BIM Handbook Chapter 5: BIM for Architects and Engineers
The chapter discusses the strengths
and abilities of BIM software for architects and engineers. As an engineering
student I have gotten a lot of exposure to this technology. I began using BIM
software back in high school. I learned to use Autodesk inventor and
SolidWorks, but mostly used Revit and AutoCAD for projects. From that
experience and the usage of these technologies in classes and on co-op, I’ve
learned a lot about the features and advantages of using this technology. I’ve
seen firsthand that the software allows for better integration and
collaboration of all disciplines working on a project. It allows for better
communication between fields and overall can be used to create a better design.
The software also breaks the barrier between the design and construction phases
which can be a major source of inefficiency.
Because of the wide variety of BIM
technology, the services they can offer range from a quick 3D sketch as a
conceptual design tool (something like SketchUp) to mapping energy usage
(eQuest and the like) to creating a full working model of a building (like
Revit). BIM can be used to understand both the design and the performance of a
building. It can run simulations for different location and design conditions
and map energy usage, lighting, and other sustainability aspects.
For my second co-op, I worked at an
MEP Engineering firm. One of the large projects I worked on used the central
model function of Revit. Architects, structural, mechanical, and electrical engineers
each had a model of the building that could be altered and resynced with to the
central model. This updated model would then show in the other models. With
this, several people could be working in the model at the same time which improved
efficiency and the design process. The architects changed the wall layouts
several times, but with this system changes could be seen in real time and we
could adjust our model based on that. It was also easier on the construction side
to use BIM because the contractors could see the model, and creating actual construction
documents and plans was easy in the software.
I was working on mechanical systems
and used the built-in features of Revit for that discipline. For example, if
you knew the airflow rate and the static pressure of a duct, the program can
size it for you. It can automatically put in size transitions as well. It made
it simple to map where equipment was going to be placed and whether it worked
with respect to the other discipline’s work.
Besides these aspects, the chapter
also talks about the ability to create objects and family libraries. You can
make generic objects or partially specified that can be modified to fit the
specific need. Pretty much anything used in the design of a building in Revit is
a family—from wall type to room tags. There are also public sites that allow people
to share different libraries they’ve created. Overall, the chapter connects
perfectly to my experiences with BIM in both academic and work projects.
Source: C. M. Eastman, “Chapter 5: BIM for Architects and
Engineers,” in BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners,
Managers, Designers, Engineers, and Contractors, 2nd ed., Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2012, pp. 193-261.
COMMENTS:
Kerry Milligan:
I liked that the chapter went down to the basics of the
software. I understand the BIM technology well, but reading about it in a more
general sense gives me a better idea of how powerful of a tool it really is. I
never really thought of it as the linking of objects together and the system
automatically adjusting as things change. The overview of BIM as a tool and
parametric modeling as whole gives me a more well-rounded understand of the
tool I use almost daily.
Jordan Shuster:
I never really considered the fact that BIM could help with
the language barrier seen between clients and designers as well as on
construction sites. It makes sense that seeing a model and having a visual
rather than a text document is better understood by all involved. I agree that
BIM makes it easier in general for different groups of people (i.e. different
engineers and architects) to understand and convey their ideas. I found it interesting
to see yet another aspect of the design process that is improved with this
software.
Thomas Sisson:
I’ve seen firsthand interoperability work well and terribly
for projects. Being able to bring a model from AutoCAD to Revit is incredibly
easy because both are Autodesk products. Like you said, this makes the design process
move more quickly and smoothly, which is an advantage in respect to deadlines
and budgets. I’ve also seen the gap in models when two software do not have an
easy transition, which is frustrating not only for the designer, but the
drawbacks affect the client as well. With the direction technology is going, I
could see companies like Autodesk begin to take over the marketplace because
they do have so many programs that have interoperability.
Dee Dee, I like that you mentioned using Revit MEP at your co-op, because I did too! I used it in a pretty different capacity though - I worked at an acoustical engineering firm for my first co-op and we used the MEP engineers' Revit models to help navigate the plans to create our models for the acoustic properties of the designed HVAC systems. So it seems that BIM is useful not only for the engineers doing the direct design work, but also the ones doing the complementary design work that builds off of what the structural, mechanical, electrical, and other engineers initially do.
ReplyDeleteDee Dee,
ReplyDeleteI like your connection to your own experiences. I have been on the structural side of the central model for my coops, so it was nice to see how the MEP side differed. I also found it interesting that you used REVIT's built in design features for sizing ducts. Since the structural design of REVIT is not quite up to speed with other sizing programs, I always had to rely on RAM Structures or other programs when looking at the support loads. Maybe Autodesk will be able to improve their REVIT structural analysis to allow all engineering disciplines to design all systems directly in the program.
I’ve had experience in Revit similarly to what Cody described above in his comment - on the structural side, relying on RAM for sizing, etc. Were you working simultaneously with architects out-of-house in the central model? That sounds remarkable! In the structural consulting firms I have worked at, we would always get an updated Revit model from the architect that we would link into our structural model, then we would have the worksharing you described with multiple engineers in-house working on the model simultaneously. We were never working on the same central model as the other disciplines, though. That sounds very efficient! Similarly for the contractors, I have never had exposure to allowing the contractor see the model while it is in progress. To me - that sounds like a negative aspect to collaboration, because I have experienced major changes happen to the model close to the deadline for CD’s. It would be counterproductive for a contractor to progress based on a model that is incomplete or susceptible to major changes.
ReplyDeleteDee Dee,
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a very useful property Revit has. I did not know that Revit had the ability to be worked on simultaneously and updated in real time. This, like you had mentioned, allows the various engineers and architects to alter things at the same time and not have to a few weeks later learn that everything they were designing for is completely wrong because the architect moved a major structural wall you were counting on using to run the duct work. Revit let’s all the disciplines know at the same time, allowing them to adjust and speed up the overall design process. Which, since I worked in the construction industry, this would limit and drastically reduce the conflicts and the constructability issues certain designs have. Overall, I believe and have seen some evidence for the fact that with BIM the overall design and construction process will be much quicker.
Dee Dee,
ReplyDeleteI had a similar experience on my second co-op. I used to sit in big meetings with all the designers: Mechanical, structural engineer, fire protection (different company than the mechanicals), and even the electricians. This group would meet and all have the BIM model up, then as the meeting went on and issues were brought up, solutions were sought. Sometimes the mechanical engineer would ask the electrician for their input regarding practicality of a design. Or the structural steel would clash with the ducts. In my personal experience, I learned that the steel is rarely moved in a "clash", and that the fire protection pipes or heads in a clash always lose (easiest to re-route). It probably is easiest to re-route the sprinkler pipes because the BIM today can perform most of the calculations and code checks instantly, where a structural change, no matter how small, can greatly impact the building.
Dee Dee,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing your Co-Op and Revit experience at your blog post. I really wonder about the central model function of Revit. It is really cool to design models of structural system or MEP system without depending on Architect's model. Also, I am curious what would happen if the architect decide to change a design? Otherwise, it is really cool to know that Revit MEP has developed add-ons for air duct sizing.