Quick Links - Also see the menu above and more choices on the right side of the blog (too much, but all good stuff)

\/ ...and now BIMbuilder.com Blog Posts... \/

Monday, March 29, 2010

A blog comment on Time Cost Quality Triangle - The BIMuda Triangle.

Ive had some interesting discussions today regarding my BIMuda Triangle post. Instead of paranormal activity, there's parametricnormal activity. What else could explain the phenomena that occurs in the BIMuda Triangle where spending less money and time actually turns into higher quality.

So, in one of my conversations we were discussing Time-Cost-Quality from an architect's perspective. How could you not want to save time and money to get higher quality? What are you trying to accomplish with CAD? Is your goal to just create a roll of blueprints and stop there?

If Revit could actually be used as a tool to help you create higher quality construction documents, what's your excuse to not want to embrace it? Oh yeah, it's too much money to pay for software and training. How exactly do you explain that to your client who's stuck with a project 10% over budget from change orders?

As you spend less and less on software, qualified modelers and designers, how exactly are you going to decrease time and increase quality? The less you spend on software and salary, the worse the quality gets. Is that really the business model you expect to get you repeat business? What a contradiction in business approach from the contractors. Should we call them Contradiction Documents?

Enough of my rant, here are some thoughts from Trent I got today:

Trent, March 29, 2010 11:39 AM

I'm on the MEP end of things now, and realizing that what you have said is too true. Our Engineers look at Revit as another software to use much like CAD, they aren't looking at it as a new way of approach. For example, starting a project, everyone wants to start in CAD, then go to Revit, but then they are losing all the valuable information and time saved using Revit. Then other's say we will use CAD while there are a lot of changes going on, then when the plans get solidified by the Architect, we will create in Revit. I laugh and scoff, because Revit handles these constant changes much better than CAD, and thus we could save many man hours by using Revit.

Although I have found that the biggest time loss in Revit is the initial setup, getting everything to look like you want, getting your symbols and objects to display properly, and setting up an office standard. I wasn't around for the switch to CAD (well, I wasn't in this industry then...) but I can assume there was a lot of time lost for similar reasons. So when we have people complaining about the time it takes, we need to remind them that CAD looks the way it does because it has been refined across some 12 years or so of trial and error. For most of us, this is probably our 2nd or 3rd year (for the "experienced") and more likely our 1st year. So as this blog says, take the time to re-evaluate how we do things, get Revit to work for you and your Engineers.

Revit3D.com - BIMBoom Revitlution: Time Cost Quality Triangle - The BIMuda Triangle.


Josh Moore March 30, 2010 at 12:44 AM  

I agree with this post and the above comment wholeheartedly. I see the same workflow related problems. People don't want to change, and many, believe it or not, are still ignorant to what Revit actually is and does. There are going to be many architects/engineers who will be against change, even when it is clear this is the better way (dare I say the "only" way?!!)

I think it will take time, because we are not only changing the program, but also the entire methodology of designing and issuing documents for consruction. We are turning the A/E/C industry upside down, which is welcomed in my book, but difficult for many.

Gregory, if you are reading this, great talking to you the other day...would love for you to make a post sending your readers my way to discuss the Revit v. Sketchup workflow...

  © Blogger template ProBlogger Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP  

[Valid Atom 1.0]