|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:29 am Post subject: |
    |
|
| pbacot wrote: |
General topic response:
(Matt, in particular)
I guess I will have to look at BIM software to understand how a builder could use a 3d model to get the appropriate information--without the architect cutting plans and sections and adding notes beforehand. Construction documents in my experience are really diagrams, they aren't recreations of reality. I would imagine the builder starting off by cutting a section or plan from the model... |
From what I understand from the contractor at the roundtable - they will use the model for coordination more than anything. They still bid from a normal set of drawings. However, they do get the "design intent" model (his words) from the architect for their use. And I don't think they are necessarily using Revit, but a BIM program for contractors.
| pbacot wrote: |
If this really is a recreation of the old CAD discussion (I would argue: more like 25 years ago not 10), it's still worth discussing. CAD's been an ongoing evolution and learning process, whereas the nature of institutions and corporations is to take over the technology and prescribe how it will be used before it's grown. (I'm thinking universities, AIA and AutoDesk, "them") |
That last line is an GREAT comment and a should be a concern to all of us. It goes along my line that forces outside of the practicing profession are driving the profession. What's wrong with that picture?
| pbacot wrote: |
(Phansford)
PC BIM--don't hold your breath. |
 yeah - I understand. And probably one of the major concerns I have.
Any program has to continue to grow and meet the market. And its market share needs to stay steady or improve. I've got a copy of DesignWorkshop..... anyone interested. 
Whether I like it or not..... I think BIM is a train headed our way... just as CAD was so many years ago. BTW - I made the full switch to CAD once a local municipality told me they wanted everything electronically. I was doing a small interior reno project for them. I don't intend to wait for that to occur twice. I can either decide to ride the train or get run over by the train...... personally I like riding.
I think BIM will be an industry standard sooner than later. It might mean I have to migrate to another CAD program or start discussions with HUC about translations - if that is even possible.
It might not be that BIM is something I need to accomplish the task at hand - CAD certainly does not stop me from hand-drafting projects if I was so inclined. Hell - I lost a project to someone this year who refuses to do her work in CAD. (and not for artistic reasons.... she just refuses to learn CAD) But typically clients expect electronic copies now (pdf's - dwg's) and they will soon expect to see 3D modeling and walk-thrus as time continues to march forward.
BIM could be a new market for ES or the death of ES. It's not mine to dictate. Maybe Bill is happy with his market share and is thinking of retiring to Carolina coast in a couple of years. Of course - he can't tell us that.... maybe he plans on selling the company to Goggle who will have Sketchup and PC become some sort of Super BIM.
The key argument for BIM is that it is a new process in creating buildings. That became the overriding comment in the roundtable. It seems to be about coordination and scheduling. There seem to be a lot of glitches..... at least in Revit. How one takes the model and produces schematic and progress drawings without them looking bad.
As I said earlier.... I am working on LEED certification right now.... fully researching BIM will come later this year or next. No matter what.... I am staying Mac-based.
| pbacot wrote: | | Happy New Year! |
Thanks - Lets hope we all have good fortune this year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Matt
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 525
Location: Sterling, Virginia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pbacot wrote: |
I guess I will have to look at BIM software to understand how a builder could use a 3d model to get the appropriate information--without the architect cutting plans and sections and adding notes beforehand. Construction documents in my experience are really diagrams, they aren't recreations of reality. I would imagine the builder starting off by cutting a section or plan from the model...
A drawing is made to show specific elements. If instead, a model needed to be created whereby anywhere a builder, a plan checker, an owner looks, the required construction and specifications are easily obtained, e.g. the required edge nailing in a panel, (moreover the information is displayed without the viewer needing to ask for it)-- I guess I just can't imagine this as yet. Feels a bit like Star Trek (which is fine with me, I like beaming up).
|
The expectation of a BIM system is that the design team creates a model that includes complete information (dimension, location, quality, quantity, specification, etc.) for every single element of the building. This is an enormous change in the scope of responsibility for the design team.
If such a document were created, and the design team accepts the assignment, then I think the user of the document (whoever they may be) should be able to make an inquiry of the document to ascertain the information they want.
Creativity, in my experience, is an iterative process. BIM systems are intended to document the result of this process, not assist the process itself (perhaps they will tell you it is intended to support the process, and perhaps it does, but the difference in the amount of effort seems to me to be an order of magnitude more). I have clients who can't even figure out how to print a pdf file properly, I am not going to waste my time creating even more sophisticated digital files until the level of interoperability has increased by at least two orders of magnitude.
If software engineers really wanted to improve the process, they would be putting their efforts into the interface, and interface hardware, that we use.
We should have screens the size of our desk, on which we can directly draw, and which watch our eyes, detect what we are looking at and behave accordingly -- for example, if you focus on a tool and blink twice, the tool is activated. Or you use a bluetooth headset to whisper commands to your computer. That kind of stuff would be useful to me.
You should investigate BIM for yourself and draw your own conclusions, this is just my sour HO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matt - (well really everyone) I am really glad to see this thread creating a lot of discussion. I personally want to hear everyone's opinion.... sour or not.
Interestingly enough - AIA has come out with a new document for electronic information. E202-2008- BIM Protocol Anyone seen a copy of this document? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pbacot
Joined: 15 Apr 2004
Posts: 959
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"then I think the user of the document (whoever they may be) should be able to make an inquiry of the document"
If builders always new the right questions to ask...
Even those who have a specific list of queries to make (bankers, plan checkers, inspectors), the logistics of them FINDING the answers in a whole building model is a conceptual problem.
Not only is a drawing a sort of "diagram", the set of drawings is a "story" about the construction contract, the process, as well as the spatial and mechanical facts about a building. Such a level of completeness you describe in a model is only attainable by the computer filling in everything everywhere, and creating a deep disconnect between the professional and the delivery of the design information.
So I say you will most likely continue to extract from the model, the construction information (often in orthographic form), for consumption by others.
Either way I agree it is a tough outlook for the smaller firm that must make the BIM move. But this looks like the way things are going. I doubt that anyone I work with will care what I use (in the single family residential to low rise commercial market), as long as I produce the same sort of drawings I have in the past. I don't see any movement by local contractors, building officials, or owners to ask about BIM, let alone use BIM themselves. Some form of 3d modeling, on the other hand, is becoming an expectation, if you you only want to build a garden bench.
I am looking forward to learning about BIM, and informing my opinion. Not looking forward to acquiring it.
P.S. I think it is appropriate for AIA to try to regulate and elucidate the process. I only hope this is more helpful than the CAD Layers System they tried to promote.
_________________
Peter B |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CJH
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
Posts: 351
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting discussion. As a structural engineer, I work with a number of different architects who range from doing hand drafting to designing in Sketchup then having a drafter use the Sketchup model to create 2D cadd working drawings. I also see this move toward BIM as similar to the move to Cadd from hand drawings. In both cases, I see early adopters getting hurt-In the move to Cadd there were several large architectural firms in my area literally destroyed by their early move to Cadd-after a huge expenditure on workstations and training staff, when it came time to create the prints, they ran into major problems requiring yet more expense-and then a year later the equipment, software and staff training was all obsolete, requiring yet more major expense to stay current, but they were still paying for the initial expense and in some cases went under. I see the same thing with BIM-there are a number of products which are expensive to obtain and train staff to use. As a design office, the benefit to use is questionable, and at the same time the contractors mostly want the same 2D drawings which they know how to use.
Last summer I decided to look more closely at using a BIM solution. My oldest son being a 3rd year Architectural student was able to obtain student versions of various programs for very low cost. I had a very complex large residential project, so I had him model (architectural only) the projects in Sketchup, Archicad, and Vectorworks. He had to learn to use each program. I felt this gave us a good feel for the learning curve and the abilities of the programs.
Sketchup had a fast learning curve, and while he was frustrated at some reactions of the program to what he was trying to do, he was able to create very good models of roofs which had compound curvatures which helped me understand what the architect was trying to do and create framing that worked. Sketchup will cut line sections in dwg which I was able to import into PC as a starting point for my drawings.
Archicad started off looking good, as it supposedly can create complete plan and section views from the 3D model. Very high learning curve, required some programing ability to do some things, and was not able to do some of the compound curvature that sketchup was able to do. We gave up on it after about 3 weeks.
