| by Ralph Grabowski with Allan Partridge |
|
CanBIM calls itself "the business voice of BIM [building information modeling] in Canada." During the regional CanBIM conference held last week in Vancouver Canada, I had the opportunity to interview its president, Allan Partridge. See WorldCAD Access for a blog of the day athttp://www.worldcadaccess.com/blog/2016/02/blogging-live-from-canbim-conference-in-vancouver-canada.html.
- - -
Ralph Grabowski: How does CanBIM fit in with other BIM organizations in Canada?
Allan Partridge: We were the first one. Back in 2008, a group of us felt that BIM had to be a business decision; it cannot be enforced by government, or dictated to the industry. As founders of CanBIM, we came from variety of sizes of firms, wanting to raise the agenda of BIM collectively for the entire industry – regardless of size. We firmly believe BIM will gain its traction not just in an isolated sense in design, procurement, assembly, or operation, but holistically for all these aspects.
After CanBIM was formed, the Institute for BIM was formed by founding partners CCA, RIAC, ACEC, and CSI, following a similar path for making BIM a business decision. After this, buildingSmart Canada arrived as a council of IBC taking a chapter position under buildingSmart international.
We are looking at certification, as well as providing tools to kick start companies with BIM. All of us are there to help one another. We are deeply concerned about making a robust design and construction community in Canada that can withstand organizations from other countries coming in and telling us what to do.
Grabowski: Who would do that, and why?
Partridge: BIM(UK) is designed to be an exportable industry [from United Kingdom]. England used to export other things to other countries; this is a new export. It was a clarion call to make our own community robust.
Grabowski: For the last few weeks, I’ve been researching BIM and CAD standards for the update to my book on CAD management. I could not find much in Canada for BIM standards.
Partridge: The IBC has developed a practice manual that is available for purchase. CanBIM would rather develop a series of protocols to find a baseline way of working with BIM. We are proud of our current work with other international bodies to develop protocols for working with Revit. We are also exploring working on versions for ArchiCAD and Bentley.
But standards concern me. They were fine when drawings were the output; how do you define standards when data is the output? This is where the work on OpenBIM under buildingSMART international that has some gifted Canadians at the table under ISO. These hold some very exciting potential. However, we have to be careful as standards will need be more fluid as technology changes come more rapidly. I think people will find a way to work together and establish their own way of working -- creating a much different way of standardizing.
Panel discussion at CanBIM Vancouver
Grabowski: Is there a place for CAD standards in a data-centric world?
Partridge: There are evolving standards in the ISO to make sure that the creators of software allows complete, coordinated and consistent data extraction, data mining, exporting to CNC, and so on.
But should I be using 2.5mm Arial Narrow? I don’t care. All that matters is the format of the data, especially getting IFCs [industry foundation classes] right.
Grabowski: What do you see as the future direction of BIM?
Partridge: Change is never linear. There lies the problem: we hang on to what is traditional, not really realizing what is coming down the pipe. I see a very different industry two decades from now that will have both players and outcomes that are very different to what we see today. We are truly at the cusp of a golden era for design, procurement, assembly, and operation of buildings.
Grabowski: What is an example of the shortsightedness?
Partridge: We are focusing BIM in a document-centric environment, and we are failing miserably. It should be information-centric; CAD was document-centric. We need to use the model to make a metadata [data about the model].
[Mr Partridge gets out his fountain pen, still a useful tool, and then begins to sketch what he means on a PostIt note.] CAD allowed us to make many more drawings, and then BIM made the number of drawings become exponential. What happens when there are so many drawings?
Grabowski: The problem with too many drawings is that their value falls.
Partridge: Exactly. It is a problem today that we are using BIM to create drawings. Can I decrease my drawing output by say 50%, and increase the data output 100%? That increases value. We need to get off the heroin of drawings, and get into data. We need BIM to output directly to fabrication, with no drawings at all -- except for the foreseeable future when drawings are still required for regulatory purpose. Even then, these should be minimized.
Grabowski: Well, construction is very, very conservative. They prefer to keep putting up 2x4 studs. On another topic, why are you president of CanBIM?
Partridge: It is a passion for me. I began with BIM in 2002 with Revit version 2. As to when I will step aside as president? When it is right to do so, first for CanBIM and second for myself.
Grabowski: Some of the talks at this conference today involve augmented reality, mobile, Web. What are your thoughts on these future technologies?
Partridge: I think anything that can communicate design and assembly (construction) intent is very useful. The primary source of legal claims against architects and engineers is a lack of communication, not the deliverables. So I find the constant issue of liability around the BIM laughable.
I don’t think we will be designing on this [he make a scribbling motion over his 4” iPhone]. But they are good for communication. Anything that improves communication reduces risk, anything to help people convey something that is being thought out. The power in mobile technology is communication, not design.
I think the days of the solo designer are going away, we are going to have nimble teams that come to together as needed. On this premise we will go back to the master builder, but a virtual one; not silos, but cylinders of excellence. In the future, I think we will deal more with something not too dissimilar to a large drawing board, around which we assemble the building as a team. Check out on YouTube the construction video of Leadenhall in London.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5RgRboBE2Y
Once we get over the notion of drawings, the industry will mature quickly. It will take the next generation to not worry about drawings. We should be able to work this so that someone at Leduc truss can make it. Perhaps 20 years from now, drawings will be gone and we will simply be better.
www.canbim.com |
|
It's that time of life when lots of software firms are celebrating 25th anniversaries. Heck, I celebrated my 25 years as a freelance writer in just this year in mid-January. Last week, it was the turn of form-z.
