Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Little Big BIM

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Little Big BIM

    Good morning,

    My company is making the move from doing everything in Revit, to working in 3D with preferred suppliers. This is a business case I would like some input for but I would also like to discuss some of the best ways to achieve this in an open fashion.
    Let me outline what we're doing. Our primary business is to build homes from a conceptual viewpoint, mainly floor plan repetition throughout a project from prefabricated components. i.e. it is quite common to have a project of 60-100 houses with only three or four different floor plans. The variation comes from options buyers get to choose from (extensions, open or closed kitchen, and when possible a garage or carport, etc.). The construction time of each house is about 12 weeks, and for big projects we are able to start construction on the next house the next day. The main structure is wind- and watertight in two weeks after construction starts.
    As a side note, we achieve repetition and manage changes by working with groups.

    From our Revit models we extract permit, sales, system floors, prefabricated walls and contract drawings. The focus for our construction drawings rests on system floors and prefabricated walls. Those are now extracted 2D with no annotations. The plant will then load them into their software and do their work. So one could imagine our models contain a lot of information and 3D detailing which is a time hog for the design process and change management. Maybe this is the way to go. And maybe not.
    Basically one of the suggestions is to dumb the model down all the way back to 'basic Revit intelligence', and after permit and sales drawings break it into separate pieces for our manufacturers to do their work. After all, they know their detailing better than we do.

    My biggest concern is that this is very much like working in one direction. We create, we export, they make. But we would also like to co-ordinate what they make, especially if we are going to dumben our models down.
    One of the way to do this is Navisworks. But I have also heard of a variation loosely based on worksets, which is to send the model to our manufacturers, then let them do their work, after which we link that into a Revit file. This is used as a sort of 'Navisworks light' to detect clashes and co-ordinate the process. The linked file is synced with an internet location to which our manufacturers have access so whenever they upload a new file, it gets synced with our server and loaded into the project.
    I am sure there are more (and probably more suitable) ways, and that each of the methods mentioned above have their cons and pros. And I would like to investigate as many of them as possible. If you have any experience please feel welcome to share, or if you have your own suggestions you want to put to the test then that would also be appreciated.

    Please note, we are a small scale operation. We have 5 Revit modellers who also co-ordinate the construction process and use the models to make their decisions. We build about 300 houses each year. So our software budget is fairly limited and so are the resources (manpower) to exercise pilot projects. In my opinion BIM should not become a goal on it's own but a solution to support existing processes, and the best way to do this is to use existing tools in a more sensible fashion.
    Last edited by Clogboy; May 20, 2011, 06:45 AM.

    #2
    I apologize for my inability to get the jest of what you're asking (I even looked for a '?' but couldn't find one). I'll try to help based on what I think you're getting at.

    First, though, some ?s of my own:
    1) Why do the manufacturer's need 3D models? Are the literally fabricating an entire room using CNC machines? o.O
    2) How repetitive are your models? You used the 'c' word so I'm guessing each plan contains quite a few custom modeled elements that can not be reused. It seems that if the goal is to crate quickly manufacturable homes, then the modeling should be able to reflect this. Model it once, reuse it many times. I you're having to model many custom elements that never get reused, then the manufacturer is going to have to manufacturer those custom elements each time and, dare I say, it no longer becomes a repetitive pre-manufactured solution.
    3) You say you use groups. Are these groups entire room layouts? So essentially instead of using design options you use groups to change the plan according to the buyer's desires? Are these groups created in an external model and then loaded as a group or do you create them inside the model?

    Let's see where this gets us and go from there.
    .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

    Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

    Comment


      #3
      Could you be more precise or give examples off the stuff your suppliers use your drawings for? Being from Holland, I can make an educated guess, but still.

      The one thing I wouldn't do is dumben down your model. That's like buying a Rolls, strip it, and replace it with the bodywork of a Holden Commodore (for those of you who don't know that car, check this
      Instead, think of ways you can use the stuff given to you by the manufacturer. I check floor and concrete wall drawings all the time. I load the dwg's into special views with filters set up. The original model is filtered so I only see the element that needs checking in bright shiny colors. The dwg is imported in black & white in the line thickness. Put both on top of each other, where the shiny colors come through you have a problem...
      Martijn de Riet
      Professional Revit Consultant | Revit API Developer
      MdR Advies
      Planta1 Revit Online Consulting

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by mdradvies View Post
        ... and replace it with the bodywork of a Holden Commodore ...
        You may watch too much Top Gear if you are an American and know what this is... >_>
        .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

        Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Clogboy View Post
          My company is making the move from doing everything in Revit, to working in 3D with preferred suppliers. This is a business case I would like some input for but I would also like to discuss some of the best ways to achieve this in an open fashion.
          For the kind of focused work you're talking about moving into more of a production focus you might want to look at a BIM tool that is more focused as well.

          I know a guy who runs a company (http://www.cutmytimber.com/) that makes high-end homes from CNC-cut heavy timber. They use a Swiss product called Cadwork (http://www.cadwork.com/) that's every bit BIM even if they don't use that term. There are several Europe-based tools like this, BIM tools focused just on housing with a heavy bend towards prefabrication. It's a lot more common of a way to work over there.

          If you don't want to switch platforms (which I can totally understand given your budget concerns and people) then you might want to look into both Navisworks and getting some automation help via the API.

          We've made some plugins in-house that help us automate exporting our work to our CNC machine. While I don't think those plugins would help you in your case, having a few custom bits of code to export things in a format or form that's closer to what your suppliers are looking for might also help smooth the transition.

          Another thing to consider is the new pointcloud abilities in Revit along with Total Stations and Navis. Are you doing much in-field coordination?

          Finally, in regards to the 'Navis Light' approach, you can actually take almost any solid model and use it for clash detection in Revit. You simply link their work into an in-place Family of the right category. So if the subs are working with a tool that can produce solid 3D models, then you could link those same models back into Revit and use them for coordination...
          Jeffrey McGrew
          Architect & Founder
          Because We Can, a Design-Build Studio
          Check out our new sister company Model No. making sustainable 3D printed furniture!

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by revittotd View Post
            You may watch too much Top Gear if you are an American and know what this is... >_>
            But I'm no American...
            I was actually looking for the Dutch SsangYong crash test (which is slightly less disastrous then this), but this makes my point too.
            Martijn de Riet
            Professional Revit Consultant | Revit API Developer
            MdR Advies
            Planta1 Revit Online Consulting

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by mdradvies View Post
              But I'm no American...
              Sorry, I wasn't implying this and I should clarify. *clears throat* I understood what you were talking about, and therefore watch WAY too much top gear xD
              .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

              Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by revittotd View Post
                Sorry, I wasn't implying this and I should clarify. *clears throat* I understood what you were talking about, and therefore watch WAY too much top gear xD
                Well, I'm watching it now. Hilarious show about cheap family cars...
                Friday evening is my tv-evening. My wife goes to bed early so I can watch 3 episodes of TG in a row. LMAO... :beer:
                Martijn de Riet
                Professional Revit Consultant | Revit API Developer
                MdR Advies
                Planta1 Revit Online Consulting

                Comment


                  #9
                  See I'm lucky, my wife wants to watch them with me. We can't get enough of those three amigos.
                  .Carl - Architect, BIM Manager, Father, Husband, Coach, Player, Disc Tosser, Driver... not necessarily in that order.

                  Free Revit Chat | Cre8iveThings Blog | Live Architecture! | Past Live Architecture!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Thanks for the replies, I will study them.
                    Guess I should clarify... I didn't really put it as a specific problem, but more like a sort of business case. If you want to go into specifics, we are mostly communicating what passes as system families in Revit (walls, floors, roofs) and everything embedded into it (windows and MEP stuff) should be machine interpretable as a quantifiable part and operation. Then reload all their work to co-ordinate it. Just looking for the best way(s) to do this in a durable BIM fashion. Because I really think this is the direction we want to go the next five-ish years and I don't think anyone has a bulletproof answer yet.

                    So basically those asking for question marks: what is the best process to basically communicate any kind of construction work with a subcontractor, according to your interpretation of BIM? Are there any tools that do this right now, and what are the best formats to communicate them in according to your own personal experience? How much effort are you willing to put into BIM before it beats the purpose?


                    EDIT: Thank you Martijn it only took two replies for this topic to derail
                    Last edited by Clogboy; May 23, 2011, 11:17 AM.

                    Comment

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X