Use of the Level Of Detail (LOD) concept among american architects?

[m.knutsson714642]

Hi,

How does american architects follow/use the Level Of Detail concept in reality?
We're participating in an R&D-project concerning BIM-information classification and it would be beneficial not to invent the wheel all over so we're looking at the LOD-system. Does LOD make sense in a real world environment? Anyone using it and can share experiences? Do you as arch get LOD-demands on your BIM-modelling (...we want a 3D model of the new hotel in LOD 200 next thursday...and LOD 300 in seven weeks)? Is it common or just a seleceted few large firms or nothing?

I post this in a cad-forum since many BIM-architects reside here...:)

Cheers,
Mat

[sbrown]

I maybe behind the times because I have never had a client know what LOD is or ask for it. So we model what we need to produce CD's and Design Drawings. So as to date with over 12 years of revit use I have yet to use LOD. But the clients I've worked for are all private companies. So I know that companies that work with Franchise and Government projects have used LOD.

I see practical problems with it, in that the design process requires detailed models early for visualization, then dumbed down models(graphically) for construction models.

[david_peterson]

"Level of Detail" or "Level of Development"? 2 different things. If you are referring to the AIA E202, it's level of development. I've seen it in some of the State Standards. There's a few that have them defined. Wisconsin is one of them I believe. From a Structural side we start at 300. It's really kind of hard to do anything much less and be able to complete CD's. As a design firm, I don't think you can really go beyond 300. After that, you're getting into specific vendors for the most part. I don't model bolts or bars as they aren't required. I don't do 3d connections as they aren't required. If a client requests it, I guess I'd pass on my model to the Steel fabricator and let them import all that stuff.
I'd disagree that in the design process that you start at a high detail and dumb things down. At least that hasn't been my experience. Then again, we use sketch up for most of our design process due to rendering times with revit. Sketch-up is just quicker. Or I should say at least it was. Also easier to change IMHO for SD's.
Just my 2 cents.

[MikeJarosz]

LOD 100,200,300 and 400 are roughly equivalent to schematic design, design development, construction documents and construction administration, project phases US Architects have used forever. James Vandezande, with whom I worked for years at SOM, wrote a blog explaining it some time ago. http://www.allthingsbim.com/search?updated-min=2008-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&updated-max=2009-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&max-results=19

He recently updated his thoughts on LOD. http://www.allthingsbim.com/2012/05/agc-bimforum-and-more.html

I am just about to begin a huge new project and the Owner has required us to use LOD. We have written it into our BIM Execution Plan, and it is currently in the approval process. The level of development concept doesn't frighten me all that much because, as I said above, all it really is is SD, DD, CD and CA, with some updated terminology. On the other hand, I don't know anyone who has actually used the AIA E202 form. Certainly, liability is an issue with LOD.