As we work with Teng to figure out how to collaborate in the model in real-time, we are testing different ways for 'gate keeping'. There is trust between team members, so no one is worried about malicious destruction of the model; the concern is unintentional moving of objects.
Strategy 1: Worksets
Scenario: Teng will 'check out' various worksets, so that Tocci cannot inadvertently move any objects.
Tocci Can: Modify Type Parameters including Assembly Code (good) and Wall Thickness (bad)
Tocci Cannot: Move Objects (good), Change Object Types (good), Change Instance Parameters such as Sill Height (good) and user-created parameters like Schedule Start and Schedule Complete (bad).
Issues: What if Teng forgets to checkout worksets? Also - is Teng set up in a way that certain Teng users can always have specific worksets checked out or will it interfere with their workflow?
3.24.2008
Autodesk RFP & Collaboration
Autodesk recently issued an RFP for 'architectural services'. The RFP was issued to several architects who were to pick a GC to work with in an IPD fashion. The objectives of the RFP are (paraphrased):
1. To select an integrated team for the tenant fit-out for the new HQ of Autodesk's AEC Division
2. To develop a design which creates a environment that presents the breadth/depth of Autodesk applications
3. Use the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) approach, which leverages early contribution of knowloedge through the utilization of new BIM technologies
4. Meet an aggressive schedule
And of course, the team will use Autodesk software.
I think it goes without saying that this would be a pretty phenomenal project to work on - from a promotional standpoint, if nothing else. More than that, it is a chance to use and prove this technology with an owner that clearly believes in it.
The timing of this RFP is interesting, as Tocci is currently working with Teng & Associates to figure out how to collaborate in a model, which seems to be a part of IPD. So far, thanks in large part to some help from Autodesk, we have found a few work-arounds to checking each others work and limiting access as needed (because let's face it - it seems to be that the fewer people working in a model, the better).
However, there is no clear way to "safely" collaborate in a model: we cannot restrict access to specific actions based on username (which isn't really fool proof anyway, because it's very easy to change a username in Revit). We also cannot create any kind of audit of actions in a model, which would probably be useful for Tocci-only projects, too (although Tocci modelers know that I have my ways of finding out who did what...)
It will be very interesting to see how Autodesk supports an IPD with Revit - for their own project.
1. To select an integrated team for the tenant fit-out for the new HQ of Autodesk's AEC Division
2. To develop a design which creates a environment that presents the breadth/depth of Autodesk applications
3. Use the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) approach, which leverages early contribution of knowloedge through the utilization of new BIM technologies
4. Meet an aggressive schedule
And of course, the team will use Autodesk software.
I think it goes without saying that this would be a pretty phenomenal project to work on - from a promotional standpoint, if nothing else. More than that, it is a chance to use and prove this technology with an owner that clearly believes in it.
The timing of this RFP is interesting, as Tocci is currently working with Teng & Associates to figure out how to collaborate in a model, which seems to be a part of IPD. So far, thanks in large part to some help from Autodesk, we have found a few work-arounds to checking each others work and limiting access as needed (because let's face it - it seems to be that the fewer people working in a model, the better).
However, there is no clear way to "safely" collaborate in a model: we cannot restrict access to specific actions based on username (which isn't really fool proof anyway, because it's very easy to change a username in Revit). We also cannot create any kind of audit of actions in a model, which would probably be useful for Tocci-only projects, too (although Tocci modelers know that I have my ways of finding out who did what...)
It will be very interesting to see how Autodesk supports an IPD with Revit - for their own project.
3.20.2008
3d modeling & mechanical contracting
Today, I attended a presentation at on how Cannistraro, a mechanical contracting firm, does coordination.
For many of their projects, they model and coordinate using AutoCAD MEP and then clash in NavisWorks, to see if they missed any issues - sounds familiar.
One of the interesting things that the presenter brought up is how they convey the information to their pre-fab shop. I've heard rumors that other MEP subs export a BIM to CNC for automatic fabrication. However, at Cannistraro, the information is communicated to the pre-fab shop the same way Tocci's VC group communicates most information to the field: 2D documents that shown dimensioned 2D & 3D views of the model.
