Help the Revit design team understand stairs [Archive]

barathd

2009-07-24, 09:50 PM

Aaron your right - little wonder why all the confusion, blotches, half fixes, etc., etc.

I am not so deliberate and structured in my approach. Things just evolve in many different directions at the same time.

This fill in the blanks approach would never work for me. I thought the whole idea of Revit was flexibility. The tools just need to be flexible and intuative.

I realize that is not a simple task. If this task had been started a long time ago - we would not be looking for a miracle cure now.

David - not to sound cheeky - I hope the factory does not have to relearn the alphabet to get some better "text tools."

Regards

Dick Barath

cdatechguy

2009-07-24, 10:15 PM

I actually don't have any problems with the stairs.....its the railings that attach to the stairs I have issues with.... I have in my mind creating a family for some of them instead..too bad we can't do 3D sweeps....

funkman

2009-07-24, 10:46 PM

oh my goodness. I see this thread and I thought finally the factory (or to borrow a Prison Break analogy - "the company") have found out that stair design in revit is far from satisfactory. Then I go to a survey like this! I gave up as well.....how disappointing. Seriously we have all known for far too long that stair design in revit needs a complete overhaul. So David, here is my "survey"

Such as.....
- joining stairs to other elements such as floor and walls
- baluster controls and behaviours - need more flexibility
- handrail controls and behaviours - need more flexibility
- finishes allow more than one type of finish
- materials definitions - stringers
- stringer profiling
- stringer extension to under landings
- more flexibility for stringers
- 2d representation
- material patterns to be allowed for stairs
- interaction of stairs with plan regions
- multistorey stairs (overlapping stairs)

anyone else....

rdaniel

2009-07-24, 11:08 PM

Triple-runs. You can do them, but Revit sure doesn't like them.

Steve_Stafford

2009-07-25, 12:20 AM

I found the survey to be rather unconvincing that they are asking the right questions. I completed it but was frustrated by the questions. All they have to do is visit a dozen or more buildings to see stairs and more specifically RAILINGS that Revit is very uncomfortable with.

Bill McLees

2009-07-25, 01:29 AM

Just like Powerpoint presentations, Survey Monkey should probably be outlawed.

Take the survey. Ignore the questions and use the text boxes to provide input on the tools you want.

I agree that railings are far worse than stairs. However, in both cases, I'm afraid a good working solution wouldn't be compatible with stairs and railings generated by the current tools. Since the guys can't support two UIs, I don't know if they can provide new stair/railing tools and support legacy tools as well. But that seems to be what we need.

Bill

David Conant

2009-07-25, 03:22 AM

Before another round of speculation gets going about motivations and methods at the factory, please be aware that this survey is only one small part of the large research effort underway. It will help us understand, in a quantifiable way, the range of constructions, representations, and working issues that are meaningful to users in many locations and many sectors of the AEC universe. It can validate (or invalidate) information that we gather with other more in-depth but more time consuming methods from smaller samples. Since, like all designers, we in the factory work with limited resources, we need to be sure that we make the most effective expenditure of those resources. Survey data like this help justify devoting the effort to build solutions that are complete enough to meet a wide range of user needs rather than ones that are targeted at only those needs deemed high frequency based on limited data.
I understand that no survey can hope to fully plumb the depths of an issue as extensive as stairs, at least within the time tolerance of those taking it. If you would like to contribute more extensive commentary, you are more than welcome to communicate with me directly.

barathd

2009-07-25, 04:17 AM

David:

Please do not fail - as you can see our confidence level with Autodesk is at an all time low. I just renewed my subscription today - very begrudgingly. I for one have felt - taken for granted, ignored, lied to, cheated, betrayed, exploited, robbed ... ... and a lot more. Surveys are no way to restore confidence. Just show us the meat.

Regards

Dick Barath

dbaldacchino

2009-07-25, 05:55 AM

Thanks for the opportunity to provide feedback.

If your goal is to give us tools to use Revit to DESIGN stairs and railings, then get rid of the dialog-box approach. It just doesn't work and is the most designer-unfriendly thing in Revit. The key is flexibility. You cannot design in a dialog box. You can reverse-engineer and labor hard to model something you solve elsewhere (sketchup or hand-sketch), but you just can't use Revit to SOLVE a stair and railing design problem. Think Curtain wall tool (add/remove/merge grids, change mullions, merge panels, etc on the fly in any view without using a dialog box.). It needs to be beautifully flexible.

2009-07-25, 12:48 PM

The survey was better than I expected - nice to be asked about the little things like how you normally show the stair in plan etc.

Anyway, compared to some other 3D cad packages I have used the stair tool in Revit is rather good.

