New into Revit.... we're having trouble with Revit 2010 -- that is, it does not appear that one can "save down" a drawing created in 2010 to 2009.
Am I doing something wrong?
New into Revit.... we're having trouble with Revit 2010 -- that is, it does not appear that one can "save down" a drawing created in 2010 to 2009.
Am I doing something wrong?
there are those that are revit zealots and those that are not. in the end, it is merely a tool. if that tools helps you to create whatever you call architecture - great! personally, i don't think it's a panacaea, and i do not plan on integrating it into my working method until mandated by the client or the construction industry.
Not to defend Autodesk, but there is another reason that you can't save down to an earlier version other than monetary reasons.
It is because of the complexity of BIM softwares in general, and how young (relatively) this software is. They are still making pretty significant changes to the software, and there is just no way you can create an equivolent model into a previous version - because there was no system or infrastructure in place before to support it. For example, in the 2010 version, they are adding NURB capability, a different kind of system for generating form, and panelization. How would the older versions read it properly? Even if it could "read" it as some geometric form, you would lose the control and the BIM capabilities.
It seems they are still not in the stage of refining the software, but still reDEfining the scope of it as they go along. I think this is pretty common for BIM software in general.
I still have mixed feelings about having such a software giant having so much control.
I have nothing againnt Autodesk -- really more of a surprise thatn anything else when I realized my structural guy only had '09, and I had done everytyhing in '10, and could not save down...
IMO, I think AutoDesk is heading towards a Vista-like meltdown in the very near future. They keep swallowing all these add-on companies & software (IES, Ecotech, Navisworks, etc) and half-assedly integrate them with Revit in attempt to sell Revit as a one-stop shopping/can do it all program. Rolling out half-baked versions definitely won't help. I think an already clunky and buggy program is going to get even more bogged down and cumbersome. It's trying to do way too much and just trying to use the software is getting in the way of design & production.
What's really interesting (or frightening) to look at is how this perceived industry shift to BIM is affecting how contracts, project delivery, coordination, and liability insurance will be structured in this new format.
The AIA recently published a document on this shift to IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) - it tries to paint a rosey picture of Owner, Architect, Consultants, and Contractor all sitting at the table in agreement. Give it a read sometime...
dml955i - I don't think the affect on contracts, project delivery, coordination and liability should be frightening because it is still a choice and the "traditional" method is still valid. We simply have more options. Not that this model is necessarily better, but I like the idea of an evolving model, and having alternatives.
wow, just installed 2010, and dml & starti you guys are right.
Autodesk continues to redefine and expand the scope of Revit. Seems like they've added some very cool features, but have totally skipped some of the BASIC things that need to be reworked/fixed/improved. It's like there's a bunch of software nerds that only want to work on the cool projects in the office and enhancing the text box isn't one of them. (Sound similar to archi offices?)
Gonna give the new MRay2 a workout this afternoon.
I been using Revit since 9.0 and Autodesk definitely fumbled the rollout of 2010. They were so concerned about attracting new users that they forgot about their existing users.
I like Revit because it forces you to think how a building goes together. And, it automates a lot of the time-consuming coordination exercises that drive me crazy in AutoCAD.
I believe that once you have worked on several projects in Revit that you end up with a better project. But, most importantly, you only get out of it what you put into it. That can be said for any software one uses...
i just finished a Revit class and our office is slowly starting to use it for projects
I think it is an ok program, will definitely take some time to integrate with everyone, and there will be many growing pains
but i imagine once people get comfortable with it, it will be an asset.
having never really used a BIM program before, i cant compare it to others out there, but it seems like it is good enough, with 2010 having some good upgrades
i imagine it is not perfect, but this is the direction things are heading, so it is a step in the right direction it seems
the problem will be with offices allowing room for growing pains with changing to this type of production
the question of how this effects contracts or project delivery, i dont think is really a concern
you arent delivering a model, you will still deliver a construction document set
I would think that contractors and owners shouldnt necessarily notice a difference in what you produce
tidalwave is right though
it will all depend on the users actually spending the time to learn how to use it correctly and efficiently for it to be worthwhile
i have already seen some instances where people in my firm will not take the time required to adjust to a new program, and have fallen into their old standards
I have now watched almost every single video autodesk has made... and I'm not to sure what their software actually does now.