For many of their projects, they model and coordinate using AutoCAD MEP and then clash in NavisWorks, to see if they missed any issues - sounds familiar.
One of the interesting things that the presenter brought up is how they convey the information to their pre-fab shop. I've heard rumors that other MEP subs export a BIM to CNC for automatic fabrication. However, at Cannistraro, the information is communicated to the pre-fab shop the same way Tocci's VC group communicates most information to the field: 2D documents that shown dimensioned 2D & 3D views of the model.
3.11.2008
Tracking DCRs in the Model
As I've mentioned before, Tocci issues DCRs instead of RFIs in many cases.
Up until recently (well, today), we haven't been doing a great job of tracking them. They normally consist of a sheet created in Revit and a list created in Excel. The list is hard to manage unless you're familiar with the project, and it requires duplication of information input.
Going forward, we won't have that problem:
I have created an Generic Object in Revit (made of invisible lines), that uses Shared Parameters (such as Date Issued; Issue Description; Suggested Resolution) to facilitate the documentation of DCRs. Basically, I place the DCR object in a view, drag the view to a sheet and tag the DCR object using a modified Generic Object tag. The tag is based on the Shared Parameters, so the required information automatically populates.
To issue the DCR, I will still have to print the sheet to PDF and then email it to the designer; however, I can log their response in Revit, in the DCR object.
And of course, since the DCR object is a Generic Object, I can schedule it - exporting it to Excel for the list as needed.
I guess it's a little extra work, but it's worth it to have the information coordinated and organized so well!
Up until recently (well, today), we haven't been doing a great job of tracking them. They normally consist of a sheet created in Revit and a list created in Excel. The list is hard to manage unless you're familiar with the project, and it requires duplication of information input.
Going forward, we won't have that problem:
I have created an Generic Object in Revit (made of invisible lines), that uses Shared Parameters (such as Date Issued; Issue Description; Suggested Resolution) to facilitate the documentation of DCRs. Basically, I place the DCR object in a view, drag the view to a sheet and tag the DCR object using a modified Generic Object tag. The tag is based on the Shared Parameters, so the required information automatically populates.
To issue the DCR, I will still have to print the sheet to PDF and then email it to the designer; however, I can log their response in Revit, in the DCR object.
And of course, since the DCR object is a Generic Object, I can schedule it - exporting it to Excel for the list as needed.
I guess it's a little extra work, but it's worth it to have the information coordinated and organized so well!
A New VDC Motto?
Recently emailed to me:
"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less."
General Eric Shinseki, former Army Chief of Staff
"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less."
General Eric Shinseki, former Army Chief of Staff
3.10.2008
as-built modeling
As one of our earliest VDC-enabled projects wraps up, we are starting to figure out what to deliver to the owner, in this case Starwood Hotels.
(FM Model 101: Part of an as-built model is really developed over the course of construction - geometry is updated based on design updates and modifications due to construction. The other part is the information required for facilities management.)
Without direction from owners, we can't sure the level of detail needed in either case. When we developed our modeling "LOD", it was based on what we needed to create deliverables for construction. Although we indicate that we can provide a model for owners to use, I'm not so sure we can - without the appropriate direction and feedback. It is much like how we can't really use designers' models, as is.
I'm not really expecting a general standard for this. Much like everything else, standards will have to be updated project-project, based on the team, use of the model, etc. But a little direction would be helpful, and much more productive for everyone involved.
(FM Model 101: Part of an as-built model is really developed over the course of construction - geometry is updated based on design updates and modifications due to construction. The other part is the information required for facilities management.)
Without direction from owners, we can't sure the level of detail needed in either case. When we developed our modeling "LOD", it was based on what we needed to create deliverables for construction. Although we indicate that we can provide a model for owners to use, I'm not so sure we can - without the appropriate direction and feedback. It is much like how we can't really use designers' models, as is.
I'm not really expecting a general standard for this. Much like everything else, standards will have to be updated project-project, based on the team, use of the model, etc. But a little direction would be helpful, and much more productive for everyone involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
