Following the release of BIMForum’s LOD spec, there has been a bit of a blog discussion happening, involving at least the following three posts:
practical BIM: LOD, are we there yet
…using BIM for the creation of construction documentation is a valid use, and one that needs to be encouraged
All Things BIM: LOD Reply: PracticalBIM
The simple answer starts with an equation:
In this equation, x refers to anything else that might accompany a model being offered as a project deliverable. This might include drawings, specifications, napkin sketches, and so on. The LOD Specification addresses ONLY the “model” part of the equation – it does not serve as a guide to complete project deliverables in current work flows.
And:
BIM Fix Blog: Developing LOD (Level of Development)
LOD should never be seen as the design is complete, or “design sign off”. Just because an element is; e.g. LOD 300, does not mean it will not change. We are in a design and construction environment. Design changes, coordination, rationalisation, value engineering & preferred construction methods, will all influence the element’s size, shape, location, and orientation. Design sign-off will continue to have the traditional design stage mile-stone approvals (e.g. Design Development and Construction Documentation)
Heads-up:
Great conversation happening “@jvandezande: @fedenegro @theBIMForum #LODSpec Reply to practicalBIM blog post. http://t.co/p0BimxU27p”
— Federico (@fedenegro) August 25, 2013
not that I like to promote the use of acronyms, but I can't help but ponder why doesn't LOD include or refer to a Level Of Accuracy (LOA). If we are building a virtual prototype of a physical object, a building, surely the virtual prototype should conform/comply with the physical objects construction tolerances. In my opinion I think it would go a long way to defining, measuring and auditing LOD on BIM's if real world tolerances and construction accuracy was factored into the overall process.