The music is awful. Does Revit generate awful music?
</joke>
But the video for Revit Structure is highly misleading. I didn't get an iota of information about how it "does science" just that it does it.
Also, the videos talking about Revit don't show any actual buildings getting made by Revit other than some pipes, a joint and the same building that is in every single video.
Would you like Revit better if the music in the videos was this.
its true potential is still years away...but it is the way of the future as someone put it, and like it or not, we'll all be using it soon enough...
my fear is more philosophical...with Revit, or any other BIM software, we - our profession - are exchanging intellectual ownership to the software...in other words, the machine starts to do the thinking based on our data input (as autocad was a basic draft tool in its heyday). i personally think we've traded enough...
soon, the kids won't know how to draw sections anymore...and damn, sections are an important thing to draw...
one last point...if we were able to use this new -powerful- tool to increase productivity, reduce cost so we can keep more of our fee, or schedule, so we could better design, produce better buildings, investigate better solutions and therefore enhance the value of our profession, i would probably not be so negative...but based on what i've seen so far, we'll use this tool to create things quicker, think less, charge less, and lose more credibility and value...
but hey, it's monday...so i might be just in a bad mood...
I think what you are feeling simples is what "traditional" print designers felt by the introduction of new layout systems that popped up in newspapers around 2001. The managed colors by itself, adjusted columns by itself, it laid out pages by itself, it typesetted by itself.
It increased workflow and productivity so much that individuals soon realized that they were becoming obsolete by their own software that they whole heartedly endorsed. A single designer could now layout entire sections instead of just pages.
If it becomes easier, cheaper and quicker to make a project materialized... will there be a need to expand the workforce.
Cost and redundancy are cute words for "employees and contractors." Pushing for BIM everywhere might push people out of jobs because the software is replacing the bottom line.
it sucks because it is autodesk is trying to dominate the industry yet again and the GSA demanded interoperability and they have no such intention.
choice and compatibility matter, avoid the trap.
the day when the state stands up to monopolies and anti-competitive practices i hope will one day return. the dictatorship of the corporate patent is nothing pretty for the future of humanity.
My secret wish for Rhino, that McNeel could develop an interface for managing so many details and sheets, like Revit .
Rhino will always be #1 for doing Architecture, in my book, but I love Revit's ability to organize sheets and project documentation. A rhino to ai workflow is cumbersome, even if it is graphically superior.
You say that Rhino is the number one for doing Architecture. Do you document in it too (floor plans, sections, elevations) or just use it for 3d modeling?
harold when the workers own the company and the users drive the development it feels allot better to beta test because you are working for yourself so to speak not the stock holders who will and can not listen and only seek a continued profit model for monopolization.
jaja,
well I guess that statement is pretty funny now that i think if it.
In general the workflow is what I am getting at here.
i.e. right now my workflow for the curent project is :
Revit for programming/massing
then to rhino/grsshopper for cooler tectionics
then to Max for geometry refinements.
back to Revit for organization of details and quick 2d work or ai.
i guess that sounds crazy...
revitkid,
The only issue I have with Revitkid.com is that although I think the website is actually good and helpful especially for beginners...but it just seems kind of a kiss ass way to do it..I mean IMHO, you should be promoting Design and the assorted tools you use vs getting super specific about a single tool, especially one that is mainly a Kit of Parts type of application. But again..I think you are doing good job at "all things revit"
FF33 - that sounds exactly right. Rhino is simply the best at manipulating complex geometries / forms into a workable solid or surface. I dont use it much, but when I need to model something with any complexity I go Rhino to get the geometry. From there I can send to any other program.
