Learnings about architectural competitions with BIM.

1st of December, I was invited at the "Wettbewerbslabor" in Zürich. We presented and discussed requirements for architectural competitions with BIM. The main conclusion in terms of digitalization are:

Digitalization in the competition begins with the program.

If you provide a room program, architects can efficiently work when they receive it as an open Excel list with the department, room type name, room classification (e.g., SIA416/d0165), target m2, and all other room properties if necessary. Having this Excel helps them to automatically create the spaces in the right size and start working instead of having to reenter the data manually. In a more significant project, this could be one day of work. (8h x 100 participants x 100CHF = 80'000 CHF vs. Zero additional effort for the competition organizer)

The basic data supplied for the site and the existing building is often incorrect and poorly prepared. Good preparation of the basic data by the client, including predefined georeferenced insertion points, can considerably reduce the effort involved. (8h x 100 participants x )

• The landscape should be a mesh surface model.
• Three georeferenced points should be provided for all teams - This is already the foundation for the subsequent phases.
• Existing buildings as point clouds.

Handling modeled existing buildings in IFC can be tedious, especially when they have a very high level of detail. I've seen models with modeled slopes in the screed. That's great when you have to build. Having to continue working with the model in a competition is annoying. So when it makes sense for the specific project, provide the existing buildings with a low level of geometry and a correct level of information, E.g., straight walls, and floors, only the main elements like walls, slabs, roofs, columns, beams, windows, doors, and spaces. Regarding LOI, use the standard IFC properties, especially PredefinedType, Name, IsExternal, LoadBearing, and Status.

The architect's deliverables focus on the idea/project raw data

The deliverables should be as simple as possible. The guiding principles are:

• Only ask for something you need for decision-making.
• Don't ask for anything because you always did.
• All calculations, analyses, and simulations should be done and centralized on the client side. This guarantees comparability.?

This last point means that the client formulates a goal. For example, we need a sustainable building with low life cycle costs.?

With this information, the creative process can start. The architect could run some simulations with Rhino/Grasshopper or other tools, or they could work with some consultants. It's up to them to find a suitable solution with their best tools. Let the market play.

Clients should ask for as little as possible. And for as much as is necessary

A room cube model with room names can be requested, and most architects have the software to deliver them. The survey during my talk with approximatly 100 architects showed that the software is available in 99% of offices. The know-how about the room cube model is present in about 60%. So, it is not a technical but an organizational issue. During the discussions we learned that for digitally experienced architects, this is easier than providing Excel with area calculations and overview floor plans.

To carry out efficient evaluations for sustainability and energy, it is advisable to ask additionally for the windows as IfcWindow.?

Employing digital means e.g. the abstractBIM, the client can use this for:

• Area analysis and Benchmarking
• Cost Calculations
• Energy Simulations
• Life Cycle Cost calculations
• ...

The client focuses on analyzing the architect's data

It's the client's responsibility to choose the right one, and this can't be delegated. They need to compare all the different ideas and find the optimal solution. As the architects spend quite some money to develop the solutions, it's only fair to compare them objectively. To do so properly, the client needs some technical expertise as well.?

The justification for BIM from clients that this already creates data for the further processing phases is only confirmed in extremely structured offices. In most offices, the model is rebuilt cleanly after commissioning.

Organization of the digital competition

There are three levels of digitalization in the competition:

1. Mini: Traditionally, it was with all the usual stuff, except the technical plans, and instead, the Room model as Ifc for technical checks
2. Midi: Same as 1, but using the digital models additionally for decision-making.
3. Maxi: Asking for no analog deliverables and using screens, VR, etc., for decision-making.

The "Mini" process is the best way to get started. It's not about analog OR digital, but analog AND digital and making the best of both worlds. In other words, there will be hybrid processes in the future. The great opportunity is that the question of what is needed in the specific project to make a good decision will be discussed again.?

It's analog AND digital

Plaster model or digital model is the wrong question. The strength of the plaster model is the simultaneity and the possibility of free viewing. The power of the digital model is the ability to assess pedestrian perspectives effectively. One exciting contribution was having the client centrally create the plaster model as a 3D print to guarantee uniformity.?

At the moment, the jury (still) needs training/support to be able to handle models. However, the younger generation has an entirely different approach, i.e., the problem will die out in the longer term.

Using digital means for better decision-making or visualizing the unseen

Wolfgang Rossbauer introduced the flip model as a means to visualize the unseen. In most competitions, the final discussion is around the model, but the model only shows what's happening above ground. Wolfgang proposes the flip model because the excavation and the underground substructure have a substantial environmental impact. It's the plaster model from the downside, so on top, you see the urban setting, and when you flip, you see the underground work.

I love this idea as a creative way to show the unseen and enable better buildings. And I love the direction the discussion did go at the "Wettbewerbslabor". I have the feeling that now that the first hype of BIM is over, we can really focus on delivering value with less effort! And it's time to reduce the effort for competitions again!