This thread is not only confined to just one software. Revit, Microstation, ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, Rhino, Navisworks, and etc. are all valid topics.
It could be as technical as asking how to do a parametric paneling system in Revit, or as big picture as asking what the ROI on transferring to BIM is. This isn't to stop anyone from creating other BIM related threads, its just to create a place to discuss things that may not warrant a new thread or is too off-topic for existing threads.
There should be a general understanding that BIM is not simply defined by what software you use, but by the workflow, exchange of information, and the capabilities of the deliverables.
Ive made a surface in Rhino with a slight undulation and imported that into REVIT as an SAT file in a conceptual mass. The mass is placed in the project. The problem is how do I divide the surface to apply a pattern to it? Being an imported surface it ( 2010 ) doesnt allow me to surface divide. But if I make a mass in place it does let me surface divide. I cant see making this surface in REVIT hence why I used Rhino.
The second issue is paneling once the surface is divided - thats a whole other can of worms.
All packages of REVIT shouold come with a years supply of valium.
ANYone who has ANY problems with revit, you should come visit this revit chat room. At least 5-6 people are here every work day and sometimes even on the weekends:
click the server
button - the server address is: gibsonhh.info:6669
Make a nickname for yourself and click "go" Then ask away.
I tend to be there from noon - 5 or 6pm PST
The guy who runs the chatroom is the same guy who made this Revit Tip Of The Day website.
The best way is obviously to model everything in Revit, but if you can't, then using the API is your best bet, to import parameters from Rhino into Revit.
Urbanist - Is your goal to have parametric design in large-scale, or to be able to use/exchange information from a large scale model? I realize they CAN go hand in hand, but I'm guessing there is a primary goal here.
more the latter, although parametric design scenario testing of infrastructure applicable to clusters of buildings would be useful. Goal is to exchange info between buildings etc, to model aggregate energy use, water use, etc, given district scale systems.
Im actualy still working on getting it to work right - I scrapped my Rhino surface and remade it inside Revit - very tedious but it works now. The only issue Im still having is getting the bottom chords of the space frame to snap together properly as it follows the surface. The top chords are working fine. In fact for a rendering, I could pas what I got although its not 100% correct. Revit is a beast thats for sure but on the other hand, I can draw over 100 varying structural space frame cells in a few steps following a freeform surface, thats pretty cool.
OK - Finally got the bottom and top chords to meet correctly between modules. Only took a week.
The key is in the curtain based panel family, the bottom chords relate to the points on the grid surface even though they are offset; I kept trying to make planes that defined the bottom chords where the plane was offset; the key is and it seems so simple now, you can draw a line or a plane in the top surface and do an extruded object 4 feet below it, and it will still move with the top plane if thats the plane that defined it - in other words you dont have to extrude a tube along the definition reference plane - they can be offset -
Dam, this mass family alone is 50mb and crashing my model when I try to load it in. Is the best practice for dealing with complex geometry and large files to save the structure as it's own revit project file and then link it in?
i work in a large arch firm ... and i was 1 of 4 people in this location chosen to learn revit. we have a 3 day class (8 hour sessions) to learn from a CAD center.
what should my expectations be when im done? ive been on CAD for 7 years and i'm still learning!
@ cmdace18 - You're class will be as good as your instructor is. ask the right questions at the right times and, in my opinion... three days with someone who really knows their material can set you straight with Revit.
That said, most people coming out of one of those 3 day training sessions don't retain much knowledge because they are poorly planned in conjunction with project workload in Revit.
If you aren't in a Revit project at the office, you will have to work loads extra in your 'free time' (download trial, complete tutorials) before you can swim without bogging down a serious project.
It will also help if you have someone knowledgeable to ask questions to during the learning process.
That's a very nice space frame. Typically we break down our models when and where they make sense. It will also depend on your machine as well. We find 4gigs of RAM lets us run around a 150Mb file on Revit Arch, 70Mb in Revit MEP, and around 100Mb in Revit Struct. (If you're using the Revit Struct tools, but need it to perform a little quicker, there's a .ini modification you can make noted in the white paper.) (Of course, I should be running 64 bit, but it's been a little difficult to convince management)
So this leads to breaking up files into different floors and disciplines. Arch, Struct, & MEP all have different files for every few floors depending on the size of the jobs. It may make sense to create a file specifically for your space frame, and you can work the view settings so perhaps all those extrusions aren't visible all the time.
Also, minimizing Revit will "dump" memory from past views. This is huge! "Close Hidden Windows" and minimizing will save you from many a crash!
So, that's in my experience. Would be curious to know others' opinions/experiences.
It seems like we are kind of at a point where offices are really taking to BIM tech while schools have been mostly (I recognize there are exceptions) slow to adopt it in their curriculum. I just graduated from one of said schools which is a little slow on the BIMwagon, yet I've been trained on the software several times over but have no professional experience with it. Any recommendations on what to do to break into a firm working with it? Take an old project and reproduce it in Revit?
archrise, that's not a bad idea. learning to document in Revit is half the battle I guess. (you are talking about producing CD's, right? not like a previous studio project?) But that's really only half the battle. Using BIM throughout the design process is really the skill you need.
so, before i get off on a tangent, if you had a set of drawings that you could plop down on an employers desk (and they looked good, mind you) I'm sure that would carry a decent amount of value, but...
the other half of the battle is using the tool in SD and DD, using quantities on the fly to inform occupancy, pricing, programming, and presentation, then carrying the model through CD's and exploring design options, revisions, and managing all the documentation outside of CD's within the model, coordinating multiple models, clash detection, and finding ways that BIM can help you check your work quicker, and then carry that model through CA and use it to communicate with contractors, document changes, and then deliver an as-built model that will help inform facility management...
people talk about BIM being a very large social change within the office, and it is, dealing with different people using the model is the experience that everyone needs. doing a job within an office is really the only way you get that experience. (and that experience may be very specific to that particular office to a certain degree) so, i guess what i'd say is yes, it has value... but you can't really master a BIM program till you take it from start to finish. JMhO
so, i thought it was work a mention, but autodesk is showing off their 2011 stuff today. though, probably all of you have seen the rash spreading through the blogosphere. the webcast is at 11 CT
It looks like the 2011 updates to Revit will be one of the best I've seen. Good thing the Revit Software development team listen to the users.
Archrise - I felt the same way when I was in school. Considering schools should be more experimentative (not only in design but in delivery), I didn't get any BIM education while in school. As for getting more experience, some is better than none, even if you manufacture the need to do it in BIM. But as I mentioned previously somewhere, it is nearly impossible to duplicate the learning environment when you're working on a real project.
this might warrant a new thread, but I'm curious as to what liability issues firms have run across with BIM - do they only use it as a production tool and then still release drawings the old-fashioned way, or do they maintain models during construction and release (or maintain) the model for lifecycle management?
and how many firms actually do lifecycle management? is this something clients are willing to pay for? many clients aren't even interested in maintaining our services for adequate CA, so how many actually see value in BIM?
everyone I know is always talking about BIM in terms of production and coordination, but to me that's not really an issue - it's how the project is delivered that really matters. if project delivery hasn't really changed, then why bother adopting BIM if you already have a good production/coordination system in place (especially if you do a lot of smaller projects)?
Thanks for the input postal an Slartibartfast, you bring up some important points. I agree that experience working with software (especially cad/documentation software) in an office setting is usually vastly different than in an academic setting. Hope to get my hands dirty with this stuff soon.
Does anyone have experience with Digital Project? I am curious about the learning curve on that one.
toaster - I think the answer is much easier when you consider BIM as a source for output, rather than the file itself (i.e. Giving the RVT model to the client). For example, for facilities management or energy modelling, it is certainly possible to export information and formats appropriate to those uses. Clients are willing to pay for it, if they realize how much intelligence is in the model and work was done already, and what it would take to get it in a format that is useable. Ideally, the situation would be that they would save money with the lack of redundancy, and the architect will make more money by getting a bigger slice of the pie. Good business is about making Win Win situations. I sometimes see architects not trying to get a bigger slice of the pie when it is available to them; its much easier to get more work for the same project and with an existing client than marketing to get new projects.
And I think the trend is that, we're getting closer and closer to being able to produce better deliverables. While we're not there yet in general, if we sit back and wait for that to happen, it'll probably be too late in the game to catch up.
As for doing only small projects... thats a tough call, depends on how small I guess.
so - kind of like buying a long-term service contract. interesting...
