Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

AutoDesk BIM_MGT_101 Exam - Topic 4 Question 3 Discussion

During a coordination meeting, project leads ask for a report showing only active clashes between mechanical systems and structural framing in patient-room zones, following the approved clash matrix.What is the most effective way to provide this report using Model Coordination?
A) Create a custom View from the published models, then export the filtered clash-list results.
B) Ask each discipline to review its own clash results and report any critical issues from its perspective.
C) Export all clash results to a spreadsheet and manually filter by trade and zone.
D) Assign all relevant clashes to mechanical and structural teams using the Issues tool.

AutoDesk BIM_MGT_101 Exam - Topic 4 Question 3 Discussion

Actual exam question for AutoDesk's BIM_MGT_101 exam
Question #: 3
Topic #: 4
[All BIM_MGT_101 Questions]

During a coordination meeting, project leads ask for a report showing only active clashes between mechanical systems and structural framing in patient-room zones, following the approved clash matrix.

What is the most effective way to provide this report using Model Coordination?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

A custom coordination view should be created using the applicable published mechanical and structural models and limited to the patient-room zones required by the approved clash matrix. The clash results can then be filtered by model pair, location, object category, and active status before the filtered list is exported. This produces a targeted report containing only the coordination conditions requested by the project leads.

The custom-view approach maintains the relationship between the clash records and the coordinated model geometry. It also makes the review repeatable: the BIM manager can return to the saved view during subsequent coordination cycles and evaluate whether the same discipline and location criteria have been resolved.

Asking individual disciplines to prepare independent reports creates inconsistent evaluation criteria and weakens the centralized coordination record. Exporting every clash and manually filtering the spreadsheet introduces unnecessary effort and increases the risk of omitting or misclassifying issues. Assigning clashes through the Issues tool is appropriate after clashes have been reviewed and determined to require action, but assignment does not itself generate the requested filtered clash report.

Reference topics: Autodesk Model Coordination; custom coordination views; clash filtering; clash matrices; published models; active-clash reporting; location-based coordination.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Glen
1 day ago
Wait, can we really trust the clash matrix to be accurate?
upvoted 0 times
...
Nida
6 days ago
D) seems like a good team approach, but will it slow things down?
upvoted 0 times
...
Loreen
11 days ago
C) sounds like a lot of extra work, why not just use A)?
upvoted 0 times
...
Crista
17 days ago
I disagree, B) could lead to missed issues.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annalee
22 days ago
A) is the quickest way to get just what they need.
upvoted 0 times
...
Deangelo
27 days ago
I recall that having each discipline review their own clashes, like in option B, might lead to missed issues. It seems less efficient for this scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amie
1 month ago
I practiced a similar question where filtering clashes was key. I feel like manually filtering in option C could be too time-consuming.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arminda
1 month ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I remember something about the Issues tool being useful for tracking problems. Maybe option D could work too?
upvoted 0 times
...
Troy
1 month ago
I think option A makes the most sense since creating a custom view should help focus on just the active clashes we need.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel