Autodesk FMDesktop

[#1]

Greetings all -

I'm coming at this as someone who's used all the big name FM products daily for the last 15 years and a user of Autodesk's FM Desktop. Would anyone care to engage me on the topic: What value would there be in tying a 3D model to a production day to day Facility Management (Space, Occupants, Allocation, Assets) system such as FMD? I'd really like to develop my understanding.

Thanks,
-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

Message was edited by: rburns

[#2]

Robert,

I believe I've stated before that I don't manage spaces, I manage systems.
Having a 3D model of those systems would aid in planning, renovations as
well as maintenance/upkeep.

(quicker than a mechanic finding the mech, elect, plumb, fp, nurse call,
telecomm, IS, etc prints, getting up on his ladder, needing to move
something, but, not knowing what it is, going back to the office, finding
more files/prints/documents to determine what sort of thing is running
through a particular hallway/chase, etc... also, from an infection control
standpoint in the hospital, the more times you have to pull up ceiling
tiles, the more opportunities you have to spread contaminants into areas
where patients will be exposed to them).

So, I really couldn't think how it might be useful in asset management
(unless you're trying to see if certain equipment can fit in certain spaces,
but, it wouldn't be that vital, as you could easily find the same
information with a tape measure in most cases).

just my $0.02, feel free to give me change.

--
Melanie Perry
***not all who wander are lost***
http://mistressofthedorkness.blogspot.com/

wrote in message news:5272691@discussion.autodesk.com...
Greetings all -

I'm coming at this as someone who's used all the big name FM products daily
for the last 15 years and a user of Autodesk's FM Desktop. Would anyone
care to engage me on the topic: What value would there be in tying a 3D
model to a production day to day Facility Management (Space, Occupants,
Allocation, Assets) system such as FMD? I'd really like to develop my
understanding.

Thanks,
-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

Message was edited by: rburns

[#3]

A well stated viewpoint that brings me to a different question: If you're going to have a 3D model of your building, how do resolve its accuracy, especially for building systems?

Having observed construction firsthand on countless projects, and then measuring and physically verifying the end result, I know how very different a building can be "as built" when compared to the drawing/model. The final location of things like HVAC and plumbing are often determined "at the top of a ladder", not in a 3D model at the Architect's office.

To me, relying on a 3D model either means that you're accepting it as a schematic representation, or you're verifying the final build in 3D ($$) - otherwise, how can it be depended on for accurate answers?


Back to the original topic, it's all about relating the data to the drawings for visual planning. Since FMD drawings should stand on thier own (by which I mean that you don't put your polylines in your actual design drawings or as-builts), I'm still having a tough time understanding why many people are persuing the idea of having a 3D ADT objects connected to the data. Nobody's ever asked me "How many cubic feet do we have in Accounting?".

-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

[#4]

Ah, but! isn't the the SAME question you have, no matter what format your
drawings are in?

It will be up to the facility owner to take this into account, and make sure
verification is done properly at project close-out.

It's not 2d vs 3d in that case, it's having the resources in place to ensure
data is kept accurate and up to date.

Noone's ever asked you that? Really?
Of course, I might be asked for that mainly by our Mechanical engineer and
hvac shop. Something about calculating air exchanges... which is done by
department, because obviously accounting is a different world from
infectious disease care areas with their negative pressure, and or's with
their requirements, etc.


I am just interested in the 3D data, as it appears the industry overall is
heading that way. It should be a fantastic tool for the collaborative design
that our contractors do, greatly reducing intereferences, etc, should be
reducing cost overruns due to rework needed in the field, etc. I know that's
not directly in a property manager's realm, but, he contractors need to get
their information from 'somewhere', the facility owner should be able to
step up and provide something like that if that's what all of their
contractors will be using.

--
Melanie Perry
***not all who wander are lost***
http://mistressofthedorkness.blogspot.com/
wrote in message news:5273089@discussion.autodesk.com...
A well stated viewpoint that brings me to a different question: If you're
going to have a 3D model of your building, how do resolve its accuracy,
especially for building systems?

Having observed construction firsthand on countless projects, and then
measuring and physically verifying the end result, I know how very different
a building can be "as built" when compared to the drawing/model. The final
location of things like HVAC and plumbing are often determined "at the top
of a ladder", not in a 3D model at the Architect's office.

To me, relying on a 3D model either means that you're accepting it as a
schematic representation, or you're verifying the final build in 3D ($$) -
otherwise, how can it be depended on for accurate answers?


Back to the original topic, it's all about relating the data to the drawings
for visual planning. Since FMD drawings should stand on thier own (by which
I mean that you don't put your polylines in your actual design drawings or
as-builts), I'm still having a tough time understanding why many people are
persuing the idea of having a 3D ADT objects connected to the data.
Nobody's ever asked me "How many cubic feet do we have in Accounting?".

-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

[#5]

To your point about the resources: Verifying a building in 3D vs. 2D is costly at best and rarely included in projects.

I got my start working on HVAC design so I know where you're coming from in terms of determining volumes for load calculations, etc. That's a very different thing from having a database of accurate square footages driven by an accurate drawing (which is what FMD is all about). IMHO, a successful FM system shows its value by connecting financial accountability to space/assets and making groups responsible for thier needs.

