ADT 2006 vs. Revit 7 or 8

[mrd.84339]

Hello,
I know this question has been asked about previous versions. I did the search but found nothing comparing Revit 7 or 8 to ADT 2006. I am a one man shop using the Autocad portion of ADT 3.3 to design and create CD's for high-end custom homes. My designs can get highly detailed. My way of thinking with ACAD is that if I can imagine it I can draw it (in 2D). I need to make a quick decision , in the next week, to either upgrade to ADT 2005 then 2006 or cross grade to Revit 7 series then 8. No matter what I do, I know I need to get on the ball and start using the 3D capabilities of the software I use. So, the question I ask is, What makes the most sense? I still want to create highly detailed designs and CD's, but do not have a week or month to stop work and learn either program. Any input would be appreciated.
-Thanks

[Andrew Dobson]

Why don't you upgrade to Revit Series 8 and have Revit plus AutoCAD?

[jiaoyanbing]

regardlees of the parameter modeling of revit,is adt modeling stronger than revit?

[SkiSouth]

Hello,
I. I am a one man shop using the Autocad portion of ADT 3.3 to design and create CD's for high-end custom homes. .
-Thanks

Well, which ever you change to, you'll have a learning curve. I say "change" intentionally. The ADT of today is a far cry from ADT 3.3, and it HURTS to learn the new one. Having tried the ADT's after 3.3, my advise is to switch to Revit. It too will be very frustrating for a few weeks, but it is SO much better than ADT. The "built-in" error checking is great. I say error checking in that you can not easily "fake" anything. Really handy for me, as I am so familiar with a project, that I "know" I have drawn something. Then I go to the reflected ceiling plan, and its not there - The reason is I didn't really draw it - just "Knew" I did.

Anyway, good luck on your decision. Make the jump. Get Revit.

[stuntmonkee]

If your primary goal is to get into the 3D world, then really there isn't much of a discussion here. Revit will save you time, and headaches. . . .Both in learning, and down the road.

My only hesitation is when you say "highly detailed". Part of the problem is that I don't know what you mean by that. . . .my drawings could be highly detailed I suppose. . . .or they could be very plain. . .thats all a matter of opinion.

NOW. . . lets just go along with you being a "Detailed Orientated Person". . . . .In my opinion, you have to know when to stop with Revit. There really is no limit to detailing with Revit, but you have to learn to be able to define what is worth modeling, and what is worth just drawing as lines in the view. Some times that the hardest part. Most of the time, I try to decided early on if we will be using the project for 3d presentation. . . .or just the be used as drawings.

I have just seen people go over board with modeling, and get crazy into detailing, and it eliminates the productive parts of Revit. :? . . . . .it doesn't matter how fast you can run a mile if your tied to a 1/2 mile rope with an anchor at the end.

The other part to take in to consideration is the coordination abilities of Revit. . . .not having to worry about that. . . .one of my favorite parts. :wink:

Anyway, both will involve learning curves. . . .If one of your main focuses is 3D, then personally I would rather invest time into a product that was designed around this, as opposed to one that had been forced to evolve into one.

Just my nickel.

[BillyGrey]

Revit Series.

Revit wins at modeling hands down (without even going into all the benefits of the parametric change engine, scheduling, coordination benefits).

Revit does not have what I would consider, in comparison to ADT, or other BIM app's, a steep initial learning curve. It is very intuitive, and can/does construct models the way they build in the physical world. I was an ADT 3.3 user in the past, and when 2004 hit the market, I was perplexed. I dropped it in favor of Revit, and am very glad I did.

In terms of detailing, if that is part of your program, then with the Series, you have that with the inclusion of ACAD. You are already familiar with it. However, I also create highly detailed CD's from Revit only, varying the resolution of detail as I see fit.

Finally, I hope at some point, as a sole practitioner, you will come to rely Revit for nearly all of your daily work. I coordinate with structural and mep pro's without glitches, and I too am in the custom home and light commercial arena.

I see choosing the Revit Series as a win/win for you.

