Skip to content or navigation

Viewpoint: How BIM is Crushing the Art from Architecture and How to Stop It

Architosh is thrilled to share with its readers its latest Viewpoint contribution by architects Louis Smith and Lisa Stacholy, expressing a clear vision about the importance of “Inspiration” in the age of BIM. This well constructed essay leads the reader with its most powerful reasons ahead of its main conclusion and then subtly counter punches the reader’s own response with a few deftly crafted versions of more modest projects that put to use the very theories the authors espouse.

[Editor’s Note: This paper was co-written by Lisa Stacholy AIA LEED AP.  Image of Sydney Opera House, 2008, copyright, David Iliff, Wikipedia Commons,]

Would you consider a project a success if the initial client request was for a budget of five million dollars and a completion date in five years and it came in at 110 million dollars over budget and 30 years late? The city government that sponsored the project has said they would do it again if they needed to. They don’t need to. The Sydney Opera House has become a success because its iconic presence based on sails in the harbor is such a powerful image that people come to Australia and to Sydney for no other reason than to see it. In the years it has been open it has brought countless tourists and their money to Australia and to Sydney. It is featured in nearly every tourist promotion of travel to Australia. That is the power of having Art in Architecture.

Yet, it is not necessary to go that far over budget nor that far beyond schedule to have an iconic building. The Addition to the Milwaukee Museum of Art by Santiago Calatrava has become a destination in the continental United States for much the same reason. Its image of the building’s roof structure opening and closing such that the building brings to mind a bird preparing for flight causes people to come to Milwaukee just for that. The openings are scheduled for several times a day so that people can attend to see the roof not simply standing open but in operation. (see image 01 below)

01 - The Art Milwaukee Museum by designed by Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava.

01 – The Milwaukee Art Museum by designed by Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava. (image courtesy C. Burnett, Wikipedia Commons GFDL. 2006)

The Sydney Opera House was designed and built before the advent of BIM (Building Information Modeling). The Milwaukee Museum of Art Addition was designed before BIM was a leading trend. Both used some of the most capable computing and analysis technology that could be had at the time. That technology did not define the artistic or cultural content of the project. The contribution of the technology was in how to best achieve the cultural and artistic intent of the project. So where did the cultural and artistic intent of the project come from? Inspiration.

The Effect of BIM on the Art of Architecture

BIM has made the ability to express artistic and creative intent more difficult. Let’s take a look at the BIM process and see where the inspiration needs to come. Architectural professionals are generally familiar with what’s called the MacLeamy curve, named after Patrick MacLeamy FAIA LEED AP, CEO and chairman of international AEC firm HOK. This shows the classic bell curve of the design process with the peak of effort and resources at the center of the Construction Documentation phase and shows how BIM moves the peak of resource use and production back to late in the schematic design phase. It also shows that effective design changes are easiest and least expensive early in the process and least effective and most expensive later. Patrick MacLeamy, at a 2005 AIA presentation, identified the upslope of BIM as the location for effective Integrated Process Delivery. (see image 02 of BIM/IPD chart below or a buildingSMART produced MacLeamy curve diagram here.)

02 - The McLeamy Curve.

02 – The MacLeamy Curve.

Essentially this requires that the engineers and Contractor and even major subcontractors in HVAC and Structure be on the team and engaged in the design at this early stage. Yet none of the consulting engineers or other team members generates the initial idea for the building. They generally respond to the architects definition of the building and discuss how to optimize the areas of their specialty to create what the architect has envisioned.

This produces intense pressure on the architect to create a quick vision and an accompanying BIM model so that the other team members can begin their design and optimization processes. This sometimes begins not long after the program has been generated and sometimes before even spatial analysis is done. In some firms — perhaps even most firms — this results in whichever intern is most effective at using BIM software tools being assigned to generate a rectangular design that meets the program and adjacency requirements. This model is intended to be a placeholder while the design architect comes up with a vision.

