Fisherman....

Per my experience on this subject matter, I can tell you this:

(straight from the good folks at Autodesk)
Revit is a good software, and it's model intelligent, however and this is a big however, if you decide to remove the model from Revit to render the model elsewhere (cause the built in modeller is crap) you loose all the "smart" aspects of the model, futhermore, that would also hold true if you take it from Revit to Autocad. Thus, the only solution is utilizing Revit as your 2d/3d modeller and document generator, because otherwise it's not very managable going from one software to the next....too much lost.

btw, my office is just as small, we have 4. We purchased it (revit) only because it was a "cheap" buy when purchasing autocad 2006, we are now running 07. I am not sure on Revit, but my professional opinion would be that it's only good in larger offices where you would need to have it because of all teh people utilizing it!

my $.02 cents

REVIT seems to have issues with large project teams- the power of xrefs can't be understated. My current project has 6 staffers working in revit and the job captain is pulling out his hair keeping everybody from crashing into each other. myself and another designer have been shunted to ADT to keep the project moving ahead. We've also encountered issues with bringing in structural's revit model for coordination... this is only a 300k sf project.

stay tuned because we're the pilot revit project in the office.

squirrelly, you never have any of that info anyway? right? you don't model a "brick" wall in rhino, max, form-z, etc. anyway... you model a box... so this doesn't make the software worse than other alternatives... it's like moving any model into a rendering program. perhaps some day there will be some kind of protocol to transfer that info, but currently not so much. (revit would be great if they had a sweet plugin to render, alas it is not so...)

we've also experienced problems with the structural reference (copy/monitor) crap... this is a major problem that needs to be worked out, but of no consequence if you're not trying to do the entire project in revit.

we're slowly working more projects into revit. and since we're all disciplines, we're using building, structural, and systems. so far, systems seems to be pissing the engineers off...it's in its first stages and i think we're going to wait to seriously implement that software into projects

personally, i've just been trained and started messing around in revit, (doodling on company time), the power of scheduling and modeling and quantifying is immense. frankly, though i've had little experience with ADT, you're putting all this time into modelling your building, but aren't able to get as much info out. it makes more sense to go BIM in this case.

however, there are some tools that i think are still missing in revit. ADT seems to have some tools that would be great additions to revit (some corner tool i'm told is pretty good)...but the power that revit contains in families is incredible, allowing you to script parameters into your model. if you're a small office, i'd maybe wait to fully implement, features are still being added it seems, people are generating long wish lists for the software, but in the long run, revit and programs like revit (Bentley, Nemetscheck, etc.) should be taking over how we model our buildings.

oh and yes, barry is right, having many people work on the same file is still in need of some finesse by autodesk, the checking out of components seems to not be working to efficiently...

...it would be nice to all upgrade to supa-computas and run t3's to each desk so we could all operate live on the file, but that's a little ways out...

The office I have just started working in uses Revit and when i was hired I spent the two weeks before I started teaching it to myself. I now find revit to be far superior to autodesk in so many ways that the few ways it suffers i find to be a pretty even trade off. Yes there are still obvious bugs with the program and the rendering software is pretty atrocious but as far as the actual documentation goes, revit is faster and easier. And after the good people at revit read this i expect my free copy in the mail

barry, your team and job captain must be doing someting seriously wrong. Are you using the worksets correctly? We started revit with a 6 person office and the people who had the most difficult time with it were the ADT/ACAD users. Squirrelly is also doing someting seriously wrong if you have to move the model elsewhere to render it. There are a lot of settings that need definitions in the accurender process. Now afer a year and a half of being on the program, NO ONE in the office would switch back to ANY 2d cad based software. Check out reivtcity.com for more info...

Postal..... you are correct...maybe I lacked something in my post to express the uneasiness I had about the software. Whilst the families/parameters aspect is dead on (quite handy and powerful) I suppose I was speaking about the aspects of working on a design model (SD and DD stages) which would lead you into CD. Problem being that for those conditions, it's quite difficult when there are loads better softwares out there to take advantage of.

