The BIG BIM picture

[Anonymous]

Currently I am in the research phase of moving our company in the world of Building Information Modeling. Our firm is on the cutting edge of design for science and technology facilities. To our credit we have designed some of largest research facilities in the world. Our firm is a multidisciplinary organization with Architecture, Laboratory Planning, Structural, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical, Site Planning, Facility Planning, and Interiors under one umbrella. We have been working in 2D AutoCad since release 10 but now that the technology has evolved it is time for us to incorporate the latest technologies into our workflow. Our firm, like most AE firms, has decided that BIM is our future. The question is what technologies(software) will improve how we deliver projects.
As I continue to research and understand the world of BIM I continue to keep the following points in mind when choosing any technology. My questions for the ArchiCad community are at the end of the list.

1. Past, Present, and Future. Because we cannot just drop the current 2D process and switch all future projects to the 3D BIM process, what current software will help us transition by supporting our old projects, our current projects and our future projects?

2. Interoperability. What software will support the 3D interoperability between all the above disciplines? The software needs to support the old way of 2D xrefs, but it must now support 3D interoperability(Industry Foundation Classes).

3. 2D Drawing Coordination. How does the software interface with multiple users and with users who are using different software? Our firm, our contractor, our clients, and consultants require several different drawing formats from AutoCad 14, 2000, 2002, Microstation, PDF, DWF, Tif, Jpeg, etc. Will the software support all these formats?

4. Design flexibility. How customizable can the building be? I have yet to see any of our facilities contain just run-of-the-mill building designs. Our designers aim for something new every time on all aspects of the facility design, from overall building shapes to very fine details. We cannot rely on the software’s libraries; instead can the libraries be customized to fit our every need.

5. Building Size and Complexity. Can the software handle the complexity and size of our buildings? For us, it not just size that is a factor it’s also the complexity of all that goes into a science and research facility. How does the software handle these things?

6. Scheduling and Cost Estimating. If you are familiar with BIM, you understand the BID process is getting pulled closer and closer to the early part of the Construction Document phase and even into Design Documentation. Does the software support the ability to view or export out a broad range of building data for early bidding and cost estimating?

7. Error checking. Does the software support a “building spell check?” Can we perform coordination checks between disciplines and consultants on major aspects of the facility?

8. Code Checking. In Asia there are a few governments that are working on programs that code checks your BIM model. When USA code officials adopt this methodology will the software be ready to support it?

9. Analysis Reports. Will the software support the future of Wind or Energy analysis on a facility?

10. Construction. Does the software fit the BIM process beyond the design phase? Can contractors use the software or the BIM model to do 4D construction?

11. As Built BIM Model. How will the software encourage the creation of an As Built BIM Model for the owner?

12. Facility Management. Can the software support facility management? Does the software help the owner to better understand the facility and how to manage every complex part of it?

13. Building Lifecycle. Because our facilities are design to evolve with the changes of science and technology, can the BIM model be reopened in five or more years to support major changes to the facility such as renovations and additions?


If you have managed to read through that entire list then I ask you to comment on how ArchiCad or ArchiFM fit into any one of the above points. I am not asking and I know that ArchiCad or ArchiFM cannot do all these things. I am also not look for one single application that can. What I am looking for is software that supports the BIG BIM picture. If the software cannot fulfill one of the above points then what can the software do to support it. For example, if Revit cannot do 4D Construction for a contractor then how will Revit help to get the information to the contractor so that he can do a 4D model in his own software?

I am posting this message on Zoogdesign.com forum and eventually Bentley’s. Because I have had a chance to pilot Revit in the design phase and seen a demo of ArchiCad, and soon Bentley; I will also reply to this thread on how I think these applications are fulfilling the above points. Also feel free to add any points that I might have missed.

Thank you in advance,

Ben Ferrer
bferrer@cuh2a.com

[Djordje]

Scott wrote:
Here is another well though out response on the topic of BIM, PEN, and other 3-letter words...