In practice this placeholder becomes the design and is modified only slightly after the engineers and other consultants have begun to review it. The modifications to this design generally consist in changing the facade detailing and proportions and playing visual games with the facade materials, transparency and the placement of openings. Occasionally there may be a change in the shape of the roof structure or an overhang or setback of one or more stories created to “add visual interest” or to respond to the surrounding context. It seems that in many cases these changes are based on visual analysis and not really upon an overriding theme or concept. However, with the model designed and BIM/IPD at full steam optimizing all the building’s systems, the architects are soon confined to these minor changes and what was a placeholder design in rectangular format becomes a part of the built environment and even with the most elegant solution to the engineering and systems performance becomes a relatively uninspiring example of a well built building. This is not the fault of BIM. This is the result of using BIM without a controlling inspiration.

Art Fights Back: The Power of Inspiration

Clearly, the inspiration has to come before the primary model is created in order to change the trajectory of events. In order to have some weight in the face of the technical challenges that may be required the “inspired design” must have some meaning, relevance and value to the design situation. An arbitrary change in volume or arrangement that is not supported culturally will soon be crushed back to the decorated box that BIM seems to generate most easily.

03 - The Denver International Airport in Denver, Colorado, was designed with inspiration from the range of the mountains in the Colorado Rocky Mountains, visible in the distance from downtown and suburban Denver.

03 – The Denver International Airport in Denver, Colorado, was designed with inspiration from the range of the mountains in the Colorado Rocky Mountains, visible in the distance from downtown and suburban Denver. (image courtesy of Skipenlinkin, Wikipedia Commons GFDL, 2007).

Yet, the “inspired design” when clearly perceived and communicated may have the ability to inspire not only new technology but new laws as well. The intent of the designers of the Denver Airport was to recall in its imagery the range of the Rocky Mountains. This was done primarily through the use of a fabric roof with peaks formed by the fabric supports. Unfortunately, the mechanical engineers reported that the R-Values of the fabric structure did not meet the prescriptive requirements of the energy code. (see image 03 above) Further analysis of the usage of energy in the airport suggested that heat retention as the code had been designed for was really not an issue. The real issue was heat dispersion. The presence of lighting and equipment operating on a nearly constant basis throughout the day caused the major energy load to be cooling not heating. The fabric roof aided this by rejecting heat through reflectivity during the day and allowing heat to escape through the membrane at night. The codes were changed to allow actual calculated loads to be considered equivalent compliance. The process was not short or easy. However, it was the power of the “inspired design” concept that drove the effort to solve the problems and make the changes needed in the energy code.

next page: The Winning Characteristics of Inspiration

Pages >

Reader Comments

  1. – Viewpoint: How BIM is Crushing the Art from Architecture and How to Stop It

  2. RT @architosh: Viewpoint: How BIM is Crushing the Art of Architecture: [Editor’s Note: This paper was co-written by Lisa ……

  3. @architosh – this is one of the better articles I’ve read on negative side of the BIM transformation in a long time.

  4. There hasn’t been a lot of talk about some of the negative pressures generated by the BIM transformation with respect to design. Smith and Stacholy, as practicing architects, do a fantastic job of both clarifying the massive importance of potent “inspirational” ideas and breaking down the ingredients of inspired design.

  5. The reality is BIM has moved the hump of major resources of effort in the MacLeamy Curve westward towards the front end of the process, thereby introducing an array of new requirements on the architect team that in many cases threaten the ability of management to carve out adequate time for thoughtful design ideation…the type of ideation that can be truly inspired. Smith and Stacholy show through example how even small projects can take advantage of inspired design, turning good projects into great projects that exceed the desires of their clients.

  6. Greg Conyngham liked this on Facebook.

  7. Great article Anthony-thanks for sharing.

  8. Interesting point of view | How BIM is Crushing the Art from Architecture and How to Stop It

  9. RT @architosh: Viewpoint: How BIM is Crushing the Art of Architecture: [Editor’s Note: This paper was co-written by Lisa ……

  10. Thanks Greg! Louis Smith and Lisa Stacholy have developed AIA workshops on this topic of “inspiration” and how it relates to BIM, MacLeamy Curve realities and the like…I really liked it too…so happy Louis asked to contribute it.

