Attention all Revit wizards and consultant coordination champions!
Our office is putting together a proposal for documenting an existing historic building via BIM model. My question is...what strategy would be most effective, for all practical purposes, on implementing consultants (Struct., MEP, FP, etc.) expertise w/ the model.
So far we've lined up the consultants that are Revit savvy and are brainstorming ideas for coordinating inclusion of these specialized building systems into the BIM model. Any suggestions?
My initial direction is to have our office create the full architectural model (construction information included) and then allow each consultant to add their input to the model to include their particular building systems i.e. HVAC, ductwork, electrical, etc. one by one.
if you are using an integrated project delivery system theoretically mep, structural, and other consultants should be able to use Revit to draft their scope of services.
in reality if you would like to coordinate everything. heres my recommendation, that i learned the hard way.
1st Structural engineer drafts model. Once the structural model is done and it usually is done early in a project that will be your main file to add to.
Architecture scope can follow after the structural model. so to speak your putting skin on the bones.
MEP would be more well coordinated with a completed Architecture model.
But, of course the engineers want to do their part and get it out the door asap, so more then likely they will draft their MEP Revit portion, and then later on re-coordinate with the Architecture model.
You have to keep on those MEP engineers sometimes they are in one office sometimes in seperate offices and they do not talk to each other.
weekly meetings face to face communication is vital to your success.
meaning that IPD is supposed to be a system where consultants and architects work on the same model at the same time. (though GC's are leading the way in this model of project delivery) (you know we architects are still a very secretive bunch like Brunelleschi)
a BIM coordinator should be designated for each consultant and the architecture team. These are the guys that will be updating the Central file and going to the meetings and fixing up any problems with the Central files.
Good stuff, LiveLoad. Thanks!
My past experience with existing buildings has been to bring the structural engineers on board after the basic BIM model is created. This is for a two story building on a college campus, with existing as-builts drawings in hand.
If it were new construction or more complex I would bring the struct. eng. and other design team members on board at the on set. But for this job I still think it would be most effective with allowing the struct. eng. to work with the specifics from what we've created from existing drawings, etc. And then bringing on the MEP, etc. from there. I could be stubborn, but I really think for this particular circumstance (historic bldg. w/ as-built dwgs) it would be most effective.
Also, per the IPD, I have noticed GC's trying to take the reigns from architects w/ their BIM manager; arguing that they know how a building's put together more than an architect. I think we as architect's need to do a better job educating clients on the importance of what architects bring to the table in pre-design/programming/front-end elements.
Again, I appreciate your insight!
I am currently the technical lead and "BIM guy" at a 120 person firm and they basically hired me to coordinate and do exactly what are talking about for the very first time in their firm. Luckily, or not so luckily at the same time, MEP and Structures are in house. It is turning out to be very tough but if you check back on the blog I am sure I will be posting later on this month on the progress and methodologies that I went through.
Right now we are in the process of explaining the importance of the structural guys modeling the existing structure for the sake of coordination.... Of course, the argument is about money and how that is not part of their fee and etc... While at the same time I spent a week and a half modeling the entire existing building so why should structure only model what they want/need? This project is not an IPD contract but I, and you, need to keep reminding everyone the ultimate goal. The importance of the little things, the coordination, and the INFORMATION in BIM. There is an I in BIM and it is very very important.
Jul 17, 10 3:34 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Revit for Measured Drawings - Consultant Coordination
Attention all Revit wizards and consultant coordination champions!
Our office is putting together a proposal for documenting an existing historic building via BIM model. My question is...what strategy would be most effective, for all practical purposes, on implementing consultants (Struct., MEP, FP, etc.) expertise w/ the model.
So far we've lined up the consultants that are Revit savvy and are brainstorming ideas for coordinating inclusion of these specialized building systems into the BIM model. Any suggestions?
My initial direction is to have our office create the full architectural model (construction information included) and then allow each consultant to add their input to the model to include their particular building systems i.e. HVAC, ductwork, electrical, etc. one by one.
I appreciate any and all practical input!
if you are using an integrated project delivery system theoretically mep, structural, and other consultants should be able to use Revit to draft their scope of services.
in reality if you would like to coordinate everything. heres my recommendation, that i learned the hard way.
1st Structural engineer drafts model. Once the structural model is done and it usually is done early in a project that will be your main file to add to.
Architecture scope can follow after the structural model. so to speak your putting skin on the bones.
MEP would be more well coordinated with a completed Architecture model.
But, of course the engineers want to do their part and get it out the door asap, so more then likely they will draft their MEP Revit portion, and then later on re-coordinate with the Architecture model.
You have to keep on those MEP engineers sometimes they are in one office sometimes in seperate offices and they do not talk to each other.
weekly meetings face to face communication is vital to your success.
good luck
add this to first paragraph:
at the same time.
meaning that IPD is supposed to be a system where consultants and architects work on the same model at the same time. (though GC's are leading the way in this model of project delivery) (you know we architects are still a very secretive bunch like Brunelleschi)
one more thing,
a BIM coordinator should be designated for each consultant and the architecture team. These are the guys that will be updating the Central file and going to the meetings and fixing up any problems with the Central files.
Good stuff, LiveLoad. Thanks!
My past experience with existing buildings has been to bring the structural engineers on board after the basic BIM model is created. This is for a two story building on a college campus, with existing as-builts drawings in hand.
If it were new construction or more complex I would bring the struct. eng. and other design team members on board at the on set. But for this job I still think it would be most effective with allowing the struct. eng. to work with the specifics from what we've created from existing drawings, etc. And then bringing on the MEP, etc. from there. I could be stubborn, but I really think for this particular circumstance (historic bldg. w/ as-built dwgs) it would be most effective.
Also, per the IPD, I have noticed GC's trying to take the reigns from architects w/ their BIM manager; arguing that they know how a building's put together more than an architect. I think we as architect's need to do a better job educating clients on the importance of what architects bring to the table in pre-design/programming/front-end elements.
Again, I appreciate your insight!
Hope it works out,
Thanks for actually asking a question that actually is about building and architecture.
i have a friend who has a bim website, talking about bim software.
[bim software]http://www.bimsoftware.net/
oh link didnt work out
www.bimsoftware.net
There is a nice BIM standard PDF out there from the UK:
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B9C7NrW20L4yN2U3NzY5ZTQtYjc5NS00ZGE5LWI1NTMtZDBmZWM0OGNjMWJk&hl=en_GB&authkey=CIK7kPsL
That is courtesy of: http://cadalot-revitlearningcurve.blogspot.com/
I also have some information that might be of use to you on my blog:
http://www.TheRevitKid.com
I am currently the technical lead and "BIM guy" at a 120 person firm and they basically hired me to coordinate and do exactly what are talking about for the very first time in their firm. Luckily, or not so luckily at the same time, MEP and Structures are in house. It is turning out to be very tough but if you check back on the blog I am sure I will be posting later on this month on the progress and methodologies that I went through.
Right now we are in the process of explaining the importance of the structural guys modeling the existing structure for the sake of coordination.... Of course, the argument is about money and how that is not part of their fee and etc... While at the same time I spent a week and a half modeling the entire existing building so why should structure only model what they want/need? This project is not an IPD contract but I, and you, need to keep reminding everyone the ultimate goal. The importance of the little things, the coordination, and the INFORMATION in BIM. There is an I in BIM and it is very very important.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.