15 minute read
BIM workflows
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.
When 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 digitised 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
IMAGE COURTESY OF PAUL JEFFRIES, RAMBOLL, SITESOLVE
software is now becoming a lot more this area is Frank Gehry. Before using Technologies employees involved. common. In addition to Gensler Blox, CAD, Gehry had trouble winning proj- In the UK in the 1980s, YRM and Bryden Wood has launched PRiSM for ects because contractors could never Richard Rogers were early into 3D modmodular development, Lendlease has fully understand his buildings from the elling. They used products like Sonata developed Podium, a ‘property lifecycle drawings and so would quote extremely and RUCAPS (Really Universal platform’ for planning, financial, perfor- high prices. Computer Aided Production System) mance management of buildings. He moved to deploying Dassault and were coding to complete designs. Similarly, Space Architects has developed Systèmes Catia in-house, an advanced Similarly, ARUPs, which eventually set TwinView for Digital Twin management CAD tool traditionally used by automo- up Oasys (oasys-software.com) specifiand Ramboll has SiteSolve, a computa- tive and aerospace firms, then built a cally to develop applications for internal tional design tool for building analysis at team of experts who digitised all of his and external markets. the early-stage of the In 1998 Foster + decision making process that is capable of iterative massing. On top of all this we ‘‘ Many do not want to be beholden to software firms which are attempting to own the process and Partners set up a Special Modelling Group (SMG) under Hugh Whitehead, also have consultants increase prices. As being both the client and the which similarly took on and resellers developing consumer of the software development, who better to the hard problems of and selling tools which they have created in the derive the feature set than the customer? geometry definition and created bespoke past for clients to solve specific problems. ’’ tools for the designers to experiment and play Proving Ground, Thorton Tomasetti, paper models and eventually got their with complex geometry. Oasys (Arup) to name but a few. own brand (Gehry Technologies - under It still exists to this day and is heavily Jim Glyph). into R&D for project-driven development Bespoke origins By sending 3D models to his contrac- and creates in-house tools. While most of Of course, in-house development is tors, quotes came down and his buildings the developments remain in-house nothing new. Having an expert technical became less financially onerous and secrets, some do get an occasional airing, team to help bring impossible architec- risky to build. Eventually Gehry such as Sandbox I/O, a real-time concepture to reality has been done by a select Technologies was sold to Trimble and to tual design evaluation tool, written on number of firms. this day many instances where Catia can top of Unity (see this AEC Magazine arti-
Probably the most famous architect in be found in AEC, have ex- Gehry cle to learn more tinyurl.com/AEC-unity).
Lego vs geometry definition
to stay within the BIM application for the for a dedicated full-time team. The examples of Fosters and Gehry could whole workflow, this is not an ideal envi- “Primarily we are using SiteSolve as an easily be seen as the exceptions to the ronment to run CPU-heavy design evalu- internal facing tool, but we are also sellrule vs the workflows and toolsets which ation tools, such as analysis or BIM coor- ing it externally as well to our client base. most design firms use. The need for com- dination, where federated data needs to We’re working out what best fits each cliputational tools designed by aerospace be collated and shared to resolve issues. ent. Some clients are knowledgeable engineers was certainly driven by the enough to just take the software and run need to express the extreme geometric Gameification it themselves, while others want us to use vocabulary for which these signature One of the biggest changes to the applica- the software and steer it for them. architecture firms are famous. tion development landscape has been the “We’ve been using Unity for the visual-
However, this isn’t the end of the story, arrival of the game engine tools, Unreal isation aspects of it. The core itself is our as both practices reach out to work with and Unity. These mature, extensible own kind of custom C# engine which is contractors who are digitally fabricating engines are optimised for 3D perfor- doing all the calculations. We have a link building components, connecting their mance and provide firms with powerful into Grasshopper and Rhino.” designs with fabrication machines. This development platforms. Traditionally, internally developed is the future of our AEC world and digi- Data flows between BIM tools and tools lack the finesse of a proper interface tal fabrication will liberate us from the these game engines have vastly improved and documentation. This can be fine for risks of non-rectilinear forms. in the last few years and are now proving internal use, where the developers are on
