About the Author

February 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28    

Google Translate

« Boundary Conditions | Main | Partly Cloudy, Chance of BIM »

October 01, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


It is important to clarify first that even fully aware of BIM and it implications for practice, my work environment is Argentina, where the use on BIM is very limited, due to several cultural, social and economic factors. Nevertheless, I am trying to implement BIM for the last 5 years through academy and practice, and the main limitation I found is that, there is Architectural Practice Knowledge, knowledge of how to design and build, knowledge of how to operate and maintain; but each knowledge is compartmented, due to the limitations stated above, as well as some resistance.

As a result, my research re visits the definition of BIM on a daily basis, not because it needs to be revisited, or I want it to, but because first it needs translation, and I need it to explain it in different ways to make it understandable, and move beyond the barriers of tradition.

As you mentioned, BIM as technology that can change process is a good synthesis of the concept. It is also interesting to note that not all the processes are the same because cultural context -as knowledge-, transforms stages as conceptualization, project, construction and operation, making each one different. Matching stages, knowledge and process would impel us to think of relations between people and tools, not just considering “how”, but searching the relevance in “why”. Human interaction with available technology can be understood under the Actor-Network Theory (ANT) developed by Bruno Latour, Michael Callon and others. The intention of this comment is to point out that the proposed integration and collaboration needs to equilibrate each incorporation (similar to the generalized symmetry proposed by the ANT), human and non-human, which will lead us to the process change. As I understand, the gap between design and construction is not only the difference between intent and build, it is about the Management of the Knowledge involved on each stage to feedback the tool and to generate a continuous process where information flows, updated and correlated to be used by each participant.

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed

  •  Subscribe