Talk:Building Information Modeling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have changed the first paragraph, which talked about the definition (building information model vs. modeling) and the origin of the term BIM. I added several references. I've heard that there are more theories on the origin of the term.

Ghang —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghanglee (talk • contribs) 08:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, but I have changed the link to Satellier, as it currently looks like advertising (see section on "Bias" at the policy article "Neutral Point of View"), and have linked it instead to the resources page at that firm. I have also removed the signature, as that is not standard for Wikipedia articles. Sorry Kris!

Satellier LLC a Chicago headquartered Architecture Offshore Partnering company offering high end BIM services for its clients.

I have removed the following section because it is not supported by any references. I am sure that there are some references out there, though.

Experts project that nearly three-fourths of all design development will be executed with BIM software within the next ten years. That shift could cost millions for each firm, as they create new capacities and adapt to an unfamiliar format.

I have extracted some of the following information and included it in a new introduction to the term.

The building design and construction industry is currently undergoing a generational shift to Building Information Modeling. BIM greatly enhances productivity by allowing easy retrieval of embedded information such as quantities, specifications and manufacturer’s details, and provides interactive links between architectural, engineering and construction-related information.

--Muchado 17:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I added some information giving the contracting point of view.

--User:Lhandler August 7, 2006

If Bentley, AutoDesk and Graphisoft are going to be included in Internal AND External links, then it is appropriate that VectorWorks and Nemetschek N.A be listed also. VW has had BIM functionality far longer than any of AutoDesks products and at least as long as Bentley and Graphisoft.

NNAACD 20:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)User:NNAACD October 12, 2006

I agree with NNAACD that if one is in then they all should be. I am not sure that we want to have them in both the section on "Software" and "External Links" though, as is currently the case with Nemetschek. There is also a general issue with "spam", and I think that on this basis we need to at least remove the reference to "Tecton Limited", as the linked site adds no more information. At least Satellier and RCMS link to their knowledge-bases. Gehry Technologies (which is based on Dassault's CATIA) should probably be moved to the "Software" section, since their site does not provide any general information as far as I can see. Any comments? If no counter-argument is made, then I shall do this tomorrow.

--Muchado 21:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

There needs to be a section, best placed probably under section 2, Anticipated Future Potential, of the problems and growing pains of this software - it's not all plain sailing. Although the idea is sound and the potential is there, the reality when using these somewhat immature programs on real projects is removed from the sales pitch. Just to list a few of the problems:

1. Hardware limitations especially on large complex buildings in the CD stage of a project
2. Staff training. These programs are not intuitive to use. They need to follow SketchUp's lead on that point. Highly technically minded and disciplined staff are needed to run projects.
3. 2D touching up of elevations and sections to get them to a completed state - the documentation standard of these programs has traditionally been poor compared to the 2D drafting tools. Thus the promise of a truly 100% linked and auto-updatable model is still not quite attained.

This is not required in the latest BIM project I've participated in done with Revit. --Garett Naff 22:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

4. Consultants not using, or even knowing, of such software. Thus time wasted tranfering everything back to your traditional 2D CAD format.
5. There is some limitation on the freedom of the designer using these programs. BIM works best with repetative and square buildings still.

It seems to me that nearly all the most complex buildings designed today utilize BIM, for example the recently finished Hamilton building in DenverAIA Best BIM Efforts. I believe some firms use aircraft modeling software due to the limitations of software packaged for architects, but this is still BIM. The more complex the building the more it can benefit from BIM in my opinion. --Garett Naff 22:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

6. Detailing is still done in 2D.
7. All your eggs are in one basket. The model is the central hub of all your drawings. If it gets corrupted, or if inexperienced staff slowly degrade its parametric linkages, or if the file gets unexpectedly large and drafting speed starts to get sluggish as a consequence, it effects all drawings.
8. Although not strictly a problem, when are the suppliers going to get on board? Although I wouldnt expect a model from every supplier for every product it would be nice if the major suppliers, that currently provide 2D CAD libraries of their products, provided 3D BIM models of their catalogues so I could just cut and paste instead of having to build my own library.

This is not the end of the list.

BIM programs are not a one stop documentation shop. They work better in certain stages of a project than others. For concept stage I would be using SketchUp. For DD and early CD you pick up your BIM. For details its onto your 2D CAD app. For your consultants it's your 2D CAD app also. BIM software companies are endeavouring to address these areas but we're a way off perfection yet.
--User:b1_ March 5, 2007

If BIM is not followed through on by all design team members, Architects and Engineers, contributing into one model, then most of the benefits of BIM are lost. Some of the best benefits are in being able to do conflict analysis of all the systems, letting the design team make sure that beams don’t interfere with ducts etc. One must balance the design teams skills, the allowance for design time, and computer resources against how detailed this process should be, but incorporation of all the disciplines in one model presents vast advantages.

As for the stages of a project, I agree that pre-design should be done in a quick schematic modeling program, like Sketchup. But if you go to another application to do your final detailing, you must not loose your capability to coordinate with the base model. It is imperative that you do the detailing in a software platform that you can overlay your 2d work on a cut of the 3-D model that is updated live from changes made to the model. Otherwise you sacrifice the coordination that is gained from BIM, and the value engineering changes proposed by the contractor may destroy all your hard work if you can’t easily check details against the model. Applications geared towards BIM (like Rivet, but I suspect there are others) incorporate two dimensional drafting tools that can be overlaid directly on cuts from the model allowing the user to balance exactly how comes from the model versus 2D. Revit even allows the 2D object to be tied in to locations based from the model information, so if you move a wall, a 2D lintel angle can move with it. In the future, when computers can handle more data, the models will be able to hold all the components that would be drawn in a detail, and 2D detailing will not be required. A good rule of thumb when working on BIM projects is to model only what you need to. If you can’t see it in any of the finished product, then it is only using up computer resources. In the end, your model will hold all the pertinent information. After all if it doesn’t show up in the finished drawings, it likely won’t be in the actual building either.

In the end, BIM is here, people are using it, and it is saving significant time and money in the field (AIA Best BIM Efforts). This savings insures that BIM will prosper.
--Garett Naff 17:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Additional information

When I started looking for information on Wikipedia about Tekla structures, then the only WP page containing it was cached in Google. I later discovered that it contains copyvios, but I still suggest this as merely a source for any additional information that could be added to the article without violating any copyrights (watch out — include only facts from there!!) . -BStarky 23:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's a ZDNet article about BIM, describing it and places BIM in historical context and where it sees BIM in the future. This should help in describing its situation in the article. -BStarky 01:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)