About the idea of "greatly reducing interferences", we just a had a local roundtable about this. The premise is that Contractor A might design something that collides with Contractor B's design and that AutoCAD magically finds and displays these interferences. While this might be a nice QC, I can't rationalize shifting any of this responsibility to the software. Back when we all used "regular" AutoCAD, you were required to be able to read all disciplines of drawings and read them well. I'll never forget the engineer who taught me a hard lesson by making me lay out ductwork in a building that had an unusual structural situation...

-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

[#6]

Excuse me... FMD is about maintenance as well as space management. ;-)

Mark Evans

[#7]

I hear ya Mark - apologies for pigeonholing FMD. I'm among those hoping to see the maintenace area of FMD developed. With that in mind, can you develop a scenario where a maintenace manager directly benefits from having 3D models tied into his day to day Work Order, PM, Scheduling, and Inventory system?

Remember, I'm not taking a shot at anything - I really want to generate some new ideas about how 3D connected to a living database can be useful down the road in the life of a building. I believe that's already been established in the architecture field, but I'm yet to experience it as a reality in the world of CAFM/CMMS.

I sure am looking forward to AU.

-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org

[#8]

As a matter of "interferences" I'll tell my story of working as a consultant
for Children's Hospital of Wisconsin (CHW) and hopefully it will help answer
"Why 3D?"

As an architectural student I was hired to update all of the as-built
drawings and specification manuals when CHW was first constructed. I was
called back a year or so later to help CHW setup their first CAD machine.
Much was accomplished for what could be done at the time and from what early
adopters like myself could understand about what we were trying to get done.
We established file naming and related standards such as CAD layer
guidelines (before the AIA usurped the process). My work has by now no doubt
evolved from the fundamentals I established. By "evolved" I also mean to
suggest any intelligence I hoped to impart into the process has just as
likely regressed.

The architect of record HDR had used three (count them folks) yes, three
different CAD systems to design the hospital. Everything was then dumped
into AutoCAD and I tried my best to make sense of the mess. I also inherited
a so-called plan room which was an area in a machine and equipment room
where dozens of drawing sets comprised of thousands of drawing sheets were
tossed without any means of coordination. I cleaned that all up and tried my
best to integrate with CAD and other means to manage these assets such as
appealing to those I worked with to adopt the use of spreadsheets and a
database noting the people I worked with departmentally were not (and are
not) very bright.

Regardless, I learned a lot on that job about the way hospitals were
designed and constructed. Actually I learned in these contemporary times the
business of healthcare causes a hospital to be "under construction" at all
times. The mess was so bad it got to the point that I set up a meeting to
discuss a proposal I had.

To make a long story short I proposed we use the CAD drawings as base-plans
from which security and work flow management systems could be developed and
managed. I suggested the base-plans could for example assist security to do
their job. Security should have an interactive set of drawings in their
offices. A rapid reference and response system is what I proposed.

I also pointed out that laborers from different contracting firms were
wandering all over the place so I proposed creating a work order check
in/check out system for contractors. Drawings from the work order system
would also provide contactors with facility information regarding locations
of medical gas, water supply lines, and so on.

Less than an hour after everybody politely thanked me for a great idea that
"they" in all their wisdom agreed was "not feasible" the alarms sounded --
ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK -- everybody scrambled in fear. It was LOUD and
scary. It was also poetic justice. A contractor had entered the wrong area
of a room and cut through a water supply line flooding the entire neonatal
intensive care unit which had to be evacuated of cribs and equipment. BTW,
my as-builts did show the supply line. The contractor was never given
documentation because as they used to say it was "all in the CAD."

They refused to tell me how much it cost to respond and get back to "normal"
:-)

The moral of this story? While we had 2D drawings in those days and our
institutions were and are controlled by departmental idiots then, just as
now, and because 3D "model" is here to stay. Pandora is out of her box.

The 3D model is not simply based on a value proposition relevant to visual
information. Even though visual information will be found useful (perhaps
marginally so in certain applications) the era of BIM is here and the data
that is possible to build into a 3D model is going to prove itself
invaluable over time as more insight into its use is understood.

At this point in time however those of us that understand these principles
are trying to work with our peers and colleagues to help them with the
"vision thing."
<%= Clinton Gallagher
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
MAP 43°2'17"N 88°2'37"W : 43°2'17"N 88°2'37"W



wrote in message news:5273206@discussion.autodesk.com...
To your point about the resources: Verifying a building in 3D vs. 2D is
costly at best and rarely included in projects.

I got my start working on HVAC design so I know where you're coming from in
terms of determining volumes for load calculations, etc. That's a very
different thing from having a database of accurate square footages driven by
an accurate drawing (which is what FMD is all about). IMHO, a successful FM
system shows its value by connecting financial accountability to
space/assets and making groups responsible for thier needs.

