I have recently been asked to present to the USGBC in Mississippi about how BIM is/can be a catalyst for green design. My research got me thinking about green design as a whole. Then I thought that a blog series would be a good way to share my research and some thoughts on the topic. This is a way to look at the good, the bad, and the ugly of green design, BIM, technology; and some realizations about human nature as we try to become better.
I was trained in sustainable design during my college days. Things have changed since then. We have BIM, Green Building Studio, DOE Software, IES VE and a host of other applications that take the guesswork and long hours of manual analysis out of the equation. Design has changed since then as well. We have started experimenting with new forms as said technology has enabled us to do so. Whole industries have grown up around “green technology” to aid in making our buildings more efficient, smarter, and carbon neutral.
But I have questions:
I also feel that something may be missing: People’s comprehension of green strategy and an innate understanding of themselves. I have all of these great tools and technologies at my fingertips to analyze a building’s design, but do I really know, without having a solid background in green strategy, what those numbers and graphics are telling me? We are assuming that because we can model a building pretty well then we can model it appropriately to be analyzed and then make good decisions based on it. We are sometimes assuming that throwing thousands of dollars of technology on a building makes it better, greener, when a simpler, cheaper solution may have solved the problem in a more succinct manner. That’s what I learned in college: Simple, low-tech, thoughtful solutions based on a basic understanding of the environment that the building was going to inhabit. We didn’t have the analysis tools, and I’m glad they’re here now, but let’s make sure that they don’t replace the process they are meant to enhance. I will discuss how great these applications are in a future post, but we’ll start the discussion with something that technology can’t change, but much of it has been developed to combat: Ourselves.
Let’s go ahead and admit it; we are inherently flawed. We are lazy at times, forgetful at others. We are occasionally prone to the idea that we are entitled to something, and our egos will get in the way when we aren’t keeping them in check. Coincidentally, these are the things that a goodly amount of our green technology is aimed at neutralizing. Now, I’m not saying that the development of LED or CFL lights is a bad thing. They absolutely use less energy while the light is being used and that is a good thing. (I have not researched whether the production process negates any of the benefits, but that isn’t the point right now.) My point is that the problem is exacerbated by the fact that we don’t turn them off when we are done because we are lazy or forgetful. So to combat it even further we develop fixtures that recognize when we enter and leave a room, or expensive automation systems that make ‘smart homes’. We add to the construction cost of a building to counteract our own foibles. My Kroger has installed sensors in the freezers that turn on the lights when you are walking past the pizzas, tater tots, and peas. In that situation, and in many others, I think it is a brilliant use of the technology; but on a residential or office level, I see it as an unnecessary cost that could be avoided by simply paying attention. These are some examples of many where we take a valid technology and perhaps make it frivolous.
Other times, it has less to do with technology compensating for us, but our own sense of entitlement that can destroy an otherwise useful advancement. How about HVAC? And I’m talking about both sides: heating and cooling. While we develop ever more efficient processes, we have become far more entitled about our comfort than our forefathers. Even though we are more efficient, we are still using more energy. Where in the Bill of Rights, Magna Carta, or any other document about human liberties does it state that we have the express right to be perfectly comfortable at all times? It’s not in there. So you may happen to like wearing turtleneck sweaters and think that you look snazzy in them, but then you probably shouldn’t live in Florida and keep your AC turned down to 50 degrees year round. The same goes for heating. Many of us may like wearing shorts around the house in winter, but our overdeveloped sense of ‘comfort’ is impeding our children’s ability to have affordable energy in the future. We humans are highly adaptable creatures that can purchase sweaters. We should do so. And we know this. We have seen billboards and commercials stating what the “optimal” summer and winter HVAC settings should be. Yet we still don’t (or won’t) do it.
And designers, this one is for you - or I should say, “Us.” It is so very, very hard to design a striking, warpy, organic building, only to be told that it is a complete tragedy when we are looking at it through a green lens. I have been there. I have even done the analysis on my own building and realized that I have failed on that level. Years ago, I was asked to teach a BIM class to some professors at a design school. Later, the discussion moved to using BIM to help sustainable design. I offhandedly remarked that I wished them good luck because the student’s buildings, while striking in their organic warpy-ness, were going to be impossible to analyze well. I also inquired as to whether the students had any training in performing or understanding the analysis. And even worse, they were probably about as non-sustainable as anything I had ever seen when it came to wasteful and expensive construction and fabrication. Now, I support the idea of design school being a place to experiment with, and learn about form and expression. (My wife always tells me that being married to a designer is like being married to an artist with a job.) That’s what school is about. At some point though, if your focus is supposed to be on sustainability, you have to deal people a hard blow. Unless you can look into the production, fabrication, and means and methods of constructing an organic building and guarantee minimal waste, overage, and efficient construction of that shape, you are not being green. How many sheets of glass, sheathing, insulation are being cut in odd shapes, only to have the remaning bits be worthless and thrown away? Can it be reused or recycled? Possibly, but can you guarantee it? Is it still an additional cost that isn’t necessary even if you can? I’m not saying that green has to be ugly, but I do think that we need to understand that certain aesthetics don’t work with it … yet. And I can certainly appreciate those warpy buildings for what they are, but don’t try to fool me. There better be a good reason for that shape. Otherwise, you’re just gratifying yourself. Form and function are still, and always will be, linked.
To end on a positive note, we did find a way to make BIM a teaching utility for green design for the school, and consequently everyone else. If something is that difficult to model in a virtual environment, think about how hard it is going to be to build it. It can be used as a reality catalyst. Think about how much extra waste in cost, time, and material there is by using standard construction means and methods. Think about how much it would take in time and money to develop a more efficient production or construction method, and weigh that against what you are trying to accomplish. Most importantly, weigh yourself, imperfections and all, against the greater goals that we, as designers and people are seeking to accomplish. The design starts there.
pete zyskowski
I was recently asked by one of my sales people to craft a quick overview of BIM trends that would make someone want to use it. I had a couple of gut reactions and some realizations:
Gut Reaction 1: I am over it. Do we still have to have this discussion? It’s a five-year-old question.
Gut Reaction 2: The industry is past it. The talking heads are now arguing about what is after BIM and are coming up with ridiculous things like “BIM 2.0” and 7D, 8D, 9D and XD models. (How many dimensions can there be? This isn’t quantum physics, people. I’m going to create a String-BIM theory just for my own amusement.)
Realization 1: The industry is NOT past it. While we now have the talking heads dithering about “BIM 3.0” and 99D models, we still have parts of the country and world where BIM is VERY NEW. We still have owners that have no idea why they should (or should not) be using it. There is no NEXT BIM. There is only refining it and building upon the idea to make it better.
Realization 2: I am NOT over it. I am over BIM, the singular, “solve anything” application. But not over BIM as a team based, data rich set of processes that can help solve many relevant industry problems. While my frosted side wants to dance and splash in new discoveries and uses for BIM data, my crunchy, wheat-y side realizes that we still need to evangelize, but differently than we used to talk about it; with more understanding, foresight and relevance.
The following is my initial response to this request. It needs some additional word-smithing, and doesn’t go very deep at all, but I think this is the basis of what the next generation of BIM adopters needs to understand to get on board and quickly catch up or even innovate upon current understanding. Based on what we have seen, each new wave of adoption is better than the last. We shouldn’t dismiss these later waves of BIM adopters, but realize that their new energy in learning applications that have had immense amounts of additional development could make them better than early adopters whose skills and BIM usage may have hit a plateau. These later waves also have something that the early adopters didn’t have - the backing and desire of a more educated client to do better:
“BIM isn’t the trend anymore. To be quite frank, we are past that. The real drivers towards BIM adoption now are synergistic uses that go above and beyond simply having a 3D model of a building that we can collide. The current BIM catchwords are really focused on modern operational and economic issues that are the true underlying issues that BIM can help to solve.
