Revit OR Archicad OR ??

[Epco]

:?:
Arch/Planning practice w/focus on streetscape<>bldg interface + small subdivisions design on hilly terrains.
No actual Civil engineering, but detailed approvals work includes street/bldgs-interface planning: Detailed street, parking, stormwater portrayals critical.
Also, good portrayal of graded cut/fill/ret.walls design (much topo modification).

Way more 2D over 3D, yet 3D critical to verify design. Aside from above, require BIM for multi-story elevations & occasional MEP work.



Revit, Archicad, & many others ALL can do these tasks. But I need a program which is FACILE & USER-FRIENDLY in performing them.

Considering Archicad over Revit (based on research so far) but remain very open.
Experienced user opinions welcome !

FYI, never used Autocad. Will NOT do gradual transition: instead intense 3 week "cold turkey" transition. (too many new projects to straddle old w/ new program)

[irneb]

What have you been using now? IMO Revit's siteworks isn't that great (not impossible, just too much work), you might want to check out C3D (http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-autocad-civil-3d/overview) for that instead. On the other hand, Revit's building & MEP BIM is phenomenal compared what I've seen in other packages.

Usually ADesk products are more usable if you go with one of their suites. Performing some of the work in one program (where you can more efficiently generate such) and then importing it into another to build on top of it through that program's tools. Perhaps something like Infrastructure Design (http://www.autodesk.com/suites/infrastructure-design-suite/overview) might be suited for your case. In mine (mainly Architecture) I use the Building Design Premium Suite (http://www.autodesk.com/suites/building-design-suite/overview), AutoCAD's mainly used for details (though even that is more and more done direct in Revit), Revit for modelling/scheduling/construction docs/coordination/quick 3d views/perspectives/etc., and then of course Renderings in Max. Siteworks we usually obtain from the Civil engineer and/or surveyor (they tend to use something like C3D), if it's a minor cut-n-fill we do that in Revit, but for major stuff we ask the Civil guy to generate and then import that into Revit.

[Epco]

You're right: Ideally I should use 3 different programs, 'A' for sitework, 'B' for Architectural design, & 'C' for BIM.

However, I'm just a 1.5 person firm, and I have a niche specialization: small subdivisions & mixed-used projects on challenging sites that typically would require expensive multi-disciplinary A/E firms, but are either too small or low budget for them, and most architects are unfamiliar or scared off.
Anyways, I'd greatly prefer to use just 1 program.

- MEP/CD-wise: I really like (what I hear of) Revit's MEP/BIM abilities, but less than 10% of my design work involves it.
- Architecture-wise: seems Archicad edges out Revit (from an operational/engagement perspective).
- Siteworks-wise: I don't know ?


Sensing that I won't get all 3 in one product, I'd settle for 2 high-functioning aspects.
50% work is architectural, 50% site/street, so I could forego the MEP/BIM ... or, use/import Revit just for intermitent MEP/CD work.
Since Revit doesn't sound too good for sitework, I may need to select Archicad or other program.


Unlike some, I see any CAD as just a tool, as there are so many more aspects to projects, particularly due to the multi-layered aspects to my work. I want to be able to use the tool easily, not work to use the tool.

[irneb]

Unlike some, I see any CAD as just a tool, as there are so many more aspects to projects, particularly due to the multi-layered aspects to my work. I want to be able to use the tool easily, not work to use the tool.I'm with you on that. I've not found any all-round program with the best features of all in one. Some do architectural modeling very easily (like Sketch-Up or ArchiCad), others do 2d drafting very quickly (like AutoCad), some are specifically designed for niche tasks (like C3D). If I only did conceptual "models" I'd have loved to work with this: http://www.archicadmonkey.com/files/i_love_sketch.html. I've found Revit's HVAC to be quite easy to use, but it's Piping (IMO) is inferior to AutoCAD MEP. The last time I did any structural was early 2000's so then it was either MicroStation or AutoCAD, can't say how easy it is to generate stuff like bending schedules from Revit as compared to something like AutoCAD Structural. For pure mechanical I've found SolidWorks to be the most efficient, it had some nifty tools even in the '90s which are only now starting to creep into other programs.

The major reason I've found that Revit is more in my line is not due to its strengths, but due to most other consultants working either on Revit or on something which inter-operates well with Revit. The last thing you want to do is redraw their stuff to complete your project or perform coordination. While Revit's modeling may not be as efficient as Sketch-Up/ArchiCad (at least not at first), drawing in the other 2 and attempting to change that model into a BIM is probably more work than the minor hiccup of actually drawing in Revit. And once you've got your libs sorted in Revit it's possibly more efficient than even ArchiCad, with the added bonus that you could do your B & C items directly within Revit - to a lesser extent your A item too. Don't know ArchiCad well enough to say jay or nay on that front. I know it's used a lot in Australia, over here (South Africa) there's a big following of Caddie (http://www.caddiesoftware.com/caddiesoftware/) - though that seems to be fading in favor of Revit. A lot of firms I've worked with from Europe seem to prefer AutoCAD Architectural Desktop instead, but I've even seen those start using Revit.

How does your workflow go? Do you survey the site yourself, or do you get a surveyor to produce something like a contour map? Then do you design the cut-n-fill on the site yourself? As long as you can get these as an importable file into Revit, it can use that info to model the site. You can fine-tune stuff in Revit as you can add/delete/adjust any one of the control points in the site definition direct in Revit. You can also split/merge/grade sites and add "pads" for the buildings, but grading I've found works best in C3D. One thing Revit CANNOT do (which I've had personal hair-loss about) is cut underneath the site surface. I've had a project where there was a super basement with re-landscaped surface over it (not just a flat surface as the project was a ski-resort), there's no way to get Revit to work with this very effectively (all sorts of work-arounds, but none making it simple and easy).

[Mike L Sealander]

My firm is twice as large as yours (all of 3 people) and the cost of running Autodesk's Building Design Suite Premium is not onerous. Having to work in more than one software application is not difficult. I'm probably in four or five different applications a day. So, while I can't comment on ArchiCAD, I can say that a small firm running ADSK BDS-P is a proven strategy. We often get involved in topography stuff, and it is true Revit is nothing to drool over in this regard. But, it works.

[damon.sidel]

:?:
Arch/Planning practice w/focus on streetscape<>bldg interface + small subdivisions design on hilly terrains.
No actual Civil engineering, but detailed approvals work includes street/bldgs-interface planning: Detailed street, parking, stormwater portrayals critical.
Also, good portrayal of graded cut/fill/ret.walls design (much topo modification).

I can't speak to Archicad. However, I think most people will agree with irneb that Revit's site tools are quite minimal. You could look into Revit plus Eagle Point's Siteworks, but it isn't cheap.

[dreed682637]

In my firm, we have civil, structural, and mep (about 20 people). Our civil uses C3D, structural and mep use Revit. In MEP we have several issues importing from an Archicad file...it's just a mess. Because MEP relies 100% on a great arch model, we just can't use Archicad models. Unless I want to model the architectural (which we don't have time for or the budget to spend the time) then we have to draw in AutoCAD while our structural models in Revit (importing the CAD file and building up from that) on the same project. More arch firms use Revit than Archicad I think, so compatibility is the number one issue for me. The "export to revit" feature on archicad does NOT work.

[irneb]

...More arch firms use Revit than Archicad I think, so compatibility is the number one issue for me...That depends on location. Here in South Africa we see quite a few different things, but most Architects use either ACad (Vanilla / ACA), or Caddie, or starting to a larger extent Revit (some work 100% in Revit these days). I've seen at least one (large 200+) firm refusing to work with any other consultants if they're not also using Revit.

I know that in Australia some are still using Archicad. And some in Europe (especially Germany & Switserland - from my experience) are still in ACA instead of Revit.

I've had one structural engineer (from Turkey) using some program I have never heard of. Fortunately it could export to IFC - which Revit imports quite usefully (i.e. a column is a column, a floor is a floor, etc.) Only the import loses its "smart-ness", so you can't adjust a column to go to a different level (eg.). Can Archicad export to IFC? If so I'd advise rather trying that route than Revit's proprietary format - at least IFC is open specification so the export/import filters should work better. An IFC (Industry Foundation Class (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_Foundation_Classes)) is much like a DXF, extremely large in comparison to an RVT file - but if no other possibility ...

If ADesk could up the anti on at least site works, then most (if not all) building disciplines could work direct in the RVT model.