Revit and BIM are a relatively new technology in the quickly evolving construction world. With the coming of new technology there is always some problems associated with this new system and its implications on the future of building and humankind itself. This discussion will serve to alleviate the current problems with Revit and BIM that are prohibiting its progression, usability, and potential applications.
One of the largest concerns with BIM and Revit is simply adapting to the new software. Companies are often daunted by the process of switching from 2D to 3D CAD because it has numerous consequences. This will require downloading a new software obviously, providing ample time to learn said new software, and even upgrading the necessary hardware to support the new system. This change in design technology could even manipulate the entire process or level of detail being applied into a particular set of drawings. Model ownership becomes more complicated and requires more consideration for how said documents can be shared and worked on in parallel. Often smaller companies will find it more convenient and cost efficient to continue using their current software and process for the time being. Because of this there is lack of continuity across the construction world, where some departments may utilize the program while others may not causing further confusion and incompatibility. The use of BIM and Revit is being considered unnecessary. To add more time to a set of plans in order to make them three dimensional. The cost of time may not be worth the extra visual aid added when a project could have already been financed with a completed design. There also exists many legal barriers in the progression of BIM systems. The outdated use of paper documents and old fashioned contracts still exist as a means of transportation of design information. The digital exchange of project information is still maturing and becoming more available.
I was truly inspired by your predictions for the use of BIM in future virtual reality. The thought of being able to interact with a virtual building in that way had never occurred to me until this moment. This can completely reshape the world we live in. It is fascinating to consider how relatively close we are to achieving said feat. I thought your choice to reflect on the designers perspective was very interesting. I do think being able to view one's building in VR will allow for a vastly new perspective on the design process itself. Possibly this shift will be more focused on highlighting the human experience as virtual reality will create a more human interaction with creating the structure.
I think this discussion of the comparison between these three dimensional and two dimensional modeling/designing systems was an enlightening experience. I like that you considered the age gap between AutoCAD and Revit as it was not previously known to me and it is quite astounding when you actually read it. The fact that Autocad can store a larger amount of data was a very insightful callout. As I briefly discussed in my post, the file size for a three dimensional building was absolutely outweigh that of a simple two dimensional drawing. It should also be noted of the computing time necessary for computers to run each program as it is likely that Revit becomes much slower with larger file sizes.
Madeleine: https://ae-410-510-ay19-20.blogspot.com/2020/01/walker-elders-b3-advantages-of-revitbim.html
I think your post brings to light a lot of the things that are not typically considered when weighing the benefits of BIM over 2D designing. The ability to have more realistic visuals is just not as easily capable with a 2D Format. The powerful program of Revit can create lighting and rendering visuals that would take days to draw in Autocad with the same visual aesthetic. Your post is also one of the first to introduce how the adoption of BIM is moving us closer to a paperless world where we don’t have to carelessly destroy the environment for our simplest of outdated needs.
4 comments:
Hello Michael,
You raise many points that were brought up during last week's guest lecture, and they seem pretty valid. I am intrigued, however, in the ownership of the model and what problems will that incur. I definitely think this a valid point that owners might be wary of depending on the project. If I were to geek out on this point, I'd raise the question of what happens to projects that are "classified" in which contractors are tasked in designing an impenetrable bunker for the president and its design must be kept a secret. How do they ensure the model sharing is controlled and that nothing was leaked? I guess this is my fantastical side bleeding through but always did make me wonder. I guess that's where the legend comes from with Ivan the terrible blinded the designer of Saint Basil's Cathedral to prevent him from recreating it elsewhere... but who knows.
Michael, you raise a valid concern regarding the conversion from 2D modeling to 3D modeling; for any new and innovative technologies there will be a steep learning curve to get a handle on the new software, but that is apparent with the release of any new technology, and is often an expectation when making upgrades to systems. I do see the concern on machines being able to handle new software, but with the current state of hardware components, the majority of "base-line" machines, especially within existing firms and not regarding casual users, can now run high demanding programs due to the power of the technology we can now fabricate, so I would not see this as a primary concern.
Michael,
You are totally right to bring up lack of continuity in the industry for programs like these. The fact that there is no industry standard makes it so complicated to share files, plans, and develop models across the USA or even in one's state. It is easier for companies to keep doing what they have been doing for years and say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," but like you said, the benefits of converting to program like Revit or BIM outweigh the desire to remain using the same program.
Michael,
Everything you said about transitioning from CAD to BIM makes a lot of sense. It is definitely an expensive transition and sometimes not worth it to small companies, like you said. I’ve experienced smaller companies using older versions of AutoCAD for as long as possible, since upgrading every employee is expensive. This then creates file sharing issues when clients use 2020 and a firm used 2017. It’ll take a while before BIM becomes an industry standard, though I believe it is the way to go.
Post a Comment