It isn't perfect and there are some obvious things that need fixing - I always seem to be fighting with, the 'number of risers' set in parameters, the depth of strings with winder risers, the direction arrows don't work and of course the non-visual handrail designing tools - but it would be nice to think that improvements might come... some day, once all the surveys are in ;)

dazza163968596

2009-07-25, 03:13 PM

David

This type of survey & information gathering exercise highlights the need for more direct communication between the factory and the users. I appreciate any and all opportunities to provide feedback to the factory as I think it is essential if Revit is to remain the premier BIM on the market, which it will only be if it continues to meet the needs of its users.

May I suggest that a better way of communicating with the user community would be a Revit Futures forum, perhaps over on the Beta site as the factory would be in a better position to discuss their intentions /development direction under the security of an NDA.

Surveys do have there place as long as they are structured in such a way as not to lead the participant to provide answers that the factory want to hear, thus providing unbiased feedback. They should also be kept brief and to the point as not to discourage as many participants as possible.

May I also suggest that surveys only be posted via the Revit Customer Council at www.revitcc.com. If you have a survey that you would like a large number of participants post an invite on the various forums & message boards to partake in the survey by registering with the Revit Customer Council, that way you have a larger user base to direct future surveys to using the regular RevitCC invite email.

Thank you for taking the time to directly interact with us on this forum, It is appreciated even if sometimes the reaction isn't always positive, I think it is just a symptom of the frustration and dismay that many users are currently experiencing with the way that Autodesk is perceived at the moment. I'm sure that most of us are not blaming the factory, as we all appreciate your efforts, but are rather under the impression that marketing has gone mad and taken over the asylum. Hopefully recent events will mean that the marketing department or whoever is responsible for the recent discourse, will be put back in their place, and once again talented and hardworking developers can determine the direction of our beloved software providing improvements that are wanted and needed instead of what is easy to sell.

Sorry for the long post I didn't mean to go on, this was meant to be a short comment, once I started I couldn't stop. Hopefully we can all move on together in the future.

Regards

Gadget Man

2009-07-26, 08:32 AM

... Since, like all designers, we in the factory work with limited resources, we need to be sure that we make the most effective expenditure of those resources...

Yeah, and that's why you (the Factory) decided to spend most of it on the make-up and powdering of the nose of RAC 2010, rather than on mending broken legs and arms...

It's sad...

(By the way, I participated in your survey as truthfully as I could. After all, it appears that you need all the help you can get... I just hope and wish it wasn't the wasted time...)

barathd

2009-07-26, 05:27 PM

David:

Perhaps the way to achieve the "flexibility" one needs to make a stair tool truly successful is to merge the best elements of Revit and Sketchup into a universal stair tool.

What do I mean by this? Just imagine having the ability to design with a free form tool that has intelligence. One would be able to edit individual component elements or as a group (i.e. balusters).

The more the editing tools approximate Sketchup rather than using dialogue boxes the better.

My two bits worth.

Regards

Dick Barath

Bill McLees

2009-07-26, 08:20 PM

Not to be too negative, but it's almost August. I assume we're not being asked about stairs for next year's release. Of course, I would like to be surprised.

Bill

barathd

2009-07-26, 11:54 PM

I am borrowing a quote from a fellow user to express our growing frustration with Revit's development. I thank this person for stating it so precisely and eloquently.

".... .There are so many other things that are needed NOW, not in another 12 months. They were needed 12 months, 24 months ago. To name just two...Railings and Stairs. They have not been "touched" since release 7.0. Release 7.0 came out in December 2004 and there have been roughly ten releases since then including "point" releases. That's almost FIVE years ago now without so much as a "look" or "tweak" at stairs/railings. That so much effort was applied to the user interface at their expense is extremely frustrating. ... ."

m.thomas

2009-07-27, 01:43 PM

Have taken the survey. My biggest problem with stairs is getting handrails and balustrades to behave correctly. I usually just get a rough approximation for 3D views and use drafting lines for construction drawings.

On the survey I said that a huge help for me would be.......

There is a autodesk white paper stair crib sheet which is a great help in visually understanding what a lot of the stair parameters do.
It would be great if this style of tool tip could be integrated within the type properties with a live view of the stair being modelled.
If you could then say click on a stringer, handrail, baluster etc the parameters relevant would then highlight.
Any changes inputted would immediately be visible in the live view without having to exit the type properties dialog box.

This would save huge amounts of time opening and closing dialog boxes and re-checking the stairs.

I have attached a recent simple stair where apart from the 3D view I have used a lot of filled regions and linework to get things to show correctly, especially handrails.

patricks

2009-07-27, 05:04 PM

Question #5 on page 4 does not work properly, it seems.

twiceroadsfool

2009-07-27, 05:29 PM

I- also- had to stop taking the survey mid way through. Ill maybe try it again at home, but i got tired of typing *we dont really work this way at all,* lol.

Stairs and Railings could go in SO many different ways, its a toughie. Ive got some thoughts, but ill have to wait till im off duty to try typing some out...

sjsl

2009-07-28, 02:26 PM

All Autodesk has to do is look at Archicads stair tools, Vectorworks (my choice) and of course Chief Architect.

cdatechguy

2009-07-28, 03:34 PM

All Autodesk has to do is look at Archicads stair tools, Vectorworks (my choice) and of course Chief Architect.
Wasn't going to mention ArchiCAD....but since you did ;)
Actually I create some pretty interesting stairs in ArchiCAD using the pipe tool/object...join them all together or group and you get perfect railing. :)

barathd

2009-07-28, 05:24 PM

"Actually I create some pretty interesting stairs in ArchiCAD using the pipe tool/object...join them all together or group and you get perfect railing"

Can't do that with Revit infringing on vertical product MEP *&^%$ ...

grudy

2010-01-08, 04:26 PM

Please allow us to set the height of the cut plane for stairs independently of the floor plan cut plane. The cut line for the stairs is a graphic representation that gives the viewer an idea of what the stairs are doing. No one cares if it is at the exact height of the plan cut plane--in fact it's probably more confusing to have it cut at exactly the same place as the floor plan. I'm thinking specifically of the project that I am working on right now where we have staggered floors, where our cut plane ends up being very close to the floor slab in places where the level is higher. This results in stairs cut basically 6" above the floor, and unreadable drawings.

cliff collins

2010-01-08, 04:36 PM

grudy,

This is what a Plan Region is for.

Not really a Stair issue............

cheers....

brinddd

2010-05-10, 09:17 PM

The biggest problems I have with stairs are the inability to use custom stringer profiles (though you can use a railing as a work around for the stringer) and adjust landing heights Many times we want to have different riser heights from floor to intermediate landing and intermediate landing to next floor level so that our intermediate landing is not at a crazy 256 of an inch dimension. Unfortunately the only way to accomplish this in Revit is to create two separate stairs which then cause issues with plan graphics as you cannot show the stairs beyond cut line as hidden unless you manually override the lines. We also need the ability to produce 3 run stairs and overlapping spiral stairs without having to break the stair into separate pieces.

Matt Stachoni

2010-05-10, 10:11 PM

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/4596932594_8966826821_o.jpg

Anyone else feel like this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Stachoni

Scott D Davis

2010-05-10, 10:27 PM

Anyone else feel like this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Stachoni

Sure...but looking at the original author of this topic should give some hint that the Factory is working on something. David Conant is Revit employee number 3.

Matt Stachoni

2010-05-11, 01:55 AM

Sure...but looking at the original author of this topic should give some hint that the Factory is working on something

I'm not maligning the idea that the Factory has something up its sleeve in regards to stairs (*yippee*), but c'mon - IMHO those questions are really dopey :).

btrusty

2010-05-11, 02:14 PM

completed!

iankids

2010-05-11, 09:41 PM

Must have missed it the first time around - completed the survey - hopefully we get a better functioning tool as a result - congrats to the factory.

Scott D Davis

2010-05-11, 10:08 PM

Glad you guys are doing the survey, but take into account it was first posted in July of 2009. I'll try and find out if David is still geting feedbaclk from this survey.

ron.sanpedro

2010-05-11, 11:07 PM

Glad you guys are doing the survey, but take into account it was first posted in July of 2009. I'll try and find out if David is still geting feedbaclk from this survey.
Perhaps there can also be some mention of the fact that the questionnaire is really bad and does not leave one feeling like
A: the creator of the survey "get's it"
B: there is any hope of meaningful data coming out of the process.

If Autodesk wants to improve the stair tool it is gonna take some real effort actually interacting with users, ideally while they are actually trying to use the ****** stair tool. A bunch of check boxes ain't gonna cut it. This is why the customer council is so useless. It is just a LOT of bad surveys. You need product managers and developers actually standing there watching people trying and failing.

Also, a great way for Autodesk to understand the limitations of the stair tool would be to have some folks from Autodesk simply go to Stair Porn web site and try to create all the stairs found there. Now try massaging those that are not code compliant to make them so. Don't blow them up and start over, try iterating to arrive at a final design. Do that for no more than two or three stairs and the magnitude of the problem will be more than obvious.

EDIT: I love the fact that c r a p p y gets flagged. Really?. Perhaps AUGI should just make the only acceptable description of problems be either "sub-optimal" or "potential feature for possible inclusion in a future build or release". As in "it's not a bug, it is a potential ..."

