To BIM or not to BIM

[DE-Tech]

My first post on the forum.

I am an Architectural Technologist looking into getting some experience of working with BIM. The company that I currently work for appear to show no interest in this whatsoever, and therefore rather than being left behind, I am taking it upon myself to invest in some software and learn myself.

From a cost point of view Vectorworks Architect appears to be the best value package available although it appears that it can only collaborate with other BIM systems through the IFC format. I have been advised that I should learn Revit "as it is going to be the industry standard" but this is cost prohibited. There is a Revit LT version available which is of comparable price to VWA but it cannot import/export IFC or gbXML which means you are limited to working with other consultants that use the same Revit format. Also you cannot do in place 3D modelling.

The NBS National BIM Library have some component objects in native Vectorworks format but most are in Revit/IFC format. Has anybody had any experience of downloading and importing any of these IFC objects?

My heart (and pocket) is saying Vectorworks for its all around design capabilities, 2D drafting and intuitive interface but I am still wavering a bit.

I would be grateful for any comments.

[Mark Mullany]

Hello

It sounds like a very sensible thing to do!

Learning about BIM should be invaluable in the future. The main thing to remember is BIM is a process and VW and Revit and all the other packages are just tools involved in that process.

The reason VW uses IFC is that this has been developed to be platform neutral so as to be accessible by all involved in a project - the basis of OpenBIM. Revit in my opinion are trying to make it seem as though you need only their products to achieve BIM, however its just not true. Not only do you not need everyone on the same software you dont want it! Its unlikely you want your plumber to be able to make design changes without your say so. IFC is a it like PDF, everyone can open it and extract information but only you can make changes. Also with the wide variety of software that can generate IFC the project BIM manager can merge your various models and do things like clash detection and energy analysis etc.

What I would suggest it have a visit to the BuildingSMART website http://www.buildingsmart.org.uk

Be wary of the various rants on forums - don't be afraid of BIM and realise that its not all or nothing (particularly in VW Architect) you can put as much or as little Information and Modelling into your projects as you deem necessary.

The most important part is to collaborate!! The model may be pretty and the information may be bountiful but if you don't collaborate its all for nothing.

You mentioned you an AT, me too! what region are you based in?

[DE-Tech]

Hi Mark,

I'm based in Essex.

[Christiaan]

The most important part is to collaborate!! The model may be pretty and the information may be bountiful but if you don't collaborate its all for nothing.

I disagree with this mantra. Collaboration is as important as it's always been. BIM-collaboration is just a different way of collaborating.

For instance we currently model our projects in 3D but we produce traditional 2D information in the form plans, elevations, sections and schedules. We're not collaborating in the BIM-sense. We're collaborating as we always have, by overlaying drawings. The model is not all for nothing in this scenario. The main benefit is having a single source of information and therefore no errors of co-ordination between our plans, elevations, sections and schedules.

[VincentCuclair]

For instance we currently model our projects in 3D but we produce traditional 2D information in the form plans, elevations, sections and schedules. We're not collaborating in the BIM-sense. We're collaborating as we always have, by overlaying drawings. The model is not all for nothing in this scenario. The main benefit is having a single source of information and therefore no errors of co-ordination between our plans, elevations, sections and schedules.

Our situation exactly, with the addition that in some cases where all disciplines have worked in 3D clash collision can be implemented, and is well worth the effort.

[VincentCuclair]

3D Clash detection...LOL, there is no clash detection unless you can share the correct geometry.... think about it

I only share correct geometry.......what's the use of even creating wrong geometry? I assume you let the program do the detection.....I don't, I do it myself.....I know your hash is with NVs take it to them....if you are referring to file formats I do IFC, dwg, Sketchup etc I don't care I just want to make sure.

I'm just being thorough, not religious.....

Edited October 11, 2012 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

:crazy:

[VincentCuclair]

How do you know the data connection points are correct....

I don't, I can visually see if there are collisions between pillars, air-ducts, walls, etc., I have no need (so far) for that kind of precision, a simple 3D representation and user-friendly navigation interface is all I need at the moment, e.g.. one of the many (free) IFC viewers will do.

I suggest you try using the translated files you expect other to use... your opion may then change? :-)

I do + those of others, so far so good! (I had more problems with IFC exported from Revit (eg. walls becoming several 1000 meters high etc.)

Fyi, all dimensioning is rounded to the nearest 5mm in our projects.....

Edited October 11, 2012 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

StructuralBIMGuy, you obviously have some specific issues with IFC and VW.

You might serve your interests better on this forum if you didn't spend your time trying to shoehorn these issues into every discussion about IFC no matter how unrelated.

[VincentCuclair]

Ok let's get back on track here, welcome David.

It is important to know if you want to end up doing Big BIM (data, file, information exchange at all levels) or Little BIM (build a 3D model to use for generating 2D output from + perhaps a certain amount of low level file exhange).

If it is Big BIM i would suggest Bentley or Revit.

For Little BIM Revit, ArchiCAD, AutoDesk Architecture or Vectorworks.

Revit and ArchiCAD have a clear fairly rigid workflow developed mainly for architects, while AC Architecture and Vectorworks are more diverse and creating your own workflow is part of the learning curve. In addition to this Vectorworks lacks some crucial BIM functionality for Architecture but partly makes up for this with superior 3D modeling capability.

In short the list looks like this (in order of most rigid workflow to least this generally also means lowest learning curve to highest though the difference isn't that great)

1 Revit

2 Bentley

3 ArchiCAD

4 AC Architecture

5 Vectorworks

Edited October 12, 2012 by Vincent C

[Christiaan]

Good summary.

