A while back I attended a Revit Seminar at my office. I was slightly impressed with its capabilities, but it seemed to not be that popular. Now every engineering magazine that I get is talking about how awesome BMI is, but I have still not encountered anyone who is doing it. I have not met one architect that has heard of it. Has anyone had any experience with projects where all the consulants are using a BMI software, and if so is it really all it is cracked up to be?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
BIM - The Craze of Building Information Modeling 7
- Thread starter ash060
- Start date
DaveVikingPE
Structural
I work for a Bentley shop. We're going to use all the Bentley BIM products...
BIM is being hyped now like GIS was several years ago. Is it worth the hype?
BIM will slow things down because now the engineers have to work together ALL THE TIME and the shops will just have to wait until the last interference check is done before drawings are ready...
I predict it will upset a lot of contractors because field changes will be reduced to nothing. I also predict it will befuddle a lot of PM's because they won't understand whyt he engineers are messing with their computers all the time - and that means they're costing money.
BIM is being hyped now like GIS was several years ago. Is it worth the hype?
BIM will slow things down because now the engineers have to work together ALL THE TIME and the shops will just have to wait until the last interference check is done before drawings are ready...
I predict it will upset a lot of contractors because field changes will be reduced to nothing. I also predict it will befuddle a lot of PM's because they won't understand whyt he engineers are messing with their computers all the time - and that means they're costing money.
Bottom line, it's going to cost engineers quite a bit for the software, cost engineers more to use the software (training and complexity), cost engineers more time to coordinate all the little details, for the same crappy fee....all for what? Just to reduce a few RFI's? I dont see it catching on unless it's for extremely large buildings or the owners want 0 RFI's (typically for the power and oil industry where shutdown time is very expensive)
Seems to me that oru liability will increase and you won't be able to draftsmen to do the drafting. Experienced engineers will likely have to do the work and they are very hard to find. Fees must increase for the increse in liability and the level of engineer required for the work. Sure hope it doesn't take off because we will never get enough fee to fairly cover all this.
-
2
- #7
we will have to push for higher fees to implement BIM on projects where it makes sense to use it, or else turn down the work. tough business decision. for me, there are very few projects where using BIM makes sense. I do single story projects 90% of the time and BIM would be a complete waste of effort. but I see where it might make sense on multi-story projects or very large projects. But the type of project where you design two or three typical beams/columns and the project is essentially finished, BIM is useless.
where does the engineer's use of BIM stop and the contractor's use of BIM begin? are engineers required to provide intricate details thru every wall; at every framing connection?
the increased liability is a concern for me. I see BIM as an opportunity for contractors to claim delays or problems because the shared electronic database has dimensional errors or missing information about connections or whatever. I provide a sealed and signed set of construction drawings for a project. That is the record set. Where does the electronic database fit into that? If we issue a statement that the sealed and signed set of documents is official and the electronic database is for reference, will we be creating a liability issue if the dimensions shown on the hard copies do not match exactly the cad version which is expected to be "perfect"?
I know several MEP firms who are already using BIM type of software to create 3D layouts of ducts and plumbing. The cad software is not that expensive from what I can tell, but how useful to others would a 3D layout of my structural framing be?
where does the engineer's use of BIM stop and the contractor's use of BIM begin? are engineers required to provide intricate details thru every wall; at every framing connection?
the increased liability is a concern for me. I see BIM as an opportunity for contractors to claim delays or problems because the shared electronic database has dimensional errors or missing information about connections or whatever. I provide a sealed and signed set of construction drawings for a project. That is the record set. Where does the electronic database fit into that? If we issue a statement that the sealed and signed set of documents is official and the electronic database is for reference, will we be creating a liability issue if the dimensions shown on the hard copies do not match exactly the cad version which is expected to be "perfect"?
I know several MEP firms who are already using BIM type of software to create 3D layouts of ducts and plumbing. The cad software is not that expensive from what I can tell, but how useful to others would a 3D layout of my structural framing be?
Yeah thats the way I see it. Even on large projects I don't see where it is required. It seems like a lot of things that you see in the profession these days where, because we can create a program to do something,we should all use it all the time. Wonder what the insurance industry thinks about this.
Anybody here read the mag. Structural Engineer? They've been trumpeting the wonders of BIM the last few months (is that because their advertisers hawk the BIM software or because it's really a significant trend?). Seems like I have heard this song before, when TQM was taking over. Some companies will benefit from the significant resources that must be invested to be fully capable, others will not benefit from those investments, but will be forced by contract to do it anyway. Too bad you can't hold the BIM software vendors financially liable for making sure your investment isn't wasted.
DaveVikingPE
Structural
I have been a reader of Structural Engineer for several years (free subscriptions and all...) and I've noticed the BIM hype.
They're behind it because it has to do with structural engineering and, theoretically, has a lot of promise. I'm on my firm's BIM implementation team and, while those of us on the team intuitively "know" the possibilities, we also recognize that those in charge of the money have absolutely no idea what's going to be dome with BIM. If "everyone's" using it, why aren't we? Well, is everyone using it or not? Also, the people in charge of the money have very little clue as to how long anything really takes, so, boy, are they in for a surprise...
