Doug_Park Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I did not mean to imply that we are not interested in pursuing established standards. We are interested in doing what our customers need the most first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Doug: got it... Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicinus Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Are you implying we said nothing of value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Are you implying we said nothing of value? Hi Nicinus, Quite the opposite. I spent some time with my reply. Posted my comments. This is the result.!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
architect Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 IFC in/out would be helpful but I think it is a problem for chief at the moment based on the software code..?. Chief was BIM before there was BIM but too much modern BIM stuff could make chief as unwieldy and bloated as the other mega $$ software. Most of my area contractors and clients are BIMBOS when it comes to BIM and would not be able to take advantage of the capabilities or end up using it against me. Let's work on making stairs look correct in 2d first......... Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Hi Nicinus, Quite the opposite. I spent some time with my reply. Posted my comments. This is the result.!!!!! Just reviewed the old site http://www.chieftalk.com/showthread.php?62743-What-is-Residential-BIM this makes a good read if you don't have a life. (joke) Seems The acronym BIM is the stumbling block. I favour 'Residential BIM as a definition. It's the "Residential Building Information Modelling" that's is important not the lofty idea of building life cycle - concept to demolition. It seems to me that the most basic information for a parametric model is an accurate description of materials and a mechanism for reporting. Framing is a good start. Give us better framing tools. Not auto framing tools just start with framing member we can name and will report to the materials list. Masonry wall should by now report to the materials list as masonry - not framing or siding. Also a top plate for masonry wall is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 don't know, never used Sketchup BIM is a moving target and the landscape changes. When the materials list is working properly it would be nice to schedule. Watch the video. It's an attractive proposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Ed: I had seen this before but didn't post a link I should have as it is a good video and shows how Chief could be enhanced by doing inter-operability with other BIM software Alas, I doubt if it will ever happen Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLDrafting Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 http://www.autodesk.com/solutions/building-information-modeling/overview Had to go back and take a look at this subject since there is so much activity here on the subject. I'm not sure how much interaction and coordination takes place with primarily residential plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 I'm not sure how much interaction and coordination takes place with primarily residential plans Jim: yes, BIM is for residential: just a few sites detailing this - many more out there http://www.probuilder.com/bim-home-builders http://www.vicosoftware.com/bim-for-construction-software-products/tabid/84567/ http://www.ecobuildingpulse.com/construction-trends/residential-bim.aspx http://network.aia.org/AIA/Resources/ViewDocument/?DocumentKey=00c106b0-eeb3-40b4-818f-da719ae98b4f Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLDrafting Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 From the first article: Already a success in commercial construction, BIM has not been widely adopted to date by home builders. Many feel that the technology hasn’t been tailored for the challenges of home-building’s rapid scheduling. But that sentiment is beginning to change. There have been some local "big builders" in Florida, back when the economy flourished a few years ago. They were building 150-250 homes per year. BIM was just becoming a buzz word in the early 2000's to the best of my knowledge. Some form of BIM would have been beneficial even at that level. There are national builders that build in the thousands per year. I suggest that most of that is spec housing, however, the ability to monitor variations and change orders would be huge. I'm just not that big. Developers would benefit the most from BIM I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodCole Posted November 30, 2014 Author Share Posted November 30, 2014 I appreciate the comments everyone has posted to this thread so far. Thanks I would like to point out a few things that I think may be of interest to those who have been following this thread. First is that BIM, or Building Information Modeling is not a proprietory term. It does not belong to any praticular software company or group of software developers. Originally drawing intelligence issues were handeled by CAD attributes, which were rather difficult to use, using CAD programs and outside data management software such as access or excel. Due to the difficulty of setting up these coordinated systems, software developers began trying to simplify and automate these processes for their customers. That is great news for the most part, but whether the application actually delivers on their marketing promises depends on many factors, not the least of which is how well versed they are in the building industry. The problem I see with the current state of affairs regarding BIM is not the concept itself, but rather the pie in the sky promises made by marketers and the half