- Page 4 of 4 -

What Interoperability really means in a BIM context?

It has been an interesting week for interoperability in the BIM world. Three of the dominant players have made public statements on their strategy for BIM interoperability. Autodesk and Trimble issued a joint press release announcing anagreement to increase interoperability for customers to gain flexibility throughout the BIM project lifecycle. At the core of the press release was support of IFC and COBie.

Two days later BIM+ published an interview with Bentley Systems CEO Greg Bentley where BIM interoperability were also a key topic. Bentley were less supportive of IFC and COBie as we will see but still had a solution for interoperability in the AEC industry.

In this article we will look at what what interoperability really means in a BIM context. Then we will use select quotes from the press release and the interview to discuss the current state of interoperability in the world of BIM. We will see progress and good signs but we will also see issues, limitations and confusing and provocative statements. At the end we ask if these vendors holding the interoperability banner high are “sailing under false colors” or if they are just doing the best they can with the limitation of the current standards. Read on and see if you share our opinion.

What is interoperability

Before we dive in, let us have a quick refresher on what interoperability is. Lets look at the definition from the AFUL interoperability working group :

Interoperability is a characteristic of a product or system, whose interfaces are completely understood, to work with other products or systems, present or future, in either implementation or access, without any restrictions.

This definition is quite a mouthful. At least we can draw one main conclusion – you cannot have interoperability without open standards. Let us explore further

Interoperability in BIM software

Wikipedia have a separate sub-chapter on software interoperability that are a bit more specific.

With respect to software, the term interoperability is used to describe the capability of different programs to exchange data via a common set of exchange formats, to read and write the same file formats, and to use the same protocols.

One common use case for software interoperability is for the customers freedom to switch from one product to another while keeping the data intact after the transfer. This is especially important for use cases where the data will stay in one system for a long time (e.g. in Computer Aided Facility Management – CAFM systems) to prevent vendor lock-in.

For BIM interoperability there is another just as important driver. In the construction industry where one-off projects teams are assembled across different organisations, disciplines and phases you want the different discipline tools to share information with each other and you want data generated in one phase to be usable without re-entry for the next phase. This is the foundation for openBIM. You cannot have a true openBIM workflow without interoperable software. Interoperability is about freedom to work with the best in any discipline and for them to use the tools they are most comfortable and productive with.

Semantic interoperability and BIM

To communicate with each other systems need to use common data formats and communication protocols. Examples of formats are XML, JSON, SQL, ASCII and Unicode. Examples of protocols are HTTP, TCP, FTP and IMAP. When systems are able to communicate with each other using these standards they exhibit syntactic interoperability.

For BIM tools to work together we need more than just the ability to transfer information. We need the ability to transfer meaning. What is sent must be the same as what is understood. To achieve this both sides must refer to a common information exchange reference model. We need semantic interoperability.

What is not interoperability

The figure above is also taken from the interoperability working group. It is presented under the heading “degrees of interoperability”. However we would argue that the two first categories are not real interoperability. Again we use wikipedia to clarify when a vendor is forced to adapt its system to a dominant system that is not based on Open standards, it is not interoperability but only compatibility.

Plug-ins to BIM tools are common ways of providing such a compatibility solution.

The vendor behind that product can then choose to ignore any forthcoming standards and not co-operate in any standardisation process at all, using its near-monopoly to insist that its product sets the de facto standard by its very market dominance.

The design industry have a long history of dominating vendors trying to corner the market by controlling the de facto standard. We will later see if this is still relevant in the world of BIM

BIM maturity and interoperability

We have covered BIM maturity as described by the BIM levels before BIM level 1 is obviously not interoperability. Here BIM tools are used to automate the generation of design documents but no reusable data is passed on to the other parties in a standard format.

BIM level 2 is mainly about federated models and file based collaboration. The UK based BIM level 2 minimum requirements are requiring a combination of 3D native models and COBie data. As the native formats are not open standards the BIM level 2 mandate do not require real interoperability at this stage.

In our view it is first when you get to level 3 and move beyond just the file based collaboration you get truly integrated interoperable data. By the original definition level 3 would mean a centralised model that all parties are contributing to and benefiting from.

Now that we have some background on what requirements for real BIM interoperability are, let us have a look at the two case studies

Case study 1 : Autodesk and Trimble joint press release

For our first case study we will look at the joint press release from Autodesk and Trimble

To support open industry standards such as Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) and Construction Operations Building Information Exchange (COBie)

This is good news for openBIM and following a trend we have seen lately.

Trimble already have announced this kind of partnership with Nemetschek last year (2015).

Autodesk has also moved towards more actively promoting openBIM interoperability. In example by promoting openBIM at BIM World Paris this year (2016).

