Has anyone used Revit? If you have, could you please explain how you use it and what it does. Also, where do you get trained for it? I can't find anywhere that trains you how to use it. I understand it is a 3-D modeling program for architects to design buildings and will help in overlap and clearance designs. I know a couple HVAC companies that have models for Revit, but do you design your own ductwork like AutoCAD MEP? Also, what percentage of architects use it? Architects must have unlimited budgets to buy programs because they are always the first to upgrade.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Revit 1
- Thread starter Dymalica
- Start date
-
1
- #2
Revit is a relatively new 3D modeling program that architects have been using for a few years. Only recently has the MEP portion caught up.
We have done 3 projects with it so far and have many more on the books or in design. One of the projects that I was involved was a 10 level county courthouse that we feel would have been a disaster if we had tried to do it with 2D cad. There was a lot of space problems and coordination issues.
Autodesk owns it so you can probably ask them where/sho training occurs. We use a third party company for our training - when we don't train in house. Make sure the company doing the training has people who have done layout and are not just glorified software people. The latter are about a paper's width deep on understanding how to make it work for a MEP worker and are totally useless in answering the questions we would have.
It is a powerful program to do coordination of MEP with structural and architectural. You can run a command and it will tell you where you are in conflict with other disciplines. You do design your own ductwork and I think it is easier to use than Autocad MEP. It is different, but once you get used to it, it is better.
I don't know how many architects use it, but I know that we got a job when an architect called Autodesk and asked them what MEP companies use it.
One thing that I have learned is that I can no longer be a "line" jockey. I am now a "pipe fitter". It is a definite paradigm shift, but it is advantageous. I also use two monitors when I run it. I have the floor plan open on one monitor and either a 3D view or two perpendicular sections. That way I can see where the mechanical, electrical, structural, and/or architectural elements are.
It takes more time to perform design up front but it (in theory) should significantly cut down on the coordination that has to take place in the field - which always costs money - it is cheaper to do it before bid than after.
Hopefully that helps.
We have done 3 projects with it so far and have many more on the books or in design. One of the projects that I was involved was a 10 level county courthouse that we feel would have been a disaster if we had tried to do it with 2D cad. There was a lot of space problems and coordination issues.
Autodesk owns it so you can probably ask them where/sho training occurs. We use a third party company for our training - when we don't train in house. Make sure the company doing the training has people who have done layout and are not just glorified software people. The latter are about a paper's width deep on understanding how to make it work for a MEP worker and are totally useless in answering the questions we would have.
It is a powerful program to do coordination of MEP with structural and architectural. You can run a command and it will tell you where you are in conflict with other disciplines. You do design your own ductwork and I think it is easier to use than Autocad MEP. It is different, but once you get used to it, it is better.
I don't know how many architects use it, but I know that we got a job when an architect called Autodesk and asked them what MEP companies use it.
One thing that I have learned is that I can no longer be a "line" jockey. I am now a "pipe fitter". It is a definite paradigm shift, but it is advantageous. I also use two monitors when I run it. I have the floor plan open on one monitor and either a 3D view or two perpendicular sections. That way I can see where the mechanical, electrical, structural, and/or architectural elements are.
It takes more time to perform design up front but it (in theory) should significantly cut down on the coordination that has to take place in the field - which always costs money - it is cheaper to do it before bid than after.
Hopefully that helps.
Revit costs money, lots of money.
We do complex cordination every day with CAD without problems.
This thing is making the cost of doing business extremely expensive, small companies can no longer compete. The result is that only large firms will remain in business, and you know what happens to the price of gas when Exxon and Mobil become one company. Architects push this thing without realizing the impact on others.
The engineers now have to rely on CAD folks to make any small change because they are not trained in revit. Why train an engineer in every new cad software when he is not supposed to do drafting.
Granted, it has some things it can do, but I see it more of a contractor's thing, rather than MEP.
