Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008
- From: "Donald Bruckman" <bruckmandesign(--nospam--at)verizon.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:10:59 -0700
I made the switch, (I’m an Architect) to Revit about 18 months ago and wouldn’t go back to 2D software or even the partially BIM-inized Architectural Desktop type stuff if you paid me to do it.
Couple of points.
First, expect a steep learning curve. Revit does things and organizes things differently. But stay with it and it will begin to make sense. The biggest problem with Revit is that it is so comprehensive that it doesn’t enjoy it when you want to knock out something quick and dirty. So there is a minimum amount of additional work for small projects that may be irrelevant to the work, but that you need to lay in anyway. So it isn’t ideal for very small projects or small remodels.
Second, what makes, (or is going to make) your life heavenly is that you are not encumbered by the architect’s drawings to understand the design. The architect can no longer hide bad scenarios from you by simply not cutting a section somewhere. Everything in the model can be cut, viewed, rotated, isolated and manipulated. The architect’s model is sent to you and all of your questions can be ferreted out by simply rotating the model, cutting sections or viewing the model in 3D from a particular direction.
Third, after you lay in the structure, Revit can run a compatibility check to see if AC ducts or stairways are in the way of the structure, if headroom is an issue and similar things.. You send the structural back to the architect, and his version of the model is updated with your structure. He can then go through the same process and determine if there are design issues. When you get the model back again, changes made to the model since you last saw it are highlighted by Revit so you can see what changed.
Fourth, although I have no knowledge of it, Revit Structure is said to be integrated with some analysis program(s) although I do not know which. I do know that all the beams and columns are all fully documented in the program, so Revit knows what the Sxx or Ixx of that beam you just laid onto the plan is in anticipation of the analysis program kicking in...
Finally, the best thing is that once it’s changed on the model, It’s changed on each and every plan, section and elevation in the set and if a detail reference is changed, it is changed everywhere. Never again will you have Section A or Detail 8 referenced to the wrong sheet or detail.
I kid you not. I haven’t used ACAD more than a half dozen days since I switched to Revit.
Welcome to the brave new world. Pretty soon our clients won’t even need us….
From: Jeremy White
I have very limited experience with Revit (2 small projects), but I do have a few thoughts on the subject.
If you are familiar with other BIM software then it might not be hard to make the switch. When I first started using Revit I found certain seemingly simple tasks frustrating because I knew how to easily do it in 2D CAD, but it seemed Revit complicated the task (until I figured out how to do it, and do it the right way). Then it becomes second nature like anything else. I now sometimes get frustrated that 2D CAD doesn't do some of the things that Revit does.
On another note, I find BIM to be a "fun" way to design a building because you get to actually build it in the software. BIM software helps satify that nagging urge to build/create that just can't be fulfilled with 2D software. Maybe that's just my personality trait, though. I am bugging my bosses to get me another project suited for Revit.
- Prev by Subject: Re: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008
- Next by Subject: RE: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008
- Previous by thread: Re: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008
- Next by thread: RE: CAD: AutoCAD Revit Structure Suite 2008