Cover story
Bespoke BIM workflows With the increasing digitisation of the AEC design process, more firms are either developing their own code or paying for the creation of custom tools to refine their projects through computation. Martyn Day explores the planet of the apps.
W
hen we first moved from drawing boards to desktop PC’s running CAD software, it wasn’t long before the creation of lines, circles and arcs failed to give us additional productivity benefits. The beauty of being digitised in a computer meant that automation and higher levels of industry knowledge could be captured and used in vertical applications. Software developers added support for programming languages (e.g. Autodesk with LISP) and created Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) for professional developers to build expert systems on top of their drawing tools. This eventually led to industry-specific software firms, creating dedicated vertical applications, designed for very specific professions - architecture, structural, civil, CAFM etc. Advanced users utilised the programming extensions to automate repetitive tasks and integrate with external programs such as spreadsheets. Some firms completely tailored their CAD systems to their usage. The ability to adapt and augment has been a core part of our design tools for some time. The move over the last 20 years to 3D modelling / BIM tools has further digi12
January / February 2021
p12_13_14_15_16_AEC_JANFEB21_Coverstory.indd 12
tised the design process, pushing beyond pure symbology and ‘dumb’ drawings, capturing 3D geometry and detailed building information. These systems, namely ArchiCAD, Revit, Vectorworks, BricsCAD BIM etc. still include programming languages for end-user extensibility as well as APIs, spawning a range of modern third-party developers, like Enscape, Testfit, Strucsoft etc. keen to add additional functionality. For end users, computational design tools like Bentley Systems GenerativeComponents, McNeel Rhino Grasshopper and Autodesk Dynamo have provided deeper levels of automation, handling geometric definition complexity. The net result of this has been a generation of designers acquiring scripting and programming knowledge, together with a realisation that design requires data flow through multiple software packages. With this current incarnation of AEC design tools and user skill sets, something is different. In the last few years, I’ve noticed an increasing number of AEC firms develop ambitious in-house applications, workflow connectors, AI, simulation and specific tools for project teams. While investing in creating in-house tools might not be a new thing, the fact that many of the firms are branding and
marketing their in-house code as a potential differentiator, indicates an increased level of programming competence. The true scale of this trend hit me in the face when Gensler sent a press release last summer about ‘Blox’, an algorithm-powered design visualisation and computational tool. It came with its own logo and branding and slick interface. It looked like something you could buy from a reseller and may well be a tool that many architects would like. However, it was a proprietary technology that was designed for its inhouse teams, as part of the firm’s inFORM suite of tools to boost internal design capability. This was a new level of workflow productisation for Gensler, which was clearly making a statement to the market. AEC firms don’t just design and construct buildings; they also write their own code. Gensler has invested in technology to join up its digital thread, starting from the client brief to concept, all the way through to completion. The firm has its own in-house programming resources, together with strategic investments in small application developers to augment its own product stack. The trend for AEC firms to develop www.AECmag.com
27/01/2021 12:49
