Modify Profile

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - David Watson

Pages: [1]
WORKFLOW & COLLABORATION / Re: Current M.O. for exchanging information
« on: January 17, 2018, 05:56:17 pm »
Hi all.  I think I could summarize Claudia's comment by saying "information exchange is possible, but not easy", which is really a task for software developers to sort out.  Am I right?

IMHO, what we need to help sort it out are "background" technologies, and promote the use of open standards to help that technology.  Things that users never see (in cell phones, that would be the network you're on, the protocol used by the phone to communiate with towers, etc).  The product (the phone in this case) should encompass all those standards to make it easier for us users.

The buildingSMART IFC is one such technology, and "linked data" is another technology.  Linked data is not something you buy and turn on, but something that could be built into an application or data service designed to acquire and share information quickly and efficiently.

Hi All,

What you've just described is the PRIME motivator for the existence of OpenBIM (buildingSMART).

I think in recent years, even Autodesk (to their credit) have recognized that one tool cannot be adept at everything (in my world of specifications, there is physically no place in Revit to put the level of detailed information I need).  I think their decision to become a hub, and embrace IFC exchange will help them to remain relevant in coming years.

buildingSMART International has plenty of standards under way for enabling federated applications to talk to each other about the same virtual BIM model.

Consider tuning into the next Members Forum on April 24 to get a snapshot of everything that bSI is doing.

PS:  The BEST way for users like you to encourage support by software vendors is to ask for it (or vote with your software purchases).

STANDARDS & GUIDELINES / Re: Product libraries and resources
« on: April 13, 2017, 05:12:20 pm »
Hi Erik,

Actually worldwide there are plenty of sites, but product data is really a separate thing. 

CoBuilder actually specialize in product data (as distinct from a BIM object).  Basically, they dont' concern themselves with geometry, but focus instead on collecting and distributing structured product data for construction and facility management purposes.  Their primary focus is on delivering minimum product information mandated in the EU for any construction products supplied for a building.  I know about them because they lean heavily on bSDD technology to accomplish their goal of offering this service in 12 languages.

There is a very powerful movement afoot to standardize how Product Data Templates are structured -- in ISO TC59/SC13/WG11, CEN 442/WG4 and buildingSMART International Product Room, and some national efforts in Europe.  The benefit is quality, structured product data compatibility between the providers that carry them and software that supports them.  Let me know if you're interested in hearing more about this.

STANDARDS & GUIDELINES / Re: Generic Object Libraries
« on: April 13, 2017, 04:35:54 pm »
Hi Mirra,

I think you hit the nail square on the head!   Generic objects are useful for a "design" model, and proprietary objects more useful for creating construciton or as-built models.  Your example clearly shows the need for both! 

The drawback to "skipping" a step and trying to use a proprietary object for design models is that the proprietary models would be far too specific, making it nearly impossible for other manufacturers to match (if the model is used as the basis for a contract).  Also, all that additional detail is irrelevant for the design purpose and greatly increases the physical size of the model.  I think design models should be limited to approximate size/orientation and required (design) properties only, until such time as we know which vendor will supply the product (normally after contract award).

STANDARDS & GUIDELINES / Re: Generic Object Libraries
« on: March 23, 2017, 12:30:51 pm »

Thanks for confirming that the industry needs generic objects.  My main point was that Revit generic objects are not nearly sufficient for our needs in product selection and specifications (can't speak to other uses).  A good analogy might be the templates that come with Word;  sure, they will work but they are not customized to the level of detail you might like.  You could modify the families, of course, but the more that happens, the less standardized the objects become.

As for Europe, all I can say about my experiences attending international ISO and buildingSMART conferences is that there are generic libraries and they are used (and continue to be maintained).  Although much of the hoopla lately is about building standardized product libraries - likely because there's a lot more money in it.

STANDARDS & GUIDELINES / Generic Object Libraries
« on: March 17, 2017, 01:06:31 pm »
This is a call to anyone reading, to answer this question. 

Would a standardized generic BIM object library be welcomed? 


I'm referring to a library of BIM objects that are not biased toward a specific product (most online libraries carry models constructed by a manufacturer).  Instead, a generic object library would contain models designed to be used as a design tool BEFORE a make/model has been selected.  It might only contain properies relevant for an object at such early stages, or relevant for establishing required property values regardless of manufacturer.

This would be analogous to a generic master specification which is commercially available, versus product-specific specs that are created by manufacturers specifically for their product (and generally offered for free).  There is still a very strong market for consultants to purchase data that they trust will not be biased toward one product (and encourage competition).

Someone recently pointed out that the Revit families are generic "out of the box" objects already and wondered why anyone would create or download something new or different?  The counter-argument might be that the Revit objects meet only one standard - that of Autodesk.  I don't mean to suggest that their standard is inferior, but the industry may prefer objects constructed (or populated with more generic data) from a third party source.  Also, Revit families are only useful in Revit;  a generic object library could be produced in IFC or other generic format so they could be imported/consumed by any BIM software.

GENERAL FORUM INSTRUCTIONS / Re: Password recovery works well!
« on: February 01, 2017, 03:07:37 pm »
More feedback.

The link in the notice email worked on my desktop, but did NOT work on my phone (tried the phone first).

I concur with that last reply.   Software from the same vendor will always work better together;  the drawback is that they aren't always the "best" tool for a given job.  The individual project should determine whether same vendor is used or not (the larger the project, the more likely you'll want the best tools from a variety of vendors).

« on: February 01, 2017, 01:54:01 pm »
Just trying out this poll feature!   ;D

« on: February 01, 2017, 01:51:22 pm »
I don't believe Level 2 and Level 3 are really connected.  It just happens that Level 3 is harder to achieve, but could be accomplished on its own.

GENERAL FORUM INSTRUCTIONS / Password recovery works well!
« on: February 01, 2017, 01:49:37 pm »
Hi Susan

Just tried to login, and realized I forgot my login/password (that I set up 2 weeks ago).  Tried the recovery link and it worked really well -- only needed to put in my email address.


Pages: [1]