The truth is that we do the same thing we used to do with release 12 as we do with ACAD 2005. There was not much need for upgrade. Autodesk is feeding it in little drops to suck us dry.
We do complex cordination every day with CAD without problems.
This thing is making the cost of doing business extremely expensive, small companies can no longer compete. The result is that only large firms will remain in business, and you know what happens to the price of gas when Exxon and Mobil become one company. Architects push this thing without realizing the impact on others.
The engineers now have to rely on CAD folks to make any small change because they are not trained in revit. Why train an engineer in every new cad software when he is not supposed to do drafting.
Granted, it has some things it can do, but I see it more of a contractor's thing, rather than MEP.
The truth is that we do the same thing we used to do with release 12 as we do with ACAD 2005. There was not much need for upgrade. Autodesk is feeding it in little drops to suck us dry.
I can see many advantages in using 3D for workshop drawings and designs requiring detailed coordination.
However design is an iterative process, and by very definition 3D requires 50% more detail that 2D. Do we get paid 50% more to show 50% more details (assuming it only takes 50% longer to document)
Design details change every day early in the design and is it even possible to keep with architectural changes in 3D? Say if floor levels change, in 3D everything will suddenly clash, in 2D it does not matter, so should the 3D model be updated because the automatic 'time saving' clash detection feature is flashing red? (and knowing very well the floor levels may change again in the future)
To take full advantages of everything that 3D packages offer, it is more than just a change in drafting package, but potentially a change in the ways that buildings are designs/drafted and delivered.
However design is an iterative process, and by very definition 3D requires 50% more detail that 2D. Do we get paid 50% more to show 50% more details (assuming it only takes 50% longer to document)
Design details change every day early in the design and is it even possible to keep with architectural changes in 3D? Say if floor levels change, in 3D everything will suddenly clash, in 2D it does not matter, so should the 3D model be updated because the automatic 'time saving' clash detection feature is flashing red? (and knowing very well the floor levels may change again in the future)
To take full advantages of everything that 3D packages offer, it is more than just a change in drafting package, but potentially a change in the ways that buildings are designs/drafted and delivered.
I agree completely with Cry22, I would like to see some documented differences in total project cost that justify this technology. Many of the benefits (the database nature of elements) can be incorporated into conventional 2D ACAD.
Is Revit really a reaction to the loss of layout/drafting expertise in the workforce? There are no trade schools within 500 miles of my town that teach piping or ductwork layout skills. Lots of places teaching CAD.
Is Revit really a reaction to the loss of layout/drafting expertise in the workforce? There are no trade schools within 500 miles of my town that teach piping or ductwork layout skills. Lots of places teaching CAD.
I won't disagree that Revit is more costly or that there has been a loss of layout/drafting expertise. Too many people doing layout seem to be no more than line jockeys and just put lines down to indicate piping wherever they want to without really thinking about coordination with structural or the othe MEP drafters. The common rationale that I have heard is it will be worked out in the field or we will catch it on the coordination drawings. To me, that is too late. Again, it is cheaper to catch it before bid than after.
I like revit because I have some struggles seeing things in 3d when I look at a drawing. With revit, I can cut a section(without the extra drawing that 2d requires) and see where everything is at. I have used this to determine where my run of sloped piping has to start (tight to structure), where I have to drop the pipe to miss a beam or a duct or something else and the neferious villain of sloped piping - the ceiling. I can tell if what I am designing will work or if I have to call the architect and ask him to lower the ceiling. Now, granted, all these things can be done with 2D cadd, but you have to draw it out or you have to calculate it yourself - and there is nothing wrong with that. But with revit, I can set the slope on my pipe and do it all automatically.
In the long run, that is good. But it does require that the person doing the drafting understand what is going on and not just be somebody who puts in lines where the engineer wants them to be. With Revit, there cannot be drafters per se. They have to be designers with some knowledge of what is going on.
Revit will likely mean the end of the engineer handing sheets with penciled in markups and the drafter just putting them in. I don't know if that is progress, but it seems to be the direction things are going.
