Reply To: Confused buyers don’t buy digital twins

[Henry Fenby-Taylor]

I tend to agree with you Vladimir, because the last thing we need is mis-selling in this area in the way that we’ve seen BIM wash, but I know that Michael Grieves would argue that a virtual model for simulation purposes was the first digital twin at NASA (that was then used for managing the asset once it was in space).

So perhaps we’re in danger of being too focused on the built environment where we have developed our own terms for 3D models with embedded information aka BIM which has its own problem, what is BIM?! The lines are very grey and Digital Twins could well have the same issue. 

Take a listen to what Michael has to say. It’s a tricky subject, because we do seem to be diverging from the international vision of digital twins, but as the man says himself ‘it’s an analogy you know’