Everyone is talking about BIM, but it is not yet common practice.

So says the result of a survey by Design Master Software. David Robison emphasizes that

It is important to remember that BIM and 3D are not the same thing. You can use BIM for automated design, material takeoffs, and green design. We wanted to know how the various types of BIM were being used on projects, not just 3D collision detection (3D-BIM).

The result? Some 3/4 of respondents use "3D-BIM" on projects, and perhaps this is why the terms are used interchangeable.

You can read the full study results at www.designmaster.biz/blog/2010/10/mep-3d-bim-survey-results/ 

 

Comments

[KevinT]

Thanks for the link Ralph. It turned out to be an advertorial, but interesting none the less.
I left a bit of a rant over there... oops (it might get moderated).
Their results are about right I think. In that most people are not really doing BIM yet they are selling the fact that they are, or can do BIM.
Its in danger of becoming a problem I think in that clients will get disillusioned and stop buying BIM because they are not actually getting the useable information they paid for.
IMO, BIM is a premium product and does cost more to produce. We as an industry need to sell it as such, charge a premium price for it, then do it properly. There must be enough studies in the public domain by now to prove to clients that BIM buildings cost less to build, thus justifying the increased upfront cost.
OTOH a 3D Revit model packed with generic families fudged to schedule right can be cheaper to produce than traditional 2D plans, sections, and elevations, especially for MEP. But it isn't BIM.
Hands up if you would happily had your 'Building Information Model' over to the client or facilities manager to be used as a FM tool for the life of the building. (IP issues aside....)

[Wes M.]

I think Kevin is right in that the MEP community is being force-fed BIM when the risk for what's being presented to the rest of the team increases when BIM is brought on board. In the architectural realm, accuracy for MEP information is really only needed up the the thickness of a 2x4 ;-) If you see a collision (or a near hit) taking place, you note it and keep going. Even though BIM is a "test run" for the actual construction of a project, I think higher levels of detail in BIM will only come when clients are willing to pay for it. Or perhaps clients will add that detail later during the building's operation. For now, the mere placement of relatively generic MEP data in a model is highly valuable compared to coordinating CAD-based MEP data, which is all we're likely to get in Canada on most projects. It's changing, but adoption of BIM in the MEP realm has been slow.