[mrd.84339]

I was definitely looking at the Revit Series. As far a my details, I like to add crown mold up the rakes. I also use alot of cut limestone entry arches, brick rowlock/ soldier header combinations in stone walls. I use alot of corbels, bird holes, intricate cupolas, eyebrow dormers, standing seam copper roofs, heavy timber brackets, intricate brick details, tapered walls, etc. in my designs. I know I can create a plain 3D shell in Revit and then bring it into Acad to add 2D details on the elevation "snapshot" but don't you then loose all of the parametric features once you work on your drawings in Acad? I guess in a perfect world I would like to create the entire 3D model as it would be built in real life in half the time as 2D drafting. Dream on right? It sounds like there is not a perfect solution to that idea.
One other question I will trow out is, Is there anything ADT can do that Revit cant?
Thanks for all of you input.

[Paul Monsef]

I know I can create a plain 3D shell in Revit and then bring it into Acad to add 2D details on the elevation "snapshot" but don't you then loose all of the parametric features once you work on your drawings in Acad?.
But you can do that in Revit!!

Simply create the shell in REVIT and add 2d lines to the elevation within REVIT... << Famous Revit quote: "Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD."

[Les Therrien]

I can tell you one thing Revit will do that ADT can't......................go on for much longer!
If you're going to learn a new program regardless. Revit I promise, will be far less frustrating. Sure ADT has become Revit-like, but Revit is the only one that is parametric.
As far as the type of design you do, eyebrow dormers...etc. No problem! (see attached - sorry about the resolution - file size you know!)

I see you're in Ohio. You're a couple of hours away from me at the most. If you're ever near Detroit, hop over the border to Windsor and I'll show you what Revit can do! ;-)

[Allen Lacy]

I was definitely looking at the Revit Series. As far a my details, I like to add crown mold up the rakes. I also use alot of cut limestone entry arches, brick rowlock/ soldier header combinations in stone walls. I use alot of corbels, bird holes, intricate cupolas, eyebrow dormers, standing seam copper roofs, heavy timber brackets, intricate brick details, tapered walls, etc. in my designs. I know I can create a plain 3D shell in Revit and then bring it into Acad to add 2D details on the elevation "snapshot" but don't you then loose all of the parametric features once you work on your drawings in Acad? I guess in a perfect world I would like to create the entire 3D model as it would be built in real life in half the time as 2D drafting. Dream on right? It sounds like there is not a perfect solution to that idea.
One other question I will trow out is, Is there anything ADT can do that Revit cant?
Thanks for all of you input. Our office does a lot of "traditional" buildings. I model as much as I can with cornices, water tables, etc. Here is a perspective and detail from an office building we completed recently, all done with Revit versions 5, 6 and 7 (project was delayed for a year). In the section/details, most of what is seen is modeled, with detail components added. This was a design/build project, so the detailing is not as intricate as a bid job would be. Hope this helps.

[mrd.84339]

Les,
Did you use straight Revit to produce those renderings or did you use a rendering package? Thanks for providing the drawings guys that is a big help.
-Andy

[mrd.84339]

But you can do that in Revit!!

Simply create the shell in REVIT and add 2d lines to the elevation within REVIT... << Famous Revit quote: "Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD."

I have had a couple different people tell me that this is a good way to use Revit to model in 3D and ACAD to create 2D working drawings. One user told me that Revit was not good at producing working drawings.

[DoTheBIM]

I have had a couple different people tell me that this is a good way to use Revit to model in 3D and ACAD to create 2D working drawings. One user told me that Revit was not good at producing working drawings.

I don't personally use Revit .......... yet. But In my research and surfing.... I think I found that statement to be a myth and completely false. May have been true in the early versions, but things change everyday (seems more often then neccessary around here) sometime for the worse but generally for the better.

My thoughts are if your going to design something that there is a software built for Such as buildings or pieces and parts for mechanical stuff, then why waste your time with a generic CAD package. Frankly in this day and age I think CAD programs like AutoCAD or Microstation and many others are almost obsolete. Only useful for quick and dirty drawing or edits and full compatibility with old data and drawings that probably should be updated anyway. Just my opinion though.

[J. Grouchy]

One user told me that Revit was not good at producing working drawings.

Translation: "I don't know how to use Revit to its full potential." or "I've never tried producing working drawings in Revit"

In my opinion, our CDs have greatly improved since we switched...not just in coordination but also in appearance and graphic quality. In AutoCAD, layers and colors just ended up getting all confused and there ended up being little consistency in lineweight and 'depth'. Also, in Revit, many of the tools such as automatic alignment of text notes and grids, etc. really help to clean up the appearance of final drawings. Any detail that can be drawn in AutoCAD can be drawn in Revit, often with nicer results.