So all in all this is good new for the openBIM – buildingSMART community. IFC and COBie are taking steps to becoming the unrivalled open standard for interoperability in the AEC industry.

work together seamlessly through optimized file compatibility across applications

File compatibility is important for level 2 BIM. We are hoping the ambition is also to move beyond this

And what´s that word – compatibility – that´s not interoperability. Let explore the press release further in the next section

Tighter product-to-product integration can enable design and construction professionals to share models, project files and other data between select Autodesk and Trimble solutions

Yep – that´s compatibility for you. This is about two vendors saying their joint customers will get an edge over other players due to a tighter point to point integrations. Or are we misinterpreting this?

Again – the blame for this should not go to the vendors alone. If they want to provide “lossless” data transfers with semantic interoperability the current state of openBIM will only take them so far

The solution for industry interoperability : openBIM needs to evolve along the needs of the industry and vendors should work with standards bodies and “donate” results of these efforts back to the community

accelerate interoperability by exchanging Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and developer tools to build and market interoperable products

Again it will be interesting to see if this is a compatibility play or interoperability play. This industry is in need of open API´s to support interoperability.

UPDATE : After publishing this article we have come over this article where Jim Lynch of Autodesk confirms these points.

with those types of exchange formats or industry standards, you’re somewhat limited in what you can actually do.

AndToday, those products [Revit and Tekla] do interoperate via IFC, but when you take it to the next level of APIs, you get much stronger and more direct interoperability,

This confirms our point that the press release was a bit misleading. END UPDATE

Case study 2 – Bentley interview

Let´s move on to the Bentley interview and focus on quotes related to interoperability.

Interoperability is now provided though collaborative services that work well with our competitors’ software. You should also give some credit to Autodesk. We have a long-standing interoperability agreement with them.

This just confirms what we have seen. Point to point compatibility integrations are taken for interoperability. And those integrations are not based on open APIs. Bentley are promoting the use of its own i-model format generated by design software plug-ins.

(On IFC and COBie) : they will never go far enough, or be current enough, or be extensive enough to quite achieve a standard of persisting intelligent data

Yes there are limitations in the current implementations. But can they never be fixed? If the industry come together to work to fix the limitations? Again Bentley only see their own format as a viable solution.

Instead of complaining about lack of interoperability there are very practical ways to overcome it, that the internet has led to a strategy for self description. If in the AEC world we say that a lack of standards is holding us back we are making excuses.

Interoperability implies open standards by definition. If you are inventing your own integration layer, hoping it will become a defacto standard you should not call it interoperability.

I can’t think of anything but problems with COBie. …. What would you actually use it for, it’s verbose, it’s limited in terms of virtuosity and as a data exchange mechanism it is almost entirely theoretical as every time the design changes, which is constantly, you would have to re-export the whole COBie

COBie is not about sharing design data each time the design changes. COBie defines data drops related to the transition between each main phase change in the project lifecycle, the main one being handover of as built and operations and maintenance data. Owners capable of utilising models for the operations phase would typically require a combination of native models and openBIM iFC files to transfer the virtuosities of the models.
For the use cases Bentley describes buildingSMART are working on alternative model-view definitions and representations. We totally agree that that work needs to speed up, but attacking COBie for that flaw is really missing the point

So what is Bentleys solution to the interoperability challenge of the industry. Bentley have their own format called I-model. I-models can be created using free plugins to tools both from Bentley (e.g. Microstation) and some other tools (e.g. Revit). The i-models can be viewed in free viewers from Bentley (if you are on the windows platform) or they can be viewed as 3d pdf files (if that is the format the models were published to). The data in the i-models can be accessed via an ODBC database driver that Bentley provides. That means that there are integration possibilities but we would not call it an open standard and therefore not an interoperability solution.

To give some balance to the discussion we trust that Bentley are right when they say that the I-model format have many advantages over the openBIM formats/ standards. The one thing that counts however in interoperability and standardization is market adoption. Have a look at the trend graph below. IFC is definitely on the rise. That is not the case for i-model

Summary

openBIM as defined by buildingSMART is well positioned to become the interoperability framework for the AEC world. To do so however requires buildingSMART and the community to work through some limitations and constantly improve both the standard and the implementations.

Bentley is now the only major BIM player not openly supporting interoperability based on openBIM. At the same time the market is screaming for interoperability between the building and infrastructure domains. buidlingSMART have it on their todo list. Bentley say they have a superior solution…

Then back to our question – are the industry sailing under false colors?
Sailing under false colors is probably a too harsh expression for this. But we do think however that the interoperability term is thrown around a bit too loosely in our industry. Especially in marketing messaging. It is being used to describe point-to point solutions and it is being used to describe integrations based on proprietary formats. We think the industry needs to understand and agree on what interoperability is to make educated decisions based on the messaging from the vendors.

We also strongly hope that our standards will evolve so that compliance with the standard and working in the community is the main message you are promoting, not integration with another vendor.