Thanks for the link, Scott! Great article!

"Other side" regarding software, yes. Mentioning that, you should see the Mac-PC fights here ... hah ... talk about OTHER SIDE!

But, the very same side, regarding the process and the philosophy of the approach.

And, you guys should be fair and accept the fact that, until Revit came out, ArchiCAD was the only one holding the fort. Just a fact.

[Scott Davis]

Yes, thanks for holding down the fort! The calvary has arrived.... (you had to have seen that coming! )

And just to be fair, although directly competing, ArchiCAD users should be thankful that Revit has really brought attention to this philosophy and approach. One way or another, the competition has been good for all of us.

[Djordje]

Scott wrote:
Yes, thanks for holding down the fort! The calvary has arrived.... (you had to have seen that coming! )

But how come I still see red all around? Ah, only one platoon ... 😉

Yes, I saw it coming

Scott wrote:
And just to be fair, although directly competing, ArchiCAD users should be thankful that Revit has really brought attention to this philosophy and approach. One way or another, the competition has been good for all of us.

Definitely; even better thing is that the flatlanders who are seeing the light can choose, and not be pushed into something "because everybody else uses it".

[Anonymous]

UPDATE

Bear with me on the long post the next to paragraphs in italics are a background on our firm and what we have done in the last two years (abridged) so feel free to skip them and go to the questions at the end:

Well, here we are two years later, and no update from Ben. I can say in his defense he has been inundated with the process of taking a firm of our size into the next evolution of the AEC industry. Before I begin with the update on the progress of BIM at CUH2A (we are allowed to say our name now) let me give you a background on who Ben and I are and where our roles fall. Ben is the BIM Operations Manager and I am the Architecture BIM Technology Coordinator, I also have an engineering counterpart named Brendan, the three of with a few others comprise the BIM Operations Team. (The team has really only been formed within the last 6 months.) CUH2A is an architecture firm with over 400 people working in offices from London to San Francisco. We specialize in Science and Technology buildings mean high-tech facilities with large complicated laboratories which means that the complexity of our designs lies not only in the architecture of our buildings but also the engineering. All that said, it seems like a no-brainer to us that BIM would be the direction we would go to move our firm into the future.

So, when Ben posted his first post here in hopes of gaining some information on which software would best suit the needs of our firm, we really gained more information about what BIM is and how it can affect our company. Thank you all for your responses to the posts by the way. Our firm has now made the commitment that every project we do will be on a BIM platform no matter how big or small and we are currently getting ready to complete projects whose sizes vary from 800,000 square feet to 10,000 square feet. The point in this post is to begin the conversation of the next phase of BIM. We have made our decision about software (ArchiCAD) and we are fully committed to the cause from the top down.

The Pace of the Process:

So, one of the first challenges that we are encountering in dealing with the number of users we have here is to get everyone up to the same level without hampering power users by restricting their efforts. We have users who are more than able to tackle some of the more intricate and complicated functions of ArchiCAD and really use it for a true BIM environment. However, most of our users are not ready for that step. Our goal is to move everyone into ArchiCAD, get them modeling and drafting and just using the software in an efficient manner. Then we can focus on the next steps. Unfortunately, that is a long process and at time we feel that we are holding people back from really excelling at the software and the process. How can we allow them to move at a pace to the point that we don’t lose the standardization of the process and create a large gap in our user base?

Who are the Right People?

The goal of our use of ArchiCAD and BIM is not to work faster but to work more efficiently. Basically because with efficiency inevitably comes speed. The increase in efficiency should allow us to do two things, work with few people on a project team and complete more work with the same amount of staff. In order to do this however you need “the right people.” Who are the right people and what makes them the right people? Now by right people we could care less about the skills on the computer, it is certainly a factor but now the deciding one. Everyone can be trained. We have found that there are people who are just more naturally adept at the BIM process. We have our theories on why, what would you guys say makes one person ready for this transition than the other?

