AutoCAD <----?????----> Revit

[speng469845]

I'm a recent architecture major graduate still seeking my first job in the field.
As the topic, I would like to know how the two softwares, AutoCAD and Revit, actually work in a firm.
I learned AutoCAD through my classes and now is exploring Revit on my own.
Of course I know Acad is CAD based and Revit is for BIM but as I haven't really participated in any real design/production process out there, I'm confused about how the two software can be coherent at work and how they are used in different stages of the design.
my professor told me that Acad is essential in the industry and Revit is the new trend but he didn't explain much in between the two.

So..
I'd appreciate it, if anyone in the real market can explain to me in detail how these two softwares are generally used and whether Revit is essential to learn and what happens when you have to deal with both? Thanks a lot!

[Wanderer]

I'm a recent architecture major graduate still seeking my first job in the field.
As the topic, I would like to know how the two softwares, AutoCAD and Revit, actually work in a firm.
I learned AutoCAD through my classes and now is exploring Revit on my own.
Of course I know Acad is CAD based and Revit is for BIM but as I haven't really participated in any real design/production process out there, I'm confused about how the two software can be coherent at work and how they are used in different stages of the design.
my professor told me that Acad is essential in the industry and Revit is the new trend but he didn't explain much in between the two.

So..
I'd appreciate it, if anyone in the real market can explain to me in detail how these two softwares are generally used and whether Revit is essential to learn and what happens when you have to deal with both? Thanks a lot!

Well, I think the most truthful answer is that the more you learn and are comfortable with AutoCAD and Revit, and everything else you can get your hands on, the better it will be.

I learned AutoCAD and 3d Studio Max in school, and I've used both professionally. Currently, I'm using AutoCAD MEP, Revit MEP.
Over the years I've used 3ds a handful of time, Map3D for a few years, sketchup a couple of times, Raster Design a couple of times. Don't forget your support programs like Office, MS Project, Access, SQL or whatever else is necessary at the moment.

If you learn Revit as well, you'll be better positioned than a person that only knows AutoCAD. :)

As for how the two programs work together, that is going to vary hugely by firm and by project.
I work on the owner side, so, 85% of my campus is AutoCAD and 15% is Revit. It's taking us a long time to switch over, because our drawings/models are updated during renovations and new constructions. So, I export a lot of DWGs out of our Revit models for folks to use, because I'm not going to buy any additional seats of Revit for our workstations until we have more of it modeled.

[irneb]

In arch I've seen 3 scenarios: Those sticking with plain old ACad (even if they're on 2013 they use the normal line drawing) - IMO this is just silly (like my old company). Second (usually found in Europe) use of ACA (old Architectural Desktop) is more prevalent, not bad, but in my experience ACA tends to fold under a huge project. Third (and this seems to be a trend here) firms using either both ACad/ACA and Revit ... or more and more Revit exclusively.

Actually I've recently changed jobs. While looking for another position I've found about 80% of arch firms here (South Africa) don't even consider ACad expertise as relevant - only Revit will do. Don't know how it's going over your side though, but here it seems only some engineering & civil still go with ACad (even MEP/Structural is starting to go the Revit route).

[jpo82]

I have very little exprience about Revit or more generally BIM modelling but have been working last few years with Autocad and ASD. What I've experienced so far it seems 2D CAD is going to be around for a very long time, since details etc. are very time consuming to do with BIM softwares. At least at the moment. But I think Revit is worth learning since 3D modelling is getting more and more usual all the time.

So learn Revit or some other BIM program that's widely used in your country but also make sure you have decent CAD skills, since 2D drafting is still needed.

[irneb]

Actually concerning the detailing, the start-off for your detailing is "slow". But once you've built-up your libraries it actually becomes quicker to do the details in Revit iself. E.g. I'm busy extending the curtain-wall profiles to include detail components direct in the mullions, then simply doing to Fine grained section through the CW gives me the detail already drawn - all that's needed then are dimensions & notes. And with the notes you get to nifty tricks like adding them as a type comment for the mullion - i.e. place a Multi-Category tag onto the mullion and type the description once, then next time you place the tag the same note already appears (no need to check through all your details if something changes in the future).

So yes, detailing is a bit faster in the begining when using 2d CAD. But if you put your head down and force yourself to detail in Revit, the future timesavings are huge.

[xSmiffyx]

A good knowledge of 2d will help you transition into 3D cad/modelling. Revit (also microstation) are great because of the time saving aspect being able to update sections/plans etc in one go. Unlike in 2D where your sections/details are generally seperate from your ga's.

2D will still be need and revit is just the new kid on the block. With experiance your detailing will improve don't expect too much to being with and just enjoy the ride......

[cchallis]

My opinion is similar to the above but with a few differences.
I’m in structural engineering so this is from that point of view, though i was an architectural draftsperson in a former life so have an insight to both perspectives.
I have been using ACAD for 10+ years and Revit for about 6. I think it really comes down to a combination of who you work for and what projects you are working on. I have done a project that was 7 levels at 20,000sqm per level, without Revit in this project we would have needed double the budget and time to get the docs out. In this project the full advantages of BIM were used, i.e. - the QS used our models and the data within for take offs and quantities. We had every discipline working on synced models on a Revit server, this was an awesome experience but it did come with its difficulties. This is not really relevant to ACAD, you can do quantities in it but not much point.
The flip side to Revit however is that you are reliant on a comprehensive library, sometimes particularly in small firms this is impartial. It is almost imperative you have a Revit person who exclusively looks after the library and continuously updates and maintains it. Without the library you are screwed, you cannot maintain budgets if you are for ever trying to model this and that [family] because you don’t have it. Which is where my next opinion comes in.

On smaller jobs, such as a house, there is little point in using Revit or at least the whole modelling concept of it. It’s still nice to have a 3d model but often this is wasted time as you can knock out a 2d plan details and sections in less time that it takes to model the components set up the views and do your detailing. There is also bearing on who else is using Revit. For example as an engineer, if the architect is not using Revit, there is little point in us using it (though only for small jobs).

There are other things that come into BIM - IMO learning when to let go of your modelling is critical. We trailed a job where we modelled every last piece of reinforcing in the whole project, and although we eventually came out with an awesome set of perfectly co-ordinated plans - it took for ever. Like 3 times the amount of time you would expect. This was mostly due to software limitations. So again you have to know when to stop using families and draw some line work.

For complex detailing i still find ACAD quicker and easier, mostly because you can ultimately just draw lines if something isn’t quite working or you need to schematic rather than 1mm perfect. This is a bit harder in Revit, unless you just draw line work there too. It should be noted that although Revit has come in leaps and bounds over the last few years there are still bugs and limitations in the software, which often you can get around but sometimes with epic amounts of frustrations. Likewise ACAD still has its bugs and can also pose issues with some things (the hatching and draw order functions come to mind).

On any given day i tend to use a hybrid of the 2, Revit is great for ensuring your geometry is correct and actually works. ACAD is great for just drawing. If you have a case where your engineer is using Revit and are you’re other consultants, it comes into its own and kicks acad to the curb. But on the flip side if you’re working for a small company they may not be able to afford the time and money to maintain a Revit system. It all comes down to who you work for and what recourses they are prepared to supply you with.

It should also be noted that Revit does not always talk nicely to other programmes, so for example here in NZ, our architectural market is flooded with ArchiCAD and this makes it a bit of a pain because they don’t speak well to each other and the translation process is painful and time consuming, so for me, if an architect is using ArchiCAD i really have to think about what system I’m going to use.

The other thing thats awesome about revit (Theres heap of awesome things about it) is the referencing, if you change a view somewhere of a page number, all of the referencing updates all by its self, this saves epic amounts of time throughout the design process, you can also be a little bit hands off and know that it will still be correct (unlike ACAD).

This is of course only my opinion. There will be others and people who disagree with what i have said. Remember I’m in a small market globally so this opinion is formed from this perspective.

Kind Regards
Corey

[irneb]

The other thing thats awesome about revit (Theres heap of awesome things about it) is the referencing, if you change a view somewhere of a page number, all of the referencing updates all by its self, this saves epic amounts of time throughout the design process, you can also be a little bit hands off and know that it will still be correct (unlike ACAD).You know of course that Sheet Sets perform much the same idea in ACad (even Vanilla ACad, but the verticals have more capabilities here).

I'm with you on the "quick" just-draw in ACad. If it's a once-off then ACad's drafting tools work faster than Revit's, definitely. And there's always a hickup with Revit somewhere - which means you need to be wary of how you draw (especially when creating families). E.g. I'm having issues with Details flipping around depending on the direction of the section: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?107053-Embedded-Details-Flipping-within-Curtain-Wall-Mullion-Profiles

What we have done in the past was to use ACad as detailing prog, then import the details into Revit as Drafting Views and referencing those onto the model views. Though that also has some strange aspects. E.g. Layer 0 and Defpoints doesn't work as they do inside ACad, so blocks & xrefs show linework you don't expect. Not to mention imported CAD linework (or even linked in) is more difficult to manage than true Revit linework, I absolutely hate the Object Styles manager - it's like an amateur's attempt at creating something similar to ACad's Layer manager, but failing dismally. And don't start me on Revit's inferior revisioning system!

[cchallis]

You know of course that Sheet Sets perform much the same idea in ACad (even Vanilla ACad, but the verticals have more capabilities here).

I'm with you on the "quick" just-draw in ACad. If it's a once-off then ACad's drafting tools work faster than Revit's, definitely. And there's always a hickup with Revit somewhere - which means you need to be wary of how you draw (especially when creating families). E.g. I'm having issues with Details flipping around depending on the direction of the section: http://forums.augi.com/showthread.php?107053-Embedded-Details-Flipping-within-Curtain-Wall-Mullion-Profiles

What we have done in the past was to use ACad as detailing prog, then import the details into Revit as Drafting Views and referencing those onto the model views. Though that also has some strange aspects. E.g. Layer 0 and Defpoints doesn't work as they do inside ACad, so blocks & xrefs show linework you don't expect. Not to mention imported CAD linework (or even linked in) is more difficult to manage than true Revit linework, I absolutely hate the Object Styles manager - it's like an amateur's attempt at creating something similar to ACad's Layer manager, but failing dismally. And don't start me on Revit's inferior revisioning system!

Haha you just gave me a good wee laugh to start my day. Yes totally agree with you on what you said. The revisions are a pain in the ***, so much so i don’t use them. i made a "revision cloud family" and manually change the revisions as part of my title block. Way easier, and what’s with the ugly and slow to create revision cloud? Seriously it’s like getting a 3 year old to draw over the top of your beautiful plans. Also agreed with the Object Styles manager - pain in the backside. I do what you have mentioned by exporting "xrefs" out of Revit, using them for detailing and then importing back into Revit, but i do suffer the same line work issues. And would it be awesome if your dynamic blocks still worked within Revit (i know that’s a bit of a pipe dream). As you noted about families, you really have to have your wits about you when making them or things work 90% great and then fail in the last 10%.
Still i think it is the way the global market will lean. But I’ll be holding on to my ACAD for a long time yet

Have a good weekend where ever you all are

Cheers
Corey