Vectorworks we did not stay with long-in comparison to the Sketchup/PC mode it was, in our opinion, 'jack of all trades, export at none'.
Our conclusion was that it's going to be a long time before contractors want a BIM model in place of 2D drawings. On the projects where the architect did his design in Sketchup and then created 2D models, the contractors did use the models to supplement the drawings-but looked at this as a nice thing and in the end, still want paper 2D drawings.
As a design office, the effort to create a BIM model and 2D drawings at least increased the effort 50%, which is not going to be paid for by the client. So we decided in the end, as an engineer, there was no benefit to me to move to a BIM software at this time. As an architect, he could see that a software solution which had the ease of use of Sketchup for creating a model and which would then easily extract basic plan and sections, which would then go into a PC type 2D mode to finish up as working drawings, would be ideal. None of the software that we tried does this well enough. Perhaps Google will add on a good 2D back end to sketchup-I think then this would go somewhere. Until then, I think it's a trap which will eat up the early adopters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Cruet
Joined: 30 Apr 2004
Posts: 352
Location: Guilford, CT
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For what it's worth, I would NOT like to see the profession get forced into BIM- at least right now.
Each architect's office has to look at what are priorities for each one's practice. Prior to my moving to computers, I had a real problem meeting tight schedules as a hand drafter, and, to compound my problems, I always had the desire to detail each design element to death.
Therefore, my priority is which program can get me from soup to nuts the quickest.
My office runs two CAD programs- PowerCadd, and that Nemetschek thing. PowerCadd continues to be the fastest way for me to produce design and construction documents.
I am finally getting good at Sketchup. Part of the solution here is the Sketchup developers' ability to develop their program such as to make it more flexible and versatile, while retaining ease of use. I still have trouble with interior views, however. I use it principally to model buildings on site.
My BIM program of choice is VectorWorks Architect. While it has great tools (the Chain Extrude tool is awesome), I find it really bogs down when one gets into detail. Still, it makes fine renderings.
But the building information aspect seems overrated. In its attempt to develop information adequate to compile a lumber list, for example, it cannot develop anything for soffits and fascias. When one depends upon any BIM program for a compete information model, there is too much room for error, in my experience. Sure, the ability to auto-update elevations from plan changes is really nice. But then there are viewports, which is an aspect of CAD that I have yet to find useful. I much prefer sheet overlays.
I did audition Revit. When trying to execute a command using their tutorial to create their sample model, it made a serious error. For that reason, I gave up on it.
_________________
John Cruet
G4/733 w/1028 mb RAM & OS 10.4.10, Classic-free, skuzzy-free (runs PC7)
MacBook Pro 2G Intel core duo 2 gig RAM & OS 10.5.4.
PowerCadd 8, WT 9
Canon iP710 printer
www.johncruet.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 525
Location: Sterling, Virginia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| also, don't hold your breath hoping for any indication from engineered software about future plans. Management there is hostile to the notion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GaryV
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | also, don't hold your breath hoping for any indication from engineered software about future plans. Management there is hostile to the notion. |
Actually I am really blown away by the lack of uproar by our user base about the Alfred/Bill stalemate that will lead to WildTools not being developed any further. This is not good for the future of the tool many use for their livelihood. I do agree the package does a lot very well and may not need a lot of improvement. However, while it may not seem bad now, what about when the Mac OS improvements continue such that PC no longer keeps up or no longer takes advantage of the OS's strengths or speed? At that point, no matter how "dedicated" people areto the s/w, they will find alternatives to get from A to Z the best and fastest way, which will no longer be PC.
It still baffles me how two men can't sit down for a scotch and work out petty differences, especially when it impacts users that have been very loyal and their bank balances! Pretty sad...
On a more positive note, MacWorld is next week. If there is any graphics or CAD news of note I will advise. I suspect this will not be the case though.
Gary |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 525
Location: Sterling, Virginia
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2009 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| what would be the point of any uproar? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GaryV
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I understand that you have given up on them Matt. Perhaps others have also and I am not condemning this position although the silence is really too bad given the energy that was once present.