President and co-founder Dr. Chris Yessios says, “What an exciting 25 years it has been. Those of us that have been with the company since the very beginning would by no means trade the experience for anything else. So many tools, that are today taken for granted, were first included in form•Z after long hours of development and experimentation."
There are three versions of the form-Z 3D modeling software, form-Z free, form-Z jr, and form-Z pro. http://www.formz.com/products/formzfree.html |
|
There is more at our WorldCAD Access blog about the CAD industry, tips on using hardware and software, and our popular travelogues. You can keep up with the blog through its RSS feed and email alert service. These are some of the articles that appeared on WorldCAD Access during the last week:
- Blogging Live from CanBIM Conference in Vancouver Canada
- My new tablet became obsolete 4 years ago (Blackberry Playbook)
We're on Twitter at @upfrontezine with late-breaking CAD news and wry commentary throughout the day.
Randall S. Newton @RSNatWork Feb 16: BREAKING NEWS: PTC to pay $28 million settlement to US Gov't in China investigation http://bit.ly/1R6WDRI |
|
Re: About IronCAD Design Collaboration for 2016
I first encountered Tri-Spectives in its infancy, at (I believe) NDES in Chicago. I was working for a PTC/Computervision/Autodesk reseller at the time, and was given a copy. I believe I was somehow placed on their reseller list, as I continued to receive quite a bit of correspondence, information, and updates from the company.
But, oh, my! The ease of use! The drag and drop features! The drag and drop animations! The (what we now call) direct editing! I honestly thought I was seeing the future. Sure, there were issues with interoperability, and I encountered some with internal accuracy -- I was told it was just an ideation tool, not really valid for documentation or downstream applications, i.e., CAM -- but just the same it was a revelation. Certainly this will revolutionize the industry!
Ironic, then, that even some time into its IronCAD reincarnation, they were touting in ads that "100s of customers can't be wrong." 100s? So, yes, Ralph, thanks for following up on this very interesting product, and for the reminder that the CAD industry never plateaus and gets boring.
- Sam Hochberg
samhochberg.com
- - -
Thank you for your continued coverage of IronCAD and its history. I was an early user of Tri-Spectives and found it far better than anything else available at the time. It ran well on my Windows 95 PC and gave me the ability to do 3D solid modeling, renderings and animations at a very reasonable price.
All of this is common place now, but in 1995 this was pretty amazing stuff from a Windows PC and $500 software! While others were paying 10K+ for Pro-E and another 10K+ for a Unix workstation I was making a nice living off Trispectives with 3D solid modeling, animations and renderings on a very affordable Windows PC.
Here are some examples of work I did with the software in 1995-1996: 3D form studies, color studies, 3D printed models from .stl files, renderings and 2D documentation: http://www.idesign2.com/corel/corelimages/hex1.jpg. Again, all of this is common now but it was well ahead of the pack in 1995 and at a price that could not be beat!.
- Glenn Kennedy
idesign2.com
- - -
Thanx for the IronCAD update. Enjoyed reading it. Have many questions as a result. Cheers!
- Chris Cadman
Re: BYOL (Bring Your Own License): Frame
We need some sort of naming convention for CAD companies, or maybe just software suppliers in general. There's a comment in a later item about "rent-seeking" that is a step in the right direction. Maybe you are the new Linnaeus who can work out the taxonomy of software business approaches, so that we can have fast and easy way of identifying which companies are aiming to mine our bank accounts on:
- A monthly basis forever
- A yearly basis forever
- If their plan is to lock us into required updates with no backward compatibility
- To coerce us into keeping our stuff on their server
- Or what
There are a bewildering array of scams plans out there, and bringing order to it would be a wonderful public service. So I propose the following name for a person who allows some faceless, zero-responsibility company to keep all there data on their servers: servant. Has a nice ring to it.
- Jess Davis
Davis Precision Design, Inc.
The editor replies: Following the lock-in of the 1980s, the opening of CAD formats in the 1990s, now it appears the Autodesk and Dassaults of today yearn to be the Computervisions of yesteryear. Look at Dassault and Solidworks pushing their no-file initiative. Open CAD programs don't get very far, unfortunately, and so the only protection we are left with is the Open Design Alliance and its work in documenting DWG, DGN, and other formats.
- - -
Section 8.1 of AWS [Amazon Web Services terms and conditions] is even worse than he suspected: "We may disclose Your Content to provide the Service Offerings to you or any End Users or to comply with any request of a governmental or regulatory body (including subpoenas or court orders)."
Let’s parse that, and simply consider the conditions before the “or”: 'We may disclose Your Content to provide the Service Offerings to you or any End Users.'
I believe that means they can disclose your content to ANY end user they need to provide service offerings. This goes far beyond governments or regulatory bodies. In effect, it really says, 'We may disclose Your Content to any End Users.'
- Ken Elliott
The editor replies: I suppose it covers Amazon should hackers break in and reveal data to the world. Course, part of the problem is that we don't even know where our data is being stored. Where does Autodesk put 360 data? -- and if it is Amazon today, might it be Azure tomorrow. Then whose T&Cs rule? |
|
Thank you to readers who donate towards the operation of upFront.eZine. In return, you receive our 56-page whitepaper "MobileCAD is Reaching Maturity," free and unavailable from anywhere else.
Should you wish to support upFront.eZine through  PayPal, then the suggested amounts are these:
Or you can mail a cheque (US$ or CDN$ only, please) to upFront.eZine Publishing, Ltd., 34486 Donlyn Avenue, Abbotsford BC, V2S 4W7, Canada.
|
|
"I’d prefer Zuckerberg campaigned for access to electricity, rather than access to the internet, and created electricity grids for the poor, rather than social networks."
- Andrew Orlowski, The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/08/zero_rating_racists/ |
|
|
|
Comments