Revit will also require engineers to make sure it fits. They will look pretty foolish if the architect/construction manager/contractor cuts a view or section and sees the piping below the ceiling or through a duct.
My company hasn't totally bought into it yet. We want to see if the extra cost and the extra up design time/fee pays back in the end. I think it will - once the bugs get worked out.
I like revit because I have some struggles seeing things in 3d when I look at a drawing. With revit, I can cut a section(without the extra drawing that 2d requires) and see where everything is at. I have used this to determine where my run of sloped piping has to start (tight to structure), where I have to drop the pipe to miss a beam or a duct or something else and the neferious villain of sloped piping - the ceiling. I can tell if what I am designing will work or if I have to call the architect and ask him to lower the ceiling. Now, granted, all these things can be done with 2D cadd, but you have to draw it out or you have to calculate it yourself - and there is nothing wrong with that. But with revit, I can set the slope on my pipe and do it all automatically.
In the long run, that is good. But it does require that the person doing the drafting understand what is going on and not just be somebody who puts in lines where the engineer wants them to be. With Revit, there cannot be drafters per se. They have to be designers with some knowledge of what is going on.
Revit will likely mean the end of the engineer handing sheets with penciled in markups and the drafter just putting them in. I don't know if that is progress, but it seems to be the direction things are going.
Revit will also require engineers to make sure it fits. They will look pretty foolish if the architect/construction manager/contractor cuts a view or section and sees the piping below the ceiling or through a duct.
My company hasn't totally bought into it yet. We want to see if the extra cost and the extra up design time/fee pays back in the end. I think it will - once the bugs get worked out.
DonPhillips
Structural
I am still thinking about Revit and I have an evaluation copy of both AutoCAD MEP and Revit MEP. Perhaps this fall, I will be able to install and play with them.
I am pretty sure I will be moving on to some sort of BIM software since this is where the industry is heading amd I am pretty sure it will be Revit and it and AutoCAD start to merge.
Don Phillips
I am pretty sure I will be moving on to some sort of BIM software since this is where the industry is heading amd I am pretty sure it will be Revit and it and AutoCAD start to merge.
Don Phillips
Just a couple of random thoughts to throw out about Revit.
If the architect isn't using Revit it is useless to a MEP firm, unless you want to redraw the architects drawings into Revit. You cannot use any Autocad drawings in Revit.
More than being a way to achieve a 3D BIM design, Revit is a complete paradigm shift in how MEP design and documentation occurs. Current CAD platforms are for documenting the design. For the most part the actual design work occurs outside of the CAD program. Then you go into the CAD program to draw and document your design. With Revit you do your design work inside the program. The program will for the most part then automagically take care of the documentaion. (It's not quite that simple but it is were it is headed). The idea is to make it a one step process, no more design and then draft.
If the architect isn't using Revit it is useless to a MEP firm, unless you want to redraw the architects drawings into Revit. You cannot use any Autocad drawings in Revit.
More than being a way to achieve a 3D BIM design, Revit is a complete paradigm shift in how MEP design and documentation occurs. Current CAD platforms are for documenting the design. For the most part the actual design work occurs outside of the CAD program. Then you go into the CAD program to draw and document your design. With Revit you do your design work inside the program. The program will for the most part then automagically take care of the documentaion. (It's not quite that simple but it is were it is headed). The idea is to make it a one step process, no more design and then draft.
NCDesign,
I disagree that Revit is useless to the MEP firm if the architect is not using Revit. You are also incorrect that you cannot use any Autocad drawings in Revit.
We are working on a large parking garage where the architect is not using Revit. The main reason we got the job is that we could use Revit to create the 3-D model to show how the piping fits. This was a point of interest because this architect had worked on a similar job with another MEP (non Revit firm) and there was a lot of trouble with coordination and pipe elevations. I am not saying that using Revit eliminates all these problems, but using does help a lot.