Source: blog.areo.io/bim-interoperability

7 Reasons Why Transitioning to BIM Makes Sense for Small Firms

The benefits and capabilities of building information modeling in large-scale architectural practices are well known. But is BIM really necessary for smaller firms? Many small firms have been operating using traditional CAD methods for some time now, and switching technologies can seem a daunting task, especially for companies that operate on small budgets and without the specialized personnel of large international firms. But this is 2016 and the economic landscape has changed, with more and more expected from architects all the time. Time is more valuable now than ever. Where BIM software programs were once seen as simply nice to have, their large range of benefits have now made BIM an essential part of the design process. And as the following reasons show, BIM is just as important a tool for small offices as it is for larger ones.

Reason 1: Wow Factor

BIM is such an obvious solution for large projects, as it allows architects, consultants and contractors to work using the same information, that large-scale developers have begun to expect 3D models and multiple perspectives for every project. But many clients that small firms often work with are less familiar with BIM—or even the design process in general. Davey McEathron of Davey McEathron Architecture explains:

“The efficiencies that are built into a BIM program are one of the things we tout when we are in front of a client trying to win that business. When you show a client a 3D model and start spinning it around, it kind of blows their mind.”

Harnessing BIM technology when pitching to clients instills confidence in your work, while exciting them with an accurate visualization of how their project will look.

Reason 2: Shorten Feedback Loops, Save Time

CAD is a drafting program, not a responsive modeling program. This means that when changes need to be made to a drawing set, the architect must go through each drawing to make updates, taking valuable time and increasing the probability of user error. BIM software recognizes changes three-dimensionally, and will update all drawings at the same time, allowing architects to focus on more important duties.

Reason 3: Avoid Outsourcing

For competitions and important projects, computer renderings are an obligatory tool in attracting a client’s attention. Without BIM, creating these images is a headache that many small firms prefer to outsource rather than produce in-house. Yet outsourcing can be expensive, and any miscommunication could result in an imperfect product.

As Geoffrey Tears of Mohle Design explains, it can be difficult to compete when you “have to outsource to get things rendered, versus the bigger firms who are actually making these 3D models and producing information as they go.”

Reason 4: BIM is the Future

While it’s possible today to operate without BIM, widespread adoption and government BIM mandates have made BIM the global industry standard. New productivity updates for BIM programs continue to increase the software’s capabilities, further widening the gap between old and new ways of practicing. Meanwhile, architects will need to keep up with their clients, who will continue to demand more descriptive models and images, expect competency in modern technology, and will be less willing to pay for the hours needed to update drawing sets. Firms using only CAD software may find themselves at a disadvantage.

Reason 5: BIM Can Help Market Your Firm

Image is everything. Attracting new clients means having to tout your firm’s abilities and accomplishments. BIM can help create both the images and the documents needed. “It’s provided us a really fast tool for marketing,” said Tears, “in that we can set up all of our necessary drawings and renderings, or go through and set up a whole new document of purely marketing packages, so that we’ve done all our graphic design in Revit.”

Reason 6: Build Trust and Secure Repeat Clients

The most important thing for most clients is that a project is completed in a timely manner and for around the expected budget. If an architect is able to deliver those things, the client will be more likely to use their services again in future developments. BIM allows architects to more easily create precise, correct construction documents and thus more accurately predict costs.

For Vanessa Bizzell of Bluemouse LTD, making clients happy is about mitigating risk. “Because we’re building in 3D, I have the confidence that the work I put in Autodesk Revit LT will work when we build, and that any problems are sorted out before we get on site. I know my clients don’t always have that confidence; [working with other architects] they have to use contingency plans. But I couldn’t justify taking the risk for them.”

Reason 7: Compete with Larger Firms

Small firms often find themselves competing with much larger firms to win a project. To compete successfully in these situations, small firms need to start on a level playing field. Using BIM software allows fewer people to do a lot more in less time, while demonstrating to the client that despite your smaller size, you’re just as sophisticated as the larger practices they may be considering. Once your drawings sets are in equal standing with your competitors, the actual designs will shine through.

Tears explains how not having BIM can hurt smaller firms:

“One of the big issues for us in getting those bigger jobs — as well as just competing for those jobs — was that it was tougher for our firm to show up with just 2D drawings and space plans and elevations, compared to some of those bigger firms that were competing for the same jobs and would have renderings and walkthroughs. Any bit of information that they needed to take out, they had.”

In our fast-paced world, time is the most valuable asset for an architecture firm. BIM cuts out needless time-wasting work, allowing firms to get the most out of their projects—regardless of size.

Source: https://www.archdaily.com

Building Information Modeling is More than Software

It is 2018, and it should be clear to everyone in the AEC industry that BIM is the future of building, infrastructure design, construction, and maintenance. There are millions of marketing dollars spent by BIM software companies each year trying to convince you that Building Information Modeling can’t happen without their product. They will try to convince you that their product is the “real BIM.” Of course, we live in an open, capitalist society where this behavior is expected. However, if you and your firm are making the move to BIM, this background noise may be concerning… and if it’s not, it should be.

In the first paragraph of Wikipedia’s entry on Building Information Modeling, the statement is made that building information models are files that are “…often but not always in proprietary formats and containing proprietary data…” This is troubling to some, however, understandable, of course. If your BIM software solution becomes inaccessible for any reason, your work is captive. For many, this is unacceptable and prevents them from moving forward to the power of BIM.

