!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]

And let's not forget that Teamwork was a huge influence on how Revit's worksharing methodology was designed.

Now ArchiCAD users can feel flattered, LOL

[Djordje]

Well ...

Should we compare cars based on the number of wheels and doors, or bonnets/hoods?

It is only normal that the two leading packages are going to "borrow" from each other. Nothing inherently good or bad in it - as long as the developers stick to developing what they have started instead of watching over the fence ...

Impartiality is hard to achieve, as we are all biased by habit and the years of the experience and investment in X or Y. I don't really know of anyone paid to know both - well, maybe I do know of one person, present here ... but that is rarely the case.

[TomWaltz]

Djordje wrote:
Impartiality is hard to achieve, as we are all biased by habit and the years of the experience and investment in X or Y. I don't really know of anyone paid to know both - well, maybe I do know of one person, present here ... but that is rarely the case.

Yes, I'm working at a company using both Archicad and Revit and it is really interesting sometimes!

[TomWaltz]

mikem wrote:
Is it surprising then that he is constantly banging the drum for the official Revit view of what BIM is.

To his credit, I'd say the Autodesk view of BIM is a lot more robust than what I've seen from Graphisoft.

IFC is still pathetic as an exchange format. The interoperability issue is still really important, especially as more engineers start using it. The lack of analytical ability within Archicad makes it feel more like a 3D Drafting program (thanks Rob!) with a few reporting capabilities than a true BIM one.

I completely disagree with the Autodesk idea of buying and assimilating everything on the planet, but I think their doing so will advance the ability of design professionals to design better performing buildings with fewer issues on the construction site.

I think the Autodesk BIM suite will eventually equal the MS Office suite in the sense that the vast majority of people use it, they mostly hate the monopoly, and they use the products to get their routine work done quickly so they can focus on the more interesting parts.

[TomWaltz]

BDC wrote:
When you put yourself out there as a Revit spokesperson and Bim expert you need to know what you're talking about,I would have thought Autodesk would have checked this persons credentials?
Its quite ironic that the wishlist manager wishers to be a BIM consultant...
At least at Nemetschek you need a Phd to direct development....maybe not at Revit..Good ol Wes is out there sprooking for ideas.
LOL,hes playing Autodesk like a hand puppet mate..sucked in

I've known PhDs who truly are Piled Higher & Deeper and not qualified to lead anything.

If you want to look at credentials for something, I'd be more interested in what they've accomplished (results!) than what schooling they had, where they worked, or who they know. Wes has done a lot of good work for the AUGI group.

There are a lot of really brilliant, visionary people out there without any degree at all. Licensed builder, architect, draftsman... we are talking about IDEAS here, and a good one can come from anyone regardless of background.

Based on what I've seen written here over the years, I'd trust Wes on BIM-related issues a lot more than I would you.

Of course, we are also talking about people willing to tell us who they really are when they take a stance, Mr. BDC.

[Anonymous]

I think the Autodesk BIM suite will eventually equal the MS Office suite in the sense that the vast majority of people use it, they mostly hate the monopoly, and they use the products to get their routine work done quickly so they can focus on the more interesting parts.

I agree. That's why Archicad cannot just be a "me too!" program.

I did a quick presentation for a client a few weeks ago. It was a café. I need a specific merchandiser and some aluminum chairs, etc.. I work on a Mac. Sketchup's 3-d warehouse had all of this fabulous stuff that I didn't have time to make. So I did the presentation in that.

Could I have done it in Archicad or Vectorworks? Maybe, but I'd have trouble finding the parts I found in Sketchup. I'd spend a ton of extra time making them. Does this make my life easier or harder? I'll let you answer that.

The reality of BIM is that it feeds off the network effect. I want the largest library of FREE, pre-made building parts to access.

They are in 2 options:

Sketchup, which isn't a BIM program or necessarily an Architecture program

Revit, because it is fast on its way to being the de facto standard here in the USA.

Almost all American Architecture students are being trained on it now.

So the network--the skilled labor to use the software and the building parts-- is Revit-centric.

Food for thought.

[Anonymous]

Right know, I think Vectorworks is the first program, of the three, with and option to import sketch up files from Google Warehouse. From now, almost three years!

[Anonymous]

option to import sketch up files from Google Warehouse.

Native files are the way to go. These workarounds are no longer acceptable in the world of BIM. Importing a file loses all of the BIM info.

[Anonymous]

Well, you talked about Sketchup. If you need something from it you can get it. That's not bad at all. Specially in the design stage, or for presenting ideas. Doing it inside your Bim application, better.

Vw has an impresive native library, based on intelligents objects, too.

[__archiben]

william235711 wrote:
Sketchup, which isn't a BIM program ...

but equally, i don't think they're far off: with a back end database you could argue that they would be there. don't be put off by the front end simplicity . . .

~/archiben