Christiaan Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I went to the VW conference in London yesterday of which one of the highlights was Olly Thomas from The Design Buro talking about a big BIM project they've carried through to construction, working with engineers who were using Revit and exchanging model information via IFC. It wasn't without challenges but very heartening to see that it can be done. I think we're ready. Just need a contractor or client who's ready too. In fact having a contractor/client who was stipulating BIM was key to their success. Quote Link to comment
Christiaan Posted October 3, 2013 Author Share Posted October 3, 2013 It's online too: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/business/cpd/cpd-21-2013-putting-bim-into-practice/5060889.article Quote Link to comment
Guest Wes Gardner Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Bravo Christiaan, thank you for posting this...! Quote Link to comment
Christiaan Posted October 5, 2013 Author Share Posted October 5, 2013 They built it. Everyone made a living. Client got what they wanted. End of story. Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Is that guy annoying or what! Mr SBG go fetch yourself some happy pills. Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 SBG in your world you must be so good, you get to be the hero, the king, the fool and that annoying flea all at once. Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 I'm sure there's good positive and negative examples just as there are good designs/designers and bad ones. Quit being such a sour puss, change careers if it's affecting you morale... Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 What's the company name you work for. Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 (edited) Bravo ... Wes, when Sean Flaherty referred to open BIM in his recent remarks on upfront.ezine or when open BIM gets a general reference in Nemetschek?s promotional videos, what is being referred to? Sean Flaherty said, "we believe open BIM is essential to the AEC industry" and you?re applauding a collaboration between Revit and Vectorworks via IFC, all the while the scheme and logo promoted as ?Open BIM? here and at Nemetschek?s other subsidiaries, by design, would have prohibited any Revit / IFC collaboration with Nemetschek's products had it been used. Something Nemetschek has been keen to inform its stockholders of. It?s six months since the participant requirements were pulled from buildingSMART?s Open BIM initiative, but Nemetschek appears intent on maintaining its own trademarked scheme. Is open BIM splitting into two opposing approaches? I assume Sean Flaherty's ?open BIM? reference was specific, was he referring to the open BIM trademarked scheme Nemetschek is still promoting or was he referring to the ?open approach? that will be under buildingSMART?s management? And if open BIM references are referring to buildingSMART's ?open approach?, why continue promoting and displaying a scheme that now appears to stand in opposition to that approach? Edited October 6, 2013 by M5d Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Robert Anderson Posted October 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted October 7, 2013 @Reece (M5d): I would venture that you're reading something into 'OpenBIM' that doesn't exist. AFAIK, OpenBIM is (and has always been) an initiative independent of BuildingSMART (although they were supporters, at least at one time.) Also AFAIK, no AutoDesk product is excluded from using IFC in OpenBIM style workflows. I don't understand your use of the word "prohibited" above, it doesn't mesh with what I understand about OpenBIM. @Chris (SBG): I don't think it's fair to blame IFC for "bad geometry". If you're using CV2.0 certified versions of authoring software to export data, the IFC geometry should correspond to what was put in the authoring program. This does not mean that ill-trained or inexperienced users can't make errors, though (probably the biggest is sending out IFC data that you haven't validated first.) It's an example of the "nut holding the steering wheel" class of problem. Quote Link to comment
Dieter @ DWorks Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 IMO that article and specifically those images might impress the uninformed social media group but to the professionals, who use and implement the data, they would be asking for IFC removal from projects. Because nobody has the time to play spot the difference with the IFC and then let it slide because I cant edit the geo & we're dealing with 4 different software proprietors...and it all becomes too hard, get the gist Engineers & Builders can not let bad Geometry and mistakes slide through so why should anyone else be able to. Now look at the marketing images presented start with the finished photo (entrance) and try to locate it on the 3D Model, where's the Panels you might ask but more importantly the cantilever overhang over the entrance, where is it?, is it concrete? Top steel or bottom steel? My clients are no longer interested in Clash detection its of little significance.. but if you leave out reo watch out... do I blame IFC? You/I might have a credibility problem right There BIM=Consistancy. HTH Drawings, 2D and 3D are just representations of the real thing, and communication is Always needed! Apart from the representations, there is also a book with all the descriptions and details. So I don't see the problem... Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted October 7, 2013 Share Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) I would venture that you're reading something into 'OpenBIM' that doesn't exist. AFAIK, OpenBIM is (and has always been) an initiative independent of BuildingSMART (although they were supporters, at least at one time.) Well, my question definitely relates to the withdrawal of support by buildingSMART that you've mentioned. Open BIM can now refer to either, an exclusive contract and logo owned and controlled by Nemetschek, or the ?open approach in which all software vendors can participate? that buildingSMART wants. The two of which are evidently, seen as incompatible. AFAIK buildingSMART?s official definition of Open BIM is (and always has been): Open BIM is a universal approach to the collaborative design, realization and operation of buildings based on ?open? standards and workflows. Open BIM is an initiative of buildingSMART and several leading software vendors using the open buildingSMART Data Model. If, as you say, ?Open BIM is (and always has been) an initiative independent of BuildingSMART?, have someone clarify then, why an Open BIM banner remains at buildingSMART?s site with the statement ?We are reorganising the Open BIM initiative under new criteria to ensure an open approach in which all software vendors can participate?. Perhaps you meant, ?Open BIM is (and always has been) a trademarked logo acquired independent of buildingSMART?? That much we know is true. Do you see my confusion Robert? Open BIM appears to have splintered into two opposing approaches or factions? One faction has taken ownership of the term Open BIM by trademarking it to serve a proprietary agenda and a second faction, many may consider the rightful guardian of Open BIM, understandably, want to make Open BIM ?open? again. Don?t you find it curious Robert, that Nemetschek?s OpenBIM scheme has, by default, been deemed not ?an open approach? by the organisation whose charter is, ?supporting open BIM through the life cycle?? Also AFAIK, no AutoDesk product is excluded from using IFC in OpenBIM style workflows. I don't understand your use of the word "prohibited" above, it doesn't mesh with what I understand about OpenBIM. There?s context and a link explaining the use of the word ?prohibited? in my comment above. I said, the scheme and logo promoted as Open BIM by Nemetschek, would have prohibited any Revit / IFC collaboration with Nemetschek's products had it been used. The link is to Nemetschek's Open BIM participant requirements, i.e. the contractually exclusive requirements that buildingSMART removed from its Open BIM FAQs page. Nemetschek?s representatives haven't been shy about the purpose of those participant requirements either, highlighting Nemetschek's ownership and Autodesk's exclusion to stockholders. The comments were discussed and linked in the Revit LT thread if you?re interested. Yes Robert, as evidenced above, no certified IFC product is ?incapable? of OpenBIM style workflows. So lets discuss honestly then, the intent of Nemetschek?s trademark on the term Open BIM; because clearly it is disingenuous, clearly it has no application and clearly it hijacks the term for purposes that do not accord with the spirit and ethic that buildingSMART wants open BIM to represent in the industry. So what?s it all about? Edited October 8, 2013 by M5d Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 (edited) Robert, here's a little discrepancy you may be interested in. When buildingSMART pulled the participant requirements from it's Open BIM FAQs page six months ago, I took a copy of the Vectorworks' Open BIM FAQs page, assuming they would also be pulled. Nostalgia! Here's how point No. 6. read six months ago on this site: 6. What is the official definition of Open BIM? Open BIM is a universal approach to the collaborative design, realization and operation of buildings based on open standards and workflows. Open BIM is an initiative of buildingSMART and several leading software vendors using the open buildingSMART Data Model. It was the same as the definition still up at buildingSMART's site. But, here is how point No. 6. reads today on this site: 6. What is the official definition of Open BIM? Open BIM is a universal approach to the collaborative design, realization and operation of buildings based on open standards and workflows. Open BIM is an initiative of several leading software vendors using the open buildingSMART Data Model. The buildingSMART reference has mysteriously disappeared. Someone at your own subsidiary may be playing tricks on your digital memory there Robert. Edited October 8, 2013 by M5d Quote Link to comment
Christiaan Posted October 8, 2013 Author Share Posted October 8, 2013 There's clearly been a schism of some kind. Wouldn't we customers be better off if buildingSMART owned the trademark to "Open BIM"? Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted October 8, 2013 Share Posted October 8, 2013 Wouldn't we customers be better off if buildingSMART owned the trademark to "Open BIM"? Yes, absolutely! Quote Link to comment
gester Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Wouldn't we customers be better off if buildingSMART owned the trademark to "Open BIM"? Yes, absolutely! +1 ifc and open bim must be independent of the proprietary rat race. rob Quote Link to comment
gester Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Is that guy annoying or what! Mr SBG go fetch yourself some happy pills. You know what's annoying the 2 IFC BIM projects that I am dealing with this week...The client has already informed the Subcontractor-Architect that he's going to pay...LOL, I tell him to take the happy pills. it seems you are unable to handle this task. you should reconsider your nick, then. bim is about cooperation, not how to niggle. rob Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 LOL, does that off ramp actually go thru the corner of the building.... com on guys? Nope. don't think so, I think you got tricked by the shadows..... Quote Link to comment
Christiaan Posted November 8, 2013 Author Share Posted November 8, 2013 their credibility is at stake not mine. You have to have credibility in the first place for it to be at stake right? Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 ... where's the data? ... I don't understand? How do you propose to present an idea (i.e.. concept for a building) using data? Quote Link to comment
gester Posted November 8, 2013 Share Posted November 8, 2013 ... where's the data? ... I don't understand? How do you propose to present an idea (i.e.. concept for a building) using data? Data is used to reinforce Logos, pathos & Ethos in great presentations HTH i'm too terrified to fear it already... rob Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Well your entitled to your own opinion, but if you think most of us blindly trust in our CAD programs and you're the only one that doesn't, your greatly mistaken. As always it's only a tool to be used with discretion. Presentation is only a part of the process, as is data extraction. You constantly promote yourself as being the only one capable of presenting correct data whilst you believe everyone else is simply fumbeling in the dark trusting our CAd tools to do that for us, again I think you're greatly mistaken. Perhaps blowing your own whistle as you do has made your clients believe it's the absolute truth....?! Good for your marketing but you can't trick all of us, especially the ones here on this forum that don't really care.......our clients want more than only slick data...... Quote Link to comment
gester Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 sbg, you could easily get a job delivering scripts for roland emmerich's movies. (..)...before it gets too late? too late for what? wake up, dude, you think you're the only one leading the execution of the construction ventures? i lead a few myself, ipd-way, even with my vw virtual designs. and i don't need your catastrophic scenarios. rob Quote Link to comment
Ozzie Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 @ Chris SBG And so ? I think as rough and tough as you go about it; what your real bitch is ? NV aka VW is not keeping up I find the same thing as a landscape designer ? few out there are using VW That is a shame Think about the last word above I used What is NV doing about that? Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 (edited) SBG your forum profile is vague. If you want to add credibility to your large ego why don't you share your company name and website? Feel free to check out mine with my LinkedIn profile, for all we know you may just sit at home in your underwear all day.;-) Edited November 10, 2013 by Fritsch Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.