An overreliance on modern BIM software and lack of in situ knowledge on the part of architects may be spurring declines in the deliverability of new structures, says a new post to LinkedIn from designer Igor Goriatchev. The "Speed vs. Quality" debate, rise of remote work, and related declines in in-person mentorships are all factors leading to the conclusion that "[c]omprehensive, integrated drawings have given way to incomplete, conflicting, and fragmented sets" which are in turn affecting construction timelines on new projects, the post states.
This opinion relates to various topics within employment and professional practice that have been highlighted via our Forum threads for several years with the advent of new digital workflows and other realities for architects.
Has this matched your experience with technical drawings for AEC clients in daily professional practice? You can share your thoughts in the comments below.
17 Comments
It can be simultaneously true that the modern conception of a 'drawing set' has changed, and that - viewed from the traditional model, details and drawing techniques have been lost in the sense that they are nearly entirely digitized (and not taught or practiced in the same way, furthermore). I would argue they've 'morphed' and left much of representational normative drawing techniques in the dust. New tools also afford new capabilities. But not all 'digitization' is of equal accuracy either, which makes evaluating digital models* of primary concern to architects, the ones who make buildings anyway.
While I'm on the subject, I feel digital tools like Revit have failed to advance sufficiently, holding the industry back without its knowing. Architecture is hesitant to embrace new technologies until it sees what 'sticks'
*model is a complicated term, in reality
Accredited Arch schools need to drive home the notion that quality details are just as, if not more, important than glossy images. Firm owners need to stop listening to software reps who promise that revit will solve all their problems out of the box. Young professionals need to understand that construction needs far more than a few lines in CAD.
I'm not saying it is impossible to produce a cohesive and coordinated set of drawings within the current paradaigm of contemporary practice, but nearly everything is working against it.
I like to think I produced some fucking excellent sets of drawings in my time, but I also often worked 80+ hours a week and went way above and beyond in order to get there, and even then sometimes it wasn't what I hoped because of other aspects outside of my control - contractor meddling, abbreviated timelines, early packages, shitty consulatants, you name it.
... All of which is to say, I don't think this is a problem of remote work and lack of in-person mentorship, nor BIM technology, but rather the "Find Out" phase of the architecture and construction industry's past 35+ years of "Fucking Around" with fees, wages, team sizes, schedules, and office structure.
Excellent answer, archanonymous. I agree with all of it. The enshittification of everything related to *good quality* has been underway for decades.
Lack of budget and increase in complexity without increase in fees makes it difficult to keep up. BIM is amazing. We are using revit more lately in office and the efficiency boost is undeniable. It is not enough though, especially since it is expensive.
I'm not certain if this is a real thing or not (might be a mirage based on the few examples in front of me), but I tend to see the boost happening with those who are already pretty excellent at making drawings, and with a good bit of experience all round.
BIM models can be very messy and it is easy to cut corners without knowing it if there is no one pointing out the intent of the drawings in the first place. It is something I see in the work of students often enough. The culprit seems to be a focus too much on the drawings as a product, whether drawn by hand or made in rhino, autocad, or revit. Which is a mistake. The product is the building or the landscape, or the neighborhood. That misapprehension feels like more of a problem than which instruments we are using. Maybe it even partially explains why we aren't paid enough for our work. Clients don't see us as the ones responsible for making buildings, just drawings.
I think all of this is ridiculous. I’ve looked at project documents from 50 and 60 years ago, for 20-30,000 sf schools, can someone tell me what the average, complete set of pages were in those document sets? Just ballpark it for me.
I'm not joking here, but like 10-15 A-sheets (if it is a really important and complex building) maybe 5 S sheets, and maybe 2-3 sheets for the major trades, but I wouldn't be surprised if the set didn't include plumbing, for example. Figure that shit out in shop drawings/ on site/ it's the contractors and trade's job.
The (perhaps apocryphal) example for people who worked in Chicago is the Sears Tower set which only contained 35 sheets total, including consultants. 10,000+ sheets of shop drawings though.