measures actually provided by developers. Rather than providing better tools for data management, developers have jousted for market position using sound bytes about how wonderful their programs will be at some future date. My point is not so much which software is better, that should be personal preference IMO, but rather what features are important to modelers in general regarding design deliverables. Until end users of programs such as Chief provide meaningful feedback for marketers to follow, we will continue to see the tail wagging the dog in regards to BIM and other issues as well. To clarify my personal interest, which I am glad to see seems to be reflected by others as well, is the meaning of interoperability. For large commercial projects it is promoted in relation to the coordination of various software by one management software. For residential projects I believe the needs of designers is far different. We need file compatiblity, so we can take best advantage of available software features. Also the geometry moved between software applications should be seemless. No messing around with object placement, I would like to see an option to place the geometry at its current location when inserted. Layer control for symbols would be very useful as well. I would also like to see a major revamp of the Material List as well. I would like to see tools provided to the end user that allow the user to decide how the data is reported, and a more streamlined process of using that data in programs such as excel or even access. I am glad we can copy and paste, but that is by no means a meaningful solution to processing data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodCole Posted November 30, 2014 Author Share Posted November 30, 2014 I hear what you are saying Jim, but I do see it a bit differently though. Sure the economy of scale involved in providing meaningful costing services would be different between a large development company and a small design firm, but it shouldn't be if we both had workable tools req'd to get the tasks done. From my perspective it is about the customers need regarding seeing what their design will look like and then getting realistic cost information to base buying decisions on that should be the focus of Residential BIM. Given the right tools, there is no reason why a small time designer should not be able to provide these types of services the same as or better than a larger firm. From my perspective it is about having the right tools to get the job done for my customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLDrafting Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Drafting plans is the place where material management and job cost starts. Knowing how many square feet of drywall will end up being, is insufficient information, for instance. Waste is generated when the drop offs cannot be used effectively or the increased finishing is incurred due to design. Just as an example. Anyone bidding a job will take this into consideration. The computer can be amazing, but it needs to be able to tell you that you just cut 23" off of something that you will not likely be able to use effectively. The designer can often save or add costs to any project. All of the cost of construction for 2nd floor will increase because everybody and everything has to be taken by man or machine to another level that isn't as convenient, for instance. "Craftsman Estimator" by Craftsman publishing had some of this at one time. I haven't looked at it for quite awhile and I have know idea whether it integrates with any CAD software. The material list built in CA may have more value if you can figure waste and breakage based on experience. Your knowledge and the ability to provide useful information is absolutely good business policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yusuf-333 Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 i think i support the idea ca should do what BIM does. for sure they have done some hard parts of BIM, if they make some sort of detail analysis to the current ca capability which i can prove it is mysterious even for them selves, they would realize they can move one big step forward with out much expense. this thread may complement the interesting discussion you started. http://www.chieftalk.com/showthread.php?62008-Rc-stractural-drawings-in-ca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 This is my favourite topic and am pleased there is so much engagement. True BIM as a concept some years ago was a lofty idea. I am small and really inconsequential in the area were I live. That is why I believe that Residential BIM should differentiate itself from BIM in the same way Autocad differentiates itself from CA or vice versa. To talk about BIM in that more commercial setting creates to much background noise when comments relative to Residential BIM are being made. So I will only speak to Residential BIM and what it means to me and what I would like to see develope. We can all agree that Chief Architect was designed with smart object design principles known as Building Information Modelling. BIM So I would like my smart object based cad system to give up information in a meaningful way. As often stated the model needs to be built correctly to report to the materials list correctly. (build a model with a brick cavity wall and look for your masonry in the materials list or try and add new roof framing members and see how difficult that is) Materials list is the one area that gets a lot of attention. It works for some and is a complete waste of time for others. To say it's broken is not true. It would have to work in the first place to be broken, so at best it is an undeveloped area and needs to be developed into