Thursday, January 25, 2018

Milligan - Blog Post 3

Future Problems with Revit / BIM
There are several foreseeable problems that could arise as the use of BIM and Revit increases in our industry. The first one, which is probably the most obvious, is the increased resources needed to keep up with the trends in BIM use. Firms may not have the appropriate hardware needed in order to use BIM in an efficient way, or they may not have the appropriate resources to use BIM for some or all of their projects. Obtaining the appropriate hardware is an added cost to the firm for them to stay relevant. This cost will eventually be relayed into project costs, driving up the price of design or construction. This leads to another potential problem, which is the temporary spike in design and construction costs while the industry adapts to this learning curve. However, lack of resources is not only relevant to hardware, there is a need for additional people resources, too. There needs to be some at each firm that specializes in this process and is able to bring the firm up to speed.


The other major problem that will be faced with the increased use of BIM and Revit is the development of overdependency on the software. Our entire education process is based on the idea of learning the “how” and “why” behind a process, learning to do it the long way, and then learning to take short cuts. Those short cuts are only valuable when you understand the process they are cutting out. As BIM becomes more popular in building design, and is able to take on more responsibility in the design process, it will be less necessary to have professionals able to do the process the long way. There could even reach a point where no professionals are able to do the process the long way. This creates a situation of overdependence on the results BIM is spitting out. If you are unable to do the process yourself, you are unable to understand if the model is giving you reasonable information. This is dangerous due to the possibility of receiving faulty information from a BIM model and not being able to tell that it is faulty until something fails. 

Comments:
Josh: It was interesting to read your post about the future advantages of BIM, compared to our group's assignment to consider the future problems with BIM. There is the question with future growth if the benefits will outweigh the potential problems. One benefit you discussed which helps to balance out future problems is the use of BIM for clash detection. While one of the potential problems is resources needed, as you point out, clash detection makes the design process easier and more efficient. This reduces the overall time needed for coordination processes.

Dung: You explained great details regarding the potential for modeling software to surpass the advances in computer hardware. It is a great point that not only will the amount of data become greater, but the power needed to graphically model the data will become much greater as well. Your story about a firm taking a hit in purchasing hardware that can support this modeling software I'm sure is prevalent in many firms. The fact that the firm was only able to purchase one station demonstrates another problem. Even if a firm as the capabilities to participate in BIM processes, it may be only on a limited scale, and there may be only one or two people in the firm that are able to participate in those processes.

Mark: You make great points about the different evolution rates between hardware and software and the problems that poses for BIM development in our industry. One thing that we didn't discuss as a group, which your post sparked me to think about, is the idea that it won't just be a one-time investment to be a part of the "BIM world." As the software continues to advance and grow, firms will be forced to continually invest in their hardware. It is not even just hardware that will need to be updated, but knowledge on the software as well. Each time a new release comes out, it will be up to someone in the firm to get trained and familiarized with the new updates for ease of use on projects.

4 comments:

  1. Kerry,

    I know precisely what you mean concerning the resource needs pertaining to these high-end software and their related components. I have worked in small firms that struggled to simply integrate Revit into their workload. This is mostly because these systems are sold in bulk to large firms for the convenience of it all. This would make several small firms obsolete for commercial projects and therefore not very profitable overall.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I absolutely agree with you that over-dependence on software is a big potential issue. It's great to have software that can design a building for us, but if we start relying on that too heavily and start to lose our own abilities - or have engineers who don't learn everything in the first place - we start to be unable to trouble shoot issues when they appear. Until such time as AI is fully developed to surpass human intelligence in the future, the BIM software itself is still unlikely to be able to catch and fix every situational failure that may occur, so human observation and intelligence is still a critical part of the design process.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kerry,
    I think you make a couple of really good points about the future problems that come BIM and Revit. I think that some of the problems are problems that exist now, for example smaller firms might not want to implement BIM as much because they don’t have the proper network to support such a large file(s). Hopefully with cloud based storage, this problem won’t be a big deal in future.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kerry,
    Relying too much on a computer to do the work for you is something that scares me as well, especially for the structural aspect of design. In the 1970s, some design firms were using computers to help design structures, specifically statically indeterminate ones that would be almost impossible to solve by hand. That is exactly what the designers of the Hartford Civic Center did for its innovative roof design. They pretty much chucked the space frame design into a computer, it spit out an "OK", and they built it. It turns out there were many issues and incorrect assumptions with the design that the computer couldn't have caught or wasn't designed to catch. The structure eventually failed under a large snow load.
    https://failures.wikispaces.com/Hartford+Civic+Center+(Johnson)

    I hope that in the future that the designers can stay experts at their crafts, even with the assistance of computers.

    This 99% Invincible episode talks about the same fears, but regarding flight and the Airline Industry.
    https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/children-of-the-magenta-automation-paradox-pt-1/

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.