‘Clash Detection’ is often a waste of time particularly if applied without adequate planning, or when it is assumed that a technical solution can solve a process (design) issue. There is a lot more to good design merely than stuff not clashing.
In construction- the usual argument for doing something a particular way is usually “that’s the way we have always done it”. This post examines the future of technology in construction decision making.
In the olden days, many organisations had a group of people (nearly always women) in what was known as a ‘typing pool’. The idea was that if you needed a non-handwritten document, then these people would apply specialist skills (typing) on an incredibly complicated bit of kit (a typewriter) to produce said document.
A surprising number of organisations still work in ‘typing pool ‘ mode when it comes to BIM.
A construction project, with quality documentation so everything fits together properly, budget and program are achieved (or improved upon), construction runs efficiently and there are not any acrimonious legal disputes at the end between client, designers, contractor and subcontractors is an elusive beast.
3D goggles aren’t going to make much difference.
With BIM, it is easy to get bogged down in technology & detail and neglect the important strategic aspects. In this post, I draw parallels between the approach needed to successfully get down a mountain on a bicycle, and that needed for BIM.
Everyone talks about innovation. Most companies have some sort of mission statement, ‘values’ or other corporate mantra that mentions innovation. Some might have a separate department