On our project, we created the floors, ramps,columns and footings ourselves and then imported the architectural cad drawings to make our floor plan. It is not ideal but it does work. We did get the extra fee to do the non-MEP work.
I disagree that Revit is useless to the MEP firm if the architect is not using Revit. You are also incorrect that you cannot use any Autocad drawings in Revit.
We are working on a large parking garage where the architect is not using Revit. The main reason we got the job is that we could use Revit to create the 3-D model to show how the piping fits. This was a point of interest because this architect had worked on a similar job with another MEP (non Revit firm) and there was a lot of trouble with coordination and pipe elevations. I am not saying that using Revit eliminates all these problems, but using does help a lot.
On our project, we created the floors, ramps,columns and footings ourselves and then imported the architectural cad drawings to make our floor plan. It is not ideal but it does work. We did get the extra fee to do the non-MEP work.
cry22
I don't disagree that an engineering firm should not be selected based just on its Revit capabilities and that a true engineer can cut a complicated section.
But this architect had gotten burnt on a previous job where the engineering firm did not coordinate the elevations well with other stuff - which was a big problem.
We were chosen because we had shown the ability to use Revit to enhance our coordination effort.
Revit doesn't take away the engineer's responsibility to coordinate this stuff or cut sections. It just makes it a whole lot easier.
I can just click a couple buttons and I see the section. I don't have to draw anything - other than my pipe in plan view. I can make my section as long as I want it - a whole corridor on a single floor or maybe an entire building cut showing several floors - all with a couple commands and a click of the button.
What might take a cad drafter a whole morning or even a day to draw up - and hopefully without mistakes because he has to look at the other trades' drawings to get the right information, takes me a couple minutes and all the stuff is at the elevation and location it was put into the plan drawing. Of course this requires that everybody else is working in Revit.
While your cad operater is still drawing up the section to see what the problems are - I have already seen the problems and called the architect or walked to the mechanical or electrical designer and worked out the problem.
So, with Revit, I am several hours ahead on my design which if there are a lot of coordination issues, this means a lot less time spent on the job which means that the profit goes up, the coordination is more accurate and better which means my company gets more jobs because we get a reputation for doing projects quicker and more accurately.
I don't disagree that an engineering firm should not be selected based just on its Revit capabilities and that a true engineer can cut a complicated section.
But this architect had gotten burnt on a previous job where the engineering firm did not coordinate the elevations well with other stuff - which was a big problem.
We were chosen because we had shown the ability to use Revit to enhance our coordination effort.
Revit doesn't take away the engineer's responsibility to coordinate this stuff or cut sections. It just makes it a whole lot easier.
I can just click a couple buttons and I see the section. I don't have to draw anything - other than my pipe in plan view. I can make my section as long as I want it - a whole corridor on a single floor or maybe an entire building cut showing several floors - all with a couple commands and a click of the button.
What might take a cad drafter a whole morning or even a day to draw up - and hopefully without mistakes because he has to look at the other trades' drawings to get the right information, takes me a couple minutes and all the stuff is at the elevation and location it was put into the plan drawing. Of course this requires that everybody else is working in Revit.
While your cad operater is still drawing up the section to see what the problems are - I have already seen the problems and called the architect or walked to the mechanical or electrical designer and worked out the problem.
So, with Revit, I am several hours ahead on my design which if there are a lot of coordination issues, this means a lot less time spent on the job which means that the profit goes up, the coordination is more accurate and better which means my company gets more jobs because we get a reputation for doing projects quicker and more accurately.
PEDAR,
I see that you see it as a cost saving tool. It takes a lot of engineering time to input things in Revit from what I am hearing (i.e engineer's time, not CAD time).
More importantly, your young engineers will not learn the trade and will always rely on the computer the cut the sections for them. If no computer around (such as in the field, in a meeting or any other place) they are lost.
We actually see that with today's doctors, they cannot read an X-ray unless there is a computer nearby.
I see that you see it as a cost saving tool. It takes a lot of engineering time to input things in Revit from what I am hearing (i.e engineer's time, not CAD time).