About the idea of "greatly reducing interferences", we just a had a local
roundtable about this. The premise is that Contractor A might design
something that collides with Contractor B's design and that AutoCAD
magically finds and displays these interferences. While this might be a
nice QC, I can't rationalize shifting any of this responsibility to the
software. Back when we all used "regular" AutoCAD, you were required to be
able to read all disciplines of drawings and read them well. I'll never
forget the engineer who taught me a hard lesson by making me lay out
ductwork in a building that had an unusual structural situation...

-Robert
FM Desktop User's Group
http://www.fmdugi.org Message was edited by: Discussion Admin

[#9]

holy cow. that sounds just like my job now (except the WO system is fully
functional and invaluable they've found since implementing it about 10 years
ago).

and I do agree with you that the concept of BIM is about integrating *data*
into a model.

--
Melanie Perry
***not all who wander are lost***
http://mistressofthedorkness.blogspot.com/

"clintonG" wrote in message
news:5273480@discussion.autodesk.com...

Everything was then dumped into AutoCAD and I tried my best to make sense of
the mess. I also inherited a so-called plan room which was an area in a
machine and equipment room where dozens of drawing sets comprised of
thousands of drawing sheets were tossed without any means of coordination. I
cleaned that all up and tried my
best to integrate with CAD and other means to manage these assets

Regardless, I learned a lot on that job about the way hospitals were
designed and constructed. Actually I learned in these contemporary times the
business of healthcare causes a hospital to be "under construction" at all
times. The mess was so bad it got to the point that I set up a meeting to
discuss a proposal I had.

To make a long story short I proposed we use the CAD drawings as base-plans
from which security and work flow management systems could be developed and
managed. I suggested the base-plans could for example assist security to do
their job. Security should have an interactive set of drawings in their
offices. A rapid reference and response system is what I proposed.

I also pointed out that laborers from different contracting firms were
wandering all over the place so I proposed creating a work order check
in/check out system for contractors. Drawings from the work order system
would also provide contactors with facility information regarding locations
of medical gas, water supply lines, and so on.

Less than an hour after everybody politely thanked me for a great idea that
"they" in all their wisdom agreed was "not feasible" the alarms sounded --
ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK -- everybody scrambled in fear. It was LOUD and
scary. It was also poetic justice. A contractor had entered the wrong area
of a room and cut through a water supply line flooding the entire neonatal
intensive care unit which had to be evacuated of cribs and equipment. BTW,
my as-builts did show the supply line. The contractor was never given
documentation because as they used to say it was "all in the CAD."

The 3D model is not simply based on a value proposition relevant to visual
information. Even though visual information will be found useful (perhaps
marginally so in certain applications) the era of BIM is here and the data
that is possible to build into a 3D model is going to prove itself
invaluable over time as more insight into its use is understood.

At this point in time however those of us that understand these principles
are trying to work with our peers and colleagues to help them with the
"vision thing."

[#10]

The part about them not being very bright you mean? ;-)

<%= Clinton

"melanie stone" wrote in message
news:5273518@discussion.autodesk.com...
holy cow. that sounds just like my job now (except the WO system is fully
functional and invaluable they've found since implementing it about 10 years
ago).

and I do agree with you that the concept of BIM is about integrating *data*
into a model.

--
Melanie Perry
***not all who wander are lost***
http://mistressofthedorkness.blogspot.com/

"clintonG" wrote in message
news:5273480@discussion.autodesk.com...

Everything was then dumped into AutoCAD and I tried my best to make sense of
the mess. I also inherited a so-called plan room which was an area in a
machine and equipment room where dozens of drawing sets comprised of
thousands of drawing sheets were tossed without any means of coordination. I
cleaned that all up and tried my
best to integrate with CAD and other means to manage these assets

Regardless, I learned a lot on that job about the way hospitals were
designed and constructed. Actually I learned in these contemporary times the
business of healthcare causes a hospital to be "under construction" at all
times. The mess was so bad it got to the point that I set up a meeting to
discuss a proposal I had.

To make a long story short I proposed we use the CAD drawings as base-plans
from which security and work flow management systems could be developed and
managed. I suggested the base-plans could for example assist security to do
their job. Security should have an interactive set of drawings in their
offices. A rapid reference and response system is what I proposed.

I also pointed out that laborers from different contracting firms were
wandering all over the place so I proposed creating a work order check
in/check out system for contractors. Drawings from the work order system
would also provide contactors with facility information regarding locations
of medical gas, water supply lines, and so on.

Less than an hour after everybody politely thanked me for a great idea that
"they" in all their wisdom agreed was "not feasible" the alarms sounded --
ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK ONK -- everybody scrambled in fear. It was LOUD and
scary. It was also poetic justice. A contractor had entered the wrong area
of a room and cut through a water supply line flooding the entire neonatal
intensive care unit which had to be evacuated of cribs and equipment. BTW,
my as-builts did show the supply line. The contractor was never given
documentation because as they used to say it was "all in the CAD."

The 3D model is not simply based on a value proposition relevant to visual
information. Even though visual information will be found useful (perhaps
marginally so in certain applications) the era of BIM is here and the data
that is possible to build into a 3D model is going to prove itself
invaluable over time as more insight into its use is understood.

At this point in time however those of us that understand these principles
are trying to work with our peers and colleagues to help them with the
"vision thing."