I'm still having a hard time seeing how people who do spec work could use this as a potential selling point to buyers, though... they don't stick around long enough to get any value out of BIM themselves and buyers don't really know something like this exists (or if they do, they have a really hard time wrapping their heads around its usefulness for them) - unless condo associations want to retain the architect for facilities management purposes, it's a tough sell. I'd like to see some examples of how this has worked in residential.
anyway - I appreciate hearing this perspective instead of the constant complaints about stuff like production and organization and file-size... to me that's more of an internal production/management issue, and something the software makers can improve over time.
SublimeSpaces: Parametric design is at the foundation of Revit. One of the most efficient things about Revit is is parametric abilities. From families to walls to schedules... they all can be considered parametric.
If you do some searching on my blog you should find some stuff on parametric design... I am going to be starting a mini-series on creating parametric families very soon as well:
Hi Reviteers - Revit project management/delivery question:
Have any of you had success working with consultants executing a complicated electrical design in Revit MEP or Electrical? We are being told by our very reliable consultants that the Revit Electrical components are hopelessly primitive compared the the Architecture & M/P suites. Our project is a fairly complicated, technology heavy building that we are delivering in Revit for Architectural, Structural, Mechanical & Plumbing. Electrical, alas, is being documented using 2D AutoCAD. We have a lot of conduit going into this building (mostly low voltage), so clash detection against electrical, while not essential, would still be nice....
...But more than that (and this I hope will serve as a cautionary tale to others), we weren't particularly good at defining the Revit deliverables in the contract, and now it seems we may be on the hook for delivering a level of detail in the model that cannot easily be achieved by our consultant, for purposes no one on the client side really seems to understand and is predictably unwilling to compromise. Gulp. What do you think... can a EE be reasonably expected to document in BIM every conduit path and j-box in the building?
Items like conduit are probably better of being modeled as an as built, I hardly see low voltage conduit documented, those things change so often in the field. It sounds like a lot of work... You should be able to include j-boxs but I think conduit is expecting too much.
yeah, i agree, although Revit 2011 is sporting some fancy conduit and cable tray tools now. Haven't really messed around with them too much yet.
Small conduit, especially low voltage, isn't a concern for a designer. However, if your contractor is requiring 3d coordination, they will be requiring 3d coordination submittals. I think one of our current jobs requires their subs to model as small as 1/2" conduit. We will then be taking their 3d CAD file and linking it in to the Revit file. That has appeased our client as the metadata for low voltage items is negligible, and for other power and lighting, the data is contained within the panels and light fixtures. I think this is a reasonable compromise, for the design team who sees no real benefit from routing that stuff, and the FM model and future renovations get what they need.
Thanks for the input! That's kind of what we had arrived at ourselves. The trick now is convincing the client that there isn't any value in modelling the conduit items in the design phase, and deferring that responsibility to the contractor. Anyone know of a Best Practice type document that might speak to this type of strategy?
hmmm, i'll dig around, but I don't remember seeing anything that would say something like that. the dream has always been to get everything in the model as early as possible....
but since this is BIM Central... just thought I'd throw up some links to important documents...
I will say this... it's really tough to figure out how to define the BIM Scope... Clients want this info in different ways. The PSU BEP template is a good start, but it's overly complex and needs to be tailored to your individual job. My latest attempt to appease GSA was to draw up a matrix that categorized items by their Uniformat Code, listed their correlating Revit Categories, and then their Corresponding LOD following AIA E202. For extra special scope items, I even broke out the family name. Also, I've created a separate column in addition to LOD that lists metadata that we are tracking and obligated to make sure is accurate for certain families.
Anybody else's experience? Anybody working with Indiana U, State of Wisc, State of Texas, or the State of Ohio? These guys seem to be the clients leading the way in requiring certain levels of BIM'ing.
here's a thought --- i assume the EE have at least line drawings of the runs in 3D space in whatever CAD package they use
can you bring them into sketchup as .dwgs, duplicate as necessary, put a circle at one end of each line and use the follow me tool to get quick geometry from it? then just bring that geometry into revit --- this way you don't spend time building anything
about the revit MEP package being behind, the last two firms i was with both seriously considered revit while i was there --- in the one instance we were part of a tightly integrated design/build team of consultants who did a lot of work with one contractor and in the other, we were a larger company with all services in house
in both cases, we did not go to revit b/c of the difference in where the packages were --- it seemed revit structure was close to but not quite as well developed as revit architecture --- and that revit MEP was way behind --- and neither firm wanted to deal with the resulting coordination issues
interesting that this is still true --- so can i ask, for people who are using revit, how do you deal with this, as it sounds like a standard problem?
any ideas which program this guy used in here?
which software would you recommend for this type of presentation?
