The required reading, chapter 2 of the BIM handbook, was detailed, informative, and provided an overview of BIM and its development. Prior to reading the chapter, I didn't know all that much about the origins and specifics of BIM. However, the part of the reading that was the most interesting was the section on what separate BIM and parametric modeling from other drafting softwares. The purpose and goal behind BIM is to build actual structures, where as the other mentioned softwares more or less place design features within a space (walls, floors, etc.) I agree that BIM will certainly be a major force in our field in the future, but I also believe that the transition will take considerable time.
The other article I read was called Building Design: The Sky Is Not The Limit, discusses how BIM and other technologies has spurred on the development of "supertall" skyscrapers (building height of over 300 meters.) The article interviews prominent structural engineers, as well as BIM directors, and discusses how buildings of this size are now possible. BIM, and computational geometry, allows designers to take full advantage of the building information model. Instead of adding additional floors, the BIM models are being designed with algorithms that can account for and alter the design of the building if additional floors are added - meaning the additional floor doesn't require a complete redesign, rather the model resizes members, materials etc. I think that is a promising, and yet somewhat worrisome idea. While it certainly increases productivity and speed, I worry it could lead to a small typing error resulting in a major building issue.
The interviews of the structural engineers sound very fascinating! I too was not aware of the capabilities of the BIM software going into this week's readings and the application of BIM for superstructures makes perfect sense. I am curios about how the buildings of yesterday (Empire State Building, Sears Tower, etc.) would have been designed differently and/or more efficiently had BIM been involved.
ReplyDeleteThe second article sounds very interesting but I would also agree that all this automation of design could lead to small errors occurring without anyone knowing. I am also hesitant to automate the design process this much because it makes it seem like the people running the design do not need to think as much which is leading down a bad road. I believe the speed that some of these processes could be completed is an excellent step building design but the people using the software can not stop checking and realizing what the software is doing.
ReplyDelete