[Les Therrien]

Andy,

Just Revit.
Once you have your materials set, you can produce many views quite quickly!

[mrd.84339]

Translation: "I don't know how to use Revit to its full potential." or "I've never tried producing working drawings in Revit"

Thats a good one! I think that may be the case.

[Paul Monsef]

I have had a couple different people tell me that this is a good way to use Revit to model in 3D and ACAD to create 2D working drawings. One user told me that Revit was not good at producing working drawings.
I will completely disagree... :D It all depends on the user... AutoCAD is not good at producing working drawings, at my desk, and i've been using it since release 11. ;)

Revit is a good modeling package and a GREAT documentation package. You will save time by having everything "parametric"...

The plus side of Revit is you can export and create your doc's in 2d if you need to, until you get up to speed... If you go with ADT you will always be creating your doc's in 2d.

Hope that helps.

[Alex Page]

mrd.84339......
I would recommend getting the revit series (with Autocad included)....not because revit cant detail (it can..better then autocad by far) but because: first, hardly anymore expensive, second, you will find the transition a lot easier : you can use your existing details and will find right from the outset that you will be quicker than your existing system to get out a fully documented project without a huge panic just before the deadline.

The worst thing I find when 'swapping' cad packages is the first couple of major deadlines...but with the revit series you can 'churn' out those common details (in autocad) before learning revit down to this level.
Give yourself a training regime and 'revit' deadlines
ie:
Stage 1:
Start modelling in Revit so sections/ plans at 1:100, 1:50 etc look correct
Detail 1:20...1:5 etc in Autocad
Stage 2:
Model in Revit so 1:20 sections etc look correct
Detail 1:5 etc in Autocad
Stage 3:
Model in Revit so 1:20 sections etc look correct
Detail 1:5 etc in REVIT
Stage 4....stay with stage 3 or model down to 1:5!

If you are mainly producing one/two types of construction, you should hit Stage four within 4-6 projects I reckon!...but believe me, you will absolutely love Revit, it is a joy to use, learn and become efficient in
(by the way...forget ADT)

best of luck
Alex

[ppelegrin]

Hi mrd.84339.

You mentioned you were considering ADT and yet you have an earlier version of ADT now.

My suggestion, without being smart, is to choose to continue with AutoCAD or go to Revit (or for safeties sake Revit Series).

Sticking with ADT, well no one knows better than yourself the risk that you will continue using it as AutoCAD, because that is what you have done so far. I understand a growing need to go to 3D - But with ADT, AutoCAD is right there in your face, and the fact that today, real ADT use by businesses that have purchased it still hasn't changed, the take up rate is very low. It is not uncommon, rather it is standard for ADT users to use only a subset of ADT before completing the drawing with raw AutoCAD.

As other have suggested here, Don't go to Revit for the '3D' component only. Because it is as much about 2D drafting as it is to do with 3D. Albeit with Revit you will look at your work in a more natural way (3D)

Additionally, I often recommend against Revit Series because of the same concern as with the argument I used with ADT. How many good users in here use AutoCAD to finish their Revit work? Very few, in other words the majority complete all their work in Revit - only. And it is way it should be.

The time it takes to learn the basics in Revit will not take as long, or be as difficult as it was for (experienced) AutoCAD users to initially learn paperspace when it was new.

Regards
P Pelegrin

[Martin P]

Revit Series is superb, we upgrade to it 2 weeks ago and are now looking forward to getting Autocad 2006 and Revit... ADT or Revit will cause you to go through a bit of pain to begin with, no matter how you put you are going to be learning new software and working in a completely different way - With Revit the pain wont last as long or hurt quite as much, thats about it as far as i understand it.

The Autocad part of series we use to tidy up exports, do site plans / feu plans etc etc. And we do detailing in either - whatever the user prefers or is comfortable with, the results are the same anyway whichever you use, once on paper you cannot really tell the details apart. Personally I detail with Autocad, simply because it is what I am used to for producing 2D work. I have also detailed with Revit and had no problems (other than occasionaly trying to work as if I am using Autocad - like typing C2 for circle or whatever!!!)