The idea of proprietary formats and databases is rooted in the concept of traditional BIM.

This concept goes back to the beginning days of computer science. The concept is that these custom data structures can be optimized to store information formatted in a way that improves access speed, reducing the time needed to load the BIM’s data. While this can be true, it’s not a given – especially when you consider the incredible capabilities of today’s computers. And it is possible that proprietary file formats actually hinder productivity by limiting the way that proprietary BIM solutions work across systems and disciplines.

This lack of good software interoperability is a major obstacle to efficiency and technology adoption. This is more insidious than it might appear at first. As firms resist the move to BIM, they limit their ability to work with other disciplines in the larger AEC workflow. This can limit access to expertise, raise total project costs, and add workflow gaps that can lead to costly rework.

Is there a solution to this problem? Yes, and it’s not what some may believe to be the obvious answer. The first part of a modern, interoperable BIM workflow is based on industry standard, non-proprietary file formats. Then, you’ll want your BIM model data represented in accordance with open, international standards. And you’ll need the ability to transfer BIM data accurately between multiple BIM tools that support all disciplines in this modern BIM workflow.

Source: https://www.archdaily.com

A Brief History of BIM

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a term that has become ubiquitous in the design and construction fields over the past 20 years, but where did it come from? The story is rich and complex with players from the United States, Western Europe and the Soviet Block competing to create the perfect architectural software solution to disrupt 2-Dimensional CAD workflows.

The benefits of an architectural design model tied to a relational database have proven to be incredibly valuable, with contractors becoming the primary drivers of BIM technology for the first time in 2012.

What exactly is BIM?

The question often arises, for the purposes of this article, BIM software must be capable of representing both the physical and intrinsic properties of a building as an object-oriented model tied to a database . In addition most BIM software now features rendering engines, an optimized feature specific taxonomy and a programming environment to create model components. The user can view and interact with the model in three-dimensional views as well as orthographic two-dimensional plan, sections and elevation views of the model. As the model is developed, all other drawings within the project will be correspondingly adjusted. A Building Information Model could be designed in a software that is not strictly speaking, ‘parametric’ and where all information and geometry is explicitly defined but this would be cumbersome.

A parametric building modeler will allow the user to create constraints such as the height of a horizontal level, which can be tied to the height of specified set of walls and adjusted parametrically, creating a dynamic database model which is tied to geometry. This development answered a need in the architectural industry to be able to change drawings at multiple scales and across fragmented drawing sheets. The amount of hours that are necessary for the production of drawings has decreased steadily over time with the general trend of non-farm labor in the United States since 1964. The improvement in productivity has risen in concert with computer technology which has automated tedious tasks in all disciplines. Although some of the earliest programs for architectural representation used a BIM metaphor, limitations in computer power and awkward user interfaces for BIM platforms contributed to a growth in two-dimensional line drawing programs such as AutoCAD and Bentley Microstation.

The Beginnings

The conceptual underpinnings of the BIM system go back to the earliest days of computing. As early as 1962, Douglas C. Englebart gives us an uncanny vision of the future architect in his paper Augmenting Human Intellect.

“the architect next begins to enter a series of specifications and data–a six-inch slab floor, twelve-inch concrete walls eight feet high within the excavation, and so on. When he has finished, the revised scene appears on the screen. A structure is taking shape. He examines it, adjusts it… These lists grow into an evermore-detailed, interlinked structure, which represents the maturing thought behind the actual design.”

Englebart suggests object based design, parametric manipulation and a relational database; dreams that would become reality several years later. There is a long list of design researchers whose influence is considerable including Herbert Simon, Nicholas Negroponte and Ian McHarg who was developing a parallel track with Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The work of Christopher Alexander would certainly have had an impact as it influenced an early school of object oriented programming computer scientists with Notes on the Synthesis of Form. As thoughtful and robust as these systems were, the conceptual frameworks could not be realized without a graphical interface through which to interact with such a Building Model.

Visualizing the Model

From the roots of the SAGE graphical interface and Ivan Sutherland’s Sketchpad program in 1963, solid modeling programs began to appear building on developments in the computational representation of geometry. The two main methods of displaying and recording shape information that began to appear in the 1970s and 1980s were constructive solid geometry (CSG) and boundary representation(brep). The CSG system uses a series of primitive shapes that can be either solids or voids, so that the shapes can combine and intersect, subtract or combine to create the appearance of more complex shapes. This development is especially important in representing architecture as penetrations and subtractions are common procedures in design, (windows, doors).
The process of design requires a visceral connection to the medium that the designer is working in. This posed another challenge as architects required a way to tell the computer what to do that was less tedious than the punch cards that were used on early computers. The development of light pens, head-mounted displays and various contraptions in the early days of human-computer interaction (HCI) are well documented elsewhere. A rigorous history of HCI from an architectural perspective can be found in Nicholas DeMonchaux’s book, Spacesuit: Fashioning Apollo. The text carves a narrative of the precursors to BIM and CAD technology as they were entwined in the Space Race and Cold War.

