AutoCAD WS for iPhone and iPad…

 

Thanks to Clark Morgan at VirCon for making me aware of the AutoCAD WS app for iPhone and iPad.

I downloaded it tonight to my brand new iPad. (Happy Birthday to me, thanks honey (p.s. don’t tell her that there is a new version to be released sometime around Christmas. Ignorance is Bliss.))

So, the APP is kind of cool, but I think the concept is awesome!

Here is an application for portable devices that lets you take AutoCAD drawings with you wherever you go.  No more rolled up plan or “lap set” to get coffee stains (please, keep you mug off my iPad, thank you very much.)

The usefulness remains to be seen.  You can zoom right in to the area that you want to review.  You can cloud and markup.  You can even measure (although I have yet to figure out how to set units. That might be set in the drawing file. Not sure.)

Here’s the kicker.  I haven’t investigated this yet, but the App’s documentation claims that I can share a drawing and work on it in tandem with another user.  Read that again.  A collaborative software that allows multiple users to work in a file and see the work being done by the other users.  You had me at “take .dwgs in the field on your tablet.”  I’m blown away by the thought of real time collaboration “in the Cloud.”

From there website:

Sharing drawings

Share drawings with others directly from your device. Use permissions controls to restrict editing and download of the drawing. If other users are also viewing the drawing you can see each other's changes and collaborate in real-time.

If this actually the way the application works, and given the blog chatter about the Revit Server Extension, I think we are in for some interesting times ahead.

Seems like Autodesk is still proving that their not afraid of the Big Bad BIM…

Vico is hiring

For those looking, Vico has some interesting opportunities.

General Description

Vico Project Engineers are embedded in customer projects as project resources and perform standard Project Engineer tasks, powered by Vico Software tools. Project Engineers typically work on a large construction project for one or two years. After a successful Project Engineer project, PEs can become On-Site Project Managers and coordinate multiple Project Engineers and provide high level consulting to customer companies.

Check out the full description here.

BIM Texas 2010

My man on the scene reports that BIM Texas 2010 is well attended by representatives from all sectors of the AECO (Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and Owners) industry.

This year’s theme is “Understanding the Gap: What Owners want v. what Contractors can deliver.”

I have a feeling that good things will come from this event and it will inspire at least a few posts on this blog.

Thank you to Texas A&M and TEXO for sponsoring this event to get Contractors and Owners talking about what BIM means to them.

Gig ‘em!

In the event of a discrepancy…

While commenting on a post at BIM MANAGER, I started to think about how we reconcile discrepancies in project information. Traditionally the drawings have taken precedent. But which drawing?  The design intent drawing or the shop drawing? Plumbing waste plan or the waste isometric? Heck, even plan, section and elevation are known to have information that’s not coordinated in traditionally drafted drawing sets (even in sets produced from a model, but that’s poor use of the tool.)  Add to this the additional layers of complexity of Specifications, Cut Sheets, Hardware and Equipment Schedules, etc and you have ample opportunity for discrepancies. Cue RFI. Cue Change Order.

Enter the BIM.  Your one stop depository of information about the project. Today, right now, we all have at our disposal the tools necessary to link ALL project information to a BIM. Read that last again. Think about it, Design Intent, Specifications, Construction Sequencing, Client Meeting results (Approvals and Markups,) Fabrication Drawings, As-Builts, O&M manuals, Asset management, Building Controls, etc. etc.  ALL IN ONE PLACE.

All of this information can either be derived from the model or linked to it.  So there should be NO MORE DISCREPANCIES.  Bold statement for sure.  But hear me out.  If your spec is linked to what’s in the model, it can only reflect the information you need based on design intent.  If your drawing sets are extracted from the model, it must reflect what is there.

Discrepancies enter the picture when the deliverable doesn’t reflect the current state of the model. The spec is compiled by hand, the model changes (programs that extract specs from BIM often update “instantly.”)  Static, stock details that represent “typical” conditions (they are never typical.) Text that calls out door sizes (practically every BIM authoring solution allows “tagging” of smart objects, so the text changes when the object changes.) 

So, given that discrepancies will creep into our project (through poor use of our tools, scheduling pressures, lack of technology, etc) how should we rectify and reconcile them? I attest that the MODEL should have the final word. Why?  If the model is constructed from objects that are dimensionally accurate and data rich, you have the actual building (just before it exists in reality) to guide your decision making.

