BIM Nirvana

In the last few weeks I received a few interesting emails asking about my take on what would be the ideal architecture/construction software of the future.  After checking out to make sure that no responses were to the CAD companies, I set out to ponder this question...

Note, this is not going to address any of the awkwardness of this intern who is missing the big picture...

To process this out, let's think about the process of architecture in an Integrated Delivery manner:

The players: Owner, Architect, Contractor...Engineers, Sub-Contractors, Consultants.

Traditional problems: Systems developed in a vacuum. Keeping current with the design. Translations. Document control. Real-time cost tracking. Options studies. Information duplication/communication. Multiple offices/locations. Product accuracy. Specifications review. Design intent vs. constructability. Design review. Schedule and sequencing. Project management in the model/drawings. Redrawing and rebuilding.

So...

A software package that allows each member of the team to contribute, modify, view, and attribute in a single, modular, and tracked environment that automatically populates schedules, costing, specifications, and the real-time construction/fabrication/erection documents in a coordinated parametric BIM model that can be accessed globally, 24/7, from a single archiveable database that is hosted at a 3rd party secure location and spans outside of corporate firewalls.

That's it. Have at it Bentley/Autodesk/VICO/Google/Graphisoft/player yet to be defined. 

Hopefully one of you will get it right...

Linden Labs vs. Google : Victor takes the virtual marketplace

First: Thank you BumpTop. Your 3D desktop has recovered my desktop, a task previously unthinkable.  It's stable, and you guys rock.

Second: The migration back into a 3D desktop has reinvigorated a perception I've had on the futures of the virtual environments by Linden Labs and Google. It's no secret that I've wondered about Google's potential for SketchUp, but is that far enough? Is it possible that Google Earth is the real competitor to Second Life?

Hugh may be saying it best: 

Walk with me here - Linden Labs has combined the perks of a social chat room with a  marketplace.  Throw a 3-dimensional GUI over this, and that's it. Not much different than your Apple store and iPhone interface, except that you have cute little avatars (well, not that cute) and less control on quality environments.

So, what if you had the following acquisitions: A) a powerful, user friendly 3D modeling application;  a foray (failed, but still a foray nonetheless - RIP Lively!) into an online 3D engine; a powerful, global-based database & map/3D graphic engine; GPS synchronization; a social network/IM stream; an open-source mobile phone OS and handset(s); and finally, a powerful search and advertising/marketing network.

LL, be afraid.

This isn't to say that Google has all of the pieces, but Google has all the pieces. Sony may be able to bring a variation of this to the PS3, but they are landlocked to the console. Apple is missing the advertising connection.  Microsoft isn't even in the same neighborhood (open source? whazzat?).

So how do these pieces go together? There is not much difference if someone is creating something for the web or modeling for real-world architecture (I'm still waiting for Google SketchUp to take on Autodesk, but I've vented on that enough for now...). An intuitive modeler is an enabler, and being able to port to Google Earth is a gateway drug.

Neil Stephenson's Snow Crash speaks of a world where there is relevance between physical and virtual locations. Anyone with Google Maps on your iPhone know of the surrealism of being able to always know where you are, and entering into the virtual based on the physical brings a parallelism unprecedented in 3D environments. Discovering new worlds or landholding your real estate in both worlds gives the ability to sync retail brick and mortar locations with their online presences. 

Now distribute this to your mobile phones. Virtual searches syncronized with physical products. Tracking search and purchase over a distributed network on PC and mobile. VR synced to the physical, yet the parallel with the truly virtual. Advertising pushed to your phone through GPS, driven from the VR parallel, and vice versa. 

Combine this with attributal building information, searchable destinations, or even being able to recombine and build your own cities based on search criteria. Market data beware, you can have user data at an entirely different scale. People could build and share their own virtual 'cities', pulling people to search and build their networks with each other.

Unimaginable, no?

Misusing made up words...

Oh words,  you silly silly things you...

After a 2 1/2 hour dialogue this week involving the terminology BIM, we have reached a point where it is as generic as saying CAD or model or ice cream (you gelato people know what I mean...). 

Why, you ask? 

Theoretical Rant:: start::

BIM originally was a push towards a dynamic building model,  which was a resolution of the traditional issues with 2-dimensional documents that were not linked to elevations, sections, etc. Moving into a 3-dimensional environment 10-15 years ago, architects began utilizing 3D for visualization, unconnected models that were detached from the document set.  As we matured, and CADD marketing intervened, we came to realize that we needed architectural models that were the basis of our design, and 2D 'views' dynamically derived in real-time from said model(s).

This, depending on which marketing ploy you conceded to, become Object-oriented modelling or BIM. Throw in some intelligent databasing for scheduling, and you have the basis for what Bentley, Autodesk, Archicad, and others are marketing as BIM today. 

That's great. 

But today the terminology is changing, as we are working dynamically outside the bounds of the architects' offices. Engineers, contractors, and fabricators, are all entering into the 3D arena. One model is not the case anymore, as you have system models that overlay from the EOR and DC trades. Simulation, analytical, cost tracking, sequencing, coordination, and E&O models all exist. BIM has become watered down with all of these.

And worse.

Lawyers are entering into the fray. AIA, AGC, and owners are all trying to interpret this landscape, and without a clear lexicon, this will only create greater confusion.

Where will this go? Hopefully a clean restating of terms. BIM needs to go away, as it is beyond recovery now. We need to look to the future, or even get to where things are today. This includes moving beyond the marketing brochure. This includes a clear definition of activities, who is doing what, and the processes that extend all the way through the lifespan of the model.  

Without this ground, we will not be able to move beyond the developers, able to control and shape the tools and methodologies on our terms.

::end::Theoretical Rant

And ice cream is egg based. Gelato is not ice cream. Sorbet is not ice cream. Get with the times people, these are critical distinctions!!