Revit is king for organising sheets and sections and ability to do section presentation cuts imho - still a little slow for me on the CDs side
FF33 - "I mean IMHO, you should be promoting Design and the assorted tools you use vs getting super specific about a single tool, especially one that is mainly a Kit of Parts type of application."
I believe I am doing exactly that. Look at my Revit Classroom Student Workflow Chart... It revolves around using Revit but I also introduced tons of other software to help the Design process while utilizing Revit.
Anti - "I sure hope they are paying you well to be their 'kid'"
No one is paying me anything for the site... Accept for Google Adsense.
How does Revit perform with site grading? If an architect/engineer is basing the project on Revit, it might be nice to stay in the same software across all the design trades, but I don't want to learn it if it doesn't really address my work.
(landscape architect who has never used Revit)
revitkid,
Ok I see your point. I don't mean to be rude, because in general i appreciate your efforts. and....As you can see from my post I have alternate workflows to consider. ... that involve Rhino
I think what Anti was getting at was how commercially branded your name and site identity are. I for one am a big fan of Revitcity.com vs Augi, just because it is not sponsored by Autodesk. So i think your site is also good that way as being independent of them.
This thread is proof that there is a backlash in the Architectural community from what Revit means in the way of homogeneous design solutions and hyper production-oriented work flows for good Architectural practice.
Spent the money to buy the software, replace the computers, train the staffs...but the biggest cost will probably be teaching everyone how a building is built.
Sometimes I feel like our office is working for Revit, as oppose to Revit working for us...
I can argue the introduction of Revit means our buildings are becoming too complicated. I tend to agree. Revit can also be limiting. When you rely on Bim modeling for final production, one may find themselves sacrificing design quality simply because it cannot be reproduced in Revit. I've yet to work with Digital Project, but it seems to be more flexible regarding design possibilities.
I will add, I feel Revit mostly exists for the large corporate firms whose central focus is getting drawing out the door and buildings built as fast as possible. They use BIM modeling for speed, not necessity.
i dont doubt that Revit is good when creating documentation (plans, detail drawings) but as a modeling, form finding, conceptual massing tool, it plain sucks and can be frustrating with all the constraints. Compared to hand sketching and model building, software is slow as it is.. Revit is worse. The way the 'Massing' tools aren't well integrated with their main drawing/documentation tools seems to be its downside. Even in Rhino, you have the ability to work with your floor plans and modeling tools at the same time. In Revit, you have to open a separate conceptual massing file or work with their 'In-place Massing' method... The inability to snap conceptual massing elements to your dimensioned floor plans/volumes etc and having to work on each like two different entities make it frustrating. It would've been nice to have the accuracy of documentation tools and be able to work with conceptual massing at the same time, not having to jump back and forth between the two and the inability to use many of the tools found in the main project browser window. :/
Revit Sucks!
New into Revit.... we're having trouble with Revit 2010 -- that is, it does not appear that one can "save down" a drawing created in 2010 to 2009.
Am I doing something wrong?
New into Revit.... we're having trouble with Revit 2010 -- that is, it does not appear that one can "save down" a drawing created in 2010 to 2009.
Am I doing something wrong?
there are those that are revit zealots and those that are not. in the end, it is merely a tool. if that tools helps you to create whatever you call architecture - great! personally, i don't think it's a panacaea, and i do not plan on integrating it into my working method until mandated by the client or the construction industry.
...KURT... You cannot save down to 2009... If you are working with consultant models, you all have to be on the same version..
Wow.
Know why it works that way? Seems odd.
Kurt
Money, Its all about money$$$$
If you cant open a file from your consultants who has a newer version of Revit or vice versa - some one is going to have to upgrade ---$$$
Probably right d-fix...
We're all just pawns signing up for little game, aren't we...?
Not to defend Autodesk, but there is another reason that you can't save down to an earlier version other than monetary reasons.
