What are the principal advantages of using a single building information model of the existing conditions as the foundation for modeling proposed additions or renovations?
Using an existing model as the foundation for modeling proposed additions or renovations allows for a more cohesive design that can tell a wholistic story of how the existing building and the proposed design will interface with one another. Combining the models helps stakeholders fully understand and visualize what will need to be removed, what will need to be added, how those additions need to occur, and what will go where. Furthermore, using existing models eliminates the need to build something from scratch. Being able to modify existing models and use phasing properties makes modeling a lot faster and a lot more efficient.
Creating a separate model for a proposed addition or renovation can be time consuming because there is a need to start from scratch (for example, if there are certain building elements that need to be demolished or renovated so that the new design can integrate well with the existing building). Working on two separate models can also cause inefficiencies in workflow, as it can be a hassle to have to reference two separate model files. This can become annoying if these models are complicated and contain large amounts of information that must be considered for design.
What are the principal advantages of using a single building information model of the existing conditions as the foundation for modeling several proposed design alternatives for a portion of the building?
- Why not create a separate model for each of the design alternatives?
Using a single model as the foundation for modeling several proposed design alternatives is advantageous because
The principal advantages of using a singular model to model several proposed design alternatives follows the same logic as creating one model for separate phases does. If you are a client for a project, there are so many decisions to be made that by having all of the alternatives for various designs in one place makes the process of switching back and forth very easy for the engineers and architects involved. Most of the design alternatives end up being decided based on budget and relative cost, so by having all the alternatives in one model, the cost estimate comparison is simplified. This type of comparison could also be beneficial if you were designing a complex or building that had repetitions of the same type of wall, floor, or building element, etc. By having all the alternatives in one place almost serves as a means to parametrically flex or alter one or more of the project parameters. For example, let’s say one unit of a condo complex has brick walls but the owner of the lot wants to see stone walls instead - it is very easy to view all the alternatives and even select one option for one unit and another for a different unit to compare.