Enercalc + Revit 2

[phamENG]

Anybody using this software pairing?

I know several advanced software packages have attempted to use links to tie analytical and documentation model data together, but I've always heard lots of complaints. If they hype is correct, Enercalc has solved it by keeping all model data in Revit, and just pulling out what you need to design individual components (no changing geometry in Enercalc). The only info that gets modified is the beam size if the design plugin calls for it. Sounds pretty slick. If this actually works, it seems like it could fit nicely in my work flow. BUT...I'm a Revit LT user, so it means upgrading to full Revit AND buying Enercalc and Enercalc for Revit. That's about a $3,300$5,164/year investment (assuming I can't get AutoDesk to give me a discount).

Curious if anyone else has tried it and what your impressions and thoughts are.

 

[dold]

This actually looks pretty damn slick indeed. Not sure how I haven't seen this before...

At first glance I suspect (I'm going to see if Enercalc will give me a trial) that all of this is based off of the analytical elements within Revit, as opposed to simply the physical elements. If so then that would be a bit of a drawback since we/I typically just ignore all the analytical stuff in Revit as it gets really messy really quick unless you're diligent. I.e., moving a physical model element doesn't always move the analytical element. Plus our drafters would pitch a fit if they had to keep track of both.

I use the RISA > Revit link pretty often to get bigger models set up. But I've never tried to implement the 'round tripping' functionality to bring sizes back into Revit. But simply importing geometry from Revit to Risa (risa floor or 3D) is pretty quick if you know what needs to be cleaned up prior to the export. And it allows you to choose whether to bring in the physical model or the analytical model. It's great for exporting shearwalls with a bunch of openings. And there's a good bit of manual post processing before you can get your Risa model running.

Paging @CConrad (i think that's his handle?). Can you speak to whether this is all based off of revit analytical elements vs. physical?

This looks particularly enticing:

 

[Aesur]

I believe there was a demo of this a few months ago, I have emailed @CConrad to get him into this thread.

 

[phamENG]

So I re-figured the cost. I'm not a current Enercalc user...I've been on the fence since it, like all calculation packages, falls short somewhere. Shear walls is the big thing for Enercalc. It only offers Segmented shear walls. Here on the coast with ocean front window walls, segmented just doesn't cut it. I've fallen in love with FTAO, so a calculator that does FTAO strength and serviceability calculations would be a huge selling point for me.

Anyway...Enercalc SEL+Enercalc for Revit+AutoDesk AEC Collection (because Revit + CAD is more than the whole collection) = $5714/year. I use the LT suite, so I'm only spending $550/year currently. So that's a $5164/year added cost.

If they can incorporate columns, footings, walls (gravity, out of plane wind and in plane wind) into the Enercalc for Revit...I'd say it would be worth it. It could cut production and design time in half and pay for itself in just a couple projects with significant profitability gains over the course of the year. So for now I'll continue to wait and see.

Still looking forward to hearing more about it from other users and from CConrad himself.

 

[driftLimiter]

Hey PhamENG,

Thanks for sharing it does look pretty exciting. Enercalc is a great program for element calcs, people are familiar with it and its pretty straight forward for the user. I'd be interested to see how the loading is handled on the Revit side. Revit has a suite of tools for loading and structural modeling you probably know about the analytical model.

If you could use loading from the analytical model directly into enercalc this could really be a GEM of a software (after they get columns footings and walls like you said). Its pretty easy to set up area loads and point loads in revit that you could back and update if needed. Complex loading etc is not an issue.

I have tried playing with the Revit to Robot Link because Robot is included in the AEC package that we subscribe to for revit. So there is significant value there for us. But Robot has been a difficult program to get proficient with. I'm told by many that is quite powerful and very good at what it does but so far I haven't seen it. And it doesn't do a lot of wood elements which is a major downside.

Looking forward to seeing a demo or some feedback from someone who is able to give this thing a shot.

 

[JStructsteel]

Im hoping to use the new version of Enercalc and see if its any better. Its a good program, but the interface right now still sucks.

 

[SRoswurm]

Afternoon All,

@CConrad looped me into this thread so that I could answer some of the questions being raised here. I'm the lead developer and senior structural engineer (PE, SE) responsible for the creation and maintenance of the ENERCALC for Revit (EFR) product line.

I'll start by tackling the questions already posed here, and then I'm happy to answer any additional questions you guys may have.

@phamENG is absolutely correct in saying that EFR pulls only the critical information needed to build a calculation for the specific component being designed. The critical geometry (i.e., span geometry, support conditions, etc.) is driven by the Revit model, while the engineer retains full control over design decisions (i.e., loads, section size, material props, etc.) in the calculation. This completely eliminates any worry about getting caught in a limbo where the crucial geometry of the design calc and the Revit model no longer agree with each other.

@dold is correct in saying that managing Revit analytical is a major pain. I've lived it in design practice, and I don't wish it on anyone. That's why ENERCALC for Revit is driven by PHYSICAL MODEL geometry. Critical design information like span geometry, support locations, connective relationships, proximity of loads, tributary width, and so much more is all detected and defined using the literal solid geometry of the same physical elements you use to create your views and sheets. The "Prime Directive" throughout the design of EFR is to integrate seamlessly into your existing workflow, rather than forcing you to learn or do something new. Our philosophy is that if our tool forces you into laborious management you never did before, then how are you any better off? The only minor note regarding analytical is that we need it to at least exist so that we can quietly and automatically store some load data that helps power the design process. So basically as long as the "Analytical Enabled" checkbox is on, then you can move on and not think about it anymore. Despite the massive overhaul to Revit analytical in Revit 2023, we've worked very hard to serve up that very same easy and seamless experience in Revit 2023 as well.

@driftLimiter raised a great point concerning loads. EFR does provide seamless 2-way synchronization of Revit analytical load objects and load cases with your ENERCALC calculations. Edits to loads in either interface will be automatically reflected in the other. This includes hosted and non-hosted linear loads, hosted and non-hosted point loads, and hosted area loads on floors (via automatic detection of tributary width).

@phamENG mentioned future development: Integration of columns and foundations is already in active development right now. We're very excited to push ahead with that process to complete the basic load path for a wide array of structures that fit the profile for EFR-based design. The ultimate endgame would be for us to have integration for any ENERCALC module that has a physically modeled counterpart in the Revit environment.

@dold mentioned asking about a trial. We currently offer free trial access to EFR for existing ENERCALC subscribers. There is not currently a fully functional free trial available for ENERCALC itself that is capable of operating EFR, but we offer a money-back guarantee with your subscription purchase. Per forum rules, I'm not placing any contact info within this response, but you can easily reach us via info on our website. If you reach out, feel free to mention that you interacted with me here on Eng-Tips and I'll be notified on the resulting support thread.

For further reading, there's a lot of great info on the EFR product page, as well as our YouTube channel and LinkedIn where we continuously feature new demos and tutorials.

Finally, I just want to say that as a provider of software tools BY engineers and FOR engineers, we love to hear from you guys. Practicing engineers have the critical insight that we crave, so don't ever hesitate to reach out to us and ask questions or submit feature requests.

Best Regards,

SRoswurm,
Senior Structural Engineer, API Integrations
ENERCALC, INC
Web:

https://enercalc.com/

 

[phamENG]

SRoswurm,

Thanks for jumping in and sharing your insights. It looks like a really nice tool, and I can't wait to see it develop further. I'm transitioning my documentation to be as close to 100% Revit as I can, so switching up to full Revit is probably in the cards when my current subscription is up. I'm also looking closely at Enercalc more generally...as things come together more I may make the leap. Enercalc is a bit more expensive than Tedds, which I'm more accustomed to, but EFR may be enough to sway me.

I'm really interested in hearing from people who have tried it in their workflows in practice. But it sounds like nobody here has done that yet.

 

[driftLimiter]

SRoswurm thanks for filling us in. It sounds like for anyone who is using revit and enercalc right now this will speed up the workflow pretty well.

I have another question for @SRoswurm about interconnectivity. Does the EFR tool recognize if a beam is being supported to a beam? Can reactions from one element be applied as load to other elements? This workflow similar to Forte is something I have always wished enercalc could do. I spend a decent amount of time taking screenshots of reactions from one beam and then re-entering the reactions case by case as loads to another beam.

I see that the EFR does have this feature ! Yay

 

[dold]

SRoswurm - Thanks for all the info!

That's why ENERCALC for Revit is driven by PHYSICAL MODEL geometry.

Most excellent. That should make life easy. I guess the only sticking point will be ensuring the physical model is actually modelled correctly (beams connected to beams, etc). In a perfect world it would be, of course. But unless the engineer is doing the modelling themselves it might be a little hit and miss since drafters might not be spending the time to ensure connectivity. Is some sort of tolerance built in to the program when determining connectivity? E.g., "beam endpoint is within 0.5 inches of girder centerline" and detects/connects it?

@dold mentioned asking about a trial.

We've already gotten the updated PCC. Just waiting on the add-in installer .exe. Can't wait to check it out. I'll try to bounce back to this thread once I've explored it.

 

[SRoswurm]

driftLimiter,

Absolutely! The ability to automatically move reactions from one calculation to another was a must-have priority during development. When you launch a calculation in Revit, you'll be prompted to briefly verify the support conditions that ENERCALC uses to establish span geometry. Once that support relationship is established between elements, the associated reaction forces will populate painlessly in the next "downstream" calculation.

Here's a quick look (1 min, 28 sec) at what that process feels like. This example is at an elevator shaft opening in a steel-framed floor:

https://youtu.be/MyyF9mbqaoc

Best Regards,

SRoswurm,
Senior Structural Engineer, API Integrations
ENERCALC, INC
Web:

https://enercalc.com/

 

[driftLimiter]

It looks excellent I am going to see if I can get the trial. Although would probably wait until column and footing integration at least to buy.

 

[SRoswurm]

dold,

Concerning modeling accuracy, you'll find that there's a lot of flexibility and intelligence built into EFR's process for interpreting model geometry. In addition to proximity tolerances, you also have the option in extreme cases to instruct EFR to compute extrapolated connection points on the fly even when elements don't intersect at all. Here's an example of what that might look like:

Best Regards,

SRoswurm,
Senior Structural Engineer, API Integrations
ENERCALC, INC
Web:

https://enercalc.com/

 

[dold]

@SRoswurm
Re: modeling accuracy: that's another plus in my book!