Anyone who tells you you have to finish Construction Docs (or anything else for that matter) in autocad - basically doesnt know what they are talking about - or are so ingrained in the use of autocad they cannot comprehend or use anything outside of it. I highly recommend Revit series.

[mrd.84339]

I appreciate everyones feedback! I made the exact same post on the Autodesk ADT 2006 forum right after my initial post here. Surprisingly, there were alot of Revit feedback. One thing one poster commented on is that Revit had a problem with complex roofs. This is an important issue for me because I do tend to get into complex roofs. I know, I know....the complexity of a roof is based on what one THINKS is a complex roof. My question is, Have any of you ever run into a situation were Revit could not complete a roof accurately when you know for a fact it will work in real life? Please be honest. Again, I don't want the limitations of my software to dictate what I design. I am 90% sold on Revit. I am going to my local Reseller to view a demo of Revit today. They also sell ADT so I think it will be a very worth wile meeting. Thanks.
-Andy

[Martin P]

I really cant think of roof form that you could not do in Revit. If you can model the shape in 3D you can do the roof... maybe not with the basic roof tool every time (but pretty much i imagine), but what is called an in place family (modelling with solid extrusions sweeps etc) could resolve anything really.... and if you couldnt do it I am certain that somebody here can and will show you how!!!

one example of where i use in place families for a roof was a witches hat roof, which i believe you can now do with the roof tools.

[Scott D Davis]

One thing one poster commented on is that Revit had a problem with complex roofs.
The user that made comment had a problem making a complex roof. Basically user error. He couldn't figure it out, asked for little help, gave up, and then blames the software. I think there was an input error...something disconnected between the keyboard and the chair.

[Haden]

The time it takes to learn the basics in Revit will not take as long, or be as difficult as it was for (experienced) AutoCAD users to initially learn paperspace when it was new.

...and how many thousands of AutoCAD users are still out there who to this day don't understand and therefore don't even attempt to use paperspace! Much less display configurations, multiview blocks, etc. in ADT...hence the ADT licensees who only marginally utilize the ADT features. In Revit, it's actually harder to just bag the 3d modeling and draw everything in 2d, not because 2d drafting in Revit is not easier than 2d drafting in ACAD, but because 3d modeling is easier and more logical in Revit than 3d modeling in ADT or even 2d drafting in ACAD, when you consider the layer manager saved settings, the xref reloads, the color-by-layer, visretain, gobbledegook issues that doing floor plans in AutoCAD requires to really work properly!

I have been steadily deprogramming my brain from any AutoCAD and certainly all ADT thinking I absorbed over the years. Architects are much happier as Revit-ers than ACAD-ers!

[Les Therrien]

I do all kinds of complex things. Especially roofs.
Therefore you need a simple way to approach it (Revit). Not a complicated piece of software to worsen it (ADT).
In Revit, if you cannot figure out how to do something, there's almost always a work around.
This site is your valued information! There is a lot of people here that would help you get done what you need done. End of story.
Any new software will have its frustration when trying to learn it. As Scott said. You cannot simply give up and blame the software.
Wait no longer. Resistance if futile.

[hand471037]

...and how many thousands of AutoCAD users are still out there who to this day don't understand and therefore don't even attempt to use paperspace! Much less display configurations, multiview blocks, etc. in ADT...hence the ADT licensees who only marginally utilize the ADT features. In Revit, it's actually harder to just bag the 3d modeling and draw everything in 2d, not because 2d drafting in Revit is not easier than 2d drafting in ACAD, but because 3d modeling is easier and more logical in Revit than 3d modeling in ADT or even 2d drafting in ACAD, when you consider the layer manager saved settings, the xref reloads, the color-by-layer, visretain, gobbledegook issues that doing floor plans in AutoCAD requires to really work properly!

This is an important topic of learning Revit: In order to use Revit, you have to jump in with both feet. There are tools for each thing you need to do, and you'll need to use them to get best use out of Revit. There's no 'incremental' use, like they advertise with ADT, where you can use as much or as little ADT as you want to, and fall back upon AutoCAD- it's all Revit or no Revit (other than maybe doing your details in AutoCAD, and linking them into Revit). This frightens people that don't know Revit, and only know AutoCAD, for it was hard enough to learn AutoCAD/ADT, and they maybe have never really learned the whole system.

However, that 'incremental' approach is kinda bunk. For the tools in AutoCAD/ADT are sometimes so complex that it's easier to avoid them sometimes then to really use them. It's easier to *not* use the features sometimes (not better, mind you, but easier- like Sheet Sets are great, but are harder than just manually updating things). So they never get used, hence the majority of people using ADT as an enhanced AutoCAD. Which is fine, mind you, but don't kid yourself, it's not BIM and nowhere close to Revit. You'll never see those same productivity gains and minimization of errors that you would if you had just jumped to Revit in the first place, and you'll spend just as much time and money (if not more).

Revit requires you to jump in with both feet, and to use it's tools, and to work the way it wants you to. However, the tools are easy, and it's way of working is much closer to the way we Architects actually think and work. You actually wind up *using* all those tools instead of paying a lot for software that you never really leverage fully. You actually *want* to model things, *want* to learn how to use the phasing tools, *want* to learn how to make families, for these things are empowering and fun and let you do more in less time while directly relating to a real-world task you do as an Architect- instead of struggling to grasp some abstract concept (Display Reps, Sheet Sets, Ect) that has nothing to do with your job and just adds another layer of complexity and another thing to manage. Instead you feel like you're doing Architecture again, which is what we're all paid for, right? ;)

my 2 cents...

[mrd.84339]

...and how many thousands of AutoCAD users are still out there who to this day don't understand and therefore don't even attempt to use paperspace! Much less display configurations, multiview blocks, etc. in ADT...hence the ADT licensees who only marginally utilize the ADT features.
This is an exact description of Me!!!! I realize that drawing plans the way I do now (2D) is soon going to be the equivalent to still drawing by hand. That is why I am going to make a switch.....Well, that and I will soon loose the ability to upgrade or cross grade Acad if I don't switch now.

[ihammerhands]

mrd.84339

There is a great reseller there in Columbus. OH called Advanced Solutions. I work with Kip (he's out of Louisville) and he sold me on the advantages of switching from ADT3.3 to Revit. Best move I made!

Millard

[mrd.84339]

Thanks to everyone who replied to my question in this thread. I decided to make the switch from ACAD to Revit and ordered my cross grade yesterday. After seeing a Revit demo on Friday and playing around with a demo version over the weekend my mind was made up. All of your feedback also helped with my decision. I cant wait to get started using the software. Hope fully the transition will go smoothly.
Thanks again,
-Andy

[Wanderer]

Thanks to everyone who replied to my question in this thread. I decided to make the switch from ACAD to Revit and ordered my cross grade yesterday. After seeing a Revit demo on Friday and playing around with a demo version over the weekend my mind was made up. All of your feedback also helped with my decision. I cant wait to get started using the software. Hope fully the transition will go smoothly.
Thanks again,
-Andy
Very cool.

I must say, as an ACAD-only person. I really found it much easier and more intuitive to pick up and draw with revit than I did adt (only took me a while to notice the little prompt thing down in the corner? [5.1btw], but, I got the hang of it).

Just started drawing, very easy to find things, took me a little longer to figure out how to modify them, but, I was aiming for not using the help files or getting started booklet till after my first try was over. ;) I like.

[BillyGrey]

Congrats Andy,

Lean on this forum and it's users.
Check in here and do a search, or post regarding issues before
becoming frustrated, or wasting too much time tweaking.
There are allot of good folks in here that
are very generous with their advise and help, and you will usually get an answer
to questions almost any time of day or night (thanks world-wide users).

Have fun, and ask, ask, ask.

Regards,

Bill Cooper

[irwin]

Very cool.

I must say, as an ACAD-only person. I really found it much easier and more intuitive to pick up and draw with revit than I did adt (only took me a while to notice the little prompt thing down in the corner? [5.1btw], but, I got the hang of it).

Just started drawing, very easy to find things, took me a little longer to figure out how to modify them, but, I was aiming for not using the help files or getting started booklet till after my first try was over. ;) I like.
This is reminiscent of Revit's first usability test. In the summer of 1999, before we even had the beta version of 1.0, we brought in someone to try the "alpha" version. We sat him down in front of the program without any training or documentation (there wasn't any documentation yet) and didn't even give him a demo. We handed him a floor plan and asked him to draw it. Then we all watched and noted what he had trouble with. He ended up drawing the whole thing.