Today’s BIM tools call to assist anyone mainly tend to be based on components; the Lego approach to modelling and the conven‘‘ In the last few years, we’ve noticed an increasing number of AEC firms develop ambitious in-house who runs into trouble. However, selling software commercially requires a whole new tional approach to applications, workflow connectors, AI, simulation level of quality assurbuilding. The software is also focused on the conventional method of collaboration - 2D and specific tools for project teams ’’ ance, documentation, training and interface. For SiteSolve Jeffries explained, “Interface drawings. popular for geometry-based design wise, we’ve gone further than we would
While useful in some circumstances, development. Unreal, for instance, is have ever gone if we weren’t going to sell and targeted for documentation, they are capable of displaying an entire city in it. However, I think we’ve also found that not ideal for design exploration, especial- real time and the developer of the engine, actually doing UI and documentation is ly conceptual. This appears to be a key Epic Games, has clients such as HOK, quite important from an internal uptake area where we are seeing a lot of in-house KPF, Foster + Partners, and ZHD all point of view. You save time on training, development from AEC firms trying to developing design and collaboration if you’d just built a better interface in the fill their digital voids. tools on top. Rumour has it that ZHD is first place.”
The other issue with BIM software is developing a configuration tool for modthat as designs progress, the size of the ular buildings. Billable hours models increases, and the performance of In my discussions on coding with IT the system is impacted. While software Ramboll directors in AEC firms, the one term that vendors have typically wanted customers Paul Jeffries is computational design lead kept popping up like a bad penny was at Ramboll and is responsible for the ‘billable hours’. SiteSolve development. I asked him how Only a handful of firms have dedicated Foster + Partners’ Ramboll came to develop its own programming resources, or an architect Unity-based conceptual design environment, generative conceptual tool. He replied, or engineer dedicated to developing software. The key problem was the mindset Sandbox I/O “A few years of managers, which strictly adhered to ago, Ramboll the concept of allocating project billable set up hours to employees. around this Many firms could not see through this process called traditional resource allocation methodthe ‘Innovation ology when it came to hiring programAccelerator’, for mers to develop its own tools. In truth, different teams firms that cannot get past that old way of across Ramboll to thinking are not really aware of how pitch for funding, to important digital workflows have build a business case to become, or how new entrepreneurial get funding. Three differ- business models and revenue streams ent projects came out of can be associated to management and that, one of those was use of the data they create. SiteSolve. We had a budget to Talking with Nate Miller, CEO of self-develop the application Proving Ground, he commented, “It’s and it gave us enough resource interesting to think about an architecture
firm, trying to carve out that budget and time to develop their own solutions. Looking for billable hours amidst the kind of significant investment that would go into building a platform, or any kind of script that works reliably, is significant.
“The business model of architecture and engineers, the construction industry is, in some ways, incompatible with the business model of running a software company. And maybe there is a clue in there, that in terms of if an architecture company wants to get into this space, does it need to change how it’s going to do business?
“When you get into the cycle of project work, you’re talking about billable hours and the need to get the job out the door, to go onto the next job. Buildings are treated as one off service-oriented outputs but when you’re developing a piece of software, it’s all about how you reinvest into that product. You make it once and then figure out a way to make money, sell licences or, if internal, maybe charge it back to a project.”
Newcastle’s own BIM supremo, Rob Charlton of Space Group, is most certainly a man who can see opportunities and is willing to change business models.
While predominantly an architecture firm, Charlton clearly understood the potential for BIM and software development, diversifying Space Architecture into BIM component development (bimstore), BIM Technologies (consulting) and more recently TwinView (tinyurl.com/AEC-twinview).
This latter venture is a really smart play for those architects that want to provide Digital Twins to their clients. As an architecture firm, Charlton recognised the value of the BIM data to his clients, the ongoing lifecycle of that and the fact there was downstream income.
TwinView was developed to easily repurpose that data and hand it on as a post design service. It is still possible to be an architecture firm, while at the same time being a software developer and create tools that benefit your own business as well as productising and commercially marketing those tools to others.
Gensler uses Blox to develop massing designs based on programmatic designations at the master plan scale Conclusion
Futures
I have previously stated, many times, that the AEC industry is currently at the end of one generation of BIM tools and awaiting the next. Listening to the software developers, it’s all going to be on the cloud.
It’s worth highlighting Autodesk’s approach to development with its Forge platform. Historically if you wanted to build an application, a developer would either have to write a plug-in for the desktop application, or license a version (called OEM) to build on top of, to sell a complete turnkey application. Over the last five years, Autodesk has been creating cloud components of all its core functionality. This means that a developer could ‘call’ Autodesk’s DWG engine, 3D viewing tool, cost management or document management engine on the cloud and wire them into their own applications. Autodesk doesn’t just see developers using Forge but also its customers to develop their own cloud-based solutions by mixing and matching applications with Forge functionality to make project desktops or bespoke solutions. The idea of what an ‘application’ is capable of, is going to get a lot more fluid.
There is undoubtedly a reassessment going on inside of mature AEC firms in their approach to digital tools. Those that want to fully digitise their processes from conceptual to life-cycle and can’t find offthe-shelf solutions, are undaunted at developing them themselves.
The barrier to entry in software development in the AEC space has been dramatically lowered, with the availability of low-cost, feature rich, platforms like SketchUp, Unreal, Unity, Blender, Forge, Rhino.Inside and Nvidia Omniverse. All built for speed and the ability to display
vast amounts of data.
This app could be using internal resources, external consultants, or making strategic investments in up-and-coming software developers. While predominantly for internal usage, some are exploring productisation and even selling. There’s even the possibility of teaming up with enterprise investment funds or venture capital to develop with a commercial mindset from the start.
The one thing worth pointing out, is that there is a lot of reinventing the wheel going on, especially in conceptual design. Blox and SiteSolve are all playing in the same area as Spacemaker. Al (Autodesk), Hypar, Digital Blue Foam etc.
Most firms face similar challenges. Those that are capable of developing inhouse solutions might not realise other firms have also done this. If the trend to embrace branding, marketing and productisation of internal developments continues, there may be greater clarity as to who has developed what. There would surely be a potential to swap and share tools and save a lot of duplicated effort.
My last thoughts on this, concern the attitudes of AEC firms to software developers. Many do not want to be beholden to software firms which are attempting to own the process and increase prices. As being both the client and the consumer of the software development, who better to derive the feature set than the customer?
SiteSolve from Ramboll, an algorithmic tool that can be used to dynamically model, manipulate and explore development sites
Custom tools from AEC firms
Gensler Blox
Blox develops massing designs based on programmatic designations at the master plan scale. It provides preliminary budget estimates for construction, parking, and other project elements. It checks the building envelope, allows infinite usage mixes, and can incorporate live data. This can all be compared against, or driven by, the client’s brief. It’s only available to Gensler’s own design team.
■ gensler.com Ramboll SiteSolve
SiteSolve is an algorithmic tool which can be used to dynamically model, manipulate and explore development sites, allowing project teams to collaborate, explore and visualise iterative design options.
The software is used internally at Ramboll and is also available for purchase.
■ site-solve.co.uk
Twinview
Developed by Space Group, Twinview is a cloud-based digital twin platform, for computer aided facilities management, with a dashboard for live sensors. It was developed by architects for both their own use and as a commercial product.
■ twinview.com Foster + Partners Sandbox I/O
Built on top of Unity, Foster + Partners developed a conceptual design environment, to model, explore, simulate and analyse designs against a range of environmental conditions on desktop, iPad and in VR (pictured left). Only available within Foster + Partners.
■ fosterandpartners.com
Bryden Wood PRiSM
Funded by the Mayor of London, Bryden Wood designed a modular construction analysis tool for developers. Based on various configurations and layouts, the Unity-based software provides property developers with a guide as to the best modular construction methods. It is free to download.
