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?
The principal advantages of using a single building information model to detail proposed additions or renovations are as follows: (1) self-consistency, (2) auto-generated demolition plans, and (3) well thought out integration.
First and foremost, compiling all of the information into a single building model forces self-consistency. Since there is only one “master version” of the project, no one will be working off of an old set of drawings. This principal also holds within the project itself, where any changes to one view in one phase will propagate throughout the project.
In addition to self-consistency, using a single building model auto-generates demolition plans. Instead of manually marking all of the needed changes, the phase feature allows all of that information to be stored in a single model—making it simple to create demolition plans later.
Finally, using a single building model forces architects and engineers to be more cognizant about building integration. When creating a building model from scratch, it is easy to blur the line between the two building phases by creating walls/ roofs/ floors/ etc. that flow continuously between the two. While this is sometimes okay, it creates a cognitive dissonance in which the designer doesn’t think about how the two structures will be practically joined.
- Why not create a separate model for the new proposed design?
The reasons not to create a separate model stem directly from those cited above (i.e. it’s not necessarily self-consistent; there are no auto-generated demolition plans; there is not a need to think deeply about building integration).
What sort of complexities are introduced when you construct a building complex in phases?
- What happens at the interfaces between the buildings as the phases advance?
- How can you plan and prepare for these complexities as your create your initial building model?
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?
In your project, which features of the proposed design did you choose to model as design alternatives?
- Why did you choose these building features? And what were the biggest challenges in modeling them as the design alternatives?
I chose to model the building exterior as a design alternative. The primary model showcased an entirely glass exterior starting on the second floor. I made this choice due to the section of the brief that states, “a design that clearly reflects their forward-thinking vision and the cutting-edge work that their engineering students are doing.” Glass exteriors are typically associated with modern architecture and inspire a sense of awe from spectators. As such, I thought this was a great choice for this design.
However, glass exteriors come with significant structural limitations. Plus, some stakeholders may be against a design that is such a radical departure from preexisting buildings. As such, my proposed design alternative replaced the glass exterior with a stone veneer one.
I did not experience any significant challenges implementing this design alternative, but it was a bit time consuming to learn the design alternative workflow and implementation.