If not site tools, then what?

[Andre Baros]

I've gotten the impression that site tools will will not be changing for a long time in Revit, but we are getting more and more projects for which we are also doing all the site design. Is there another tool which we should be using which will play well with Revit and let us sculpt the landscape precisely, or should I simply apply more force to the site tools in Revit? We still usually use a Civil for drainage , etc. but because the hard scape and landscape are so connected to the building, we take care of all that.

What does Autodesk think we're using for site design (I don't really want to call it civil, because it's not at that scale)? What do landscape architects (who don't draw by hand) use?

[petervanko]

Well, VIZ has decent topo tools, but I still believe Revit cannot be beat in the site tools and development department. Just being able to run around a site with desired points, and then being able to easily host elements to that site is amazing. Check out Revitcity for some great curb tools, stormwater inlets, etc. you can use once you get the soil in the right place.

[archjake]

I agree, the site tools are difficult to use. I've even had problems when it comes to importing a topo file from my surveyor. Has anyone tried to do this with a 2D file? Yes, I know there are work arounds, but that just added an hour to my project.

When editing why does Revit have to update every time I adjust a point? This can slow down the process as well.

Or why can't we edit topography based on contour lines rather than points?

What about other site tolls as well besides topography? How can I do a grading plan with contour lines, and spot elevations of everything that gets built into our site. Paving, Sidewalks, slope stabilization?

Why must pads always be level? We need a similar tool for driveways and sidewalks / curbs.

Don't even get me started on splitting topography into different pieces. Ever tried to edit it after it has been split? A lot of times you have to start over.

[sbrown]

Civil 3d is autodesks answer. there are other products like eagle point etc. These are all tricky tools. A few years ago a friend of mine and I researched tools for his landscape architecture company and he ended up back on 2d autocad, they were all too expensive 30,000 for a good product. Now Civil 3d looks promising. But I can't say how well it would play with revit.

[DanielleAnderson]

Now Civil 3d looks promising. But I can't say how well it would play with revit.

Hmm...


What is being used out there for large planning projects? The main planner in our office is very interested in Revit, but at the moment, I think it would be more of a headache for him than a useful product.
And - agreed on the pad situation. Arg! What do you do when you have a subteranean parking garage that ramps down at the bottom? Turning off the site and using a filled region for the earth pattern just seems so sad to me at this stage of the game.
The other issue I've found with pads is when you have a parking garage that is down a couple of levels with some dirt ON TOP of it - what do you do about buried objects? Pads don't work for that one...

[gordolake]

Hi Danielle,

Have a look at EasySite or EasySurf for AutoCad from cadeasy http://www.cadeasy.com/
There is a demo version of easysite, worth a try I think.

Steve.

[luigi]

Phil Read used railings to easily control a curb with striped parking spaces along curves or splines...

BTW, although it is true that Phil did such thing...I am of course joking...to create railings, or floors, or roofs, or ramps, etc to work on site stuff is kinda crazy...don't you think?

[Andre Baros]

I think that even if I could use the same tools but call them site tools, I would be happy. If I could draw a floor but classify it as topography, or roads, or a site element, it would help. If I could manipulate both the contours and the points of a topo surface, I could do what I want. If I could pick topography as a host for a railing (or better yet create a fence element, which would more or less be a railing, just grouped under the site elements) etc.

I have a work around or brute force meathod to get everything done, but it feels wrong compared to the rest of the program.

[petervanko]

It would be nice if the topo object acted more like a mass...something you could apply void masses to. Then you could do those sloping, sub-grade ramps, etc. That actually is how I am considering handling sites in the future: import an ACAD-created topo object (i.e. "solid") into a new generic model family and applying additions/voids to it. You could paint individual faces to get material designation. This type of detail I would limit to sites less than 5 acres. As well, this is where I would draw the line for Revit.

Bigger planning stuff just seems to be better handled by flat ACAD/Microstation or VIZ/Rhino/_________(insert your favorite flavor here). However, for those of us wanting--for example--that awesome 3-d fly-through of the city with correct topography, you just have to bite the bullet and lower your expectations. I look at big planning projects going into 3-d as being like schematic paper models with very little detail...

[bowlingbrad]

<<sarcasm mode on>>

Just build on flat sites.

<<sarcasm mode off>>