Taking Care of Business
Letters to the Editor

Summary: It appears as though Contributing Editor Michael Tardif, Assoc. AIA, really struck a chord with his article last week on “Faith-based BIM.”

Great Article! Thank you for writing it. I have been telling this to my local Revit vendor for over a year. I’m just disappointed in the AIA for constantly “pushing” this to its members as the next great thing. I’m old enough to remember the paper-to-CAD movement and would like to see all that is promised, but it would be so much easier if Revit would be honest about the capabilities and the AIA would also. I went to a users group, I used the software. It’s not there yet.
—Susan Welker, AIA, Harris Welker Architects
Austin, Tex.

Excellent article; can’t wait to read more about firm experiences! We are trying to incorporate Revit into our process and have just scratched the surface. Good take on benefits and drawbacks, thanks!
—Stacey McMahan, AIA, Koch Hazard Architects
Sioux Falls, S.D.

Your recent article was great. It clearly explains in seven paragraphs what I have tried to explain to my clients; my wonderful computer gung-ho employees who always want the most up to date whiz bang software; and the sellers of AutoCAD, Desktop, and Revit, for years. I own a small architectural production firm. The majority of what I do is produce construction drawings for high-end custom homes. These are usually designed by others; architects who don’t have computers or don’t want to learn CAD. My drawings are almost always 2D drawings, drawn in AutoCAD, (basically a computer version of what my clients would hand draw) that we have printed and issue as paper sets. Although the majority of my clients don’t know any CAD, they read and believe all of the articles regarding BIM and what it can do. They truly think that I should be able to “push a button” to make a sweeping change or solve a design problem.

I have just purchased Revit and am excited to learn it so that I can start to produce some quick 3D models early in the drawings process so that I can explain and easily show any issues that come up. (I often get projects that aren’t well thought out—the roofs don’t work.) Maybe eventually I will be able to just “push that button” to make that drastic change that my clients think is easy. Thank you.
—Jennifer Decker Buck, AIA, Scale Production Architecture PC
Edwards, Colo.

Good leadoff article . . . At UCSF,we are using BIM in design and construction of complex lab projects. We are using a BIM for 3D coordination drawings in the construction of our Cancer Research Building at our new Mission Bay campus. This has had a rocky start (as all new things are wont to do) but has by all accounts settled down and is producing more accurate coordination of the work in the field than a 2-D process.

From my perspective, the real issue is how to develop a much-improved overall process, from initial design to the production control system on the jobsite. Production control on the jobsite has to match the accuracy of the BIM. Use of a BIM requires cooperative relationships on the jobsite among all parties. Everyone has to be “in the room” together working on the BIM. This includes the owner’s staff. The agreements made in the coordination process regarding sequence and schedule for completion of work in each location of the building under construction have to be kept.

The major promise that I see in BIM is that the design-construction team has the opportunity using a BIM for virtual prototyping of the design and construction during the design process. In manufacturing, products can be prototyped, and the manufacturing process studied under controlled conditions. This has heretofore been impossible in construction except under limited (and expensive) circumstances. For construction of complex buildings, this opportunity can improve outcomes, including cost control and cost certainty, accuracy of construction, quality, and functionality of the completed building. These are the outcomes we are interested in as an owner.
—Michael Bade, AIA, Director, Capital Programs
University of California San Francisco

Yours is one of the first articles I've read in a long time that seems to hit the nail on the head concerning the issue. I quickly become frustrated when written and spoken words on the BIM subject talks of "revolutionizing" the industry right now. We have begun using Revit as our primary production software on the largest public school project we have ever had in our office. I'm serving as the project architect for this job, so I've had a firsthand crash course in the promise vs. practice realities of what BIM has to offer right now. In my opinion, we are succeeding with this initial attempt, but the preconceptions of those around us, and the technical hurdles to leap along the way, have made it a very interesting process.
—Matt Rice, AIA, Symmes Maini & McKee Associates, Inc.
Cambridge, Mass.

I believe the good sense displayed in this article should have a wider audience than the AIA, and hope that you will consider distributing it to outlets such as AECbytes and UpFrontezine.
—Ralph H. Kurtz, AIA, Analytica
Baltimore

I appreciate your article. I have been trying to warn BIM advocates for the past six years that raising expectations prematurely can backfire and do more harm than good. Your article hopefully sets that somewhat straight in a diplomatic way.
—Chuck Williams, AIA, Architectural Data Systems
Carmel, N.Y.

I read your article with considerable interest. Last week I attended a seminar on BIM, which had nearly 50 attendees, at the offices of my professional insurance brokers in Oakland, Calif. The seminar talked about BIM in the context of "future" technology in the sense that the products out there from Bentley or Autodesk are not fully integrated across the various disciplines (structural, mechanical, electrical, etc.), and are therefore very difficult to implement on real projects. The seminar also had significant discussion on liability issues surrounding the implementation of BIM. The directed focus of the discussion from the legal representatives and the insurance representatives present, was that there are new legal issues involved in the implementation of this technology relative to project responsibilities. The "advice" from other professionals is that architects avoid taking responsibility for overall management of the BIM model, even though the architect may remain the coordinating entity among disciplines. I don't know how this relates to a real project, because my firm has not yet participated in any project using BIM or BIM components. However, we are interested. We have completed more than 95 percent of our work using CAD since 1988. We are well aware of the myths associated with the efficiency multipliers. Certainly at this point we see BIM as potentially more labor intensive than labor saving, but the movement towards BIM is inevitable if good, integrated, interdisciplinary software becomes available.
—Richard Minert, AIA, Minert Architects
Santa Clara, Calif.

I find your article on BIM technologies very interesting and a relevant subject for further discussion. As you mention, the acronym is used as a catchall for all positive aspects of computer technologies without a real understanding of their associated applications and potential value. And, as you mention, there are real values associated with BIM. But, if gone unrecognized, these will marginalize the position of the architect. Contractors with their vast resources do recognize the values associated with BIM and are quickly devoting their resources to exploit those technologies.
—Matthew Fineout, AIA, EDGE Studio
Pittsburgh

Thanks for your thoughtful essay/editorial on BIM. We are working to integrate Revit into our practice. Because progress (under combat conditions) and expectations are still a ways apart, I look forward to the upcoming articles.
—Ron Wendle, AIA, Wells and Company
Spokane.