Sunday, January 25, 2015

B3: Week 4 Blog Post - Group B, Voznyak


BIM software is an extraordinary tool that among many functions allows designers to visually display their three-dimensional drawings, easily share their drawings with colleagues, reduce the cost of construction, and speed up the entire construction process. But, with this great power there is a possibility of many faults and problematic human-causes issues.
Throughout the ages engineers and architects used hand-drawn sketches to explain how they wanted the builders to construct their designs. With the advent of computer technology and the availability of personal computers in the late 20th century, design firms moved to programs such as AutoCAD to increase efficiency, easy backup of drawings, etc. as well as other analysis programs to alleviate the need for hand calculations and provide visualizations. This change in workplace tasks required a mass re-education of employees. Similarly, today, with the newer technology of Building Information Modeling (BIM) software, employers face the same issues and many of the older employees are finding it ever more difficult to adapt. This issue spans to professionals in the various engineering fields and buildings trades.   
There is also an issue with legality whereas who possess legal ownership of files, how to create a copyright of them, and who is responsible for legal claims due to errors and omissions. Due to the fact that there are likely to be many contributing firms to the total design this creates a messy situation, issues that were not present in the conventional 2-D construction drawings.
Additionally, there are also huge problems with interoperability and backwards compatibility between various versions of programs. Many of the programs needed by designers to either design or analyze their products are unable to be used with one another. This creates extra work to manually re-enter data and designs and/or forces everyone to use the same version of the same exact program. With new programs coming out yearly firms simply cannot feasibly afford such luxuries.
  

COMMENTS:


No comments:

Post a Comment