Database Building Design

Seeing buildings through the lens of the database contributed to the breakdown of architecture into its constituent components, necessitating a literal taxonomy of a buildings constituent parts. One of the first projects to successfully create a building database was the Building Description System (BDS) which was the first software to describe individual library elements which can be retrieved and added to a model. This program uses a graphical user interface, orthographic and perspective views and a sortable database that allows the user to retrieve information categorically by attributes including material type and supplier. The project was designed by Charles Eastman who was trained as an architect at Berkeley and went on to work in computer science at Carnegie Melon Uniersity. Eastman continues as expert in BIM technology and Professor at the Georgia Tech School of Architecture.

Eastman claims that drawings for construction are inefficient and cause redundancies of one object that is represented at several scales. He also criticizes hardcopy drawings for their tendency to decay over time and fail to represent the building as renovations occur and drawings are not updated. In a moment of prophecy, the notion of automated model review emerges to “check for design regularity” in a 1974 paper.

Eastman concluded that BDS would reduce the cost of design, through ‘drafting and analysis efficiencies’ by more than fifty percent. Eastman’s project was funded by DARPA, the Advanced Research Projects Agency and was written before the age of personal computers, on a PDP-10 computer. Very few architects were ever able to work on the BDS system and its unclear whether any projects were realized using the software. BDS was an experiment that would identify some of the most fundamental problems to be tackled in architectural design over the next fifty years. Eastman’s next project, GLIDE (Graphical Language for Interactive Design) created in 1977 at CMU, exhibited most of the characteristics of a modern BIM platform.

In the early 1980′s there were several systems developed in England that gained traction and were applied to constructed projects. These include GDS, EdCAAD, Cedar, RUCAPS, Sonata and Reflex. The RUCAPS software System developed by GMW Computers in 1986 was the first program to use the concept of temporal phasing of construction processes and was used to assist in the phased construction of Heathrow Airport’s Terminal three (Laiserin – History of BIM). The founding of the Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE) at Stanford in 1988 by Paul Teicholz marks another landmark in the development of BIM as this created a wellspring of PhD students and industry collaborations to further the development of ‘four-dimensional’ building models with time attributes for construction. This marks an important point where two trends in the development of BIM technology would split and develop over the next two decades. On one side, the development of specialized tools for multiple disciplines to serve the construction industry and improve efficiency in construction. On the other side is the treatment of the BIM model as a prototype that could be tested and simulated against performance criteria.

A later but prominent example of a simulation tool that gave feedback and ‘suggested’ solutions based on a model is the Building Design Advisor, developed at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab beginning in 1993. This software utilizes an object model of a building and its context to perform simulations. This program was one of the first to integrate graphical analysis and simulations to provide information about how the project might perform given alternative conditions regarding the projects orientation, geometry, material properties and building systems. The program also includes basic optimization assistants to make decisions based on a range of criteria which are stored in sets called ‘Solutions’.

“The input on the left generates the stairs on the right that can be adjusted parametrically. Charles Eastman’s GLIDE was one of the first programs to incorporate most of the major features present in BIM software today.” Image via Charles Eastman’s paper “GLIDE.”

Virtual Building

While the developments were happening rapidly in the United States, the Soviet Block had two programming geniuses who would end up defining the BIM market as it is known today. Leonid Raiz and Gábor Bojár would go on to be the respective co-founder and founder of Revit and ArchiCAD. ArchiCAD developed in 1982 in Budapest, Hungary by Gábor Bojár, a physicist who rebelled against the communist government and began a private company. Gábor wrote the initial lines of code by pawning his wife’s jewelry and smuggling Apple Computers through the Iron Curtain (Story). Using similar technology as the Building Description System, the software Radar CH was released in 1984 for the Apple Lisa Operating System. This later became ArchiCAD, which makes ArchiCAD the first BIMsoftware that was made available on a personal computer.

The software was slow to start as Bojár had to struggle with a unfriendly business climate and the limitations of personal computer software, so ArchiCAD was not used on large scale projects until much later. ArchiCAD has made substantial gains in user base from 2007-2011, mainly as a tool for developing residential and small commercial projects in Europe. Recent improvements have made ArchiCAD a major player in the market though fundamental issues such as a lack of a phasing component and a complicated (but flexible) programming environment for its family components using GDL (Geometric Description Language) To date, Graphisoft claims that more than 1,000,000 projects worldwide have been designed using ArchiCAD.

Not long after Graphisoft began to sell the first seats of Radar CH, Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC) was founded in 1985 and released the first version of Pro/ENGINEER in 1988. This is a mechanical CAD program that is utilizes a constraint based parametric modeling engine. Equipped with the knowledge of working on Pro/ENGINEER, Irwin Jungreis and Leonid Raiz split from PTC and started their own software company called Charles River Software in Cambridge, MA.

