BuildingSmart IDS is here... but I've got to admit I'm a little underwhelmed right now. I honestly struggle to see how many clients will be knowledgeable enough to generate meaningful IDS, let alone have the time to waste on the slow and clunky authoring tools that are hitting the market. Sure I can see it being of benefit to the larger contractors with dedicated development staff, but I fear we'll be left wondering whatever happened to it 2 years from now. Mass uptake? I can still count the IFC experts I know on one hand, even though IFC is required on pretty much every project we work on, so I'm predicting a big no. What are we missing to make it mainstream? https://lnkd.in/dnJbsiEM
Louise Kelly
7mo
In an ideal world the client won't need to know the technicalities of how to create an IDS, hopefully they'll know what data they would like and how they would like it. Then the professionals will use the appropriate tools to create validators to verify those data requirements and in a perfect world we'll be able to export an IDS so that other members of the team can validate their own data on whatever system they use. Obviously its going to take time for vendors of these tools to support the import and export of IDS, but some are already on their way eg. Plannerly Clive Jordan
David Ehrenreich
7mo
Creation of the IDS will not happen clientside but will be the task of professionals. But I rather spend some time translating the information needs of the client into IDS and can distribute that to all involved partners so they can test compliance of their data themselves (or even better - import the IDS in the authoring software and create the information correctly in the first place) than the status quo which constist of a lot of Excel-ping-pong, Q&A and small or big errors that cost an immense amount of time until the LOI are fullfilled. My optimistic view does require a lot of (probably unjustified) trust in the sufficient implementation of the import-functions in the CAD authoring tools thought...
Menno Mekes
7mo
Are you underwhelmed by the standard or by people? If you need to check your own models or someone else, IDS is the best tool to speed up that process. Adding correct data to a model is the easiest part of modeling yet nobody really does this perfect. Now you have a set of specifications that will tell you what you did wrong. And more important... What the correct answer is. If you get bad models, create an ids and give it to the modeler. Show how it works on their tool. In a BIM process we help each other other.
William Coulter
7mo
Interesting views Nigel Davies. I'm wary that some companies might get a one-size-fits-all-template and add it to every project. The difficulty I'm finding is making the XML files 'human readable' and understandable to the masses, plus how that links with the Responsibility Matrix, maintainable asset register, etc.
Steve Deadman
7mo
I though IDS was Iain Duncan Smith! 🤣
John Ford
7mo
Like IFC. Until vendors/technology make IDS/IFC invisible, not requiring constant tinkering and adjustment, it will just be a headache for many where contract outcomes are necessitated by it. The other side of the coin is how many will use it….but wont actually use it! We have over 40% of our clients that mandate IFC/COBie outputs but dont use them or have a plan for how they want to use it. Will IDS be the same, just another way to tick the “I am digitally enabled” box but not “digitally competent”. They are both the future, like I said IfC was when we did the first UK IFC driven COBie v1 project in 2008, but that future still isnt yet as there are still hurdles to overcome. #BIMfatigue
Neil O'Reilly
7mo
Agreed Nigel, IFC is used when compatibility issues may exist, is not editable and the native file has already been validated. Cost increases in tenders and efforts for not much, apart from more duplication.
Nigel Davies I share your concerns. The biggest problem buildingSMART has in the adoption of any/all of openBIM (IFC, bSDD, BCF, IDS, etc.) is, and always will be… tooling. Ideally, IFC would be as ubiquitous as HTML when it comes to sharing info, but the software community has not implemented support with the same vigor as web tools. There are lots of reasons for this - some legit, some just due to FUD - but one obvious one if the nearly overwhelming complexity of IFC, even by software developer standards. Lots of work still needs to be done to improve what the schema is, does, and how. Some effort is being started on the ‘next gen” which may address all that. But for now, it’s tough to see wide acceptance when the insiders think that everyone needs to know all the technical intricacies of IFC (and bSDD, and IDS, and BCF) to get any of it to work on a daily basis. After all, how many people need to know all about HTML/CSS/Javascript just to engage in this website, thread, and comment?
Same opinion here! During the last BIM users groups meeting at EUBIM Encuentro de Usuarios BIM I tried to show why IDS is a great tool with so little professionals capable of using it. I honestly think there's an opportunity here for people who knows the IFC schema but the companies need to face their own limits and hire a consultant.
Helping AEC Pros work efficiently with IFC — Message me ‘IFC’ if you might be looking for help
7moIt’s funny to read this as I have a few posts on IDS in the pipeline, and one asking the same question. My personal take is that resistance to change and trying new things is a significant issue. I really can’t see working with IFC without using IDS. To me, that’s a huge risk. I think the biggest trap people fall into is thinking it’s just another fad or buzzword. They’ve been lied to too many times before, and now their response is ignorance. But at what cost? For me, as someone who has crossed that bridge, it’s a no-brainer. You just have to try it, and you’ll see the real value. When I think more about this, I believe the most important reason is that people prefer to not check at all and keep their eyes closed. Yes, it definitely makes sense. Why see the reality of poor-quality data or their models? Why show that to their clients? There are many reasons, but at the end of the day, reality will catch up with those ignoring it, compared to those addressing it. People prefer spending countless hours writing a useless BEP in Word, but won’t invest a few hours to learn something that will actually move the needle for them.