a useful tool for those with a need for a materials list. AS a natural progression of a well built model a schedule would be the icing on the cake. Not to fanciful. The information is already in the model all that is needed is a way to get it out. There that's my short list. What does CA do for me now and do very well. Import a DWG. Fantastic there is my survey information. Import 3d models. Fantastic gives me a great deal of control. In the future I will look at 3D printing. Because the stl files are there I can plan for this expansion to our services. So for me looking outside of Chief for another user (engineering, landscaping, electrical, plumbing etc) is not the way forward. I build the model I want my model to behave with intelligence. I want full control inside our office environment. I want Chief to stop using the big arguments about the meaning of BIM to not do anything and focus on the specific things that Chief as a BIM program does and develop the concept of Residential BIM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 So for me looking outside of Chief for another user (engineering, landscaping, electrical, plumbing etc) is not the way forward Ed: inside Chief is fine but Chief also needs inter-operability with other BIM apps uni-dirictional via file export is ok but bi-directional would be fantastic without inter-operability Chief is like watching B/W tv when we could be watching color in HD Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 inside Chief is fine but Chief also needs inter-operability with other BIM apps This seems to be part of the problem discussing BIM. What do I need from other BIM app and what are they? I can be specific about what I would like but I can't visualise the application of inter-operability with other apps. For Chief to be able to respond they would need a specific use to respond to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Ed: this has been discussed in a zillion threads if CA doesn't know by now they never will I've said it a thousand times - check out all the apps that Sketchup can interact with that would be a good place to start short list would be Affinity, material lists, cost estimating, energy calcs, structural calcs collision detection, sun studies etc etc etc can Chief do some of these things - sure but there are apps who are solely dedicated to one of these tasks thus, they can do it far better than chief could ever hope to I would suggest attending some of the free BIM webinars they can be eye-openers and cause drooling Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 I think Rod has made some good points with regard to BIM in trying to focus on what he wants to do. Focusing on what you need is important. BIM has such a broad and varied definition that you can pretty much say that everything that we do is BIM. But that doesn't pay the bills. What pays the bills is getting the tasks done that you need to do. Ok Good start (or is it a restart) The ability to create an accurate model. For example I would like to place a top plate (chief refers to this as a sill plate) on a masonry wall. The wall maybe the interior of the cavity or exterior of the cavity depends on the eaves. Auto mud sills is not a suitable solution, This would make a great companion for the brick dbx with the brick ledge and a choice to have a top plate on the wall of my choosing. My life will return to normal. Foundations or confusion. It twist's my brain. Stem wall and multiple ways for settings. I think I have the animal trained only to watch it collapse in elevations. It's like wrestling with an octopus or playing a fairground amusement where you hit a small creature on the head to push it down the hole only to see more creatures popping up different places.There is something very unintuitive about foundations. It could be because I am trying to get a top plate with a work around. What ever the problem is - it's a time waster and doesn't go towards paying my bills. Would like more flexibility with foundations for example we don't always pour a monolithic slab. I would like to be able to place a strip footing and have a thickened slab sit on top, the brick ledge is controlled by the brick dbx the result will be a concrete footing material and a concrete slab material in the material list. Auto roof framing. That is a fantastic start. Would love some framing members that could be used manually if we can't have them auto framing for example under purlins and strutting beams. Ability to rename framing members so that the materials list will report our names. For example separate ridge board, hip rafter, valley rafter, valley board and choose battens or sheathing layer for a framing material. Ceiling framing. Would like to have a hanging beam and it report accurately to the materials list This is not a hijack. These issues speak directly to what BIM is. Building Information Modelling = accurate model. The answers to what is Residential BIM are inside the program. Broad and varied definitions of BIM is a totally irrelevant comment. Chief has made some very nice improvements over the years and has tried to deny its BIM heritage when really you should be embracing it. The way forward is an accurate model. Does that mean every screw needs to be modelled.. Lets be real. Does it mean it has to interact with other programs? Not in my view. Does it mean an accurate model and accurate flexible reporting? That is the big YES. When Chief develops the X6 into an accurate modelling platform it will have come of age and get much applause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Does it mean it has to interact with other programs? Not in my view Ed: this is the fork in the road you say no to interact - I say yes to interact Chief