one that aims to correlate the use of BIM with being sued. It leads me to wonder: is there an industry stigma on using BIM software? There are certainly a lot of companies that are hesitant to make the switch, and to a certain degree it is justifiable. These companies most likely have spent the last 30 years building up their CAD libraries, standards, file formats, etc.. And now, in addition to fighting for work in a heavily diluted industry, they are feeling pressure to update their technology? The thought of spending another 30 years to build up a new set of standards, typical objects and formats is quite daunting, and today making that investment could be the domino that puts a company out of business. These software packages are expensive to buy, not to mention the cost - both in terms of time and money - of training your employees to use the new software. Still, there appear to be some people who, rather than put in the effort to improve their practices, are content with fighting the change and discounting the obvious potential. Its an interesting perspective on the current state of our industry.
Speaking of potential, the first reading is a cool article about a proposed residential high-rise building in Mumbai, India. The city is currently overcrowded by dense horizontal planning, and the 200 meter building would be a relief on land constraints. The firm designing the building, Orcutt Winslow used a team of four architects, two each from the United States and India. This grouping provided the group with the techinical experience of American architecture, with the cultrual practices and details of the native region. The architects used ArchiCAD as their BIM tool of choice, which allowed them to create a 'modular' design file wherein they could rearrage the layout to provide the client with several different options. Pretty cool. Even cooler, the architects were able to collaborate on the project and simultaneously work on aspects of the model while remaining in their respective countries. This reminded me of a book that I read by Thomas Friedman called The World is Flat. The book talks about the effect that RFID, the Internet, Walmart, UPS and outsourcing are having on breaking down the geographical barries of the world, allowing information to spread faster, and people to collaborate easier. Add BIM to that list.
Reading #1 - Sahana Pride Project
Reading #2 - De-Mything BIM
Special treat for you guys this week. If you haven't happened across these two site yet, I strongly suggest you take a look at them. The blog is exactly what the title suggests - All Things BIM. The blogger talks about his opinions and also provides some pretty cool links to articles, software updates, etc. The website is outstanding. Both of my article this week came from this site. Its wonderfully crafted and I easliy spent 2 hours just clicking from link to link. Do yourself a favor and check it out!
Blog - All Things BIM
Website - Archdaily
No comments:
Post a Comment