The two wanted to create an architectural version of the software that could handle more complex projects than ArchiCAD. They hired David Conant as their first employee, who is a trained architect and designed the initial interface which lasted for nine releases. By 2000 the company had developed a program called ‘Revit’, a made up word that is meant to imply revision and speed, which was written in C++ and utilized a parametric change engine, made possible through object oriented programming. In 2002, Autodesk purchased the company and began to heavily promote the software in competition with its own object-based software ‘Architectural Desktop’.

Revit revolutionized the world of Building Information Modeling by creating a platform that utilized a visual programming environment for creating parametric families and allowing for a time attribute to be added to a component to allow a ‘fourth-dimension’ of time to be associated with the building model. This enables contractors to generate construction schedules based on the BIM models and simulate the construction process. One of the earliest projects to use Revit for design and construction scheduling was the Freedom Tower project in Manhattan. This project was completed in a series of separated but linked BIM models which were tied to schedules to provide real-time cost estimation and material quantities. Though the construction schedule of the Freedom Tower has been racked with political issues, improvements in coordination and efficiency on the construction site catalyzed the development of integrated software that could be used to view and interact with architects, engineers and contractors models in overlay simultaneously.

“This screenshot from Radar CH (later ArchiCAD) shows how far BIM modeling capabilities had developed by 1984, the first major BIM release on a personal computer.” Image via Graphisoft

Towards a Collaborative Architecture

There has been a trend towards the compositing of architectural files with those of engineers who create the systems to support them which has become more prevalent within the past seven years as Autodesk has released versions of Revit specifically for Structural and Mechanical engineers. This increased collaboration has had impacts on the larger industry including a movement away from design-bid-build contracts towards integrated project delivery where many disciplines typically work on a mutually accessible set of BIM models that are updated in varying degrees of frequency. A central file takes an object and applies an attribute of ownership so that a user who is working on a given project can view all objects but can only change those that they have checked out of a ‘workset’. This feature released in Revit 6 in 2004, enables large teams of architects and engineers to work on one integrated model, a form of collaborative software. There are now several firms working towards visualization of BIM models in the field using augmented reality.

A broad variety of programs used by architects and engineers makes collaboration difficult. Varying file formats lose fidelity as they move across platforms, especially BIM models as the information is hierarchical and specific. To combat this inefficiency the International Foundation Class (IFC) file format was developed in 1995 and has continued to adapt to allow the exchange of data from one BIM program to another. This effort has been augmented by the development of viewing software such as Navisworks which is solely designed to coordinate across varying file formats. Navisworks allows for data collection, construction simulation and clash detection and is used by most major contractors in the US today.

Following in the footsteps of the Building Design Advisor, simulation programs such as Ecotect, Energy Plus, IES and Green Building Studio allow the BIM model to be imported directly and results to be gathered from simulations. In some cases there are simulations that are built directly into the base software, this method of visualization for design iteration has been introduced to Autodesk’s Vasari, a stand alone beta program similar to the Revit Conceptual Modeling Environment where solar studies and insolation levels can be calculated using weather data similar to the Ecotect package. Autodesk, through their growth and acquisition of a broad variety of software related to BIM have contributed to the expansion of what is possible from analysis of a model. In late November 2012, the development of formit, an application that allows the conceptual beginnings of a BIM model to be started on a mobile device is a leap for the company.

Contemporary Practice and Design Academics

Some have taken a negative stance on BIM and parametrics as they assume so much about the design process and limit any work produced to the user’s knowledge of the program. This can enable a novice designer who has learned how to perform basic commands to become an incredibly prolific producer while a highly educated and experienced architect can be crippled from inexperience with a programs interface or underlying concepts. This creates a potential for a generational break line that becomes more harsh as a new technology gains market parity.

Some BIM platforms that have a small market share but have made big impacts on the world of design include Generative Components (GC), developed by Bentley Systems in 2003. The GC system is focused on parametric flexibility and sculpting geometry and supports NURBS surfaces. The interface hinges on a node-based scripting environment that is similar to Grasshopper to generate forms. Digital Project is a similar program was developed by Gehry Technologies around 2006 based on CATIA, a design program (and one of the first CAD programs) that was developed as an in house project by Dessault systems, a French airplane manufacturer. These two platforms have spawned something of a revolution in design as the power to iterate and transform has resulted in especially complex and provocative architectural forms.

Patrick Schumacher has coined the movement of parametric building models in architecture, specifically those which allow for NURBS surfaces and scripting environments as ‘parametricism’ in his 2008 ‘Parametricist Manifesto’.

“The current stage of advancement within parametricism relates as much to the continuous advancement of the attendant computational design technologies as it is due to the designer’s realization of the unique formal and organizational opportunities that are afforded. Parametricism can only exist via sophisticated parametric techniques. Finally, computationally advanced design techniques like scripting (in Mel-script or Rhino-script) and parametric modeling (with tools like GC or DP) are becoming a pervasive reality. Today it is impossible to compete within the contemporary avant-garde scene without mastering these techniques.”