More importantly, your young engineers will not learn the trade and will always rely on the computer the cut the sections for them. If no computer around (such as in the field, in a meeting or any other place) they are lost.
We actually see that with today's doctors, they cannot read an X-ray unless there is a computer nearby.
I agree that young engineers - and I don't see myself too far removed from that - need to know how to do something by hand or by brain before they use a computer. I see that with calculations and it is no different with the lay out of drawings. Like you said, they may not have a computer out on the jobsite.
But all that comes from experience and it takes time.
But from a business perspective, use of the computer with its spreadsheets and drafting software cuts down on the time it takes for the engineer and/or drafter to do things. And in business - time is money. I never did hand drafting for a company - but in talking with those who did, it took a lot longer to do it that way than it does with the computer - and Revit is just the next step in that evolution.
And Revit is a paradigm shift. If it catches on, gone will be the days that the engineer lays it out and the drafter puts it on paper.
Either the engineer does the layout himself with Revit - like I do, or the drafter becomes a designer and learns the ins and outs of the trade (how to lay out piping/ductwork, how to coordinate above the ceiling, etc.) and puts it into Revit himself - and the engineer does the more difficult technical work (sizing the equipment, running the calcs, sizes the piping, etc.) and/or oversees the drafter and goes to meetings.
It all comes down to progress. We cannot go back to drafting by hand for our work. It just is not cost competitive.
We definitely need to remember how to do it and try to learn from those who did it that way so we know why we do the things we do and know how to ask the question when the computer spits something out to us and not just take it at face value.
But all that comes from experience and it takes time.
But from a business perspective, use of the computer with its spreadsheets and drafting software cuts down on the time it takes for the engineer and/or drafter to do things. And in business - time is money. I never did hand drafting for a company - but in talking with those who did, it took a lot longer to do it that way than it does with the computer - and Revit is just the next step in that evolution.
And Revit is a paradigm shift. If it catches on, gone will be the days that the engineer lays it out and the drafter puts it on paper.
Either the engineer does the layout himself with Revit - like I do, or the drafter becomes a designer and learns the ins and outs of the trade (how to lay out piping/ductwork, how to coordinate above the ceiling, etc.) and puts it into Revit himself - and the engineer does the more difficult technical work (sizing the equipment, running the calcs, sizes the piping, etc.) and/or oversees the drafter and goes to meetings.
It all comes down to progress. We cannot go back to drafting by hand for our work. It just is not cost competitive.
We definitely need to remember how to do it and try to learn from those who did it that way so we know why we do the things we do and know how to ask the question when the computer spits something out to us and not just take it at face value.
Good vision Pedar, and I fully agree with you with the technology advancement and its impact on our daily lives.
I, too do things faster (excell being one of them-I just made a VAV box schedule with 152 terminals in 1 hour's time, plug in formulas and go). A CAD dwg can be PDF'ed, e-mailed etc... I even did some work on the plane over the Atlantic one time and e-mailed back to the states by the time I landed.
I guess it is just the cost of this Revit thing that is getting me ticked off.
I still maintain that I have not seen any sugnificant diferences betwen Release 12 of 15 years ago and ACAD 2005 and every other version in between.
I, too do things faster (excell being one of them-I just made a VAV box schedule with 152 terminals in 1 hour's time, plug in formulas and go). A CAD dwg can be PDF'ed, e-mailed etc... I even did some work on the plane over the Atlantic one time and e-mailed back to the states by the time I landed.
I guess it is just the cost of this Revit thing that is getting me ticked off.
I still maintain that I have not seen any sugnificant diferences betwen Release 12 of 15 years ago and ACAD 2005 and every other version in between.
I agree that from a drafting perspective, there has not been a lot of improvement in the Auto Cad software releases - just some tweaking - and making you pay for those improvements and upgrades.
