It was very interesting to hear how technologies deployed in the construction business can
enable cost savings for
contractors and their clients. Adoption of new technologies in the building industry have traditionally been associated with high costs, often making use or
implementation out of reach for customers and thus for design and
building professionals. For example, many innovative sustainable building technologies have lagged in market adoption as a result of the high end-user costs. In the case of sustainable building technologies, it is often difficult to get customers to pay higher upfront costs for technologies and building systems that promise costs savings down the line (
ie. lower
energy bills for use of photovoltaic panels).
In terms of advanced building information modelling technologies, as discussed by
Orndorff, these systems come at a very high cost to businesses. As well, they lack support across the building industry supply or value chain. In the case of the software used for the Disney Concert Hall, that
Orndorff referenced, the architecture firm used
Catia, a modelling software developed for and used by the the
aeronautics industry. Therefore, at the time there is little familiarity within the building industry in using such software. Contractors, subcontractors, engineers, all had to become familiar with learning how to read such models. The costs of purchasing the software and educating builders, engineers and designers are high. Furthermore, these challenge
industry standards of using
AutoCad and prints of 2-d drawings. Many contractors and subcontractors do not know how to read 3-d models and use 2-d drafting programs and are used to reading traditional "blueprints."
In my experience practicing architecture, our firm used BIM software and worked to model structural, mechanical and electrical designs developed by our consultants to forsee and prevent conflicts that Orndorff mentioned. Unfortuneately, our design fees did not often cover the costs the taking 2-d drawings from consultants and rendering this information 3 dimensionally. Clients don't want to pay upfront to prevent errors. Though such errors, are incredibly difficult to predict given conventional tools. Furthermore, few engineers used such systems, so we could not simply "drop" these systems into our models. Finally, for the liability issues that Orndorff mentioned, architects provided dated, stamped and signed drawings that have been pre-approved by the city to contractors. These are legal documents and the legal issues of building from "working" model are many.
While industry changes are necessary to maximize the effectiveness of such technologies, I think these technologies are
incredibly valuable for the industry - for both cost controls and design innovation. I think it is great to see that large building firms are using these technologies and hopefully this trend will continue.