BUT, once the BIM model is complete and all the disciplines are satisfied and the customer has this nifty 3D model to look at and maybe fly through... NOW, the PM will have to sell the model to the customer and manage any changes, etc., etc.
And... once the building is finished, the Operations folks will have a 3D model of the working structure and can monitor/record/etc. all the maintenance they've done, and so on.
But... haven't we had the technology to be doing this all along?
They're behind it because it has to do with structural engineering and, theoretically, has a lot of promise. I'm on my firm's BIM implementation team and, while those of us on the team intuitively "know" the possibilities, we also recognize that those in charge of the money have absolutely no idea what's going to be dome with BIM. If "everyone's" using it, why aren't we? Well, is everyone using it or not? Also, the people in charge of the money have very little clue as to how long anything really takes, so, boy, are they in for a surprise...
BUT, once the BIM model is complete and all the disciplines are satisfied and the customer has this nifty 3D model to look at and maybe fly through... NOW, the PM will have to sell the model to the customer and manage any changes, etc., etc.
And... once the building is finished, the Operations folks will have a 3D model of the working structure and can monitor/record/etc. all the maintenance they've done, and so on.
But... haven't we had the technology to be doing this all along?
I read SE, also, and noted the large push that "BIM is coming so get ready". I agree that it's today's buzzword, similar to TQM. also, I agree that it's part of what their advertisers want to see in the magazine. one thing I've heard during the "selling" of BIM is that the owners/building operators will have the 3D model for future renovations. How many of you want your design model available to the general, non-structural public for future use? let me restate that: the future mis-use? Man, talk about a pandora's box of potential liability.
I remember when CAD first started being used regularly. it was supposed to save time and cut weeks off of a project schedule. in my opinion after about 20 years of using CAD, schedules are reduced but the quantity of changes made during the course of a design project has increased. Architects make changes to the CAD file right up to the final day in the schedule, email the revised base to you and want the changes incorporated on the sealed and signed documents. I'm concerned about similar things happening in the BIM world. Also, owners and architects expect more in less time because of computers. Computers are just a tool. no better or worse than a sharpened pencil. no matter which tool you use, the design has to be printed on paper for us to seal and sign as the instrument of service.
-
4
- #15
We just wrapped up a project were the Architect wanted to use BIM, about half way through he abandoned the idea. We did however discover that the Revit software allowed us to create our standard 2D drawings a little faster while the Architect stated they saved a lot of time during drawing production.
It was abandoned because the take off quantities is only as good as the model itself and it is two easy to not click a box here or there that could greatly change your quantities. In the end the Contractor stated they would not use the model for their estimate. More importantly we would have blown the budget many times over.
Talking to a friend at ZweigWhite, the publisher of Structural Engineering and all the other free Engineer/Architecture magazines, he admitted that they are big supporters of BIM. One, look at all the ads and articles related to BIM. Two, look at all the seminars and conferences that they sponsor educating all of us about BIM. They are trying to convince everyone you must use BIM or you will be left behind like the dinosaurs. It has been a great marketing campaign to sell something nobody seems to want and it has worked.
It is similar to how ASCE really supported continuing education a few years back. Now they are the leader in continuing education for Civil Engineers. All of you that are ASCE members get the same daily ASCE Seminar pamphlet in the mail that I do showcasing Excavation Safety or Seismic Design of Liquid Storage Tanks for $1,045 plus Travel and Hotel. Since Jan. 1st I have received 25 offers by mail from ASCE, at $0.39 apiece it appears my $200+ annual dues are used to mail me more offers. No wonder the dues keep going up.
Just think ASCE also thinks that you should have a Masters degree (or 30 hours of classwork beyond a B.S. degree) in order to get your P.E. license. Which has now been adopted by NCEES, do you think that this is because Grad school enrollment is down and the majority of ASCE Board members are also Professors. While I am glad I went to Grad school and received M.S. I still think I learned more my first year out of school then I ever did in school.
I also believe if we get more practicing Professional Engineers and less Professors and product salesman on the Building code committees we would have a lot less changes to the building codes. But I think we are all to busy trying to keep up with the changes that we don’t have time to attend committee meetings.
It was abandoned because the take off quantities is only as good as the model itself and it is two easy to not click a box here or there that could greatly change your quantities. In the end the Contractor stated they would not use the model for their estimate. More importantly we would have blown the budget many times over.
Talking to a friend at ZweigWhite, the publisher of Structural Engineering and all the other free Engineer/Architecture magazines, he admitted that they are big supporters of BIM. One, look at all the ads and articles related to BIM. Two, look at all the seminars and conferences that they sponsor educating all of us about BIM. They are trying to convince everyone you must use BIM or you will be left behind like the dinosaurs. It has been a great marketing campaign to sell something nobody seems to want and it has worked.
