^ that is true.
The thing to also consider is that before BIM, the GC would provide the architect with markups (as-builts) and they architect would then have to adjust the drawing to the as-built. Now if the GC measured 10'-4 3/16" using a laser measuring device we would probably provide a mark up that says 10'-4" (Unless I am mistaken). And even if the GC would markup 10'-4 3/16" the architect would update 10'-4" Having a point cloud for this purpose would yield the same reasoning / workflow. Unless I am mistaken. What do you thinks.
Revit model accuracy
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 436
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:26 am
- 9
- Full Name: C-Augusto
- Company Details: 3d scanning
- Company Position Title: USA
- Country: US
- Has thanked: 115 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
- kiloweb
- I have made 40-50 posts
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 6:50 pm
- 10
- Full Name: Philip Lorenzo
- Company Details: www.Rithm.io
- Company Position Title: Software Developer and Consultant
- Country: USA
- Skype Name: philipglorenzo
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: San Francisco, CA
- Contact:
Re: Revit model accuracy
There is some good discussion going on here. I've heard LOD stated many times. What's important at the end of the day is that the objective are clearly defined to the Owner.
This is where the new LOA (Level of Accuracy) spec comes in, which is specifically geared towards addressing these issues using best practice standards. It directly addresses the fact that error is introduced when real world out-of-plumb conditions are represented in orthogonal fashion, as discussed. It addresses questions such as: is the accuracy relative or absolute? Is it related to the intent (i.e. modeling, or just floor flatness)? How are you proving accuracy, are you using some sort of secondary methods (like a total station)? These are all things that the LOA addresses. This can especially be used as a good tool to let owners know what is and what isn't possible or practical.
This spec has been drafted by the USIBD (US Institute of Building Documentation, usibd.org) which is currently sponsored by both Faro and Leica. Feel free to contact me or John Russo ([email protected]) if you'd be interested in knowing more or participating/joining the committee.
This is where the new LOA (Level of Accuracy) spec comes in, which is specifically geared towards addressing these issues using best practice standards. It directly addresses the fact that error is introduced when real world out-of-plumb conditions are represented in orthogonal fashion, as discussed. It addresses questions such as: is the accuracy relative or absolute? Is it related to the intent (i.e. modeling, or just floor flatness)? How are you proving accuracy, are you using some sort of secondary methods (like a total station)? These are all things that the LOA addresses. This can especially be used as a good tool to let owners know what is and what isn't possible or practical.
This spec has been drafted by the USIBD (US Institute of Building Documentation, usibd.org) which is currently sponsored by both Faro and Leica. Feel free to contact me or John Russo ([email protected]) if you'd be interested in knowing more or participating/joining the committee.
Last edited by kiloweb on Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
www.Rithm.io | 3D Laser Scanning Plugins | Simplify, Automate, Visualize
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 436
- Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:26 am
- 9
- Full Name: C-Augusto
- Company Details: 3d scanning
- Company Position Title: USA
- Country: US
- Has thanked: 115 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: Revit model accuracy
Thanks for your input. I had come across LOA before but I was aware if was being formalized.
In the end it all depends on what the model will be used for.
What is interesting is that you can use both LOA and LOD when describing a deliverable simultaneously.
In the end it all depends on what the model will be used for.
What is interesting is that you can use both LOA and LOD when describing a deliverable simultaneously.