Since these techniques have become increasingly complex there has become a component of architectural schools which is specified to train in specific software. A student with knowledge of only one type of software platform may well be trained to design according to the biases of the programs that they are using to represent their ideas. Software performs useful tasks by breaking down a procedure into a set of actions that have been explicitly designed by a programmer. The programmer takes an idea of what is commonsense (Sack 14) and simulates a workflow using tools available to them to create an idealized goal. In the case of BIM tools, the building is represented as components including walls, roofs, floors, windows, columns, etc. These components have pre-defined rules or constraints which help them perform their respective tasks.

BIM platforms typically represent walls as objects with layers, these layers are defined in terms of the depth and height of a wall and are extruded along the length of a line. The program then has the ability to calculate the volume of material contained within the wall assembly and to create wall sections and details easily. This type of workflow is based on the existing building stock and common industry standards and therefore a project which is produced in a BIM platform which emphasizes these tools is likely to reinforce existing paradigms rather than develop new ones. Additionally, the programmers who worked on the early BIM platforms often did not have a background in architecture but employed hybrid architect/programmers who contributed to the development of the programs. One notable exception I have found to this is the work of Charles Eastman who received a Masters of Architecture from Berkeley before working on the Building Description System. The roots of the major BIM platforms that are in use today have been developed by programmers with the peripheral input of hybrid programmer/architects and a global user base who contributes to the development of the software via ‘wish lists’ or online forums where grievances can be aired about a product workflow. The grievances typically result in new features and build upon the existing interface.

Though the general concept and technology behind BIM is approaching its thirtieth anniversary, the industry has only begun to realize the potential benefits of Building Information Models. As we reach a point where a majority of buildings are being crafted digitally, an existing building marketplace where building materials and structural components can be bought and sold locally will emerge. Sustainable design practices reinforce an attitude of designing for disassembly and a marketplace of these parts is essential. Trends in Human Computer Interaction, Augmented Reality, Cloud Computing, Generative Design and Virtual Design and Construction continue to rapidly influence the development of BIM. Looking back at the past it is easier to realize that the present moment is an exciting time for designers and programmers in this evolving industry.

To BIM or Not to BIM: That is the Question

Building Information Modelling (BIM) is being used to help deliver large scale water projects more efficiently, economically and more quickly. In this article consultancy Atkins explains why it is a key part of the digital revolution and how it was used to deliver the £150 million expansion programme at United Utilities’ Liverpool Wastewater Treatment Works.

As we move towards a digital revolution for our buildings and infrastructure, information is playing an increasingly significant role. Building Information Modelling (BIM) is an important step towards realising this vision – redefining and challenging how we deliver projects in our industry, changing everything from the tools we use, the skills we require and our relationships with clients.

BIM enables teams to work together on infrastructure to predict its performance before it’s actually built. By fully understanding how infrastructure will work at the design stage through analysis, simulation and visualisation, better decisions can be made.

Treating waste in Liverpool

BIM is delivering multiple benefits for utility United Utilities at Liverpool Wastewater Treatment Works, a £150 million expansion programme where consultancy Atkins is working in a joint venture partnership with Galliford Try and Costain (GCAJV). The finished project will serve the needs of more than 600,000 people and have the capacity to deal with 960,000 m3/day. Specifically set up to deliver detailed design and construction for United Utilities Asset Management Programmes, the joint venture has been in partnership with the company for over 12 years.

Atkins was responsible for the detailed design of a 16-cell, two-level sequence batch reactor (SBR), complete with pumping station, sludge treatment plant, distribution chambers, blower building and control centre. The facility has been constructed inside the previously operational Wellington Dock, adjacent to UU’s existing Sandon Dock Treatment Works.

Implementing a BIM strategy to deliver a 3D model to act as a ‘single source of truth’ and the core of the design process promoted a culture of collaboration and integration. The project team had the freedom to explore alternative concepts, conduct value engineering, optimise designs, and plan and rehearse construction. Designers, constructors, process partners, supply chain and client behaved far more efficiently than ever, which led to improved cost-effective coordination, buildability, operability and maintainablility.

The federated model of the entire new build brought together over 400 individual models from all disciplines and the supply chain. This showed the value of having a virtual model to highlight opportunities for change, leading to quick and easy comment and sign off. Value-engineered design improvements could also be communicated to the client more effectively.

For example, the 3D model was also used to explain how raising part of the basement level in the pumping station would greatly reduce the size of the cofferdam and decrease the amount of concrete required. In practical terms, the use of BIM optimised the internal flooring, improving access to equipment and enhancing safety. It also highlights the extent to which waste can be reduced in the design phase.

Although BIM has been evolving for over 40 years, only relatively recently has software been capable of producing 4D timeline tools to plan and track various stages in a building’s lifecycle, from concept to construction.

The granularity of the model ensured it could be aligned to the construction programme, facilitating 4D timelining to monitor progress, and planning construction activities to avoid clashes in the schedule. Costs and embedded carbon were also added to give the team a complete picture of the work in progress.