When a condition isn’t clear in the “printed” documents, go look at it in the model. View it from infinite angles, I guarantee you will have a more clear understanding of the condition than you can receive from ANY number of 2D drawings.

If information is missing from the plan set (and the model) MODEL IT!! Take the time to model the condition.  What wouldn’t we give to have the budget for unlimited mock-ups. Well, we don’t have unlimited budget (I don’t anyway) but Virtual Mock-ups offer extreme value.  Model any conditions that aren’t clear. Communicate with images or even videos of those conditions.  Get the model in the hands of the decision makers. The closer you can get the model to those asking the questions, the better.

Model correctly and use those models to reconcile any discrepancies.

Don’t let discrepancies in your project information make you afraid of the Big Bad BIM.

In Remembrance- 9-11-2001

Never Forget...
All gave some, and Some gave all.

In Remembrance of the 2700+...

AU 2010 Advance Registration

In case you didn't get your reminder email.  Advanced registration for attending AU in Las Vegas opens today (for AU members.)

Get busy.  Click Here.

Vela Systems and Autodesk

I’m a little behind in talking about this, but Vela Systems has closed a Series B round of investing in which they raised a reported $6 M. Autodesk was a significant partner in this investment.

Read the press release.

The the thing that I find encouraging is that this shows Autodesk’s commitment to using BIM in the field and throughout the Building Lifecycle.

Good luck to Vela Systems as they put this investment to good use making BIM accessible and useful in the field.

Don’t put your BIM in a Box!

What can a BIM be used for? Think outside of the Box.

A better question is how can I use BIM for <insert use>?  I ran across an interesting use yesterday.

How can Emergency Response Services use a BIM?  It doesn’t take much thought to think of dozens of ways.  Mostly they are related to visualization.

• Cameras placed in the model can simulate planned security cameras and validate the coverage.
• Animated crowd simulations can identify bottlenecks.
• Visual reports on threats/emergencies overlaid on the BIM can help leadership evaluate the location, extent and magnitude of the incident so that they can plan an informed response. A related example would be the interconnectivity of the  US Army’s Land Warrior
• Sensor driven data can visually report conditions of the environment in a visual manner that is quicker to conceptualize and easier to understand than just raw data.

When President Obama visited Kalamazoo Michigan, the Secret Service was “blown away” by the information they could extract from Western Michigan University’s BIM. I don’t know what exactly the Secret Service does when they scout a venue for the President, but can you imagine the time saved and the quality of the information available in a BIM compared to either walking the whole venue (time intensive) or typical FM CAD plans (limited amount of information and limited display of spatial relationships)?  Of course with a mission as critical as the protection of a dignitary, the Secret Service must still visit and verify the identified trouble spots.  Can you imagine the liability if the the BIM was taken for unquestionable fact.  But, that said, As-Built should be As-Built.

Anyway, check out this article about how WMU’s “Bronco BIM” project helped the Secret Service prep for a President’s visit and the plans they have for it’s future.

Why would Owners want BIM?

In response to a discussion at a Group I belong to on Linked IN  (BIM for Owners)  I got a little lengthy.  I'm not sure that those without Linked In accounts can view the discussion, so I have re-posted it here.
I think the “Why” of BIM is directly related to where it is applied in the building lifecycle.
In the early design stage the owner benefits from 3D visual communication of the designer’s ideas. Being visual creatures, we can conceptualize a condition much easier when presented with a 3D image. Now if you can exam that condition in 3D from all angles easily, well, all the better. This benefits the Owner by creating a common language (visual language) that everyone involved can comment on. Owners and Designers both will know they are “on the same page.”
In the Late design/ Pre-Construction stage visualization helps as well. Again everyone can understand a particular condition better when they can exam a virtual model of that condition. Models can also be investigated semi-automatically for Spatial Coordination issues involving the Building’s Systems (Clash Detection.) The Owner Benefits at this stage in Cost and Schedule. If we can immediately agree what a condition is through the model (whether it is right, wrong, or indifferent) then we can move to the real discussion of Constructability and how it relates to Design intent. We don’t have to spend time sketching and having “deep discussions” (OK Arguing) about what we “think” the condition is. That churn effects schedule. If Contractors have a more clear idea of Design intent due to a well built model, the Owner saves money (and time) with a reduction of RFIs and Change Orders.
At handoff, the Owner benefits when the BIM contains data such as O&M, Specs, and Warranties. When that happens we eliminate the “boxes and boxes” of handoff docs and provide a model that can serve as a repository for all of that information.
The model can then serve as a start for a FM database. Currently that information is usually exported to a “traditional” FM database, but there are solutions to allow that information live on in the visual environment of the BIM. As we develop more and better solutions that allow Owners and Operators to access data in a rich visual environment, then Owner’s will see dramatic returns in efficiencies and quality.