These things are synergistically tied to each other as well. Solving one issue tends to solve the others. BIM is not THE THING, but a tool that helps foster greater understanding and solutions to the real problems listed above and more. In our own experience we are training BIM tools at a 4:1 rate over traditional CAD applications. The classes are getting more specific and targeted on a weekly basis. Additionally, we are now working with owners in commercial, educational, and government spaces helping them craft their own BIM requirements and corporate BIM Execution Plans – which is possibly the real trend. BIM isn’t about marketing brochures or colliding 3D pieces anymore. Owners are starting to understand how it can help them generate efficiency, design sustainably, foster partnering, standardize data, trim operational costs and reveal new understanding about how they use their spaces. Now that I think about it, that’s not a trend, that’s finally getting it right.”
I just ran across this while looking at some Project Vasari videos for a Green BIM presentation I’m working on. Autodesk Research is dipping its toe into some really cool next generation BIM stuff that really ties the model (and data) to real world use. Between this and some of the other stuff going on over there, I think we’re going to see some fantastic innovation in the coming years. Take a look at this video and then go visit Autodesk Research. I can’t wait for some of this stuff to show up in Autodesk Labs.
From Autodesk:
“Project Dasher is a web-based application that helps to augment existing Autodesk® Revit® design models with real-time building submeter and sensor data on electricity and occupancy. Using meter and sensor data, Autodesk Project Dasher aims to demonstrate the value of integrating Building Information Modeling (BIM) and building instrumentation to provide building owners more insight into how existing buildings perform in real time and throughout the lifecycle of the building.”
PS - Check out the Analytic Drawing project too! Get ready to really start having fun with 3D models.
This is a quick overview I created to explain Revit Server and how we have been able to make it work outside the box. Just click the post tile above to go take a look.
Revit Server. Let’s review quickly what it was meant to do and the problems that it solves. Then we’ll take it to the next level. 
Revit Server was designed to help a SINGLE company with distributed, satellite offices work on a single model. In that scenario, everyone is on the same wide area network with no worries about security or other IT issues to get the server up and running. In the traditional model to the left, we are using some sort of VPN for synchronization, or an FTP site to share a model that has been sliced into pieces so that each office can work on their piece of the project. This can work, but only if the pieces of the puzzle are cleanly delineated, which is very rare on a project of the size and magnitude that would require
multiple offices’ involvement. The offices are also having to re-link updated models or having to wait for a s-l-o-w synchronization via VPN to a central file housed at Office A.
Now, Revit Server, in the image to the right, uses two central files. A main one (C) at the home office and another localized central file (L) at the satellite office. These two files are constantly talking to one another and updating data. So the person at Office B is quickly synchronizing to a localized central file and not having to wait for an extended period of time as they sync via a VPN connection directly to the central file at Office A. Things like object locks are directly communicated to the main central file at Office A as well, so you still get immediate communication of who is working on what. Problem solved.
The next level: Now, what about those pesky projects where multiple firms are involved? Sometimes it requires TWO firms to do the project. So how do you distribute a Revit design between multiple COMPANIES? Not just satellite offices, but different firms. It can take a little bit of IT knowhow, but it can (and has) been done. It takes a couple of firewalls and an encrypted VPN tunnel so that neither company can see the other companies’ other projects. A word of warning though. Most companies are only using a T1 connection to the internet and it will take more than that to make this successful. There are still bursts of data during synchronization and when the files are opened and closed. Therefore the office that houses the main central file (Office A, in this diagram) will need a much larger internet connection. That office will also have additional IT burdens, and BOTH companies are stranded if there is a power outage at Office A. But there is another option…
We have found that if the main central file is housed in a data center, then each office has a localized central file and is only responsible for its own connection. Data centers are designed to have large connections, fast access, and reliable up-time. The process is similar to setting up a connection between the two offices, there just happens to be a “third leg.” It would also be easier to add another team member to the project because the local IT group wouldn’t have to worry about additional permissions or concerns at Office A. Management of the central file at the data center can be delegated to a support company.
