!Restored: Vectorworks 2009 BIM: Its Happening... Its Not Happening

[Aaron Bourgoin]

The press release and the white paper on this product are reminiscent of the American Presidential Election: casting doubt on the competition's experience and outlook.

"From a conceptual and philosophical perspective, BIM is a better way to design, construct, and manage buildings. It allows architects to design more efficiently, construction firms to better manage costs, and owners to stay on budget and control day-to-day operational costs. BIM fulfills the promise
of economic gain and also better business relations. Excessive change orders, resulting from communication errors or missing information, negatively reflect on owner’s perception of architects and construction firms. Architects and construction firms with a reputation for costly overruns tend to lose business.

"As the key technology shared between architects and construction firms, CAD applications have taken center stage in the movement to take BIM mainstream. CAD’s ability to capture and represent the geographic information, building geometry, component relationships, and quantities and
properties of building components is at the heart of BIM. Several CAD vendors tout their applications as central to the BIM process, capable of managing the complex 3D information model generated on a BIM project. But are they really? As BIM evolved, architectural intelligence was built on top of primitive foundations. Many BIM applications have limited functionality and key elements of the model cannot be represented in 3D; most do not have a modeling kernel reliable or fast enough to handle large, detailed 3D models. Without the efficiency of a purpose-built 3D modeling kernel, good visualization becomes an extremely time-consuming process.

"We have the answer to BIM’s technological problems: adopt the time-tested platform used by the MCAD industry to build the best architectural 3D CAD solution available. With a purpose-built 3D modeling kernel, Vectorworks 2009 manages building complexity which previously tested the limits of
most BIM applications."

But then, Boingo:

At the Nemetschek Press Event, Ralph Grabowski reports this about Jim Flaherty's keynote theme which is

"BIM Isn't Happening...

...because it costs architects to implement BIM [building information modeling], but they do not get paid more for using it. (In the row ahead of me, Ed Goldberg was vigorously nodding his head in agreement.) Architects want a payback for themselves; they care not if the owner saves money down the road with BIM, because architects don't get any of that savings paid back.

"The key strength of Vectorworks is its free-form modeling, which products like Revit can't do. Mr Flaherty is pleased that Autodesk helps out Vectorworks by marketing BIM and Revit -- but then ends up selling AutoCAD.

"For five years, the #1 selling point of Vectorworks has been its presentation graphics -- outputting good looking drawings with gradients, transparency, 2D Booleans, and non-photorealistic effects in 2D and 3D. All this generated within Vectorworks, again something competitors can't do.

"Now there is a new key mission: Design. Mr Flaherty segregates design into four steps:

I. 2D.
II. 3D Conceptualization or Visualization.
III. Integrated Design and Development.
IV. Model-centric BIM [building information modeling].

Most customers are at step II, 3D Conceptualization; he's trying to get users to the next step, Integrated Design.

Step IV? It's a long way off. Model-centric BIM is the future that everyone talks about today. But there are lots of holes in the process, such as legal issues. Today, BIM works only for owner-builder-operators, such as GM building its own plants.

So, what are some of the limitations of competitors -- Revit, in particular?

* Modeling limitation; freeform modeling is needed to design things like spline-shaped roof edges. Vectorworks is the only one with NURBS surfaces.
* 3D speed and robustness; purely parametric modelers can't handle the model size once details are added.
* Complex UI; users face varying user interfaces when they switch between 2D and 3D packages from the same vendor. Vectorworks has the same UI for all its software.
* BIM slows down design; users spend too much time wrestling with the system.
* Good visualization is hard to get; customers find they have a hard time reproducing the beautiful renderings pictured on the vendor's Web site.

Mr Flaherty sees BIM as something that excites accountants, but not architects, and thinks that paper drawings will be the preferred output method for his lifetime -- as opposed to exchanging drawings electronically."

see the whole article at Issue #572 : : Setpember 16, 2008
http://www.upfrontezine.com/2008/upf-572.htm

Seems Mr. Flaherty has a different idea of what BIM is. His approach seems to be to say, everyone else's ideas about BIM are wrong or wrong headed. And then to take BIM back to CAD circa 1993.

[Anonymous]

Aaron, having just read the ezine it seems to me you have been a little creative with your conclusions on what Sean Flaherty was actually saying.