I don't know how much it costs - not my concern - but I could see that if the cost was extreme, it could hinder smaller companies from using it. But was that any different than when drafting softwares came on the market. And from what I have been told, there were quite a few. You had to have a computer, then you had to have an upgrade to be able to run the software, then you had to have a plotter and all the peripherals. And you hoped you picked the software that would last because if you didn't, you would be buying another software. I know a couple companies that did that.
That process had to be much more expensive than the hand drafting tools. And I imagine that the smaller companies had to either invest in the new stuff or face the possibility of extinction from not being able to compete with those who did make the investment.
I guess it is the price of progress.
I don't know how much it costs - not my concern - but I could see that if the cost was extreme, it could hinder smaller companies from using it. But was that any different than when drafting softwares came on the market. And from what I have been told, there were quite a few. You had to have a computer, then you had to have an upgrade to be able to run the software, then you had to have a plotter and all the peripherals. And you hoped you picked the software that would last because if you didn't, you would be buying another software. I know a couple companies that did that.
That process had to be much more expensive than the hand drafting tools. And I imagine that the smaller companies had to either invest in the new stuff or face the possibility of extinction from not being able to compete with those who did make the investment.
I guess it is the price of progress.
There is one problem - Education.
We get college kids not capable of seeing 3D. Now you expect drafters to become designers and vision 3D design to keep their job. They don't have the necessary education to become designers, most want to be drafters and that's it. If they wanted to study, they would've gone to college in the first place.
This revit thing is going to automatically outsource the drafter's job which will be followed immediately by the designer's job, then ultimately by the engineer's job.
Check out the large A/E firms' web sites, you'll notice that they all have a Hong Kong/Shanghai office of some sort, that's where Revit be done from. Revit will expedite the outsourcing.
Hell with Revit man.
We get college kids not capable of seeing 3D. Now you expect drafters to become designers and vision 3D design to keep their job. They don't have the necessary education to become designers, most want to be drafters and that's it. If they wanted to study, they would've gone to college in the first place.
This revit thing is going to automatically outsource the drafter's job which will be followed immediately by the designer's job, then ultimately by the engineer's job.
Check out the large A/E firms' web sites, you'll notice that they all have a Hong Kong/Shanghai office of some sort, that's where Revit be done from. Revit will expedite the outsourcing.
Hell with Revit man.
I know when we went to ABS which was sort of a weak Revit light, we had some who did not want to give up the "drafter" part of their position. They were content with drawing lines and stuff like that and when forced to think with pipe, they decided we were not the company to work for and they went elsewhere. That is not a slam on them or anything.
I don't disagree that the kids out of college and some us 3D deficient people (like me) can have trouble seeing things in 3D. We also get kids out of college who do not really know what a duct is also. It is not a matter of previous education, it is a matter of doing it for a while under a mentor. That is a problem in some places I have worked - the lack of mentoring - but that is a whole other discussion.
If we want to work in the MEP design field and stay in it, we have to be able to see in the 3D - whether we use Revit or not. Revit helped me to see in 3D because I could turn my 2D plan into a 3D isometric, revolve it to get a better view and see just how things were fitting. Using it has made me a better engineer and designer.
I don't have any feel for the outsourcing aspect. The A/E firms my company works with do not outsource their work. But then we don't do any international wor either and that may be the reason.
I don't disagree that the kids out of college and some us 3D deficient people (like me) can have trouble seeing things in 3D. We also get kids out of college who do not really know what a duct is also. It is not a matter of previous education, it is a matter of doing it for a while under a mentor. That is a problem in some places I have worked - the lack of mentoring - but that is a whole other discussion.
If we want to work in the MEP design field and stay in it, we have to be able to see in the 3D - whether we use Revit or not. Revit helped me to see in 3D because I could turn my 2D plan into a 3D isometric, revolve it to get a better view and see just how things were fitting. Using it has made me a better engineer and designer.
I don't have any feel for the outsourcing aspect. The A/E firms my company works with do not outsource their work. But then we don't do any international wor either and that may be the reason.
- Status
Similar threads
