Courtesy of Acelab
Share
Share
Or
https://www.archdaily.com/1183861/how-material-intelligence-solves-what-bim-cant
The original promise of BIM (Building Information Modeling) went far beyond the three-dimensional representation of a building. Its ambition was to turn the model into a coordinated information structure, in which geometry, components, systems, and data remained connected as the project evolved. Changes to one element could be reflected across corresponding plans, sections, elevations, and quantities; clashes between different disciplines could be identified before construction; and information associated with building components could follow the project through different stages of its life cycle.
In the early 2000s, Dave Lemont, now Executive Chairman of Acelab, was among a small group involved in shaping this vision during the period following Autodesk’s acquisition of Revit Technology Corporation, when the strategy and terminology around BIM were still being discussed. Two decades later, this approach has moved well beyond pioneering practices and become part of the everyday workflow of much of the construction industry and its scope has also expanded into areas such as scheduling, cost, and management.
Yet, according to Lemont himself, models never fully delivered on that promise. One of the most persistent gaps appears in the transition between the modeled element and the product that will ultimately be specified. A model may define the geometry, composition, and performance requirements of a wall, roof, or facade, but decisions about which product to use, from which manufacturer, with which certifications, environmental data, specification section, keynote, and technical documentation are still commonly distributed across platforms, spreadsheets, PDFs, and databases. Also, product information changes continuously: lines are discontinued, formulations change, and new certifications are introduced. Even a well-organized internal library therefore requires constant maintenance if the information it contains is to remain reliable.
The issue is not necessarily BIM’s ability to store this information, but rather how well it can keep it structured and synchronized throughout the process. When a product selection changes without specifications, schedules, drawings, and other documents being updated at the same time, discrepancies can emerge between what was selected, specified, and documented. And the later these inconsistencies are identified, the more costly they tend to become.
Courtesy of AcelabThe idea behind material intelligence is to bring product information into the project’s working data, so it remains connected across selections, specifications, and documentation. Performance, certifications, environmental impact, cost, and technical information can then be linked to material selections and updated as those selections evolve. It is less about adding more data to the model than about keeping the information behind material decisions current and consistent throughout the project.
Acelab’s Material Hub is one example of how this approach can be applied in practice. Built around this gap, it organizes product and material information as structured data and keeps it connected to the documentation that depends on it as the project develops. In this sense, it extends BIM’s coordination logic to specification decisions. The platform brings together data related to aesthetics, performance, certifications, embodied carbon, and cost, linking it to specifications, schedules, and drawings developed in Autodesk Revit. This information is organized into three layers:
- Database: brings together more than 200,000 products, sorted according to performance information, certifications, and sustainability metrics, treating them as structured data rather than simply catalog content.
- Library: maintains each firm’s history of products and material decisions, preserving knowledge accumulated across projects, including previous experience with use, installation, and sourcing.
- Collaborative workflow: allows architects, specifiers, manufacturers, contractors, and owners to work from a shared source of material information, reducing the need to reconcile different versions scattered across emails, PDFs, and other documents.
This becomes even more relevant in interiors and FF&E (Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment), where not every selection necessarily corresponds to an object in the model. A paint color, wallcovering, or fabric, for example, may exist in schedules and specifications without ever becoming a Revit family or modeled object. In these cases, coordination has to happen through the information and documentation itself rather than through geometry alone.
Courtesy of AcelabPart of the project documentation can then be generated directly from specification decisions. Through what Acelab calls Smart Docs, information associated with selected products feeds specifications, schedules, keynotes, and sustainability reports, reducing the need to update each document separately when a selection changes. According to data provided by Acelab, firms using this workflow report reductions of up to 50% in the time spent on material documentation.
What Changes for the Project Team
The main shift is that material decisions can enter the project earlier. Things like performance data, certifications, environmental impact, and cost can be considered while solutions are still being developed, rather than being addressed primarily during documentation. Because those decisions remain connected to specifications, schedules, and drawings, they can also be easier to track as the project moves from design to construction.
BIM established a framework for coordinating a building’s geometry and components across disciplines. Product and material information, however, has often remained less integrated into that process. The next step for BIM is to bring these decisions into the same coordinated information environment, helping reduce inconsistencies, rework, cost overruns, and material waste.