BIM station drives collaboration

A BIM station was set up in the common area of the site offices. Site personnel were able to navigate around the model to their designated work areas and check for safety concerns and access routes, or simply orientate themselves within the structure and ongoing construction areas.

Client operatives visited the station to view a facility that would not be handed over to them for at least another 12 to 18 months, but gave them the chance to offer feedback to aid design. The model was also used by the safety, health and environment department to aid inductions, tool box talks and risk assessments.

Feeding discipline-specific applications into the model, and providing an informed work environment to support the design and documentation process reduced errors, and helped deliver the project on time and under budget.

Enhanced safety

Visualising infrastructure while it is being built is another advantage of BIM, and health and safety reviews are far more effective because a model is easier to interpret than a series of 2D drawings. So in the context of Liverpool, the model was used to show operatives the damage that would occur to the large diameter steel pipe if it was cut on-site using hand tools.

BIM technology enables teams to build the infrastructure twice; once, virtually, and the second time for installation. With greater collaboration comes greater accuracy and fewer design corrections. For example, clash avoidance minimised the risk of expensive and time-consuming re-work, with the model synchronised periodically to ensure all elements are compatible. These benefits extend to the build phase, where fewer alterations also saves time and money.

But the value of BIM extends well beyond the design and build stage to the entire lifecycle of assets – and this really is the whole point of it. The information contained in the model is available to the client to help them make the best decisions possible to maintain and operate assets during their life and at the decommissioning stage, which inevitably involves saving money. And although BIM is still in its infancy across industry, we are using it to help a range of clients realise the benefits of delivering asset planning, design, implementation and management across the entire lifecycle.

The eight2O alliance

Thames Water’s eight2O alliance has adopted BIM as part of their AMP6 commitment to effective management of whole lifecycle cost (TOTEX). BIM supports this in a number of ways, from creating and managing digital asset information to construction, commissioning and into asset management.

Turning that vision into reality has required significant changes to the way projects are delivered and the way digital information is created and managed. An incremental approach is maximising early benefits, and delivering ‘asset ready design’ that can be used throughout the asset lifecycle.

Thames Water Standards have been enhanced to align with the processes defined in UK Government BIM and Information Management guidance; a Common Data Environment has been configured; and new design and authoring tools adopted for the programme. A Thames asset tagging standard has been created to ensure digital information is produced in a consistent way, one which is complementary to Thames’s systems of record and asset management processes.

Project teams are choosing to design projects virtually and in 3D wherever possible. There is a focus on using standard designs and off-site manufacture to reduce time on site. Early engagement with the supply chain and operations is reducing costly change during construction. With these ‘foundations for success’ in place we will look to see how we can embrace new technology in the field to drive further efficiency and improve Thames Water’s asset data. This is particularly exciting in the water and wastewater infrastructure quadrants where new technology is being deployed to improve the quality of information captured during the work, reduce the length of disruption being experienced by customers and improving satisfaction scores, an important metric for OFWAT.

Aboard the BIM Bus

To aid greater collaboration among designers and stakeholders, eight2O is using a mobile design & solution studio, aka BIM Bus, which is fitted with multiple screens, seating areas and workstations.

The idea is to save time and money by using virtual-world design tools to resolve as many challenges as possible during the pre-construction phase. This supports the drive to use modular and standardised products and off-site construction wherever possible.

This latest approach to collaboration is driven by the need to achieve end user and customer satisfaction, protect the environment, and deliver a satisfactory financial outcome for the eight2O alliance partners.

Charing Cross geometry

High definition surveying (HDS) – aerial, mobile and static – is increasingly being used for many types of measured survey. This presents new opportunities for ‘accurate as built’ 3D models to be produced which can be used for digital 3D design, validation, virtual/augmented reality and ongoing maintenance. This delivers a quicker, more cost effective solution for the client, and in the case of Charing Cross, with no disruption to the operational working of the station.

Our geomatics team undertook high definition surveying and BIM modelling, which involved using static laser scanning to create a detailed and accurate ‘point cloud’ of the areas. Even in a live and busy station environment, HDS could survey the interior and external structural elements in less than a week.

Don Martindale, geomatics project manager, says: “Laser scanning helps minimise site time, reducing the health and safety risk. And the potential for re-visits is heavily reduced because once the initial data capture is complete, the survey is a desk-based exercise and any queries can be answered from the 3D laser point cloud.”

Dutch Roads and Waterways Agency

Further afield, we were at the forefront of efforts to persuade the Dutch Roads and Waterways Agency (Rijkswaterstaat Adviesdienst Geo-informatie en ICT) of the benefits of using digital aerial imagery to improve the reliability of mapped data.

Since 1994, we’ve been helping to maintain its mapping database, developing innovative software solutions to convert and supply of large volumes of data, and using photogrammetry techniques and aerial photography at a scale of 1:4000. Atkins has also processed the three-dimensional building models required for noise assessment activities, and consistently scored highly in the client’s supplier performance measurement.