Comments for AECbytes.com Blog

Comment on Graphisoft’s New White Paper on BIM by StructuralBIMGuy

StructuralBIMGuy — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:21:47 +0000

I for one have given up on Archicad and I am just hanging on to VWs- also hoping they (Nem) deliver VW Structural. Couldn’t agree more with Design/Engineering optimisation. My choice is Maplesoft…integration would be nice…presentations are spectacular….

Comment on Solibri Model Checker v7 by Lachmi Khemlani

Lachmi Khemlani — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:20:28 +0000

Hi Derek,

Thanks for your question. I would advise firms like yours to get further along on your BIM implementation. Only then you can appreciate and gainfully use the power and sophistication of a product like Solibri Model Checker.

Lachmi

Comment on HOK’s 2nd Annual BIM Awards by arvind bhandari

arvind bhandari — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:57:11 +0000

Good to see the projects and the ideas used. I am a architect at Satellier India, but it is still very inspiring to see all this work. Congratulations to Team HOK…..

Comment on Solibri Model Checker v7 by Derek Maher

Derek Maher — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:29:22 +0000

Thanks for the post. I’m currently part of a firm that is relatively new to BIM (this is the first year of exclusively using BIM)and was wondering whether or not you would advise a firm so early in it’s BIM development to use a product like this. I think the potential of a product like this is great, just curious as to how effective it would be at this point. Thanks again.

Comment on Adopting Lean Practices in the Architectural/Engineering Industry by David Haynes

David Haynes — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:51:27 +0000

Leo – I agree that Lean and Six Sigma is from manufacturing (Motorola and Toyota) and that those industries are product design and build which is different than building design and build. Three points:
1. In the article, I was describing where Lean and Six Sigma had their historical background.
2. If you really look at Virtual Design and Construction or BIM, its roots are also in the manufacturing world (Automotive and Aerospace).
3. I believe the A/E industry can learn from other industries – or at least glean their best practices and make them useful/meaningful in the A/E industry.

The new paradigm of BIM and Lean demands more relevant/pertinent information into the model as the project progresses. This is where IPD comes into play – the saying ‘more minds, better minds’ – that the design team gathers and synthesizes the input from many sources (contractors and trade partners). That synthesized information is placed into the model so the final design reflects more clearly what the design intent is to be.

Comment on HOK’s 2nd Annual BIM Awards by kai pascal

kai pascal — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:39:57 +0000

It is great to see all these projects and the ideas they have used. I am a student architect in Cameroon and can design, but it is still very inspiring to see all this work. Congratulations!

Comment on Adopting Lean Practices in the Architectural/Engineering Industry by Leo Schlosberg

Leo Schlosberg — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:44:46 +0000

Mr. Haynes has interesting ideas, but many are borrowed from domains with different characteristics. Motorola, like most manufacturers, designed products and then made many of them. A/E/C is in the business of designing and building large-scale prototypes. As Mr. Haynes points out, “Problems arise with BIM when A/E firms rely upon BIM’s visualization only, and when complexity issues arise as a result of modeling granularity. 3D modeling without integrated data lacks information sustainability. ” This points to the core problem of current practice – architects are responsible for great granularity but necessarily (too many products, too much complexity) lack the knowledge needed to support detailed design. Consequently, information flows are bizarre because they cannot be trusted – each handoff requires new expertise to evaluate it. This is reflected in the decades-old transition from approving shop drawings to stamping them “reviewed” (but without much contractual meaning to the review).

Comment on The AR LAB: A Vision by Bill GIlliss

Bill GIlliss — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 16:55:18 +0000

In response to Paul Seletsky’s article: I set up the first CAD lab at the Yale School of Architecture in 1985, and like his friend was also astonished at the facilities there upon a recent visit. Maybe one solution to the resource centers he envisions would be to use university facilities while the students are on vacation — I ran week-long programs for local architects at Yale during the summer, with the idea that if they could get a good grasp of what was possible, they would be far more likely to bring it into their own offices, where the “kids” would then put it to use. At the University of Louisville where I now teach in the Interior Architecture program, I have a room full of computers laden with great software that sit idle from the middle of May to the middle of August. Just across the street, the engineering school has every CNC and rapid prototyping tool imaginable.

A week of five- or six-hour days should be manageable for working professionals, and would fit easily into winter break, spring break, and summer vacation at most schools. The revenue these sessions would produce could be used to update equipment and help defray the cost of software subscriptions.

Comment on The AR LAB: A Vision by Paul Teicholz

Paul Teicholz — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 17:51:23 +0000

I am not an architect, but think I can understand the goals that are expressed in this opinion piece: continual education in modern tools and methods are needed over an architect’s working lifetime, and particularly during the early years to “ease the pain” of working in a subservient role. This would seem to be the role of the AIA since they already support other continuing education courses and lectures. But Paul must realize that there is significant cost for the learning centers that he is proposing and it would be unlikely that this could be met by the AIA. A possible alternative could be a hands-on course during an AIA Conference that was supported by tool makers and associated software vendors. This would not provide the continuing support identified in by Paul, but it might be a step in the right direction. As IPD becomes more widely used, architects will become more familiar with the skills and tools of other professionals in the building industry (including fabricators). This will also provide important educational insights.

Comment on The AR LAB: A Vision by Stourley Kracklite

Stourley Kracklite — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:17:44 +0000

Architects who wish to focus on user needs and building life cycle issues tend to denigrate the primacy of architectural design, aka “form-giving.”

Their inability to esteem themselves except at the expense of others is telling.

Building science and economics will continue to play a vital background role in the further development of architecture.