It is because of the complexity of BIM softwares in general, and how young (relatively) this software is. They are still making pretty significant changes to the software, and there is just no way you can create an equivolent model into a previous version - because there was no system or infrastructure in place before to support it. For example, in the 2010 version, they are adding NURB capability, a different kind of system for generating form, and panelization. How would the older versions read it properly? Even if it could "read" it as some geometric form, you would lose the control and the BIM capabilities.
It seems they are still not in the stage of refining the software, but still reDEfining the scope of it as they go along. I think this is pretty common for BIM software in general.
I still have mixed feelings about having such a software giant having so much control.
Makes sense, Slarti -- reasonable explanation.
I have nothing againnt Autodesk -- really more of a surprise thatn anything else when I realized my structural guy only had '09, and I had done everytyhing in '10, and could not save down...
IMO, I think AutoDesk is heading towards a Vista-like meltdown in the very near future. They keep swallowing all these add-on companies & software (IES, Ecotech, Navisworks, etc) and half-assedly integrate them with Revit in attempt to sell Revit as a one-stop shopping/can do it all program. Rolling out half-baked versions definitely won't help. I think an already clunky and buggy program is going to get even more bogged down and cumbersome. It's trying to do way too much and just trying to use the software is getting in the way of design & production.
What's really interesting (or frightening) to look at is how this perceived industry shift to BIM is affecting how contracts, project delivery, coordination, and liability insurance will be structured in this new format.
The AIA recently published a document on this shift to IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) - it tries to paint a rosey picture of Owner, Architect, Consultants, and Contractor all sitting at the table in agreement. Give it a read sometime...
dml955i - I don't think the affect on contracts, project delivery, coordination and liability should be frightening because it is still a choice and the "traditional" method is still valid. We simply have more options. Not that this model is necessarily better, but I like the idea of an evolving model, and having alternatives.
wow, just installed 2010, and dml & starti you guys are right.
Autodesk continues to redefine and expand the scope of Revit. Seems like they've added some very cool features, but have totally skipped some of the BASIC things that need to be reworked/fixed/improved. It's like there's a bunch of software nerds that only want to work on the cool projects in the office and enhancing the text box isn't one of them. (Sound similar to archi offices?)
Gonna give the new MRay2 a workout this afternoon.
I been using Revit since 9.0 and Autodesk definitely fumbled the rollout of 2010. They were so concerned about attracting new users that they forgot about their existing users.
I like Revit because it forces you to think how a building goes together. And, it automates a lot of the time-consuming coordination exercises that drive me crazy in AutoCAD.
I believe that once you have worked on several projects in Revit that you end up with a better project. But, most importantly, you only get out of it what you put into it. That can be said for any software one uses...
i just finished a Revit class and our office is slowly starting to use it for projects
I think it is an ok program, will definitely take some time to integrate with everyone, and there will be many growing pains
but i imagine once people get comfortable with it, it will be an asset.
having never really used a BIM program before, i cant compare it to others out there, but it seems like it is good enough, with 2010 having some good upgrades
i imagine it is not perfect, but this is the direction things are heading, so it is a step in the right direction it seems
the problem will be with offices allowing room for growing pains with changing to this type of production
the question of how this effects contracts or project delivery, i dont think is really a concern
you arent delivering a model, you will still deliver a construction document set
I would think that contractors and owners shouldnt necessarily notice a difference in what you produce
tidalwave is right though
it will all depend on the users actually spending the time to learn how to use it correctly and efficiently for it to be worthwhile
i have already seen some instances where people in my firm will not take the time required to adjust to a new program, and have fallen into their old standards
I have now watched almost every single video autodesk has made... and I'm not to sure what their software actually does now.
The music is awful. Does Revit generate awful music?
</joke>
But the video for Revit Structure is highly misleading. I didn't get an iota of information about how it "does science" just that it does it.
Also, the videos talking about Revit don't show any actual buildings getting made by Revit other than some pipes, a joint and the same building that is in every single video.
