3 ms·

My complaint about cad is the exact opposite. That those traditional techniques have too much influence on how people use cad and how cad software was designed

by 7952 4y ago

My complaint about cad is the exact opposite. That those traditional techniques have too much influence on how people use cad and how cad software was designed. People use low level abstractions that leave far too much to interpretation.

samwillis 4y ago
I would love to hear more of your thoughts on that. I could see that being the case with 2d focussed cad tools such as AutoCad, however “3d first” tools like Revit for architecture or SolidWorks for product design are so far removed form traditional drafting I don’t realy see any alignment.
- 7952 4y ago
  I work in an infrastructure field with lots of engineering disciplines doing separate design. Designs are typically exchanged in AutoCAD even when a 3d tool are used to make them. Or AutoCAD is used to do design work in 3D. BIM exists but is just another data silo. A lot of the large engineering companies will try and push their own BIM solution which adds one more silo that no one else uses. Everyone wants their own system and solution to be the single source of truth and that is a huge part of the problem. On a project of thousands of people there is never going to be a single source of truth. It's like expecting a globally distributed system to be in sync. Ultimately you have to chose between locking and eventual consistency and there is no other option. Having a single BIM system helps but is not a silver bullet. Because people will still get out of sync as other teams and tools are brought into play.
halffaday 4y ago
I agree. The purpose of plans is to transfer information about design intent for specific construction outcomes. Years ago, this was done by paper because there was not another efficient option. For the last few decades, this hasn’t been necessary, but we still produce paper products. Now roadway and earthwork folks tend to lean on digital models, but that’s after bidding and only for a handful of items. There’s “BIM” but nobody can actually tell you in concrete terms what that is. I don’t know what we should be doing to deliver construction projects efficiently, but I’m pretty sure it’s not this.
- kimburgess 4y ago
  To add to the agreement chain: completely concur that models > printed projections of these. Dropping to a paper based form will always result in information loss. The challenge is paper / pdf's are ubiquitous. Tools in the CAD space are built around vendor lock-in with non-trivial license costs. As a result there still needs to be a way to distribute that detail to all the people involved in delivery.

by 7952 4y ago

samwillis 4y ago

I would love to hear more of your thoughts on that. I could see that being the case with 2d focussed cad tools such as AutoCad, however “3d first” tools like Revit for architecture or SolidWorks for product design are so far removed form traditional drafting I don’t realy see any alignment.

7952 4y ago
I work in an infrastructure field with lots of engineering disciplines doing separate design. Designs are typically exchanged in AutoCAD even when a 3d tool are used to make them. Or AutoCAD is used to do design work in 3D. BIM exists but is just another data silo. A lot of the large engineering companies will try and push their own BIM solution which adds one more silo that no one else uses. Everyone wants their own system and solution to be the single source of truth and that is a huge part of the problem. On a project of thousands of people there is never going to be a single source of truth. It's like expecting a globally distributed system to be in sync. Ultimately you have to chose between locking and eventual consistency and there is no other option. Having a single BIM system helps but is not a silver bullet. Because people will still get out of sync as other teams and tools are brought into play.

halffaday 4y ago

I agree. The purpose of plans is to transfer information about design intent for specific construction outcomes. Years ago, this was done by paper because there was not another efficient option. For the last few decades, this hasn’t been necessary, but we still produce paper products. Now roadway and earthwork folks tend to lean on digital models, but that’s after bidding and only for a handful of items. There’s “BIM” but nobody can actually tell you in concrete terms what that is. I don’t know what we should be doing to deliver construction projects efficiently, but I’m pretty sure it’s not this.

kimburgess 4y ago
To add to the agreement chain: completely concur that models > printed projections of these. Dropping to a paper based form will always result in information loss. The challenge is paper / pdf's are ubiquitous. Tools in the CAD space are built around vendor lock-in with non-trivial license costs. As a result there still needs to be a way to distribute that detail to all the people involved in delivery.