What a shame that their inattentiveness to the issue(s) has "forced" us to feel this way and have to worry about software when there is so many more pressing issues to be worrying about. For me personally, I will be out of a job next Friday and and I am taking the time to comment about their childish behavior? I guess I should not bother either. Frankly, maybe Kevin should just shut this message board down being that the vendor does not participate any more and therefor appears to not need or care about any of our input.
-G |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 525
Location: Sterling, Virginia
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gary --
I'm sorry to hear your news. Tough times are ahead. I closed my office on Dec 31.
It's been a long time since engineered software showed any interest in my views. Bill Stanley's next-to-last post here was this one, about 8 months ago.
http://powercadd.designcommunity.com/viewtopic.php?p=3275103#3275103
Mike Cleveland hasn't posted a word here in a year. David's last post was last July.
It isn't me who has given up.
-- Matt
PS That engineered software would let Alfred's announcement go un-addressed, nevermind un-rebutted, publicly, is a disgrace. That they would allow the relationship to deteriorate to the point where it could even happen is a senseless tragedy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 832
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GaryV wrote: |
Actually I am really blown away by the lack of uproar by our user base about the Alfred/Bill stalemate that will lead to WildTools not being developed any further. This is not good for the future of the tool many use for their livelihood. I do agree the package does a lot very well and may not need a lot of improvement. However, while it may not seem bad now, what about when the Mac OS improvements continue such that PC no longer keeps up or no longer takes advantage of the OS's strengths or speed? At that point, no matter how "dedicated" people areto the s/w, they will find alternatives to get from A to Z the best and fastest way, which will no longer be PC.
It still baffles me how two men can't sit down for a scotch and work out petty differences, especially when it impacts users that have been very loyal and their bank balances! Pretty sad... |
| Matt wrote: |
PS That engineered software would let Alfred's announcement go un-addressed, nevermind un-rebutted, publicly, is a disgrace. That they would allow the relationship to deteriorate to the point where it could even happen is a senseless tragedy. |
Man..... I am out of the loop. Links please....... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Matt
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 525
Location: Sterling, Virginia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CJH
Joined: 24 Apr 2004
Posts: 351
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
In a sense, this is all somewhat a moot point for me as in this economy it's not like I'm going to go out and invest in a whole new CADD system, when there is little work to do on it. I have a great system with PC that I can be very productive on, even if I do nothing to upgrade it for several years. I'll probably just sit tight, obtain any upgrades that ES comes out with and let the whole BIM issue settle out. Perhaps by the time the economy improves the direction of CADD will be more clear.
Also note that Alfred stated he will be supporting WT, which I presume means keeping it compatible with any new versions of PC-he is just not going to actively work on new features.
I don't know about the rest of you, but there is a pretty large emotional edge to the crash in our industry-my work basically fell of the cliff in October/November. At first there was denial, that as fast as it fell apart it would improve, then when it didn't I was angry at myself for having missed any warning signs. I've gotten past that in seeing that money people who know a lot more than I do missed this. Now it's just apprehension as to how long this will last and how to get through it. Perhaps instead of venting at ES we could share survival strategies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ValmontR
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 95
Location: Chattanooga, TN
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
WHOA!!
Somehow I missed Alfred's post regarding the end of development for WildTools.
Lately I've had to use VectorWorks (grimace on face here) for 3D proposal drawings. While I overall like the final result, the program is a mess. I do all of my sketching and design work in PowerCadd and transfer the drawings via dwg to VW. The program is so non-intuitive, or better put—PRIMITIVE. But our competitors have been doing more involved proposals so we have to follow.
The point of this is that without WildTools PowerCADD would be only a degree better. I have not followed up on promises to Alfred to submit drawings to the Drawing Room, but have intended to do it. His work has made drawing a joy. Meanwhile, EngSW has been so detached from the program that its future scares me. I used ClarisCADD for 5 years after development stopped because it was the best and easiest program around, and I imagine that I will do the same if PowerCADD becomes no longer viable.
I could write for a long time about this, but the issue to me, as evidenced by a few responses from ES, is that when ego (theirs) becomes too big, the product suffers. We all WANT this program to continue. Enough said.
Ralph |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