About a decade ago we did the plans to convert a historic (1920s) warehouse/office building into apartments. Four storeys, maybe a 5000sf footprint. Our renovation set was 35 pages (with just 1 structural). If it had been a new build, likely about 60 pages. The original drawings? 7 pages total for all consultants.
A complete set if you did the A, S, and MEP stuff, they would be maybe 30-50 or so sheets. Sometimes, it might be upwards of 75 sheets. Today, you'll need 3 to 10 times that. Part of the reason is, back in the day, you had more experienced and better quality construction contractors. Back another 50 years more to the 1920s and earlier, you would typically needed half the number of sheets than 50 years ago. Part of this comes down to one, building technology was generally simpler and two, you have craftsmen.
The average builder of the day would be equivalent to today's specialty craftsmen that work on historic preservation projects. This was the baseline and the best of them were more experienced and be those with 30+ years in the crafts. Every construction contractor has finish carpentry level woodworkers and milling workshop. Going back 50 more years, they would also work on shipbuilding (building wood ships) and had all this capability and they produced. There were also those that worked and specialize in trades like masonry. They were equipped and had the resources to build with high skill.
Another thing, back in the day, architects were also functionally the equivalent of the general contractor as well. They brought the trades and organized the operation and did the work and were on the construction site a lot more than architects do today. You can see, the schism and degree of departure/separation from construction only expanded since after WW II and we perpetuate that.
Some of the techniques of representing information on a sheet changed. They can pack a lot onto a single sheet and the builders could understand what they are looking at. Today, you don't have the quality. Many in the trade have absolutely zero training or schooling to teach them how to read technical submissions. We also pack a lot of information on drawings pointing to and referencing building codes which we didn't have back at the time. We didn't have plan review process and building departments. There were standards for a long time and such that guided architects on conditions like live loads and such that would need to be met in certain use applications and they built accordingly and designed accordingly. They knew for plaster ceilings, deflection needs to be minimized and they also knew they need to design to a maximum deflection not exceeding a maximum amount so they designed so the joists & beams were sufficiently sized and planed the spans accordingly. There were load/span tables and methods to sizing joists & beams and columns long before code. This the architect would do and then call out the size, spacing, and spans of joists, beams, and columns and such.
Bad design results in bad reputation. This can be a career ender. Remember, in those days, moving from place to place at great distances was a significant thing. You started and lived out your career in the city or towns. Moving across nation was expensive and not something done as much as it does now. It was like compared to today, would cost you 3-5 times as much in today's dollars if you did a proportional adjustment. Your reputation really means something.
From personal experiece, Level and quality of drawings is directly correlated to the project budget, project quality and the quality of the client and general contractor involved.
Quality project / owner / GC = quality drawings
Crappy project / owner / GC = crappy drawings.
quality staff that cares about their work = quality drawings regardless of project budget.
If you are a cad monkey yes, in the real world and I can tell you dont work for yourself or have any idea of how a business works, quality staff and time spent on drawings is directly corelated to project budget.
They are not. Come back when you have real world experience on real projects. Until then, keep faking it.
I run my own business, while you run your mouth on this forum. come back when I have revit questions, as for anything else your opinion is worthless. Thank god for ignore button, filters out the weak.
Keep trying.
Non, you said this: quality staff that cares about their work = quality drawings regardless of project budget and I agree, BUT the high quality from people who care *always* comes at their personal expense aka work-life balance.
I did a killer set of drawings (in CAD in 2019) for a project I cared about but I also spent 8 weekends in a row in the office. One week ago a co-worker and I pulled an all-nighter because we truly care about our work. But I don't like living this way, and I don't want to any more, and the only way that happens is if fees go up *significantly*.
in other words eat the rich
Donna, not always at personal expense. I stress with my staff not to work OT. That's my job and I'll do the overnights when required because I'm paid to do that (and I can often do their jobs 3x faster without breaking the bank). Just need to reinforce the old-timey notion of care and craft. We have room in our fees for good drawing set but what we lack is effective architects who can design & draft at the same time. This is something I struggle to teach and so far, have a under 50% record.
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.