  11. #CAD Viewpoint: How BIM is Crushing the Art from Architecture and How to Stop It

  12. “The most important part of the BIM/IPD process may well be the few minutes when the architect sketches out a first take of what might express the concept he has thought of and hands that to the lead Revit operator instead of saying “put it in a box.””

    That sentence is the real problem. The lead designer/architect being separated from BIM is the flaw. How is that a good process? It’s not. BIM projects will always run the risk of being soulless if those ostensibly in charge of design aren’t integrated into the process. It’s not that inputs from engineers and consultants come early. Those can be great things. It’s that the main architectural forces view BIM as outside their main function. That is a tragedy and risks marginalizing us further.

  13. Viewpoint: How #BIM is Crushing the Art from #Architecture and How to Stop It

  14. June-Hao Hou liked this on Facebook.

  15. FWIW, while I respect the authors to rightfully focus on the aspect of the design process that support the inspirational qualities, they hardly say anything about BIM.
    BIM may have started out of software technology, but has grown into a more wider methodology. Any methodology can be applied in good or bad ways. If BIM is put early in the design process, there is no guarantee for these inspirational qualities, but there is nothing preventing these qualities either. Architects still need to design, wether using BIM or not. And while we usually don’t consider engineers and consultants as the driving forces of the design process, they do play a very important role for a reality check.
    Just like most traditional architectural offices have their CAD drafting monkeys, there will be offices that just outsource their initial brief to a BIM monkey and get monkey results in return.

    The problem is not the tools, nor the technology, but their application in the process.

    I don’t see this article answering its title. BIM in itself is not crushing architecture. Bad practice might do so, whether we use BIM or CAD or napkin sketches or crumbled paper.

  16. There are a lot of great comments here. I see the authors’ arguments, in respect to BIM, hinging primarily on an observation about what happens to the design process when the bulk of the resource allocation shifts west on the MacLeamy curve? There is absolutely little counter-argument that this shift or migration to the left of the chart increases demand on the primary project designer to now pay attention to more inputs and players. With that new shift comes good and bad things. This new pressure described or warned about in the essay–to me–is the take-home part of the article. I agree with stefkeB that perhaps the article doesn’t truly answer the last part of the title. I imagine the authors gets interesting feedback when they run this in their AIA seminars. What is the solution to gaining incubation or gestation time for the main designer in the era of BIM where time pressures mount?

  17. VP: How BIM is Crushing the Art from Architecture and How to Stop It
    by louis smith and lisa stacholy via @architosh

  18. I don’t think the “How to stop it” in the title refers to the westward shift on the McLeamy curve. That shift can — and should — be there. It does make the project more effective and least cost. What is “stopped” is the removal of the artistic elements. Our workshops have shown us that, while weeks would be nice, dynamic and engaging concepts can be developed in less than a day. To do that it must be the focus of the work for that day! Our workshops are interactive. We show critical and creative thinking methods and practice their use on a variety of inspirations. Concepts are built by attendees according to program, sustainability requirements, zoning and code requirements. The participants are *almost* universally surprised with how well the concepts survive the pressures of the real world. This is especially true when the definition has more qualitative aspects and less quantitative ones. Our writing on the subject not withstanding, this is best learned by doing. The workshops are light on talking heads and long on “doing.” Lisa and I are enjoying the discussion. Much like with our concept workshop. There is no “one” right answer.

  19. Louis, very much enjoyed your clarification. Your workshops sound quite interesting…you will have to let us know when you are doing them again. As a past Thesis Studio instructor at the Boston Architectural College, developing a rigorous conceptual framework that not only guides the process and project successfully but can survive real-life practice pressures is easier said than done. I applaud the direction you and Lisa are taking professions’ minds.

  20. A provocative question posed on @Architosh today: is BIM at odds with art in architecture?
    What do you think?

Comments are closed.