From that article and other interviews with Sean Flaherty (Architosh and Podcad Podcasts) he was trying to point out that:
- Vectorworks is heading down a path that will provide design flexibility to Architects so that they can design and build the buildings they want without the limitations of being restricted to only what the built in object programming is able to do.
- Vectorworks is not trying to become a cheap clone of Archicad or Revit.
- There is a misconception that BIM is a virtual building model. It isn't. It is about the data that is embedded in the drawn or modelled building elements.
- For the forseeable future buildings will be built from printed drawings not virtual models residing in a computer. The latter might be the reality when robots are doing the work, but I doubt that we will see any time soon a grano worker or a bricklayer using a computer out on a real site working out what they have to do.

The problem with BIM is that most CAD vendors are promoting it as virtual building modelling that is only important in the design phase. Nothing could be further from the truth. The real concept is about having intelligent documentation with embedded data that will facilitate the management of the building over its lifetime. To be able to do that effectively will require that each set of building documents accurately reflect how the building was actually built. ie. they will need to be as built with all substitutions and variations incorporated into them. Once it starts happening properly architects will have to both embed the information up front and then ensure that it is all correct when the building is handed over to the owner. More work which will benefit the building owner, but at the moment very little recognition that this mind numbing boring work will have to be paid for. If you want to get paid for doing it you will have to fight tooth and nail for it.

PS -
Vectorworks and Archicad operate in different market segments which is why there is a difference in approach. I personally don't see a problem with that. Different people have different needs and ways of working. Having a choice means users can use the program that best fits their needs. For some it will be Archicad, for others it will be Vectorworks, AllPlan or one of the many other programs available. It is in nobody's interest to have only a few choices because inevitably that would mean we would get screwed through a higher cost of ownership.

[Anonymous]

There is a bit more information on the VW 2009 launch in this Architosh report on it: http://architosh.com/news/2008-09/0917_press-day1.html

It included an interesting chart showing the relative modelling capabilities of the various BIM programs.

[Thomas Holm]

Mikem, thanks for the Architosh link.

- I find it very interesting that Nemetschek has bought into Siemen's Parasolid modeling kernel for Vectorworks. It's the same engine that drives Microstation, Mcad and SolidEdge. It does Nurbs surfaces and true solids. It's fast and handles large projects with ease. And it was ported to MacOSX with Mcad already several years ago.

I wouldn't be surprised if this shows a future route for Archicad too. We all know that Archicad's old modeling engine currently is aged and in the need for a refurbishment. And it would be completely logical for Nemetschek AG to consolidate its purchases behind the scenes, while maintaining the three-pronged market approach with Allplan, Vectorworks and Archicad.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the heads up - it is great to hear what is happening elsewhere - hopefully GS have read this given it is development of a "family" member!

I think from this forum's point of view a very telling slide was one that I have attached here.....

and it is from Nemetschek....

and it confirms ArchiCADs slipping into irrelevancy as a modeler...
I won't even mention the archaic implementation of a renderer (Light works)...

so much for all the hype regarding 12

[Thomas Holm]

rwallis, as I said, I also think the chart is interesting. But remember they still compete, even if owned by the same company.

But regarding AC12, hype or whatever, there is a HUGE difference felt when working with it on a multi-core machine, compared with the previous versions. And I'm not selling it!

[Anonymous]

It's also interesting to note from the above image that Nemetschek are stating a whole year+ in advance that they are planning to implement full 3d parametrics into Vectorworks. I suspect the current users will feel quite positive as this clearly shows the program has a direction it is heading in.

I'd like to see something similar from GS, not necessarily full 3d parametrics as such, just an indication of where they are heading & what they are aiming for etc.

I'm not asking them to show all their cards, but maybe at least the suit they will be playing with. We are the ones betting on the software with our subscriptions!

[Thomas Holm]

Peter wrote:
I'm not asking them to show all their cards, but maybe at least the suit they will be playing with. We are the ones betting on the software with our subscriptions!

I fully agree on this. Graphisoft should come forward. Otherwise they risk that we conclude that Nemetschek AG isn't supporting Archicad. Not good.

[Anonymous]

I am currently exploring Cinema 4D as a tool to create organic architectural forms. I noticed that Vectorworks offers solid modelling AND nurbs modelling. I understand what nurbs modelling is from using C4D, but what is solid modelling? Don't we already have that in AC with SMO?

[Dwight]

We have SMURP for that.