Manufacturer Content, PIM, et al. (part 1)

For a while now, I have restrained from commenting on BIM content (for the Revit platform or otherwise) from Product Manufacturers/Suppliers, also called PIM (Product Information Models (or Modeling.))  Mostly this is due to some negative experiences I have had with Product Suppliers/Manufacturers content as well as the fact that I have noticed a general trend of improvement in that same content. I feel I need throw a few opinions out there and see what folks think.

The cry from the industry for “content” from Autodesk and Manufacturers makes sense from an end-user standpoint, and I “get” it. They need the tools to complete their tasks. I don’t know what release of AutoCAD was the first to have Blocks (AutoCAD “content”) but I’m sure that the first few didn’t do everything for everybody. As AutoCAD has matured and manufacturers have provided shop-drawing quality .dwg details and blocks (including the high-tech dynamic blocks) users have gotten used to (spoiled?) and expect it for their BIM modeling applications as well.

I have felt until very recently that expecting Autodesk or Manufacturers to create content to be used in my office is “beyond the pale.”  Every piece of content used in our office goes through testing and a standardization process. I can’t think of any content we have gotten from an outside source that didn’t need modification. Sometimes we modify for graphic standards or material standards or annotation standards or some higher desired functionality. Like I said, until recently, I didn’t think having someone outside the office making content for OUR use was an acceptable answer (more on why I changed my mind in part 2.)

A problem I see with this is the amount of information contained in PIM, and Who and How that information is used and maintained (more on that as well in part 2.)  When a manufacturer or supplier creates a 3D model of their product, it is often pushed directly to their CAD/CAM manufacturing machines and the dimensional information can be overwhelming.  While this information is necessary for the CAM workflow, it usually doesn’t translate well to a BIM environment. One reason is file size.

I have seen early attempts at PIM with light fixture families that were over 3MB, which is about 6 times the size of most of the Revit families approved for use in our office. 

Luckily, Autodesk has provided end users and product modelers with guidelines on how to optimize their families for best performance.  PIM has problems with file size and other performance robbing issues far less often than two years ago.  Autodesk’s guidelines for having content included on SEEK has made a step towards standardizing what Revit Families should be (whether you agree or not.)  Note: that’s Revit families not BIM content (sometimes folks forget there’s a difference.)

Another problem I often see is in content designed for MEP use.  Revit MEP uses “connectors” to propagate information from one part of a “system” in the model to another.  Unlike some other “best practices” for family creation, the configuration of these connectors is imperative to getting a Revit MEP model to function as expected. I rarely see MEP content where these connectors are configured correctly. (A notable exception is content from Greenheck.  Almost all of the connections on content we received were correctly configured.)

Just because a modeler (or content creation service) can create 3D models that look good and maybe even have some snappy, Neat-o functionality, doesn’t mean they have either the Engineering or Revit knowledge and experience to create families that work for MEP use.  And you do need both. If you don’t have a basic understanding of how the system your working with is engineered and works in reality, you won’t be able to design content that works for the Engineers using it.  If you don’t understand Revit MEP, you will make assumptions about how the system works in reality and try to make that happen in Revit.  And that may or may not work.

In short, I used to think that there was no way that Manufacturers would ever be able to supply useful content for my uses.  I now feel like I was way off base.  My hope is that Product Suppliers/Manufacturers will continue to poll end users, and BIM managers as well as Application providers (thanks Autodesk) about the BIM content they configure.  I think that they are an essential part of “True BIM” and it’s use in a Building’s lifecycle.

In the next part of this series I will talk about why I reversed my opinion on the subject and ideas I have for capturing and managing information in PIM.

Oh, BTW, I hate loooong, text-only blog posts, but you wouldn’t know that by this one.