The Future and the Next Step:

Lets make an assumption here and say that there are probably not many architecture firms in the world who do not use computer generated 3D modeling in one for or another, even if only SketchUp. That being the first phase and the next steps which we are beginning to take and will most likely be able to implement to the entire AEC industry within the next few years, what is the next step? Paperless job sites? Estimation of materials for recycling? Or perhaps we will begin to close the gap on our closely related cousins in the aeronautic and nautical design and manufacturing world and immerse ourselves in CAD/CAM manufacturing. Now, I am well aware that there are a few firms in the world who already make use of this type of technology, what I mean is that it becomes an industry standard practice. Where does everyone see the technology taking us in the next 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? I will not bore you all with elaboration on my interest in the CAD/CAM world, if you would like to discuss it with me please feel free to get in touch. However, I will ask does anyone else think that the design/build firms of the world will be on the forefront of the 4D revolution or will BIM possibly allow architects and engineers to take back some of the responsibilities we used to have as master builders?

So, thank you to everyone in advance for responding to these questions. I know they are probably not as thought provoking as Ben’s post of a few years ago, but I hope interesting none the less. Thanks again.

[Anonymous]

Scott wrote:
And just to be fair, although directly competing, ArchiCAD users should be thankful that Revit has really brought attention to this philosophy and approach. One way or another, the competition has been good for all of us.

It's like when Honda started selling motorcycles in the US in the 60s. Their slogan "You meet the nicest people on a Honda" along with cheap reliable bikes shifted the market from a few rebels to the mainstream. Now Harley is selling more bikes than ever and I hear there is a waiting list. Let's just hope ArchiCAD can hold onto its lead or at least keep even and not end up like BSA, Norton (my old favorite) or Matchless.

[Ernest Atanasiu]

my apologies if I hijack this topic, but my question is somehow connected to it.

reading every post and every link, I browsed until I found ADSymphony, and wondered if such a product exists for archicad.
What is ADSymphony: "A two-way interface between our powerful online database and your existing CAD program automates and coordinates your specs and schedules as you note up your drawings, add blocks or xref details, or add CAD objects." Link here
Isn't this a tool suited for BIM, (or PEN)? (
thanks scott, although that was an article written 2 years ago, nothing has changed since)
Shouldn't we have this kind of tool integrated within AC?

p.s. bferrer, did you started this topic only to read the answers? I was looking forward to your comments.

[Anonymous]

I'll be happy if they can keep it from leaking oil like the old Britbikes actually, my first love was a Norton Commando, black w/ gold pinstriping...

Matthew wrote:

Scott wrote:
And just to be fair, although directly competing, ArchiCAD users should be thankful that Revit has really brought attention to this philosophy and approach. One way or another, the competition has been good for all of us.

It's like when Honda started selling motorcycles in the US in the 60s. Their slogan "You meet the nicest people on a Honda" along with cheap reliable bikes shifted the market from a few rebels to the mainstream. Now Harley is selling more bikes than ever and I hear there is a waiting list. Let's just hope ArchiCAD can hold onto its lead or at least keep even and not end up like BSA, Norton (my old favorite) or Matchless.

[Anonymous]

bbradsby wrote:
...actually, my first love was a Norton Commando, black w/ gold pinstriping...

Mine too. It came with the Roadster tank but I bought the Interstate set-up for long hauls.

[Anonymous]

you mean you actually HAD one!? Cool. Back then, I was a high schooler with a night job, so all I could afford was a Honda 400-four, actually a cool bike in its own right. My Norton love affair was from afar, at the local dealer. Along with the Nortons & Triumphs, they had the now classic Ducati supersports, Laverda's, Moto Morinis... Little did I know those bikes would be worth serious bucks now. These days I ride Ducatis, you?

[Anonymous]

So, no replys to the information and the new set of questions in the update?