(modelling, plans, sections,elevations, parametric etc)- is it possible for a single software to do all?
i got used using the old school method= Autocad - 3ds max - photoshop combo..
Maybe it could be something else, but my experience says that something with that form would be easiest to create in Rhino. Correct me if I'm mistaken, please!
i think they used maya, primarily (at least i believe that was a mostly maya studio). probably some rhino there, too, working a bit between the two packages, but primarily, maya for the modeling.
'interesting that this is still true --- so can i ask, for people who are using revit, how do you deal with this, as it sounds like a standard problem?'
Stage 1: Build the structure and M&E into the model yourself as part of the Architecture package, still saves time on 2D CAD and you would have to draft some detail for these consutlats elements in 2D CAD sections etc anyway.
Stage 2: Bitch about how crap the consultants are and vow not to use them again until they get with the parametrics.
Aug 17, 10 8:53 am ·
·
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.
BIM Central
Discuss all topics BIM here.
This thread is not only confined to just one software. Revit, Microstation, ArchiCAD, Vectorworks, Rhino, Navisworks, and etc. are all valid topics.
It could be as technical as asking how to do a parametric paneling system in Revit, or as big picture as asking what the ROI on transferring to BIM is. This isn't to stop anyone from creating other BIM related threads, its just to create a place to discuss things that may not warrant a new thread or is too off-topic for existing threads.
There should be a general understanding that BIM is not simply defined by what software you use, but by the workflow, exchange of information, and the capabilities of the deliverables.
Ok - Ill move the question over here.
Ive made a surface in Rhino with a slight undulation and imported that into REVIT as an SAT file in a conceptual mass. The mass is placed in the project. The problem is how do I divide the surface to apply a pattern to it? Being an imported surface it ( 2010 ) doesnt allow me to surface divide. But if I make a mass in place it does let me surface divide. I cant see making this surface in REVIT hence why I used Rhino.
The second issue is paneling once the surface is divided - thats a whole other can of worms.
All packages of REVIT shouold come with a years supply of valium.
There's no red dot in front of BIM Central...
ANYone who has ANY problems with revit, you should come visit this revit chat room. At least 5-6 people are here every work day and sometimes even on the weekends:
click the server
button - the server address is: gibsonhh.info:6669
Make a nickname for yourself and click "go" Then ask away.
I tend to be there from noon - 5 or 6pm PST
The guy who runs the chatroom is the same guy who made this Revit Tip Of The Day website.
Here are a few work flows on getting the surface dividing it in revit from any other software package.
http://buildz.blogspot.com/2009/05/non-industry-standard-workflow.html
http://autodesk-revit.blogspot.com/2009/09/more-sat-fun-3dsmax-2010-to-revit-2010.html
you may need a 3ds max connection extension.
The best way is obviously to model everything in Revit, but if you can't, then using the API is your best bet, to import parameters from Rhino into Revit.
http://nmillerarch.blogspot.com/2010/01/streaming-grasshopper-points-into-revit.html
I still want to figure out how to do an abbreviated urban-scale BIM for large-scale sustainability planning.
Urbanist - Is your goal to have parametric design in large-scale, or to be able to use/exchange information from a large scale model? I realize they CAN go hand in hand, but I'm guessing there is a primary goal here.
more the latter, although parametric design scenario testing of infrastructure applicable to clusters of buildings would be useful. Goal is to exchange info between buildings etc, to model aggregate energy use, water use, etc, given district scale systems.
God that revit subdividing problem is so annoying.
Im actualy still working on getting it to work right - I scrapped my Rhino surface and remade it inside Revit - very tedious but it works now. The only issue Im still having is getting the bottom chords of the space frame to snap together properly as it follows the surface. The top chords are working fine. In fact for a rendering, I could pas what I got although its not 100% correct. Revit is a beast thats for sure but on the other hand, I can draw over 100 varying structural space frame cells in a few steps following a freeform surface, thats pretty cool.
above is a demo of the new devlopments in revit 2010...
OK - Finally got the bottom and top chords to meet correctly between modules. Only took a week.
The key is in the curtain based panel family, the bottom chords relate to the points on the grid surface even though they are offset; I kept trying to make planes that defined the bottom chords where the plane was offset; the key is and it seems so simple now, you can draw a line or a plane in the top surface and do an extruded object 4 feet below it, and it will still move with the top plane if thats the plane that defined it - in other words you dont have to extrude a tube along the definition reference plane - they can be offset -
2step - that is one crazy space frame.
