The screw detail

I have often read on BIM dedicated papers a theory that risks becoming dogmatic.

This theory states that 2D detail drawings will not disappear, since 3D detailing to the screw level does not make sense.

I think there are two fundamental reasons behind this statement.

First, much ignorance over computer evolution; Secondly, a more or less covert aim to underrate the Virtual Building concept.

As for ignorance:

Quite recently (3 or 4 years ago) it was common knowledge that digital photography (and movies) would never replace film, simply because computers and cameras would never be able to deal with the huge amount of bytes involved in the recording and editing of high resolution images.

As we all know now, this presumption was completely wrong.

Computer and cameras evolved, acquiring enormous storage capacity, multiplying processing velocities. New software and compression codes allow us to photograph, film, edit and visualize on 'out of the shelf' digital equipment, with as high or higher quality than former analogical one.

There are still digital detractors, but they are a minory and condemned to extinction.

Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that, with the hardware/software evolution, namely processing, transmission and storage speed and capacity, soon BIM software will be able to include, in it's virtual model's, 3D details to the screw.

As for 2D agenda:

This intent is not new. For more than 20 years there has been on the market 'BIMlike' software, first on the Mac platform and later on Windows.

But only recently has the AEC industry adopted the BIM acronym, which was invented by the biggest CAD manufacturer, who, till 6 years ago, had no virtual building dedicated software.

I find this motive clear and simple: Inasmuch as a BIM user does the work of 3 CAD users, only on account of drawing automation, it is much more profitable to sell 2D CAD software than BIM, especially if they cost the same.

Therefore, although it is plainly worse for the user (architects, engineers, drafters, builders and building element manufacturers) to use 2D CAD, the truth is that the mentioned 2D CAD manufacturer keeps on making loads of money selling something that is little more than a digital drawing board.

Thus, be it by ignorance or greed, I think 2D detail advocates are plain wrong.

Soon we will have libraries of objects, developed by building element manufacturers, that will go to the screw detail.

Which is, after all, from what I learned in school, the right way to design architecture.

No comments: