Switching from ACAD to REVIT...

[jtiscareno]

General open question to all users of REVIT:

 

What is the big gain of changing from acad to revit? And what is the learning curve for cad users? And last,is revit good for any size project or only big ones?

 

Asking this cuz the big chief came all excited from the national AIA convetion in Vegas and asked me to get info on revit, said that revit was mentioned alot in the convention.

 

Thanks to all

[ihabkal]

I thought that Revit does not replace Autocad or else they will stop using Autocad or else Autodesk would have given Autocad an annhiliating blow, but it goes hand in hand with it in order to do more tasks easier than Autocad alone.

 

 

But after I read their FAQ at http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=5106381&siteID=123112&preview=1

 

4. Autodesk Revit Building handles building modeling well, but what about conventional drafting and detailing? Do I still need AutoCAD to get my work done?

 

You can work entirely in Autodesk Revit Building to generate your construction documentation. AutoCAD software is not required.

[Sawyer]

I am curious as to what Revit cannot do that you need cad for.

[jtiscareno]

I am curious as to what Revit cannot do that you need cad for.

 

It is not a question of what revit or acad can not do. I have read that BIM is the next great thing and all the hype but also have read that BIM has been slow to catch like they had said. So I and the office is curious to know from first hand users as to what is the big gain to switch or maybe switch is not the correct word maybe is to ADD revit to the construction document making process of the bussines.

[ihabkal]

I have tried it for a few minutes (demo) but I don't need it Autocad and max are my tools. but I think in 5 years any architectural firm will probalby use it. It is growing to be a standard. If you need to find a job, you need to learn Revit...or a similar product...

[AndyThomas]

Akzit,

 

Why switch to revit?

 

I am architectural technologist and my office is just switching to revit and I have been learning it through it's tutorials. I have also had a go at applying it to an actual job - always more troublesome. The tutorials are very simple to follow (point here, click here) but for someone with zero experience it gets you into the groove of how this program is compiled.

I am impressed with it and see that it will be able to replace ACAD completely. Saying that is a leap of faith, but whenever I think it can't do something, some exploration shows that it can, and it integrates it into the model. I see it as useful for both small and large projects.

Standard drafting can be done with it but it seems so weird and does not have the myriad of tools and features we are so used to with ACAD. It is not a 'drafting' package and a certain amount of mental shift is required to be in Revit 'mode'.

Papers have been produced on the learning curve and integratin into architectural practices and I must try and get them in a reply to you. It was someone else on this site who sent the links to them to me.

Basically it was found that Revit had the expected teethign problems being introduced as a new package to the office but was surprisingly quick at bringin back up to previous productivity and then rapidly exceeding it. A six month period may be an approximate period for the lull if I remember rightly.

 

All the best

 

Andy

[cdos00]

Because Revit is a BIM and not a CAD drafting software you cannot even remotely compare them. Let me offer this comparison to everyone:

 

How do you compare AutoCAD to Max?

 

Answer: you cannot. AutoCAD is a drafting software and accels in the 2D realm. It is extremely efficient at creating "stupid" geometry. The lines don't have any actions associated to them for the most part. Max, is a modeling/rendering software. Yes, you can draft in 2D in Max, yes you can creat "stupid geometry" in Max. You can render in AutoCAD, you can Model in AutoCAD, you can even creat lights and cameras. However, you don't. Because AutoCAD isn't good at it. Similarly, you don't use MAX to create construction documents with details. Because it isn't good at it. (nor was it part of why that software was developed.)

 

So, with this in mind, Revit has doesn't have ANYTHING in common with AutoCAD, Revit really accels at B.I.M. (Building Information Modeling) while you can technically draft in 2D in Revit, AutoCAD is the KING of drafting. Revit will be the KING of B.I.M.

 

If you needed an architect you wouldn't hire a concrete installer would you?

 

Don't buy a B.I.M. if you need a 2D drafting package.

 

another interesting piece of information to chew on: AutoCAD has been in existence since the early '80s, it has developed into a "do-all" software. However, it doesn't do everything well. It does one thing better than anyone else...2D Drafting. That is what they need to concentrate on. They just buy the rest of the software (Revit, Dwf, Max, Viz) and then integrate those software designers into their company.

 

Just food for thought.

[manta]

The thing I've never understood about Autocad, is that it doesn't care whether

your drawings match up, I started in 3D, and always took it for granted when I changed something in the top veiw, everything changed in every veiw, when my architect friend told me that he had to change every drawing everytime the client changed their mind, I thought to myself thats silly, I mean the software is smart enough, why can't they program it to know that moving this wall, that it needs to do so in all the drawings...

[Arnel]

The thing I've never understood about Autocad, is that it doesn't care whether

your drawings match up, I started in 3D, and always took it for granted when I changed something in the top veiw, everything changed in every veiw, when my architect friend told me that he had to change every drawing everytime the client changed their mind, I thought to myself thats silly, I mean the software is smart enough, why can't they program it to know that moving this wall, that it needs to do so in all the drawings...

 

That is what Revit does best coordinating changes in all your views let it be 3d, elevations, sections, schedule and etc. Thus the mantra Change anywhere and revit propagate all the changes everyhere in you documents.

 

At its core is the very powerful and the only fully parametric engine in the market today. Change anything anywhere it will be coordinated live in all your documents no need for any updating.

 

It can do all sorts of projects from small to huge projects.

[manta]

That is what Revit does best coordinating changes in all your views let it be 3d, elevations, sections, schedule and etc. Thus the mantra Change anywhere and revit propagate all the changes everyhere in you documents.

 

At its core is the very powerful and the only fully parametric engine in the market today. Change anything anywhere it will be coordinated live in all your documents no need for any updating.

 

It can do all sorts of projects from small to huge projects.

\

 

So are you saying, that if a person wanted to just do 2D drawings, that it would still be parametric, I tell ya it would sure save him alot of time and effort, enough to take on more work...

 

Oh one more thing, he used the command line alot, is there one in revit ?

[Sawyer]

I am a clear cut Revit novice so take this with that in mind but -

 

Of all of the major apps I have learned Revit is the easiest to get running with. That may just mean I am at the dangerous stage nevertheless. You can take a cad file that you have done click on the lines they become walls just like that. Note a datum spot for elevation and that carries through to your wall paramenters (datum a floor height at 13' call it 2nd floor then you have the option of creating walls at that level). If you ever wanted a program that an architect created for creating building models the way architects think...

[Riff]

Although I agree that the concept of B.I.M. is valid, I don't understand the Revit workflow.

 

Drawing from my field experience, a complex structure is actualized from many members of the construction 'village'. The architectural firm (s) and other members of the design team generally do not provide a definitive set of construction documents. Money is time and time alloted within a budget leads to (essentially) a construction outline. Much is left for the builders to engineer and detail.

 

So what does Autodesk require the village to do? Every subcontractor buy in to $4600 of Revit program with additional subscription costs? Every participant retrain and reorganize their workflow for this single project? And then "turn on a dime" back to their original setup for other projects that they are responsible for?

 

Also can the single 3d Revit model handle the immense detail of the various assemblies that comprise a high dollar and unique structure? Can a modern workstation running Revit handle ALL that geometry efficiently (not talking about concept or outline here)?

 

To commit and rely on a single provider of software could be potentially dangerous to the cost, schedule and finished quality of project.

 

I believe that both diversity and coordination are needed actual real world situations. In the past I have seen more diversity than coordination, therefore I really do feel that a 3d model is desirable. However, I am not sure that blind trust in Autodesk's Revit should replace the 'diversity' component.

 

Please persuade me otherwise.

 

Riff

[Richard McCarthy]

Hey Riff

Glad you finally take the plunge and post here hehe...

 

I agree there is the danger of having ONE corporation controlling the market, and market definitely needs "diversity", but you have to remember diversity comes with a GREAT COST. File inter-change/interopratibility will always be a problem if you using different sets of tools, and the level of coordinations require are also a cost not to be forgotten.