2step: here is an interesting link somebody posted in another thread, re: rhino/grasshopper to revit:
http://nmillerarch.blogspot.com/2010/01/streaming-grasshopper-points-into-revit.html
Dam, this mass family alone is 50mb and crashing my model when I try to load it in. Is the best practice for dealing with complex geometry and large files to save the structure as it's own revit project file and then link it in?
Im not ready for grasshopper yet - basic revit and rhino are kicking my butt well enough but thanks thats very interesting about the points
got a question for ya'll ...
i work in a large arch firm ... and i was 1 of 4 people in this location chosen to learn revit. we have a 3 day class (8 hour sessions) to learn from a CAD center.
what should my expectations be when im done? ive been on CAD for 7 years and i'm still learning!
@ cmdace18 - You're class will be as good as your instructor is. ask the right questions at the right times and, in my opinion... three days with someone who really knows their material can set you straight with Revit.
That said, most people coming out of one of those 3 day training sessions don't retain much knowledge because they are poorly planned in conjunction with project workload in Revit.
If you aren't in a Revit project at the office, you will have to work loads extra in your 'free time' (download trial, complete tutorials) before you can swim without bogging down a serious project.
It will also help if you have someone knowledgeable to ask questions to during the learning process.
Good luck!
2step, you figure it out?
That's a very nice space frame. Typically we break down our models when and where they make sense. It will also depend on your machine as well. We find 4gigs of RAM lets us run around a 150Mb file on Revit Arch, 70Mb in Revit MEP, and around 100Mb in Revit Struct. (If you're using the Revit Struct tools, but need it to perform a little quicker, there's a .ini modification you can make noted in the white paper.) (Of course, I should be running 64 bit, but it's been a little difficult to convince management)
So this leads to breaking up files into different floors and disciplines. Arch, Struct, & MEP all have different files for every few floors depending on the size of the jobs. It may make sense to create a file specifically for your space frame, and you can work the view settings so perhaps all those extrusions aren't visible all the time.
Also, minimizing Revit will "dump" memory from past views. This is huge! "Close Hidden Windows" and minimizing will save you from many a crash!
So, that's in my experience. Would be curious to know others' opinions/experiences.
Urbanist,
I worked on something similar with this guy. Have a look at this project for an idea of what he can do.
Hello BIMers,
It seems like we are kind of at a point where offices are really taking to BIM tech while schools have been mostly (I recognize there are exceptions) slow to adopt it in their curriculum. I just graduated from one of said schools which is a little slow on the BIMwagon, yet I've been trained on the software several times over but have no professional experience with it. Any recommendations on what to do to break into a firm working with it? Take an old project and reproduce it in Revit?
Thanks for any suggestions.
archrise, that's not a bad idea. learning to document in Revit is half the battle I guess. (you are talking about producing CD's, right? not like a previous studio project?) But that's really only half the battle. Using BIM throughout the design process is really the skill you need.
so, before i get off on a tangent, if you had a set of drawings that you could plop down on an employers desk (and they looked good, mind you) I'm sure that would carry a decent amount of value, but...
the other half of the battle is using the tool in SD and DD, using quantities on the fly to inform occupancy, pricing, programming, and presentation, then carrying the model through CD's and exploring design options, revisions, and managing all the documentation outside of CD's within the model, coordinating multiple models, clash detection, and finding ways that BIM can help you check your work quicker, and then carry that model through CA and use it to communicate with contractors, document changes, and then deliver an as-built model that will help inform facility management...
people talk about BIM being a very large social change within the office, and it is, dealing with different people using the model is the experience that everyone needs. doing a job within an office is really the only way you get that experience. (and that experience may be very specific to that particular office to a certain degree) so, i guess what i'd say is yes, it has value... but you can't really master a BIM program till you take it from start to finish. JMhO
so, i thought it was work a mention, but autodesk is showing off their 2011 stuff today. though, probably all of you have seen the rash spreading through the blogosphere. the webcast is at 11 CT
an overview of new Revit features
It looks like the 2011 updates to Revit will be one of the best I've seen. Good thing the Revit Software development team listen to the users.