[DE-Tech]

I can understand the logic of creating a simple 3D model to generate the general geometry of the structure and then using this as an underlay to develop 2D detail drawings (looking on youtube it appears that both Revit and Archicad recommend this approach) but how do you then generate accurate quantity takeoffs with this approach? Lots of the sales blurb I've seen for different systems make a big deal about creating accurate materials and takeoffs from the model but if most of the production information is 2D how can these be generated?

[VincentCuclair]

I can understand the logic of creating a simple 3D model to generate the general geometry of the structure and then using this as an underlay to develop 2D detail drawings (looking on youtube it appears that both Revit and Archicad recommend this approach) but how do you then generate accurate quantity takeoffs with this approach? Lots of the sales blurb I've seen for different systems make a big deal about creating accurate materials and takeoffs from the model but if most of the production information is 2D how can these be generated?

Well the model can be as accurate and detailed as you like (it is even possible to model everything to such a detailed level that you can extract all details from the model however the time it takes generally isn't economical.)

The tools for generating 'accurate' material take-offs are present in all these CAD packages, the user-friendliness varies quite a bit, the level of accuracy of the model dictates the accuracy of the take off, however certain parties have questioned the accuracy of certain data extracted from the different packages, (as you could read earlier in this thread), however exactly what type of information and how accurate I don't know, and probably greatly depends on your specialization. Generally they suffice for 'normal' architecture practices.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Vincent C

[VincentCuclair]

Is it too much to ask for accuracy in BIM is accuracy some other specialized domain?

Certainly not, accuracy is very important, however it depends on what degree of accuracy, I haven't experienced any negative outcome from the inaccuracies that do exist in VWs i.e.. Walls can't have 0 height, etc. so though I don't like the thought of them being there, it doesn't influence my workflow in such a way that the inaccuracies cause problems (as I have experienced once in a project I did in Bentley, which almost led to a lawsuit btw). Apparently your demands on VWs do lead to noticeable inaccuracies, but that doesn't mean you should dissuade others from moving to BIM because VWs is inaccurate?!

Let me remind you if the 2D poly in VWs isnt closed the surface area is 0 m2

Well, if a shape isn't closed, it doesn't have an area!? If you blow up a balloon and don't tie the knot the air runs out?!

Btw. There is a radio button for closing polys in the OIP!?

PS. If there are bugs and inaccuracies in VWs (IFC export) it would be slightly more constructive if you come with understandable examples/warnings concerning them on this forum otherwise bug submit directly to NVs.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Vincent C

[Mark Mullany]

Without wanting to get into an argument, there are far too many of those as it is.

My understanding is the BIM manager coordinates all the information from the various parties, viewing and checking in IFC and making sure the right people get the right info a the right time. They dont have any need to make changes themselves or the authority in their role as BIM manager (unless they happen to be one of the construction team, but then they are making changes in their other role not as BIM manager)

I kind of see it as a bit like project manager (ish), but you wouldnt want them messing with your structural drawings

I could be wrong, and I'm sure in practice roles get blurry.

As for the viewers, I'll admit to having little experience from that end (would love to get some if anyone knows of a good tutorial or something) but I do know that there are working projects out there who have successfully used them and there are some (generally very large) companies who saw the benefits early and have been using BIM for years so it must work.

[Mark Mullany]

DE-Tech I'm in Berkshire, hope your doing well!

Vincent looks to have quite varied experience, but have a look at the various software in case studies, Vectorworks can be found here,

http://www.vectorworks.net/bim/projects.php

I'm sure the others have examples too,

If you have the luxury of time, look into each and have a go if you can.

(mail me privately and we can set up an online demo of VW if you like)

Remember also that whatever you choose you will be using for the foreseeable future so go with what works best for you.

I'm obviously biased but having come from AutoCAD I find Vectorworks much more in tune with how I do things.

[gester]

it is a myth that architecture allows inaccuracy. as soon as windows, doors, glass and steel elements come into the concrete structure every millimeter counts.

bim is to build accurate models.

rob

[DE-Tech]

Wow!

I've certainly seemed to have got a heated debate going. Many thanks to everybody for their comments and feedback.

As I see it, the biggest problem at the moment is that BIM is the latest buzzword with clients and they see it as a means all and ends all to solve all of their building project problems without any real understanding about what they actually want from BIM. The only clients that I have had pushing for the use of BIM are mechanical engineers within our local authority, and this is purely to do with clash detection. It is my opinion that in this situation a simple 3D "block" geometry model would be accurate enough for the purposes of checking for this.

The misconception that I believe the client makes, and this even goes back to the transition from manual drawing boards to 2D CAD, was that "if the work is done on a computer it must be right". The BIM 3D model is the next stage on and they are falling into the same mistake with this, but forgetting the old adage "if you put crap in you get crap out".

[Mark Mullany]

StructuralBIMguy - Thats fine then IFC isn't BIM its just a tool like everything else. If you are the construction team its probably very easy to coordinate with yourself!

Thanks for the link I'll look into it when I get the chance - hopefully soon.

DE-Tech you seem to have reached the same conclusion I did, as for the debate it always happens so don't worry about it.

Best of luck!

[VincentCuclair]

Wow!

I've certainly seemed to have got a heated debate going.

:grin:

It is my opinion that in this situation a simple 3D "block" geometry model would be accurate enough for the purposes of checking for this.

Then using IFC export and using one of the free IFC model viewers(eg. Tekla/Solibri) is a good option.

As I see it, the biggest problem at the moment is that BIM is the latest buzzword with clients and they see it as a means all and ends all to solve all of their building project problems without any real understanding about what they actually want from BIM.

Well, I can say that when it comes to presenting and understanding a design for certain clients using Little BIM has been an invaluable asset.

Further more I believe in the foreseeable future that BIM will be an equally natural and unavoidable way of working as 2D drawings have been in the previous centuries.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Vincent C