? Rolled Beams ?

[James.Lupton]

Tom

I was not advocating the use of Xsteel instead of Revit. The cost of Xsteel does make it difficult to justify if you are not going on to produce manufacturing drawings and NC data.

The comparison I was making was really based on speed and ability to complete.

In order to cost justify and move to 3D modeling, there needs to be a direct productivity gain or other model based advantage.

Since most contractors are not yet geared up to take advantage from the BIM data, Structural engineers probably need to base their decisions on productivity gains.

There is little doubt that Revit will save you time on the 80% part but if that last 20% is not feasible at a reasonable pace then the earlier gains are soon wiped out.

Advantages are available where the data within the model can be passed on to the manufacturer however, again, where in-place families are required to complete the project geometry, the structure which they define is not available to pass on.

It is for these reasons that I think we need a different approach to defining structural framing based on more powerful property definition within the families.

[Tom Weir]

Hi James,
The BIM throughput of information from desing to fabrication is a ways off for sure using less expensive tools like Revit and changing the workflow in th AEC industry. I am still, finding important productivity gains as I have been using Revit though so I do not feel I have to wait for that achievement before I implement modeling in our office.

That darn last 20% though....I keep hoping it is a matter of lack of content and maturity rather than a systematic flaw in the program approach that has to be overcome, and that if we keep adding stuff like curved beams, and tapered girder families, we will be eventually whittle that 20% down. But when I listen to a user like yourself with many more years of Revit experience than I, I get a little worried.

Have you ever spoke with the developers about this? It would be intersting to hear their reply.

Have a great day...

Tom

[James.Lupton]

Hi James,
The BIM throughput of information from desing to fabrication is a ways off for sure using less expensive tools like Revit and changing the workflow in th AEC industry. I am still, finding important productivity gains as I have been using Revit though so I do not feel I have to wait for that achievement before I implement modeling in our office.

That darn last 20% though....I keep hoping it is a matter of lack of content and maturity rather than a systematic flaw in the program approach that has to be overcome, and that if we keep adding stuff like curved beams, and tapered girder families, we will be eventually whittle that 20% down. But when I listen to a user like yourself with many more years of Revit experience than I, I get a little worried.

Have you ever spoke with the developers about this? It would be intersting to hear their reply.

Have a great day...

Tom

Tom,

I may be conveying the wrong impression to you.

In a comparison to a traditional 2D approach in AutoCAD, Revit delivers definite productivity gains.

At times during the roll out of Revit, the gains may not be consistent as different projects highlight the need for different solutions.

Once you get through these early stages though, the gains are more consistent so I don't want to knock your confidence. Revit is a very good product.

What I was trying to highlight was that by changing the way in which some of the system components work, This very good product could be made even better.

I think it was at around version 4 of Revit Building that the stairs component went through a major enhancement which improved the speed of use and extended the range of stairs which could be defined.

For some structural components, enhancements to the component definition could enable faster definition of more complex structures.

This would go a long way to reducing the impact of that last 20%.

We have seen a number of our requests for enhancements becoming available over the years and therefore I believe the developers are listening to our requests.

Functionality will however, improve at a faster pace if there is a body of opinion behind the need for any particular enhancement. I feel that this wish list can perhaps promote these
improvements by emphasizing that there are a number of users supporting the suggested changes.

You and I both hold the opinion that there is a split of around 80/20 in terms of what can be defined quickly. If others are of the same opinion and convey this to Autodesk I am sure we will see a solution to the 20% come along very soon thereafter.

For the time being lets hope its all sorted in 9.0

[Tom Weir]

James
I think I am sounding a little bit more defensive than I really feel. Let's keep identifying these problems. I have given the developers tons of feedback in the last two years and already seen many of the items I asked for delivered in RS2.
And I think RS3 will have substanial improvements from the scuttlebutt I have heard.

Have a great day...

Tom

[James.Lupton]

Tom

We don't get to hear much over here in the UK but I am sure there will be some good stuff in RS3

Any Beta testing rumors at your end?

[Tom Weir]

James,
I hear that we are close...

Tom

[Thomas Maleski]

This wishlist item has been granted. When placing beams, one can choose the arc option from the option toolbar.