Emaze.....no not doing something wrong....just became frustrated upon my initial attempt in rendering and then searching for a "sweet" plugin to enhance the ability of revit. Alas, I had to turn to Autodesk and spoke to them at length. I must say it took alot of digging (on the phone so quite some time) just to get to speak to someone who had any knowledge on the software that was able to speak "tech" stuff with me. At which point I was made aware that the built it rendering software for Revit (current release) is Accurender, but it's one of the very early versions (I think 1.0 and a stripped down version at that - per autodesk) And Accurender is on version 4.0 or something of that nature.

As a production tool....I can't speak too in depth on this as I/our firm has not used it or attempted to utilize it. I suppose that I felt that a mid size to larger firm might be able to truly exploit its use!

Like with everything, it does depend on the intended use and how far that is being explored. I still have my doubts about it being a tool that one can use from inception all the way to closeout!

We are using Revit, the most recent version. We are starting it on high end residential projects and are super enthused with the results. We have had as many as 3 people working on a 3000 sf house simultaneously without any major problems sharing. And any problem is solved by everyone simply hitting save and moving on. We have been able to do great rendering using Revit... with photoshop and sketchup, stuff we had to do with ADT or autoCAD anyway. If the question is just ADT or Revit, simply not having to deal with layers and pensets was enough to convince us!
j

emaze, we know you can render in revit with the material propetries, the problem is, it's crap! just take a look at all the gallery photos compared to something done in maxwell, flamingo, etc.

now, i'm not saying you can't get by with it for most clients, but if you're in school, or want to do prof. renders, etc...it can't be done...

someone needs to do a serious plug-in, but from what i've gathered, autodesk's doors are pretty much closed....

absolutely postal, that is dead on mate!

I actually asked the good folks at autodesk, and they said "we have NO plans at the current time, or anytime soon, to intergrate or offer any additional plug-in renders for this software!"

and yes that's a quote ladies and gentlemen!

wasn't trying to be a hater to squirrelly, et. al. postal is hitting it on the head. most of the folks we work with are amazed by seeing the model (their project) in 3d as opposed to any 2d mind blowing rendering. As for the quirks with the software, it does so many great things, a few mediocre things, and a few useless things. We've gotten a number of projects out the door from inception to closeout, with no doubts whatsoever.

emaze: so what is the actual autocad package you have?

Revit is bonded pretty tightly with 3DStudio. Export as a .DWG model, link into Max, materialize. Then when you update the model in Revit and re-export it, the all the materials automatically re-assign to the new model.

Plus, in 3DStudio, every revit object is named, so working with the model is super simple.

postal, last time I checked the Revit renderer is Flamingo (accurender).

Still isn't very good. Gotta use Max.

Negative....Flamingo is flamingo, and accurender is accurender (2 different engines)

btw all caps, have you had any "issues" exporting the model from revit?? (ie: the model fusing together and not allowing you to assign materials to different elements?)

any images you can share???

Could people be specific about what Program they are using and version for clarification. I'm looking at upgrading from Autocad 2000,
to Autocad 2007, thru the Legacy program.

Hmmm. I don't think they are different.

Check here.


Both are made by Bob McNeel/Rhino. And as i understand it, accurender is the version of Flamingo that they license to other 3D apps.

I used to use both. And they were identical, interface/material-wise. "Engine"-wise they may have been different, but what you saw, and the results you'd get were similar. Maybe they've updated Flamingo and let Accurender flounder. I don't know.

About your other question -- there is never an issue with things fusing together. There are default materials assigned already in Revit. If you do a select by materials in Max, you can quickly swap out materials.

Check it out if you can, export a model from revit, load into 3d max, and hit H for select by name. You'll see a named list of every element in your project. Gives you a lot of control

Cheers allcaps.

Yes you're right about McNeel selling both, but if I am not mistaken they aren't the same program (plug-in). I beleive flamingo (which came later) was modeled after accurender (<-- that one has been out for quite some time).