should not remain an island in the sea of BIM Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RodCole Posted December 2, 2014 Author Share Posted December 2, 2014 Ok Good start (or is it a restart) This is not a hijack. These issues speak directly to what BIM is. Building Information Modelling = accurate model. The answers to what is Residential BIM are inside the program. Broad and varied definitions of BIM is a totally irrelevant comment. Chief has made some very nice improvements over the years and has tried to deny its BIM heritage when really you should be embracing it. The way forward is an accurate model. Does that mean every screw needs to be modelled.. Lets be real. Does it mean it has to interact with other programs? Not in my view. Does it mean an accurate model and accurate flexible reporting? That is the big YES. When Chief develops the X6 into an accurate modelling platform it will have come of age and get much applause. No problem Ed, never for a moment considered your comments to be anything but constructive. I would like to add a bit to the discussion about inter-operability/file exchange to hopefully add some clarity as to why I consider it to be so important. Traditional CAD programs have been around since around the mid 1980's and have developed into very powerful modeling applications including 3D solid modeling. These are not just 2D programs anymore. What they do not do well is parametric modeling in the manner that Chief does architectural modeling. Some try, but they fall a bit short of the mark IMO. So, what is the big deal about interacting or exchanging work between programs such as this when Chief already models many aspects of Architectural design better and faster than these other apps. It is quite simple really, it is in order to take advantage of what they can do that is better than what Chief can do. From my perspective BIM is about utilizing what is best of various software apps to accomplish the desired goals. An example would be clean file exchange between a high end solid modeling program and Chief in order to get the stairs the way you want them in both 3D and 2D plan views. Some of the features available from this type of exchange would be hidden lines as dashed in 2D and 3D, automated section details with hatching, full 3D sectioning, exploded views,.... The list of benefits is actually quite long, and worth pursuing. In fact, it appears that what Revit is doing is adding features that have been around a long time in the traditional CAD world and automating them for commercial design applications. So, why not allow residential designers to interact with these existing design tools by eliminating the roadblocks to efficient file exchange? Seems like some powerful leveraging from my perspective. Many of these features will eventually be part of Chief at some point in the future I would imagine. But, then again, there will be many advantages to leveraging multiple applications for some time to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Downunder Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Thank Rod, I need to investigate the difference between solid modelling and parametric models. A lot of language and acronyms get used that for me are not well understood. I get your point that other high end programs can do some things better. Stairs are your example. Out of frustration I have looked for a roof framing program but stop looking because Chief is almost there for my needs. I also stopped because it would be me that has to use the roof framing program. More learning curve. Would I send my plan to a roofing contractor. No. I have no objection or philosophical opposition to a clean file exchange. There are file formats in Chief that I have not used yet. Nice to know that if the need arises they are there. I pinned hope on X6 to fix my little list of issues- that got to be the year of apple. X7 is comming up for beta. Hope to be part of that and will of course look at my specific issues. Without splitting hairs or being argumentative Chief in my view and according to their published description of the program is BIM. Can a BIM program operate as an 'island in isolation'? If Chief does not offer inter-operability is it still BIM? If chief gave up on the materials list as an internal process and no longer supported it but allowed 'an efficient file exchange' between excel and chief. That to me would be a very valuable function. So inter-operability would get a tick from me. The dilemma for me still exists. The model needs to be accurate and while Chief is using and promoting a materials list and claims the list is based on an accurate model Chief should be able to draw an accurate model and report an accurate list. There is the fundamental principle of BIM. I guess this is the limiting concept for Chief to ponder. Can it manage the expectation of users internally or is it time to reach out to the Chief community for added value. There is no doubt like many I am limping along and looking for easier process and more function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbuttery Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 If chief gave up on the materials list as an internal process and no longer supported it but allowed 'an efficient file exchange' between excel and chief. That to me would be a very valuable function. So inter-operability would get a tick from me Ed: this would be negative for me I would then have to setup/program Excel to create some kind of useful ML a positive would be if Chief could exchange with dedicated ML software such as PlanSwift or the former Cadest It's like Chief is my GP Doctor and I need to see varied specialists Lew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now