Would you like Revit better if the music in the videos was this.
its true potential is still years away...but it is the way of the future as someone put it, and like it or not, we'll all be using it soon enough...
my fear is more philosophical...with Revit, or any other BIM software, we - our profession - are exchanging intellectual ownership to the software...in other words, the machine starts to do the thinking based on our data input (as autocad was a basic draft tool in its heyday). i personally think we've traded enough...
soon, the kids won't know how to draw sections anymore...and damn, sections are an important thing to draw...
one last point...if we were able to use this new -powerful- tool to increase productivity, reduce cost so we can keep more of our fee, or schedule, so we could better design, produce better buildings, investigate better solutions and therefore enhance the value of our profession, i would probably not be so negative...but based on what i've seen so far, we'll use this tool to create things quicker, think less, charge less, and lose more credibility and value...
but hey, it's monday...so i might be just in a bad mood...
I think what you are feeling simples is what "traditional" print designers felt by the introduction of new layout systems that popped up in newspapers around 2001. The managed colors by itself, adjusted columns by itself, it laid out pages by itself, it typesetted by itself.
It increased workflow and productivity so much that individuals soon realized that they were becoming obsolete by their own software that they whole heartedly endorsed. A single designer could now layout entire sections instead of just pages.
If it becomes easier, cheaper and quicker to make a project materialized... will there be a need to expand the workforce.
Cost and redundancy are cute words for "employees and contractors." Pushing for BIM everywhere might push people out of jobs because the software is replacing the bottom line.
it sucks because it is autodesk is trying to dominate the industry yet again and the GSA demanded interoperability and they have no such intention.
choice and compatibility matter, avoid the trap.
the day when the state stands up to monopolies and anti-competitive practices i hope will one day return. the dictatorship of the corporate patent is nothing pretty for the future of humanity.
wow, thats a new one
I love the connection between Revit and the downfall of the future of humanity
nicely put, Anti
I'm hoping Google is developing some kind of free, open source, and intuitive CAD/BIM program (ala SketchUp) to take on the monopoly.
Worked (is working) against Microsoft - why not Autodesk? :)
dml, I 'm not sure if it is comparable... but google is developing city management software.
So, technically, it wouldn't be BIM "BIM" but more like Block Informational Modeling.
Anyone know where to find Autodesk's 90-day trial?
its only a 30 day I believe ...
You can download and install it from my site at:
http://therevitkid.blogspot.com/2009/04/download-revit-architecture-2010-now.html
Direct download of the .exe
It will install as 32 bit or 64 depending on your OS and is a 30 day trial.
i sure hope they are paying you well to be their 'kid'
My secret wish for Rhino, that McNeel could develop an interface for managing so many details and sheets, like Revit .
Rhino will always be #1 for doing Architecture, in my book, but I love Revit's ability to organize sheets and project documentation. A rhino to ai workflow is cumbersome, even if it is graphically superior.
ya i propose a documentation plugin it would be nice something in addition to VisualARQ (aka Athens)
"i sure hope they are paying you well to be their 'kid"
I hope McNeel is paying you well too for years of Anti Autodesk and Pro Rhino campains on Archinect?
FF330
You say that Rhino is the number one for doing Architecture. Do you document in it too (floor plans, sections, elevations) or just use it for 3d modeling?
document in it well.
harold when the workers own the company and the users drive the development it feels allot better to beta test because you are working for yourself so to speak not the stock holders who will and can not listen and only seek a continued profit model for monopolization.
jaja,
well I guess that statement is pretty funny now that i think if it.
In general the workflow is what I am getting at here.
i.e. right now my workflow for the curent project is :
Revit for programming/massing
then to rhino/grsshopper for cooler tectionics
then to Max for geometry refinements.
back to Revit for organization of details and quick 2d work or ai.
i guess that sounds crazy...
revitkid,
The only issue I have with Revitkid.com is that although I think the website is actually good and helpful especially for beginners...but it just seems kind of a kiss ass way to do it..I mean IMHO, you should be promoting Design and the assorted tools you use vs getting super specific about a single tool, especially one that is mainly a Kit of Parts type of application. But again..I think you are doing good job at "all things revit"
FF33 - that sounds exactly right. Rhino is simply the best at manipulating complex geometries / forms into a workable solid or surface. I dont use it much, but when I need to model something with any complexity I go Rhino to get the geometry. From there I can send to any other program.
