3-D modeling has been around for several years, but it isn't used enough.

The uses of 3-D include engineering drawings, community information guides and assisting juries and arbitrators in understanding the nuances of a construction project. Despite its appearance on the engineering scene years ago, the application and understanding of the importance of 3-D modeling has not been consistently applied in the industry. While there may be a delta in the cost to use such modeling over traditional two-dimensional drawings, the potential cost consequences from an error on a project could be far greater than any initial investment.

My observation comes from my own personal experience in on-going projects as well as multiple litigative forums. The vast difference between viewing a 3–D model and viewing a flat two–dimensional picture is enormous. What is the old saying? A picture is worth a thousand words.

Take for instance an urban setting where multiple underground utilities are to be installed. Consider when joint utility trenches not only have to be designed but constructed according to several different codes and standards, which can be further complicated by multiple jurisdictions. Requirements for separation distance and depth all play critical roles in the placement. So, on a line diagram that is colored to show placement of the different utilities, it isn't possible is to visualize the potential interferences. It isn't possible to visualize the impossibilities of a particular design because of how the different utilities will interact in the underground system. It can't be done.

What can result is delay and cost overruns when construction begins and both the constructor and the designer grapple with the maze of pipe and conduit keeping in mind the codes and safety considerations. Consider also the traffic congestion that occurs as the direct result of not only ripping up the roadway, but having to keep it open until decisions and possible redesigns are performed. However, these delays, disruptions and cost overruns can be avoided and/or mitigated through the use of 3-D modeling of the design drawings before issuance of bid sets of drawings. The ability of the constructor to visualize the complexities of the required construction and the ability of the designer to visualize whether the design actually meets the requirements under which the design is performed, results in a project that can be more accurately bid and constructed within the time parameters set forth in the contract.

Most designers today possess the software and hardware to produce such documents, yet, more often than not, the final drawings as completed, still reflect technology of decades prior.

Holograms have a lot of potential and could become the norm in the future. Visual pictures of the entire project are displayed over a table for everyone to look at in every angle and dimension. The project literally appears in front of you exactly as depicted in the design and how it will look once constructed. Disney began using this technology a few years ago and has made significant progress in its ability to more accurately depict the outcome of the final project before construction begins.

Design is not the only application where 3-D modeling has benefit. If you have ever had to explain a complex project to a jury of your peers or to a community public hearing, you may appreciate the need for the best images that can be developed. 3-D imaging is particularly useful when attempting to show the layman how a project will be constructed over time. Being able to depict the various components of the project over time greatly enhances one's ability to better understand complex issues and problems which may have arose during the project.Understanding the context of what is being said is half the battle.

With project costs rising and contractors' margins declining, it's time to look at the options that would greatly improve the design and construction process. One proven tool is 3-D modeling. Owners and designers should work together to review the benefits and reap the rewards with on-time and on-budget projects.

July 5, 2007

I like your comment on 3D. I am a serious advocate of 3D presentations too. I am an Architect from Nigeria and desire softwares as regarding 3D applications as I lack them making it difficult to really learn. I would also appreciate tutorials. Prefarable softwares are Autocad '07, 3dsmax and any of its major plugins, but tutorials will be of greater importance especially on rendering. Thank you very much.

Kabir Ahmadu, Architect

June 29, 2007

I have been doing 3D modeling for 6 years for a large A&E firm. The clients love it. We find that most were unable to visualize when presented with 2D drawings.

I was involved with a 2 year project that employed about 200 engineers and designers. There were NO interferences during construction. The added expense on the front end was well worth a smooth construction process.

Susan M Schaefer

June 29, 2007

Right on, I will forward this to my boss.

Robert Levy
CPZ Architects

June 29, 2007

You can also use 3d printing and physical modeling as output from 3d digital CAD. New technologies are making the applications faster and less expensive.

For solid adoption of 3d CAD, the business model needs to change so that the instrument of transaction, the item getting stamped by the professional, is no longer a drawing but a digital model.

Charles Overy
LGM Model

June 29, 2007

I've been 3D modeling since 1987, and I fully agree with all of your comments.

Fred Schriever, Architect
OAA MRAIC

June 29, 2007

As a civil engineer, I use 3d modelling on a daily basis. My primary use is building 3d wire frame models of project grading plans. The first time I used this process was in designing the grading for the airfield of the new airport in Hong Kong, in 1993. The software, at that time, was not very sophisticated. But the process that we implemented allowed my CADD drafters to extract details of the model directly into project plans without re­calculating spot elevations and grades.

I recently used a 3d model for checking the configuration of a radar tower pad site on top of a hill. To create enough area for the site, retaining walls had to be built on three sides of the square site. The tallest wall was 20 feet high and because of the existing topography of the hill, steps were required in the wall foundations. We modelled the walls and the foundations to confirm the required height and foundation width.

Several years ago, I started to research the possibility of using DTM data from designers as an input to earth­moving and paving equipment, to reduce the possible errors in construction staking. I believe research on this is on­going at Michigan Tech in Houghton.

All this doesn't address your point of checking pipe conflicts, but the mechanical engineers have been using plant design software for several years. Maybe we need to do some cross­pollenization.

Dave Akers, PE
V.P. and Senior Project Manager
Huitt-Zollars, Inc