BIM: myth or reality?

[Anonymous]

Four years ago, I worked at a firm which used Archicad. I liked the program but I basically used it as a 2D drafting tool. Nobody at the firm actually generated sections or elevations or details from the 3D model. At best, we'd use section cuts as an underlay to get the width (and to a lesser extent, the height) of the building right. The section cuts and elevations drawn from the model were not nearly presentation quality and even if we had invested a huge amount of time making the 3D model perfect which wasn't always practical, there would still be the issue of lineweights.

What I would like to know is if anyone here feels they are truly using archicad as a BIM program. Does anyone actually update something in plan and automatically have their elevations, section, details, schedules update?

I've used Autocad for the last 4 years and I plan to go back to Archicad regardless of whether I can realistically expect to use at as a BIM program. I like Archicad more than autocad because I feel it's easier to produce 3D renderings and I like how you can draw "walls" as opposed to drawing 2 parallel lines and then trimming the intersections. I feel like Archicad is making a strong effort to allow it's users to have linked drawings but I'm skeptical about whether we are actually there yet.

I hope I'm wrong- maybe my previous firm was a little backwards in it's methods or maybe a lot has changed in the last 4 years. I'm very curious to hear, for example, if people hear actually pull presentable elevations off the 3D model or if they draft them the old fashioned way? or maybe some sort of hybrid?
thanks!

[Bruce]

Well, I'm going to keep my answer simple:

I model just about everything...and not just to get the 'pretty pictures'. With Cadimages tools (which also includes a wall framing tool - http://www.cadimagetools.com/home.php?page=products&productID=185 ) I can get to a fine level of resolution before jumping into the 2d details - including guttering, down pipes, footings, slab structure, door & window schedules, wall cladding, roof cladding etc.

IMO much neater and more accurate.

[Djordje]

Bruce wrote:
I model just about everything...and not just to get the 'pretty pictures'.

The main historical problem.

ArchiCAD was conceptually so ahead of its time 20 years ago that the only way it could be comprehended was 3D modeling ... and the documentation part was an arcane secret.

As Ignacio said - it is INFORMATION modeling. Geometry for the con docs, information, information, information!

Oh, yes, does pretty pictures too, especially if you have read Dwight's book!

[Anonymous]

I model about 90% of the building, skipping some fine detais, which are easier to draw by hand. Linked sections and elevations are a major help in the design process and come ready with enough detailling. For actual CD, just before printing, I transform them to drawings (there is such an option you could switch) to be able to add the final touches like fills, text and dimentions. People and trees definitely 2D.

[Anonymous]

I think BIM is a "realistic myth" or should i say "mythical reality"