It is similar to how ASCE really supported continuing education a few years back. Now they are the leader in continuing education for Civil Engineers. All of you that are ASCE members get the same daily ASCE Seminar pamphlet in the mail that I do showcasing Excavation Safety or Seismic Design of Liquid Storage Tanks for $1,045 plus Travel and Hotel. Since Jan. 1st I have received 25 offers by mail from ASCE, at $0.39 apiece it appears my $200+ annual dues are used to mail me more offers. No wonder the dues keep going up.
Just think ASCE also thinks that you should have a Masters degree (or 30 hours of classwork beyond a B.S. degree) in order to get your P.E. license. Which has now been adopted by NCEES, do you think that this is because Grad school enrollment is down and the majority of ASCE Board members are also Professors. While I am glad I went to Grad school and received M.S. I still think I learned more my first year out of school then I ever did in school.
I also believe if we get more practicing Professional Engineers and less Professors and product salesman on the Building code committees we would have a lot less changes to the building codes. But I think we are all to busy trying to keep up with the changes that we don’t have time to attend committee meetings.
BBENG:
You are so right on this. Its something everyone is telling us we want and can use, without ever asking us if we want or can use it.
Reminds me a lot of metric about 10 years ago. I was working for a place that did a lot of federal government work. We had people, the same people trying to sell us seminars and such, telling us in 5 years nobody would be using English units, and if we didn't get on the metric band wagon now, we would be out of buisnes in a year or two.
My place of former employment is still around, still designing in English units, and doing quite well.
I am sure the same salesmen are still around, hawking BIM seminars now.
You are so right on this. Its something everyone is telling us we want and can use, without ever asking us if we want or can use it.
Reminds me a lot of metric about 10 years ago. I was working for a place that did a lot of federal government work. We had people, the same people trying to sell us seminars and such, telling us in 5 years nobody would be using English units, and if we didn't get on the metric band wagon now, we would be out of buisnes in a year or two.
My place of former employment is still around, still designing in English units, and doing quite well.
I am sure the same salesmen are still around, hawking BIM seminars now.
DaveVikingPE
Structural
Yeah, what's up with ASCE and those EXPENSIVE courses? It's almost like having a job in engineering (one that you can be fired from any minute) means you're supposed to tithe for the rest of your life to the mighty ASCE...
OT, I've gotten the FREE PDH's that were offered in Structural Engineer magazine (5 pdh through PCA self-study) and CE News (3 pdh through CON-TECH's self study) and the State of New York Recognizes their certificates as partially fulfilling my continuing education requirements
Back on topic, what gets me about BIM is that it's promise is that engineers will collaborate "more." What irks me is that how come the design team leader isn't making sure everyone's on the same sheet of paper? I guess one of the things BIM will do is design the project for you...
OT, I've gotten the FREE PDH's that were offered in Structural Engineer magazine (5 pdh through PCA self-study) and CE News (3 pdh through CON-TECH's self study) and the State of New York Recognizes their certificates as partially fulfilling my continuing education requirements
Back on topic, what gets me about BIM is that it's promise is that engineers will collaborate "more." What irks me is that how come the design team leader isn't making sure everyone's on the same sheet of paper? I guess one of the things BIM will do is design the project for you...
I am only briefly familar with BIM, but we are researching it. It is similar to what we have been doing on site work for several years at utility projects and industrial/instituional projects in 2-D. It is more expensive, it is more time consuming, but it is highly cost effective. We have been able to save the owners considerable costs in the field. The concept of BIM, having living construction documents that are constently updated when related drawings change is an excellent idea. Trying to have a detailed master drawing of the projectthat has these changes posted to it is also a great idea. I don't know if software has evolved to the point where that will be easily accomplished in 3D.
I think BIM is a great idea, but I fear that it's present form may focus too much on IT and not enough on CE.
I think BIM is a great idea, but I fear that it's present form may focus too much on IT and not enough on CE.
It seems to me that having the same organization write the codes that are heavily involved in selling the corresponding seminars is very close to a conflict of interest. It's almost like a license to print money.
Concerning BIM, while I'm sure there is potential with solid technological reasons behind the systems, I wonder about jumping in too early in the process. Does anyone here remember Autocad in the mid 80s on 286 computers with 14" monitors? Sure, CAD is a valuable tool now, but it was not a user friendly experience back then, at least in my opinion. I would guess that the BIM software available in five years would be much better than now since we are in the early stages of adoption.
Just a thought.
-Mike
Concerning BIM, while I'm sure there is potential with solid technological reasons behind the systems, I wonder about jumping in too early in the process. Does anyone here remember Autocad in the mid 80s on 286 computers with 14" monitors? Sure, CAD is a valuable tool now, but it was not a user friendly experience back then, at least in my opinion. I would guess that the BIM software available in five years would be much better than now since we are in the early stages of adoption.
Just a thought.
-Mike
utlimately, the use of and acceptance of BIM in our offices is not up to the magazine and software people. it's up to those of us who practice engineering. no one is pointing a weapon at our heads and forcing us to use BIM. if it doesn't make sense to use it, don't. Software used in engineering and any other field is only as good as the people using it. analysis and cad software will not do our work for us while we are playing golf. we all know this.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Question