 

I certainly do not agree to the pricing structure of Revit, which is quite unaffordable for small firms, but there is no reason to totally deny it's benefit and merit it provides for its target market audience (medium size to LARGE firms). In most cases, from my 2 years of experience using it and working in several medium-large firms, Revit definitely brings immense benefit, and streamline the production in most aspect of the practice. It require much less coordination, revision is a breeze, and lastly, learning curve is much gentler compare to other CAD/BIM software. You can almost certainly get up and running it without even a manual to refer to, and goes through most of the drafting duties without peoples help! It reacted more or less like what Architect thinks. So, there could be a problem with this, as it's more or less oriented towards architects.

 

In most cases, training staff to use Revit takes no more than a week (full-time) to get them up and running in MOST major projects, (3 days in most cases actually) the rest is mostly help and support from the more experienced Revit users dispensing tips and tricks.

 

Also, in my experience, coordination with contractor wasn't much of a problem either. Most firms use Autodesk products, mainly, AutoCAD, and Revit provides support for DWG formats, which every CAD application can export to. Revit itself can export to DWG as well, and this is the bases of most workflow:

The Architect design in Revit, export to DWG, and sents to engineers and contractors for analysis/detailing/printing (most likely with AutoCAD or even lower cost CAD app such as TurboCAD), the revised version is sent back in DWG and Architect can overlay that DWG by importing it back into Revit for the necessary changes.

[RAYMOND]

are you talking about switching from ADT to Revit

or just plain AutoCAD to Revit...

 

I don't think there is much more than Revit can do than ADT

Revit is very confining... ADT is quite a bit more open and flexable.

 

Also Revit has the pain of having its own format... why they did this is beyond me...

 

Also, I thot Revit used Accurender which runs within Cad.... nice program but its not a max program...

 

Also, they claim Revit is the future, I would really doubt that, the concept yes the program itself no.

[Scott Davis]

I don't think there is much more than Revit can do than ADT Revit is very confining... ADT is quite a bit more open and flexable.

 

Revit is confining? I don't think so! ADT's extreme 'management' of the software to make it do what you want it to do is confining!

 

Also Revit has the pain of having its own format... why they did this is beyond me...

 

ummm...because Revit was a separate company, and was later bought by Autodesk. It still reads and writes DWG. Often times better than ADT which has had huge problems in previous versions with Object Enablers, which were not very user friendly.

 

Also, I thot Revit used Accurender which runs within Cad.... nice program but its not a max program...

 

No, it's not Max, but anyone can figure out how to produce decent renderings with it without needing a PhD in Max.

 

Also, they claim Revit is the future, I would really doubt that, the concept yes the program itself no.

 

You really haven't used Revit, have you?

[jtiscareno]

Thanks to all for your input and comments.

 

To answer the last question, we have Architectural desktop but we dont use it at all. I sort of know the basics of its working but tought that was a little to confusing and cumbersom to use to its full potential. I think and read that Revit is a "true" BIM, and that the workflow is much more intuitive than desktop. In regards to the rendering capabilities of revit, I am an experienced user of accurender 3 and accurender 4 is in the works and is supposed to be way better and hopefully faster also... But is just like having vizrender in architectural desktop, no one will use it maybe just for a quick viz of the model in revit and that is it. But if Revit has a thrid party render like Accurender what is stopping Brazil, Vray or Maxwell to make their third party render for it and then totally enhencing the rendering capebilities of it. (just look at what is happening to Rhino, it started with flamingo and off-shoot of accuredner and know brazil is making a plug in for it and maxwell is making one too: http://reconstructivism.net/index.htm?brazilalphatesting.htm ).

 

Concering cost, I dont know how much it cost per seat and I am guessing that the boss knows it wont be cheap to make the change. I think he is more concered in the learing curve for such a big switch, I have like the description that autocad is a drafting tool and that anyone that knows it can pick up redmarks and draft but to use revit there has to be a wider knowladge of architecture know-how (i mean the technical aspect) to put a virtual building together.

 

I would imagine that if we go ahead with the switch it would be in increments, get a couple of us to get to use it and then "teach" the rest of the office to make the change.

 

Again thanks to all for the responses and the discussion, it has been most helpful.