Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Christiaan

Vectorworks big BIM open BIM in practice

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post

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...

Share this post


Link to post
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 by M5d

Share this post


Link to post

@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.

Share this post


Link to post
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...

Share this post


Link to post
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 by M5d

Share this post


Link to post

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.

ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=9668&filename=Screen%20Shot%202013-04-10%20at%208.43.53%20PM.png

ubbthreads.php?ubb=download&Number=9669&filename=Screen%20Shot%202013-10-08%20at%202.40.19%20PM.png

Edited by M5d

Share this post


Link to post

There's clearly been a schism of some kind. Wouldn't we customers be better off if buildingSMART owned the trademark to "Open BIM"?

Share this post


Link to post
Wouldn't we customers be better off if buildingSMART owned the trademark to "Open BIM"?

Yes, absolutely!

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post

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.....

Share this post


Link to post
their credibility is at stake not mine.

You have to have credibility in the first place for it to be at stake right?

Share this post


Link to post
... where's the data?

... I don't understand? How do you propose to present an idea (i.e.. concept for a building) using data?

Share this post


Link to post
... 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

Share this post


Link to post

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......

Share this post


Link to post

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

Share this post


Link to post

@ 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?

Share this post


Link to post

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 by Fritsch

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...