Those are just the basics. There is more to discuss but that can wait for later, or you can give us a call.
This just in … Marketing and I got together and decided it was high time we started a blog for the company. Look for posts from me AND the rest of my team on BIM, Revit, and some other great stuff! Just click on the title of this post or below and there you go.
http://appliedsoftwareblog.blogspot.com/
I haven’t stopped. I am simply on hiatus. Life got busy and work got crazy. I have been working through some projects that are informing my future posts and (hopefully) some published articles.
I was also unsure if anyone was really reading any of my stuff. You have given me the gumption to get back in the saddle though. Look for some new posts shortly. Thank you for that.
I went to a BIM kick-off meeting today. I have to admit that I was a bit dismayed by the fervent push-back coming from the various consultancies. To understand why this was the case I think that we have to dig a bit deeper into the backstory. The names have been changed (or not even mentioned) to protect the innocent.
BUMP.
The project was originally started in BIM by the design architect; not because there were any BIM requirements, but because that happened to be the tool that they were using. Fantastic. These are things I like to hear. However, the architect of record and the other main consultancies (structural, MEP) were never required to provide anything but the standard contract documents. Hmm. Now we have a problem.
SET.
Along comes the general contractor who knows that at least the low-hanging fruit can be reached on this project using BIM; things like collision detection, and basic coordination. They, along with their subcontractors, are ready and willing to use basic models to accomplish these goals and have a BIM ready for delivery to the owner to continue growing the data for FM usage. The subs, from the get-go, knew that this was going to be a requirement and were able to adjust their pricing to accommodate the uplift of services. Things at this point are going well.
SPIKE.
I just returned from a meeting with a design consultant. What they do isn’t considered one of the major consultancies such as Structure or MEP. The problem is that what they do is a major part of the design on the types of projects that they are needed on. I don’t want to get specific, because I think that there are many consultancies that are left out of the initial planning and design stages of a project because they are deemed unimportant or that their portion of the design is considered to be ‘flexible’.
This is dangerous. What happens then is that the contractor has “completed” all of the model integration and has “completed” all of the collision detections and feels that the project is clean and fully integrated. THEN they decide to bring in the other consultancies and find out that the project is not integrated at all. Remember the first rule of BIM: Coordinate early and often. And now, I think, we should have a Rule 1a: Make sure every consultancy is accounted for.
There is a larger problem here. We are only talking about geometric coordination at the moment. Nothing has been mentioned about the data, the INFORMATION, that is inherently lost because of this lack of foresight. Collision detection is great, but full data integration is desirable.
How does one ensure that all the necessary consultancies are invited? Make a BIM Execution Plan (BEP). This is your ticket to an integrated Nirvana. The BEP helps you define the parties involved in the process, how all of the data/model sharing is going to proceed throughout the project, and the project team’s expectations about BIM usage. Take a look at my BIM Links page for more info on BEPs and get working on those party invitations.
So … I was Googling myself to find some of the articles that I had written for Cadalyst and on BIM and Revit and I suddenly realized that I was actually being quoted in places. You name it; other websites, powerpoint presentations, etc. After completely freaking out about this new realization that people are actually listening to me, I have decided to start my own BIM Blog.
I know, I know, there are a lot of them out there already, but I think that I do have something to add to the discussion. I don’t always have time to create a nice article but I do have time to create a short post to fire up some discussions. I also think this is a nice way for me to really, truly talk about things without my editors polishing the stream of consciousness that is my writing style. (And irreverent. This was how an architect described my articles at an AIA presentation that I just did a while back. So let’s not forget that.)
My goal for this blog is to present theory, practice, process, workflow and ideas about BIM. I want to be as “application agnostic” as possible, but I may have a post or two that is specific to an application. So for those that stumble on this blog, I look forward to your comments and discussions. Let’s make BIM better through communication.
-Pete
