Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

20151112 CITA BIM Gathering Keynote Dublin

My keynote presentation at the 2015 Cita BIM Gathering in Dublin.

  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

20151112 CITA BIM Gathering Keynote Dublin

  1. 1. COLLABORATIVE ENGINEERING WITH IFC Léon van Berlo
  2. 2. LÉON VAN BERLO I do BIM stuff Carpenter  Architectural Engineer  “Researcher” H-index: 9 @berlotti - leon.vanberlo@tno.nl Open source BIM collective; BIMserver.org; CloudBIM; BIM Quickscan®; BIM compass; BIM Execution plan generator; BIM Quality Blocks; geoBIM.org; bullshitbim.com; National BIM Guidelines NL; Board member Stumico
  3. 3. NETHERLANDS ORGANISATION FOR APPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH TNO Helmond Eindhoven Rijswijk Delft Leiden The Hague Zeist Utrecht Groningen Soesterberg
  4. 4. INTERNATIONAL OFFICES / AGENCIES Offices Agencies
  5. 5. THE POWER OF TNO FROM IDEA TO INNOVATION
  6. 6. TNO IN NUMBERS Number of employees (effective average) Consolidated turnover 3.276 € 564 million
  7. 7. INDEPENDENT OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE ORGANISATION READ: “I HAVE NOTHING TO SELL”
  8. 8. NERVOUS
  9. 9. NERVOUS
  10. 10. ?
  11. 11. HISTORY BIM track record: First reference of ‘BIM’ in publication (1992) BIM Handbook in 1988 (!) Worked on IFC since beginning Involved on several levels at BuildingSMART Developed multiple (data)standards and (process)tools We know what doesn’t work. And why. We know what does work. And how.
  12. 12. HOW ABOUT YOU? Can you predict the future? Are you ready for controversial statements? Can you handle sarcasm? How about IFC?
  13. 13. START WITH A BIT OF HISTORY
  14. 14. 1998 (?) “SHARED DATA MODEL” shared data model
  15. 15. COMMON MISCONCEPTION: Shared data model is NOT equal to: Shared data(base) Shared BIM model instance Shared data model comes from the need to share/distribute data in a standardized way…. “let’s agree this is a door” shared data model == creating agreements (interoperability) IFC = an agreement about a lot of objects and properties
  16. 16. BIM DATA FLOW THROUGH STANDARDS: REDUCING INTERFACES
  17. 17. YES, I’VE SEEN THE PICTURES…
  18. 18. SEEMS LOGIC, BRINGS STRUCTURE IT’S ALMOST LIKE A RELIGION
  19. 19. 2008: BIMSERVER.ORG
  20. 20. 2009: 1ST RELEASE
  21. 21. 2010/11: NATIONAL BIMSERVER PILOT
  22. 22. 2012: REPORT
  23. 23. THE PILOT / RESEARCH Research: compare ‘homogeneous’ software with ‘own choice’ software Compare Top Down enforcing software tools with Bottom up free choice of tools
  24. 24. “THERE IS NO CENTRAL MODEL” (IN A COLLABORATION PROJECT)
  25. 25. DENMARK 2006:
  26. 26. DENMARK 2008:
  27. 27. NL 2012:
  28. 28. NO ROUNDTRIP (import/export in a chain of tools)
  29. 29. OBSERVATIONS: “There is no loss of data using IFC”… It is all in the native software. The question is what data you want to share (using IFC). What data do you need to do your job? Then we look if that is in IFC (and in your tool after import) Not a single IFC ‘loss of data’-issue occurred during the experiments. In a homogeneous software environment, users felt that all team members should have equal BIM software modeling expertise. When using the concept of reference models, not all project team members collaborating in a project need to have the same level of BIM expertise.
  30. 30. AND TO CLOSE UP…. The use of a reference model concept with IFC can lower the needed BIM competences for a project partner to be able to collaborate in a way that is sufficiently effective for the entire project team. All respondents in this experiment were strongly convinced that choosing project partners based on their competence of a specific software tool, prior to their engineering competence, is never preferred
  31. 31. FOUND CONCLUSION: WORKING (LIVE) IN A ‘CENTRAL’ MODELSERVER HAS MORE DOWNSIDES THAN ADVANTAGES. (OWNERSHIP OF OBJECTS, LEGAL ASPECTS, BIM MANAGER, CHANGE REQUESTS, ETC...)
  32. 32. “CENTRALIZING COLLABORATION STIMULATES WRONG BEHAVIOUR”
  33. 33. THE REAL QUESTIONS ARE: WHAT DO I NEED TO DO MY JOB? WHAT DO OTHERS NEED FROM ME TO DO THEIRS?
  34. 34. EVERYONE BRINGS THEIR CRAFTSMANSHIP AND EXPERTISE TO ACTUALLY COLLABORATE
  35. 35. HOW ABOUT ALL THESE “CLOUD BIM” PLATFORMS?
  36. 36. “Open API” “Platform” “Extendable”
  37. 37. ISLAND!
  38. 38. Listoffeaturesontheleft Comparison of ‘islands’
  39. 39. THE SITUATION “integration is nót about sitting on the same island” You can only use the features of your island No crossing over to the other island for that one cool feature they have! No integration of features between islands! Won’t go into detail now. Please visit bimbots.org
  40. 40. THE BUSINESS Automating tasks Individual applications; not dependence on a ‘platform’ Can be closed source / ask money for specific features Can be more than one per topic (competition) Is centralized for the bot provider (big data analyses) This: Creates a new market for niche appliations (you don’t have to choose an island anymore; combine features) Takes advantage of the fragmented nature of the industry Open approach instead of getting everyone on one island
  41. 41. DATA DRIVEN INDUSTRY Many many (!) more data From many different sources Even ‘shared data model’ will be impossible in the near future IFC is ‘one’ of the many dataformats
  42. 42. AMSTERDAM ARENA “Data driven operations” “Living BIM” Integrating information about traffic information, weather reports, seating availability, parking gate, beer taps, heating and cooling, automatic doors, fire system, temperature, waiting lines, video cameras (!), etc... “Fully” up and running in 2018
  43. 43. ANOTHER EXAMPLE: PROCESS MINING
  44. 44. ELASSTIC PROJECT
  45. 45. THE BUSINESS Automating tasks Individual applications; not dependence on a ‘platform’ Can be closed source / ask money for specific features Can be more than one per topic (competition) Is centralized for the bot provider (big data analyses) This: Creates a new market for niche appliations (you don’t have to choose an island anymore; combine features) Takes advantage of the fragmented nature of the industry Open approach instead of getting everyone on one island
  46. 46. HOW ABOUT BIMSERVER?
  47. 47. BIMSERVER TODAY:
  48. 48. AND MANY MANY OTHER EXAMPLES (SEE THEM AT OPENSOURCEBIM.ORG
  49. 49. BACK TO COLLABORATION…..
  50. 50. STATE OF BIM COLLABORATION IN 2015 Working with ‘Reference model concept’ is the norm Working with IFC is like sliced bread IFC usage and understanding is on high level and rapidly growing Making a BIM is not the goal – redundant data are welcome Collaboration is seen as something else than just sharing data!
  51. 51. model coordinate conclude communicate
  52. 52. model coordinate conclude communicate
  53. 53. EXAMPLE: SEVERAL MODELING TOOLS Several modelling tools used All sharing parts of the model as IFC Quality checks Filtering objects to create a new view For good coordination you still need to know who created what object So even in a single database you still have separate models….
  54. 54. EXAMPLE: CONTRACTOR USING SUPPLIER MODELS Architectural and Construction model as a base Suppliers deliver IFC models to replace original model parts
  55. 55. EXAMPLE: COMPARE DESIGN / ENGINEERING Contractor and lime stone supplier Comparing models
  56. 56. EXAMPLE: 3 IFC EXPORTS FROM 1 MODEL Because that is what collaboration is about!
  57. 57. IFC Coordination view IFC 2nd order space boundaries IFC explicit geometry
  58. 58. WHO’S TAKING NOTES?
  59. 59. NATIONAL BIM GUIDELINES Written by the sector (“this is how we do it, and it works”) Higher quality than most (any) mandates Only extensively proven content (no experiments or innovations – “this works”) Series of topics Coming from the industry itself All using same terminology All aligned with each other
  60. 60. 2015 PUBLICATION (UPDATE)
  61. 61. RESULTS Many unnecessary myths around about IFC (proven to work) Top down policy makers are not on the same track Standardized ‘BIM Execution plan’ is not possible Educate top down policy thinkers / Look at current practice! Increase priority on BIM education (myths)
  62. 62. BIM EXECUTION PLANS DO NOT WORK Top down approach!
  63. 63. THE REAL QUESTIONS ARE: WHAT DO I NEED TO DO MY JOB ON THÍS PROJECT? WHAT DO OTHERS NEED FROM ME TO DO THEIRS? Bottom up thinking
  64. 64. 2014: BIM EXECUTION PLAN GENERATOR
  65. 65. BIM EXECUTION PLAN GENERATOR Ask others about their preferred way of working What data do you need to do your job? How do you want it? What tools do you use? And what data structures? We developed the BIM Quickscan® to help organisations in their BIM journey: www.bimquickscan.nl – currently rebranded to www.bimcompass.com Also in development: www.bimqualityblocks.com to help client defining their BIM norm / employers information requirements https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMM5MttMNV0
  66. 66. BIM EXECUTION PLAN GENERATOR Ask others about their preferred way of working What data do you need to do your job? How do you want it? What tools do you use? And what data structures? Protocol generator merges the answers to a concept protocol. Team discusses the issues and transforms it to final protocol. “Protocol generator is a team building machine”
  67. 67. COLLABORATION: FORGET ABOUT THE BLACK BOX!
  68. 68. BEWARE OF QUEST FOR STRUCTURE AND STANDARDISATION
  69. 69. HOW ABOUT IRELAND? TOP DOWN DRIVEN, OR BOTTOM UP? TALKING ABOUT IT, OR DOING IT?
  70. 70. “green representing the Gaelic tradition of Ireland, orange representing the followers of William of Orange in Ireland, and white representing the aspiration for peace between them”
  71. 71. PDF documents? Today’s BIM profits and gains
  72. 72. FLIP THE ICEBERG! YOUR DISCUSSIONS DEFINE WHAT IS ON TOP OF THE ICEBERG!
  73. 73. ASK YOURSELF: HOW CAN WE GET THE SILENT MAJORITY OF HIGH LEVEL BIM DATA USERS TO LEAD THE WAY?
  74. 74. THANK YOU FOR THINKING FOR YOURSELF
  75. 75. LEON.VANBERLO@TNO.NL

×