Brickchat

Everyone likes the BIM (Building Information Modelling) process because it has sped up our ability to build, audit and manage every project we undertake, but are we running headlong into the next iteration of technological determinism?

Parametricism grew from the adoption of 3D CAD software, leaving a collection of odd shaped buildings that to my mind have a certain ' because we can' style about them. Look to current trends and the BIM process and offsite construction methods are becoming more popular. These are exciting developments for the construction industry, but too often these new technologies are being hidden behind false brick and alumimium cladding systems, concealing their innovative powers from view.

While we are using fewer materials and minimising onsite labour, there is something deceptive about specifying a veneer of traditional materials to clad a building has no structural use for them. If we are innovating, why don't we let it show on the facades of our buildings?

Too often finishes only go skin-deep. The challenge to us as designers is to reconcile innovations in construction with the traditional expectations of society, all the while challenging people's perceptions of what good design looks like.

Our forbears dealt with this in a variety of ways. For example, the Ritz Hotel is famously a steel framed building, clad in brick and Portland stone, where as the high tech Lloyds building leaves all of its structure and services out on display. I'm not trying to define what is right and wrong about those particular buildings, instead I'm proposing that the representation of a building's construction on it's facade should be measured on a sliding scale between these two extremes.

I acknowledge this one small part of the process and every project must also respond to its client, site and budget. These are the crucial elements that bring a project to fruition, but they also serve as the primary design constraints and make the achievement of good design outcomes all the more challenging.

The BIM process is a useful design tool for architects but we must resist any temptation for it to define our design process.The aim is to work towards doing the simple things well, and not allow the technological advances of recent years to perpetuate a 'because we can' approach. Our objective – as I see it – is to combine these new design tools and processes with well chosen materials and techniques to ensure that our buildings refer to the technologies that have made them possible, but are not defined by them.

What do you like about BIM? What do you dislike about it? Do you share my concerns about the tool over-powering it's operator? Let me know in the comments down below.