The Future of BIM

Over the next five years, as technology improves and BIM becomes more prevalent in the building design and construction industry, I think BIM will become like the AutoCAD that we see today.  Although AutoCAD is not difficult to master once you know the basics and shortcuts, it is not like Microsoft Office where anyone can be a proficient user.  Note: as I do not know anything about BIM, my speculations about the future of its tools are based off my assumptions of its current toolbox.  I believe that AutoDesk will make the BIM interface more similar to AutoCAD.  In AutoCAD, when drawing a building frame with joists, minimal mouse movement is required; type “l” for line, move the mouse slightly to the right, type in the length of the line, click “enter”, repeat for all directions of the basic frame.  A line can be highlighted and repeated for joists or offset for a column.  I could see this becoming the norm for BIM with the ability to construct a basic "outline" of the structure and then change the "basic" objects in the outline to reflect the different sized pipes, columns, etc.  In this way, a whole building can easily be constructed from a couple of mouse movements.

I also think that BIM will have its own degree much like how people can go to school to become a CAD drafter.  Similarly, “CAD drafters” may also become just “drafters” who are proficient at both CAD and BIM.  Today, potential drafters can enroll at a technical college or community where they learn all the skills required to become an advanced user of the latest versions of AutoCAD.  Upon graduation, these drafters are highly sought after by architecture, engineering, and construction firms who appreciate that they do not need extensive, or any, training to perform their job.  However, with the introduction of BIM into the workplace, either CAD drafters are expected to learn the new technology, entry-level engineers – who specify that they know the technology – are recruited to draft, or companies have to reach outside the company to hire another firm to do their BIM work for them.  As it is expensive to hire an outside firm or use your own engineer to perform CAD and BIM work, I think that people who are expert in both will become more valuable in the short-term, until BIM and CAD proficiency are an expectation of new hires.

I completely agree with Wang Chunyi about the evolution that BIM needs to experience in order to maintain its command over the AEC world.  As I mentioned above and Chunyi mentioned in his post, the program needs to become more user-friendly.  There are programs out there that engineers use that are not user-friendly and therefore are not the dominant programs used by its respective field (e.g. there is a software program that I used when working for a geotechnical engineering group and my co-workers made me have the manual next to me while utilizing it; they then explained that the program, while useful and accurate, was not consistently used by other geotechnical firms).  Secondly, communication between programs is key.  This was an issue that our group discussed in last week's blogs as a major detractor against BIM and that Chunyi again brought back up.  If a program is not easily compatible with other programs (like Adobe or Microsoft Office), firms will be hesitant to make it a priority.  Lastly, Chunyi's discussion on life-cycle analysis is, I believe, the most crucial aspect of the future of BIM.  As firms are requiring, and being required, to construct green buildings, LCA will be a vital role of BIM.  A true LCA will incorporate materials' LCA, energy usage, water usage, and all other analyses that USGBC includes during their assessment of a green building.  I think that a superior analysis tool in BIM could help lead the way to designing and constructing greener buildings.  However, if BIM does not step up to incorporating LCA into their program, another program will come along that can do everything BIM can do plus everything that BIM cannot do.