Gordon

Scott D Davis

2010-05-11, 11:22 PM

. You need product managers and developers actually standing there watching people trying and failing.

We do that. All the time. Customers go to Waltham, or we go to them. We even do usability testing at AU. We video the people's faces, record their voice, as well as screen capture their actions on screen. We ask them to "talk" their thoughts out loud. It all gets recorded and used by the developers and the PMs.

ron.sanpedro

2010-05-11, 11:55 PM

We do that. All the time. Customers go to Waltham, or we go to them. We even do usability testing at AU. We video the people's faces, record their voice, as well as screen capture their actions on screen. We ask them to "talk" their thoughts out loud. It all gets recorded and used by the developers and the PMs.

And yet the stair and site tools are still in the condition they are? After seemingly YEARS of Autodesk "listening"? Inconceivable! I know, that word does not mean what I think it means. ;) But honestly, most of the usability testing I have done has been testing things that are already conceived and will be delivered as demonstrated. It really is more usability validation than anything else. And I haven't ever heard of much testing of current ideas to see how and in what ways they are flawed.
I wonder just how many people, talking into the camera, said "I want a nice new graphic look that mimics bounced light, but I have no need to print anything."

Gordon

rkitect

2010-05-12, 01:56 AM

..."I want a nice new graphic look that mimics bounced light, but I have no need to print anything."

Sorry, that was me. On the bright side my contractors know EXACTLY what it is supposed to look like even if I haven't told them how to build it </truArchitecturalSpeak> :)

Scott D Davis

2010-05-12, 05:06 AM

"I want a nice new graphic look that mimics bounced light, but I have no need to print anything."

c'mon...do you really think we didn't consider printing AO output? Of course we did. It just didn't pass testing to be included in this this release.

cliff collins

2010-05-12, 02:05 PM

I think for Stairs, we need a similar dialogue such as this one on Railings:

http://insidethefactory.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/04/name-that-railing-object.html

cheers

tory.puglisi

2010-05-12, 11:57 PM

Like Revit, the survey itself doesn't work properly. There are situations where multiple ticks along the horizontal bar are required but not possible, or perhaps the question is poorly worded. Either way the question can only therefore be answered incorrectly and your survey results are inaccurate.

Did the whole survey. For those who gave up halfway through, there was an opportunity to talk about +s and -s, general comments, at the end.

On the question of the survey being posted July last year, perhaps a time limit for taking the survey should have been specified in the original post, 'cause today was the first time I've seen this thread.

r.grandmaison

2010-05-13, 04:00 AM

I think we are creatures of habit. As such, the way we design stairs is, honestly, more often a process that begins like this:

"I want these stairs to look like those other ones I saw the other day or worked on two projects ago".

I honestly think design software has to get smarter. It has to ANTICIPATE the way a designer thinks and find ways of presenting to him/her options that they can pick from visually instead of picking/choosing parameters in a list. We don't reinvent the wheel from scratch when we need a wheel.

I would love to see the stair creation process go something like this:

Architect: "Revit, I want to design a stair that has to go from the lowest level to the second floor level- can you please show me some stairs I've done in the past or that were featured in last months Architecture magazine?"

Revit: "Yes, oh he/she who aims to save the world by order, beauty and truth."

Revit then shows you thumbnails of a dozen or so different stairs - some of which are from your own prior models some from recent publications, each of which has separate checkboxes for "guardrail", "Risers" "Treads", "Stringers", "Carriages", etc...and you check the ones that you want to make meld into your stair design.

Architect: "Oh, and this has to be a commercial stair, so please obey commercial rules for stair rise/run and handrail safety returns. Make it about 4'-6" clear from inside of handrails and just make it a straight run starting at the point my mouse is at now."

Revit: "Yes, oh he/she who is not only kind, generous and super-intelligent, but handsome/pretty too. One minute...ok almost there...Done!"

See? It really should be that simple.

Scott D Davis

2010-05-13, 04:19 AM

Survey was old and it has been turned off now. It should have been turned off some time ago as it was intended to be a device to do some very early informational gathering/validation.

charliep

2010-05-13, 10:11 AM

sfaust

2010-05-13, 03:43 PM

Revit: "Yes, oh he/she who aims to save the world by order, beauty and truth."
...

Revit: "Yes, oh he/she who is not only kind, generous and super-intelligent, but handsome/pretty too. One minute...ok almost there...Done!"

See? It really should be that simple.

Haha. Thanks for the morning laugh :). I've often thought it would be helpful to carry on a conversation with Revit (although some conversations would be less cordial than others...)