Revit Structure
Revit Structure
(OP)
Is anybody using Revit Structure? We have a client that wants us to use it and we've been checking it out. At first glance it looks to be very powerful. Any opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.
When was the last time you drove down the highway without seeing a commercial truck hauling goods?
Download nowINTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS Come Join Us!Are you an
Engineering professional? Join Eng-Tips Forums!
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Posting GuidelinesJobs |
|
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
All of the good structural firms out there are using Revit for basic floor plan layout, but leave all sections and details for autocad.
If you would like further information about the "catches" I could go into it. I think there are a few other posts on this too.
RE: Revit Structure
Atomic 25, I would definitely be interested on any 'catches' that may affect how I have described utilizing Revit.
Thx!
RE: Revit Structure
MJ
RE: Revit Structure
#1 You need brand new computers with powerful video cards. If your machines aren't nearly the top of the line, it will take forever to open and scroll around.
#2 Revit doesn't catch spatial conflicts automatically. Mechanical can draw a pipe through a beam and the program will not complain.
#3 Cutting sections has huge limitations. You create a 3d model of the framing and say cut a section through a beam to beam connection. It will generate a section and will show a beam butting up to a beam, no connection hardware, clip angles, bolts etc. In the section view, you have to draw the connection hardware in by hand as 2d drafting lines over the beams. Then if later on the beam size changes, it will change the beam in your section, but the 2d drafting lines don't follow along with it. There are probably hundreds of other section types that will cause you pain....just think about it.
#4 Drafting efficiency is just slow. Menu setup is poor and drafting 2d lines takes longer than it does in Autocad. The way the program is set up is for modeling, not so much drafting IMHO.
#5 Revit models are a bad choice for complex or irregular structures. If you have anything sloped and irregular, creating models is a huge challenge because you have to know the exact coordinates where each beam goes, and you have to start making your own model pieces. We had a custom house with a an odd roof, and our Revit "expert" took about 2 months straight just to get the basic framing geometry in the model.
#6 Line weights, section titles, section markers, etc have a different look to them that you cannot easily change.
#7 We've tried ETABS and RAM links and neither have proved reliable for typical buildings.
#8 You're going through all the work to create a 3d model in order to print 2d plans.
RE: Revit Structure
Thanks!
RE: Revit Structure
The initial projects with it are very painful due to the "catches" that have been mentioned. I have termed them "pitfalls". Sometimes it is very frustrating to do something that would be relatively simple in Autocad, but you just can't figuire out how to do it in Revit. The help manuals definitely need improvement.
The matching of current company standards is especially frustrating and difficult to do.
However, some of the benefits that I realized are
1. Work sharing on the same model. More than one person can work on the same model in different areas of it.
2. Interference checking with existing items.
3. Rapid drawing creation and annotation once you get the "catches" of company standards worked out.
4. Changing the drawings is easy and because you change the model from which the drawings get their information, all drawings update at once.
5. Reduced RFI's because of drawings not showing the same information due to last minute changes.
6. Doing and intial 1st dump of geomotry from Revit to Risa. They claim the link is bidirectional, but I just can't get it to work out good yet. Most of my stuff is small, so I just update it manually.
7. Rapid communcation of concepts to others via the 3D model.
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
Don Phillips
http://worthingtonengineering.com
RE: Revit Structure
As for Revit Structure, I am not convinced it will make life as productive as MEP but BIM is future.
Cvanoverbeke
RE: Revit Structure
My AutoCAD Revit MEP Suite DVD's came in Friday and I hope and pray I can get a few hours within the next 30 days to try out the software. I think Revit MEP probably works best if the architect starts with Revit Architecture to ensure the building model is accurate - especially the envelope U-values - otherwise, it means entering this information into Elite to calculate heat gain/loss.
I am looking forward to having the one-line diagrams and panel schedules automatically generated - either through AutoCAD MEP or Revit MEP.
And I have to assume the plumbing isometrics is a piece of cake.
Don Phillips
http://worthingtonengineering.com
RE: Revit Structure
Based on your comments it sounds like you are getting Revit MEP 2009. Our firm has not received the upgrade DVDs yet. If the architects you work with use Revit, then it is definetly the way to go. Revit MEP has more features than Autocad MEP. We just finished an industrial building with Revit MEP where we did the HVAC and plumbing, no electrical but the problem was architect did drawings in 2D Autocad. After spending a week to building an architecural model, we were able to do the Mechanical stuff. The big advantage for us was the IES cooling load and heat loss calcs are part of the program. We were working with another engineer who was doing energy simulation of daylighting, process cooling etc. We used Revit to test the IES modules. Overall we are both pleased.
The biggest problem is learning all of the program nuances but you could say that for any software
Cvanoverbeke
RE: Revit Structure
Some objects are easier to change, such as spread footings or wall footings. You just type in the width dimension and it redraws the foundation for you.
Some industrial applications where you have a matrix of orthogonal steel members lend themselves well to Revit. The 3D aspects in these cases definitely make it easier to visualize what's going on. Start throwing a bunch of skewed members in the mix, and Revit starts losing its appeal.
Worksharing is cool once you understand it and get a proper system established with your coworkers. ie, you need to make sure you're working on different areas of the structure. On the same note, worksharing is required in Revit since all sheets are held within a master file.
The biggest benefit is having a 3D model to "Wow" clients when they come in the office.
I honestly think the legal ramifications will limit the spread of BIM in the future but who knows...I'm sure people said the same thing about AutoCad back in the day. Maybe steel fabricators will be less likely to sue over field issues caused by incorrectly located elements they import from Revit.
RE: Revit Structure
To download these extensions on www.extensions4revit.com, it is obligatory to be a "Autodesk Subscriber Customer". It is imposible for a job seeker like me!
Thank you.
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
For those using Revit, how much of the work is performed by an engineer instead of a CAD tech?
RE: Revit Structure
Don Phillips
http://worthingtonengineering.com
RE: Revit Structure
It seems archeng that your in my sort of position. Autocad is a great product no arguments there, but maybe revit is or will become better. Don how much experience have you with revit ? are you still in the learning curve? are there any good texts to learn how to use revit? My all time favorite in learning autocad is Frey, wondering if there is such a text for revit?
Cheers!
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
I've even saved the file under a different name and systematically deleted every thing from the model. All I can see is a work plane shaded in light blue mocking me.
I've tried the visibility graphics overrides, as well as the light bulb that reveals hidden elements.
I did receive some notices about corrupt items, along with their ID numbers, but I was told they were deleted.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
My experience is limited to a presentation by a vendor where he used Revit to literally design and create some simple construction documents for a single family residence in about 2 hours, plus I have been able to play with an old Revit (version 7) copy. I can see this is the future. Once I get Revit MEP installed and put in a couple of old projects, I can see how it integrates with CHVAC (by Elite) and see if it saves some drafting time.
Don Phillips
http://worthingtonengineering.com
RE: Revit Structure
Interesting comments
So what sort of computer do you recommend for using revit? I have a pentium 4 with windows xp (waiting for new op to come before upgrading!) and 1Gbyte of ram.
Cheers!
RE: Revit Structure
Sounds like you know what your talking about.
I think I'll keep revit right where it is at the moment at least for the next 3 years and thats in the back of my mind.
Im quite happy with autocad.
Cheers!!
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
Cheers!
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
Thanks Skicat
RE: Revit Structure
Tekla on the other hand was easier to use both from a picking it up perspective and a modification perspective. The file sizes are ridiculous when compared to Revit, in the fact they are a 1/10th if not more of the file size, they are tiny. Manipulation of drawing settings was a big thing for us as their output is ultimately our deliverable. With Tekla it just made this process very simple. One big winner for us was their dominance in the Fabrication market given their old X-Steel product which has now become Tekla Structures. By using their Engineering configuration we can now start to work earlier with the Fabricator ensuring shorter project programmes and more coherant data transfer as it's the same system.
