BIM ThinkSpace

Episode 3: Focus on Information

"Architecture does not create buildings but creates information that creates buildings"

An elaboration on a quote by Robert Sheil, Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London [1]

BIModellers do not depict nor encode the full scope of industry knowledge even within individual sectors (Architecture, Engineering or Construction). To express the matter differently, we first need to decipher what is really meant by ‘information’ within Building Information Modelling:

 

This episode is available in other languages. For a list of all translated episodes, pleaser refer to http://www.bimthinkspace.com/translations.html. The original English version continues below:

 

There are five levels of ‘meaning’ that must be understood: Data, Information, Knowledge, Understanding and Wisdom. I will rely on Landauer [2] to define the first 4 levels yet risk providing my own definition for the last term:

Data is/are the basic observations and collectibles
Data is what you can see and collect

Information represents connected data whether to other data or to a context
Information is what you can see and say (collect then express)

Knowledge sets a goal for the information. Knowledge is the expression of regularity
Knowledge is what you see, say and able to do

Understanding is the transmission and explanations of a phenomenon within a context
Understanding is what you can see, say, do and able to teach

Wisdom is the action based on understanding phenomena across heterogeneous domains
Wisdom is seeing, saying, doing and teaching across disciplines and contexts.

Building Information Modelling deals with Data and Information only although some vendors would like to promote BIModellers as Knowledge-Based. As per the definitions above and if we assume Goals to be synonymous to encoded Rules, BIModels can include Knowledge-Based Models and Models based on Systems Thinking. In any case, discussion of these issues is well and truly beyond the scope of this article.

Figure 3.1: The information realm of BIM

To be continued..the next Episode will discus BIM vs. Partial BIM

References:

[1] Sheil, R. (2004) Design Through Making, In Fabrication: Examining the Digital Practice of Achitecture, Cambridge, Ontario, pp.17

[2] Landauer, C. (1998) Data, information, knowledge, understanding: computing up the meaning hierarchy, In Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1998. 1998 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 2255-2260 vol.3

Episode 2: Focus on Modelling

 

Not all models or modellers qualify as BIM.  Although there are neither clear definitions nor umbrella agreements of what constitutes a Building Information Modeller, researchers and software developers alike allude to a lowest common denominator.

 

This episode is available in other languages. For a list of all translated episodes, pleaser refer to http://www.bimthinkspace.com/translations.html. The original English version continues below:

 

This non-declared denominator is a set of technological and procedural attributes that BIModels (Building Information Models) need to have:

• Must be Three Dimensional,
• built from Objects (solid modelling - object oriented technology),
• have encoded and embedded [1] discipline-specific information (more than a mere database),
• have interwoven relationships & hierarchies between their objects (rules and/or constraints: similar to a relationship between a wall and a door where a door creates an opening in a wall),
• and describes a Building of some sort.

 

Figure 2.1: Common Denominator for a BIModel (updated image, 2015)

Again, the above attributes are the inclusive definitions of a BIModel. Needless to say, each proprietary and non-proprietary BIM package adds its own qualifications to the attribute pool in an attempt to squeeze its conceptual and commercial competitors out of the BIM acronym itself. Whether a package is interoperable, fully parametric or allows digital fabrication output has nothing to do with the inclusive set but are additional (and highly welcome) attributes. Exclusive definitions (those that exclude others) are quite simple: Surface Modellers (like SketchUp® for example), Entity-Based Modellers (like 3D AutoCAD®) and Geometric Modellers (like Autodesk® VIZ) do not qualify as a BIModellers. The exclusion is also passed onto 3D object-based platforms that are outside the Architectural Engineering and Construction domain (like SolidWorks®, Solid Edge® and Inventor®).

 

Figure 2.2: Non-BIM Modellers (updated image, June 2015)

To be continued; next Episode will focus on Information within Building Information Modelling

References:

[1] Blackler, F. (1995) Knowledge, Knowledge Work and Organizations: An Overview and Interpretation, Organization Studies, 16, 6, 1021-1046.

Episode 1: Introduction

The BIM Episodes
Exploring the boundaries of Building Information Modelling

We all may have read various definitions of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and most do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the evolving term. This article is no different; it is yet another attempt to define and understand the ever changing boundaries of the BIM concept as well as the ever expanding digital landscape of Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry. What I hope to achieve in these blog episodes (posts) is some coverage of BIM’s conceptual and practical bases. I have already pre-written a few and will be posting them consecutively.