（转）CAD is not BIM
本帖来源于autodesk-revit博客，版权归作者所有
原文地址：http://autodesk-revit.blogspot.com/2013/03/cad-is-not-bim.html
前天初接触Revit，只画了平面图，给我的感觉是和天正差不多，于是找了这篇来看
I guess when somebody spins a comment that I am “raw”, I feel I at least need to defend my comment piece as I don’t personally think I am “Guileless”, but everybody is entitled to their point of view.
The comment relates to Martyn Days recent article in AEC magazine that CAD is not BIM.
http://aecmag.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=531
My view is that in many cases “some” CAD managers should not be managing BIM still standards true. It’s not that the CAD manager is not capable; I suspect there are many which with the right skills & knowledge of design, data structures & building assembly can certainly do a superb job. BTW I’m not out here to make enemies. As noted by a response to this article by Nigel Davis, the reality is its semantics. I would totally agree with that.
http://www.evolve-consultancy.com/article.php?incat_id=213&category_id=68
The term BIM has been overhyped over used to spin business & I know for a fact there are plenty of businesses who talk about doing “BIM”, but the reality is they are just using their latest & greatest tools to do smarter, more efficient documentation. This is great. I don’t have issues with that, as this is genuine progression. Utilising the benefits of technology for a more streamlined production process is something I believe is really important. I have even said in the past, if you had a very smart lean process, you can do a BIM enabled process with CAD if you are prepared to customize the crap out of it. Today’s smart technology tools for delivering “model based design” are there to reduce the pain in the process, yet they also open up other issues. By no means are they perfect, but they work well and as Nigel suggests in his comment, they deliver quality output, so the term CAD or BIM, then becomes semantics.
The point I was making & which Nigel suggests that maybe I was being Guileless, is that the demands of BIM or what we are being told about BIM are different. I certainly believe the depth of knowledge & research which is required for you to become a successful “BIM” manager is far greater than if you were a successful CAD manager. That’s not to say, you couldn’t learn this stuff, you certainly can. But my point is that from my experience & what I have seen in the industry, many firms who have employed a CAD manager require the said person to manage that, just computer aided design “stuff”. This typically means dealing with support, maintenance of the system, successful deployment, training & standards. I don’t doubt there are firms whose CAD manager does way more than just that. All these points are equally relevant to BIM, but with one big difference. When I started as a CAD manager, I could manage & develop standards, layer names, smart systems for naming layers, work on projects, research technology to improve the process etc., but suddenly the demands have shifted. The new generation of manager is expected to understand a BXP, LOD, PAS, IFC, BIM standards, open standards, cobie, legal implications of delivery all this other stuff which is being pushed in our face by the BIM bandwagon. How much of this is actually relevant to what we do is open for debate, you don’t need to know it intimately, but I would suggest you need to at least have an understanding of it. Let me give you an example. When I was at a large firm (you know who they are), we would receive all sorts of PQP for projects which often had a BIM component. Many of these BIM requirements were actually laughable. “You shall hand over an as-built model totally clash free & shall deliver based on Level 5 BIM!” Total garbage! The point I am making is whether its BIM or CAD, I actually don’t give a stuff about the acronym. The point is that the go to person in any firm, must have a broader understanding of what is happening in the industry to filter all this BIM debris which is thrown at the AEC industry. Which is why I make the comment that I don’t necessarily believe a traditional CAD manager should be managing BIM within the business. SO, call me naïve if you want, but having been at the coal face within an organisation, I would suggest the knowledge required is slightly different & somewhat deeper. Even if at the end of the day the title CAD or BIM should or shouldn’t remain the same, the knowledge required is different. You only need to see this by the job description & requirements that many firms require for their BIM leaders here in the UK & globally. Whether you believe the industry has it right or wrong, only time will tell if I am personally right or I am barking up the wrong tree.
Posted by David Light
