Steve wrote:
$16 billion in annual losses for the design and construction industries is due to a lack of accurate and effective information exchange?
Yes...it's due to the incompatible 'data schemas' between the various programs. For instance, 2 weeks ago, I had a problem swapping an AutoCAD file/dwg with a consultant on a time critical deadline. What with correcting the files' formatting and the incidental communication back & forth to debug the format, the time spent was about; 5 man hours (x yours & their billing rates).
Steve wrote:
Is that so? Is he equating hypothetical savings with losses or what?
Not 'he,' but they; this is a committee within the AIA.
In most practices, we expect to reduce the amount of time spent doing things as we get better at doing the same procedures. I remember hand drawing so my reference goes back many years. Most successful firms benchmark their tasks in terms of time & then note how new technologies affect the project's 'real time' to develop relative to similar projects.
When software actually introduces MORE complexity and time into the the work flow, efficiency and productivity suffer. To be honest, my productivity has suffered due to several annual 'relearning phases' of ArchiCAD's changed graphic interfaces, 'new features' that I don't need, features that don't work (like Stairmaker) and other topics discussed in far greater detail elsewhere in these forums. What's gauling & a little embarrassing is when my data or my consultant's data can't be utilized to complete our respective design work; others are then affected esp. when we are trying to work as a real team.
This report gives me some knowledge and strengthens my resolve to insist on compatibility as the Architect/Project Info Manager of my projects. Architects must do a lot of advocating and managing data files has supplanted 'drawing management' with some new and interesting challenges. Despite its problems, ArchiCAD is still ahead other software.....for now.
Steve wrote:
How much of these “losses” is do the fact that the information he refers to can’t be extracted from the model?
Well, I'm not sure what kind of practice you're running, but the next time you receive a file from a consultant that is not compatible, measure or note the time dealing with it, the time coordinating matters until they are resolved and how long it takes before you can continue working.
It's what the AIA surveyed many firms over the last year.
Steve wrote:It's compounded by the fact that more and more consulting firms are now using many different types of BIM or CAD software with '3D data schema' that do not 'play' well with each other. Getting the files usable does waste a lot of time.
I can’t help but notice how BIM software (ArchiCAD specifically) has made little progress in their ability to extract and process the BI.
Steve wrote:I'm not sure that inventing a semantic term 'authoring,' will make the problem go away. Right now, I'm looking forward to another 'file-go-around' early next week when a consultant sends me something 'they' think will work with the version of ArchiCAD that I use. Testing takes way too much time that our clients won't pay for. We have to simply work things out as we go along. So... We'll see what happens.
This deficiency has been eliminated however, by inventing a new definition. In case you haven’t noticed, ArchiCAD is BIM “authoring” software.
The fact that you can’t get the BI out of the model and into useful formats is incidental. ArchiCAD is just for “authoring” the BI, not actually using it.
Just a friendly note to an interesting comment.....
Mark
Still looking?