All in all i really enjoyed trialling both systems but am confident we made the right decision, especially since they release V14 today and we find that our licence now included capabilities for modelling RC so am looking forward to getting my hands on it
RE: Revit Structure
The most important really is to know beforehand the clashing of members esp with services (Me , ee, etc..) and to know clearances (ceiling heights, available distances,etc..).
RE: Revit Structure
Our experience is very mixed. some things are nice, but some things are so very frustrating. Sheets of general notes are one of the most frustrating, as the text editing capabilities are very sub-par. I do like having a 3D model to play with, especially when the architect sends his revit model. Then I can cut sections wherever i want them, regardless if he has his sections cut yet.
Generating the model is very fast and works well most of the time. Some geometry is a problem, as stated above. Generating the actual production drawings is still very tedious at times, given the poor 2D drafting capabilities.
As for hardware, here are a few recommendations. A fast processor and fast RAM are important. Revit does not support multi-core processors, so consider this in choosing. A faster dual core may be better than getting quad-core here. Get as much RAM as you can. 4GB with Windows XP is recommended (well 3GB, but usually 4 is easier to install in matched pairs). Revit does not support 64 bit operation yet, so you don't need a 64 bit system. Get the fastest RAM you can get.
Revit is not a big hard drive user, except when opening/saving files. But I would still get a large fast hard drive. Running over a LAN to a central server will slow down your save/open speeds. So if you use a server, learn about work sharing and central files.
Revit also does not require a super high end graphics card. Revit runs much quicker on my machine than Autocad Architecture does with similarly complex 3D models. I would look for a mid-range workstation card with 512MB ram. I have an nVidia QuadroFX 1400 and it runs just fine, even with large 30 story models. The exception to this would be if you want to use the new rendering engine in Revit 2009. Then the faster graphics card the better, as the renderings, even simple ones, can take many hours.
Revit does not support dual monitors, so I would recommend one large monitor, say 24" in size or better.
Obviously, all of the things I listed above that Revit does not take advantage of, other applications you use may. So consider those when buying. Here is my workstation specs, and it runs beautifully with Revit 2008 and 2009. Granted this was top of the line about 2 years ago.
Dell Precision 380
Pentium Extreme duo at 3.46 GHz
Windows XP Pro
4GB RAM
quadroFX 1400 graphics
75GB 10000 RPM SATA hard drive (runs about 1/2 full right now with Autocad ADT 2004, 2006, 2008, Revit 2008 & 2009, Staad, Etabs, ADAPT, Enercalc, mat3D, Mathcad, PCA, etc. installed)
Dell 20" LCD (24" on my wish list)
Hope this helps some.
RE: Revit Structure
RE: Revit Structure
In fact, I have personally talked to the product manager for Revit Structure (Nicholas Mangon) and asked him about a 64bit version of Revit. He said that was not in the current development plan, but may be added for the next major release. The current version is only 32bit. Perhaps I should have said that there is no plan for 64bit version of Revit. But the 32bit version should run on a 64bit system though. My meaning was that you don't need to spend the extra to get a 64bit version just for Revit, as it won't take advantage of it. Other apps may though, so YMMV.
And it is possible that the new rendering engine uses multi-core processors. But basic Revit does not, and for most of us structural (or MEP) users, we are not too concerned about rendering. But as I said, other apps may take advantage of multi-core processors. So you need to evaluate what you are using and decide do you want dual core or quad core. For me, using cad, revit and analysis software, none of which have multi-core support, dual is just fine. For my computer at home, where I do a lot of photo processing using Photoshop, quad core is essential, and photoshop takes full advantage of it.
RE: Revit Structure
As a new user of Tekla Structures Engineering configuration we recently got sent this http:
The link was invaluable for us to pick up snippets of information. Also we have been working very closely with a Fabricator using Tekla recently and shaved 3 weeks of design production time as we both worked in the model at the same time, awesome for us as users.
RE: Revit Structure
I thought that revit was reliant on pretty expensive hardware too and mentioned this to a rep on a seminar not long ago where he disagreed. But I guess there is no one better qualified to comment than the people who use it rather than the sales reps who want to sell it.