Again, I am not completely engrossed with Revit just yet....but since we have it in the office, I may give it a go, but the jury is still out on this one for me!

snooker

We have been working entirely on Revit for over a year. The office is signed up for the subscription service. Currently using Revit V 9.1 and autocad 2007 (however nobody can recall the last time they used cad...) Seriously, it was difficult to get everyone on board but again, NOONE would go back to any 2d drafting, non BIM.

thanks everyone - still processing and weighing all your input.

i'm leaning towards Revit. we've been handling a bunch of contractor and developer tasks inside the office (a whole other can of worms but let's not go there right now) and i've been dreaming of something that can reduce the amount of time we spend on some of those tasks. for instance, we've modeled (in ACAD) and calculated the yardage of concrete on one of our projects so that we can bid it out ourselves (it's a small lot project our office has ownership in). we do lots of take-offs.

the other aspect we'm interested in is having a parallel development of 2d/3d so we can give the client a more frequent and accurate visual understanding of the project (even if it's crude and not flashy) as well as make informed decisions ourselves about what to detail and how to integrate systems. I doubt very highly that any of the consultants we work with are going to be integrating with us any time soon, (but we generate the mechanical schematics in house anyway).

for finished/presentation renderings we outsource and will likely continue this practice. we find it to be a much more efficient use of our limited resources.

So in our office we've got people who are technologically adept and technologically challenged (predictably there's a correlation between those characteristics and age/experience). There are also those who know a how to put a building together and those who frankly just don't (yet). Predictably, it's a role reversal of the above.

How does Revit come into play here? What have you experienced in the interface not so much between 'user an software' but 'tech user who is an inexperienced architect' and 'experienced architect who is a near ludite?'

How has this affected the dynamic in your office? Do your less experienced employees run up against walls because of software demands for specificity that they would have been able to push through with ACAD?

I'm guessing that this line of questioning is pointing to some mentorship shortcomings in our office, but it's still a real question.

lastly: how have you found it integrating with contractors in construction and management?

Those are some real questions.

In my opinion, it is a fantastic program and is how all of us will be designing in the near future.

But if it were my job to impliment it office wide, I'd have to make sure I were up to the task. It is going to take a long time. It is going to cost the company a lot of money. And people are going to be very frustrated with you.

Although it is very intuitive, it takes a while to learn and feel comfortable. Months. Maybe 6 months. At least one project.

I've watched a lot of people learn it. The most resistant have been people who know and are skilled at ACAD. Once they really spend the time to learn it (again months -- usually 6 months), they come around.

The fact is that you can just do so much with it that you can't do with CAD. Like find out how many linear feet of steel is in your project. Or find out how much it weighs. Or do real time costing of finish materials. Change the length of a wood wall and watch the costs on the material schedules update.

Change the width/number/type of a window once in a schedule and have it update in all drawings. Hell, change ANYTHING once and it is fixed everywhere.

For the SD phase it is very fast and powerful. I've found it faster than sketchup -- mainly because the drawings are being updated as you model. You can get very nice hidden-line renderings with shadows. I wouldn't call it "rough." And as I mentioned, with integration thru Max, you can get "professional" results very quickly.

Consultants? Usually this is a little bit of a headache. You wish the structural engineers were using revit. You have to always be exporting to .dwg.

Bottom line: send as many people in the office as possible to do Revit training (including yourself). The more heads you have wrapped around problems/opportunities that will arise, the better off you and your firm will be.

I'm resurrecting a near dead post here, but we've still not made the switch yet (we had to focus on hiring some new employees instead).

Anyway, I just registered for a BIM symposium run by McGraw-Hill Construction (I've shied away from software sponsored events) that sounds like it will be pretty informative. I'm told the question/answer portion of the event will be substantial, and from my perspective it would be great if some current users were there to raise some of the issues that have come up for them.

Here is the press info on the event. It's $75/person.

Oct. 13: Zetlin & De Chiara LLP and McGraw-Hill Construction in Association with AIANYS and ACEC-NYS Present "It's a BIM New World-The Next Revolution in Design and Construction Technology."

From 8:00am-11:00am at the McGraw Hill Auditorium.

Panelists will include Phil Bernstein, vice president Industry Strategy & Relations, Autodesk; James Brogan, director IT Worldwide Kohn Pedersen Fox PC; Carl Galioto, partner, Skidmore Owings & Merrill LLP; Paul Katz, partner, Kohn Pedersen Fox PC; Allan Paull, first vice president, Tishman Construction Corporation of New York; Robert Schubert, senior vice president-Construction, Boston Properties, Inc.; Paul Seletsky, director of Digital Design, Skidmore Owings & Merrill LLP; and Dennis Shelden, chief information officer, Gehry Technologies.

For an invitation to this event, go to www.zdlaw.com and click on the BIM symposium link displayed on the home page.