Archrise - I felt the same way when I was in school. Considering schools should be more experimentative (not only in design but in delivery), I didn't get any BIM education while in school. As for getting more experience, some is better than none, even if you manufacture the need to do it in BIM. But as I mentioned previously somewhere, it is nearly impossible to duplicate the learning environment when you're working on a real project.
this might warrant a new thread, but I'm curious as to what liability issues firms have run across with BIM - do they only use it as a production tool and then still release drawings the old-fashioned way, or do they maintain models during construction and release (or maintain) the model for lifecycle management?
and how many firms actually do lifecycle management? is this something clients are willing to pay for? many clients aren't even interested in maintaining our services for adequate CA, so how many actually see value in BIM?
everyone I know is always talking about BIM in terms of production and coordination, but to me that's not really an issue - it's how the project is delivered that really matters. if project delivery hasn't really changed, then why bother adopting BIM if you already have a good production/coordination system in place (especially if you do a lot of smaller projects)?
Thanks for the input postal an Slartibartfast, you bring up some important points. I agree that experience working with software (especially cad/documentation software) in an office setting is usually vastly different than in an academic setting. Hope to get my hands dirty with this stuff soon.
Does anyone have experience with Digital Project? I am curious about the learning curve on that one.
toaster - I think the answer is much easier when you consider BIM as a source for output, rather than the file itself (i.e. Giving the RVT model to the client). For example, for facilities management or energy modelling, it is certainly possible to export information and formats appropriate to those uses. Clients are willing to pay for it, if they realize how much intelligence is in the model and work was done already, and what it would take to get it in a format that is useable. Ideally, the situation would be that they would save money with the lack of redundancy, and the architect will make more money by getting a bigger slice of the pie. Good business is about making Win Win situations. I sometimes see architects not trying to get a bigger slice of the pie when it is available to them; its much easier to get more work for the same project and with an existing client than marketing to get new projects.
And I think the trend is that, we're getting closer and closer to being able to produce better deliverables. While we're not there yet in general, if we sit back and wait for that to happen, it'll probably be too late in the game to catch up.
As for doing only small projects... thats a tough call, depends on how small I guess.
slart - thanks.
so - kind of like buying a long-term service contract. interesting...
I'm still having a hard time seeing how people who do spec work could use this as a potential selling point to buyers, though... they don't stick around long enough to get any value out of BIM themselves and buyers don't really know something like this exists (or if they do, they have a really hard time wrapping their heads around its usefulness for them) - unless condo associations want to retain the architect for facilities management purposes, it's a tough sell. I'd like to see some examples of how this has worked in residential.
anyway - I appreciate hearing this perspective instead of the constant complaints about stuff like production and organization and file-size... to me that's more of an internal production/management issue, and something the software makers can improve over time.
... could anyone post links of each of these programs showcasing parametric designs?
i know i saw lots of stuff from rhino, how about the rest?thanks in advance
SublimeSpaces: Parametric design is at the foundation of Revit. One of the most efficient things about Revit is is parametric abilities. From families to walls to schedules... they all can be considered parametric.
If you do some searching on my blog you should find some stuff on parametric design... I am going to be starting a mini-series on creating parametric families very soon as well:
http://www.TheRevitKid.com/
TheRevitKid....
Someone pointed me to your site a few weeks ago and I love it. Great work, excellent straight to the point tutorials and discussion. Thanks!!
I highly recommend the site to anyone looking for reliable Revit info.
@PsyArch
He used to be one of my tutors… seems to have done well for himself.
Hi Reviteers - Revit project management/delivery question:
Have any of you had success working with consultants executing a complicated electrical design in Revit MEP or Electrical? We are being told by our very reliable consultants that the Revit Electrical components are hopelessly primitive compared the the Architecture & M/P suites. Our project is a fairly complicated, technology heavy building that we are delivering in Revit for Architectural, Structural, Mechanical & Plumbing. Electrical, alas, is being documented using 2D AutoCAD. We have a lot of conduit going into this building (mostly low voltage), so clash detection against electrical, while not essential, would still be nice....
...But more than that (and this I hope will serve as a cautionary tale to others), we weren't particularly good at defining the Revit deliverables in the contract, and now it seems we may be on the hook for delivering a level of detail in the model that cannot easily be achieved by our consultant, for purposes no one on the client side really seems to understand and is predictably unwilling to compromise. Gulp. What do you think... can a EE be reasonably expected to document in BIM every conduit path and j-box in the building?