Revit is king for organising sheets and sections and ability to do section presentation cuts imho - still a little slow for me on the CDs side
Nothing inmho beats drawing details in acad yet.
disclaimer - never used grasshopper
FF33 - "I mean IMHO, you should be promoting Design and the assorted tools you use vs getting super specific about a single tool, especially one that is mainly a Kit of Parts type of application."
I believe I am doing exactly that. Look at my Revit Classroom Student Workflow Chart... It revolves around using Revit but I also introduced tons of other software to help the Design process while utilizing Revit.
Anti - "I sure hope they are paying you well to be their 'kid'"
No one is paying me anything for the site... Accept for Google Adsense.
How does Revit perform with site grading? If an architect/engineer is basing the project on Revit, it might be nice to stay in the same software across all the design trades, but I don't want to learn it if it doesn't really address my work.
(landscape architect who has never used Revit)
revitkid,
Ok I see your point. I don't mean to be rude, because in general i appreciate your efforts. and....As you can see from my post I have alternate workflows to consider. ... that involve Rhino
I think what Anti was getting at was how commercially branded your name and site identity are. I for one am a big fan of Revitcity.com vs Augi, just because it is not sponsored by Autodesk. So i think your site is also good that way as being independent of them.
This thread is proof that there is a backlash in the Architectural community from what Revit means in the way of homogeneous design solutions and hyper production-oriented work flows for good Architectural practice.
Check out this blog. http://buildz.blogspot.com/
It seems to me a waste of money and time just to use Revit only for organising sheets and sections.
Spent the money to buy the software, replace the computers, train the staffs...but the biggest cost will probably be teaching everyone how a building is built.
Sometimes I feel like our office is working for Revit, as oppose to Revit working for us...
many have offices have closed shop due to this
I reserve comment until I have to use revit in the heat of the summer without AC.
http://tinyurl.com/ctdmne
sorry... have to revive this thread to rant.. yeah.. REVIT SUCKS when you're modeling/still in the schematic design state.
What would take me half a second to do in other 3d softwares like rhino, max etc, takes me a few seconds and often times without success in Revit..
I can argue the introduction of Revit means our buildings are becoming too complicated. I tend to agree. Revit can also be limiting. When you rely on Bim modeling for final production, one may find themselves sacrificing design quality simply because it cannot be reproduced in Revit. I've yet to work with Digital Project, but it seems to be more flexible regarding design possibilities.
I will add, I feel Revit mostly exists for the large corporate firms whose central focus is getting drawing out the door and buildings built as fast as possible. They use BIM modeling for speed, not necessity.
Revit is better than archicad. But autocad is the best in terms of freedom and no limit.
i dont doubt that Revit is good when creating documentation (plans, detail drawings) but as a modeling, form finding, conceptual massing tool, it plain sucks and can be frustrating with all the constraints. Compared to hand sketching and model building, software is slow as it is.. Revit is worse. The way the 'Massing' tools aren't well integrated with their main drawing/documentation tools seems to be its downside. Even in Rhino, you have the ability to work with your floor plans and modeling tools at the same time. In Revit, you have to open a separate conceptual massing file or work with their 'In-place Massing' method... The inability to snap conceptual massing elements to your dimensioned floor plans/volumes etc and having to work on each like two different entities make it frustrating. It would've been nice to have the accuracy of documentation tools and be able to work with conceptual massing at the same time, not having to jump back and forth between the two and the inability to use many of the tools found in the main project browser window. :/
^ Yes frustrating is the best way to put it. it's almost as frustrating as trying to get itune to work.
Revit sucks for design. In other words, I need to have a CAD plan/section already drawn to make a Revit model. Rhino, though is awesome.
revit only sucks because no one knows where to draw the line between modeling and document production.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.