Your input will be appreciated!
houseo
Items like conduit are probably better of being modeled as an as built, I hardly see low voltage conduit documented, those things change so often in the field. It sounds like a lot of work... You should be able to include j-boxs but I think conduit is expecting too much.
yeah, i agree, although Revit 2011 is sporting some fancy conduit and cable tray tools now. Haven't really messed around with them too much yet.
Small conduit, especially low voltage, isn't a concern for a designer. However, if your contractor is requiring 3d coordination, they will be requiring 3d coordination submittals. I think one of our current jobs requires their subs to model as small as 1/2" conduit. We will then be taking their 3d CAD file and linking it in to the Revit file. That has appeased our client as the metadata for low voltage items is negligible, and for other power and lighting, the data is contained within the panels and light fixtures. I think this is a reasonable compromise, for the design team who sees no real benefit from routing that stuff, and the FM model and future renovations get what they need.
Thanks for the input! That's kind of what we had arrived at ourselves. The trick now is convincing the client that there isn't any value in modelling the conduit items in the design phase, and deferring that responsibility to the contractor. Anyone know of a Best Practice type document that might speak to this type of strategy?
hmmm, i'll dig around, but I don't remember seeing anything that would say something like that. the dream has always been to get everything in the model as early as possible....
but since this is BIM Central... just thought I'd throw up some links to important documents...
PSU BIM Execution Planning Guide (Something it sounds like you should have done HoM!)
AEC (UK) BIM Standard Great place to start with defining an office's Revit Template
National BIM Standard Still needs a lot of work. Does anyone know what's going on with this? Seems like they are behind schedule.
I will say this... it's really tough to figure out how to define the BIM Scope... Clients want this info in different ways. The PSU BEP template is a good start, but it's overly complex and needs to be tailored to your individual job. My latest attempt to appease GSA was to draw up a matrix that categorized items by their Uniformat Code, listed their correlating Revit Categories, and then their Corresponding LOD following AIA E202. For extra special scope items, I even broke out the family name. Also, I've created a separate column in addition to LOD that lists metadata that we are tracking and obligated to make sure is accurate for certain families.
Anybody else's experience? Anybody working with Indiana U, State of Wisc, State of Texas, or the State of Ohio? These guys seem to be the clients leading the way in requiring certain levels of BIM'ing.
thanks for the bim guide links
here's a thought --- i assume the EE have at least line drawings of the runs in 3D space in whatever CAD package they use
can you bring them into sketchup as .dwgs, duplicate as necessary, put a circle at one end of each line and use the follow me tool to get quick geometry from it? then just bring that geometry into revit --- this way you don't spend time building anything
about the revit MEP package being behind, the last two firms i was with both seriously considered revit while i was there --- in the one instance we were part of a tightly integrated design/build team of consultants who did a lot of work with one contractor and in the other, we were a larger company with all services in house
in both cases, we did not go to revit b/c of the difference in where the packages were --- it seemed revit structure was close to but not quite as well developed as revit architecture --- and that revit MEP was way behind --- and neither firm wanted to deal with the resulting coordination issues
interesting that this is still true --- so can i ask, for people who are using revit, how do you deal with this, as it sounds like a standard problem?
staring at this competition entry,
http://www.evolo.us/competition/residential-skyscraper-in-new-york/#more-311
any ideas which program this guy used in here?
which software would you recommend for this type of presentation?
(modelling, plans, sections,elevations, parametric etc)- is it possible for a single software to do all?
i got used using the old school method= Autocad - 3ds max - photoshop combo..
....sorry , reposting the link
[url=http://www.evolo.us/competition/residential-skyscraper-in-new-york/#more-311]link[url]
That seems like Rhino to me...
Maybe it could be something else, but my experience says that something with that form would be easiest to create in Rhino. Correct me if I'm mistaken, please!
i think they used maya, primarily (at least i believe that was a mostly maya studio). probably some rhino there, too, working a bit between the two packages, but primarily, maya for the modeling.
'interesting that this is still true --- so can i ask, for people who are using revit, how do you deal with this, as it sounds like a standard problem?'
Stage 1: Build the structure and M&E into the model yourself as part of the Architecture package, still saves time on 2D CAD and you would have to draft some detail for these consutlats elements in 2D CAD sections etc anyway.
Stage 2: Bitch about how crap the consultants are and vow not to use them again until they get with the parametrics.
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.