S.O.M. standardizes FT on Revit

[beegee]

Not really news (http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/05-19-2005/0003639139&EDATE=)I guess, but maybe it will dispel some of the naysayers rumors.

[Wes Macaulay]

One thing none of these news reports reveals is how exactly Revit is being used -- the technical details of how the software is being employed by SOM and its consultants. These guys are working so close to the developers... few of us get that amount of input on our projects!

[beegee]

I'm confident that there will be flow-on eventually. F1 to family car style. ;-)

[mmolina]

Funny how they don't say who's actually doing the training.
I don't know if I can mention it either. So I'll be quiet for now.

[JamesVan]

The rumor mill continues. What specifics would you like to know about? I'll answer what I can about the project and our Revit usage.

[aaronrumple]

Are you using groups? If so, why haven't you demanded they work better? Are you satisfied with the elevation markers?

[luigi]

How often do people get mad when something goes wrong with worksets??? :D

Maybe this is not what you meant???

[JamesVan]

Are you using groups? If so, why haven't you demanded they work better?
We are using groups, particularly to manage vertical stacking of shaft openings and core toilet layouts. I'm familiar with the frustration you've been having with groups, but we just haven't had too much difficulty with them so far. We're probably not using them to the extent that you are though.

Are you satisfied with the elevation markers?
These are a bit frustrating. First, the visual aspect - our standard is more like the section head so I have to convince our senior staff to try to accept the 'modified' standard. Second, duplicate views - very tough to work with different versions of an elevation when you have to put a new marker in every time. Third, irregular shape room elevations - this one is less problematic, but if we have a room that is non-rectangular and want to do the interior elevations, we have to use 4 separate symbols. Not sure how this would be resolved in Revit, but does cause a small amount of pain.

[Prodev75]

Is S.O.M. using an A.P.I. for Revit. Are they developed internally or by Autodesk?

[JamesVan]

How often do people get mad when something goes wrong with worksets??? :D

Maybe this is not what you meant???
We've been learning quite alot about worksets and the division of work among the team. We have rearranged the worksets 3 times over the past year to better fit our team's organization. There haven't been too many big headaches with worksets, every once in awhile someone's local file can't reconcile with the central. This is most often solved by saving locally, closing Revit, reopening the local file, then retrying the STC. STC's usually take about 5 minutes on the two major project files - tower core and subgrade. Typically about 4-6 people in each project file, STC-ing every hour or so.

Once, the central file became corrupt and the team started to freak out. Within 10 minutes, we took the most recent local copy from one of the users and recreated the central file. Problem solved. The Central-Local setup is like built-in backup.

[JamesVan]

Is S.O.M. using an A.P.I. for Revit. Are they developed internally or by Autodesk?
No API - just Revit out of the box.

[Wes Macaulay]

Thanks for your replies, James!

I would label myself as a Phil-Read-wannabe. So the families used for the curtain wall were particularly frustrating to look at because I knew that those things do magic once they're inserted into the project. The diagonal glazing lines warp with the twist of the building as the building ascends. The family has to pick up on that! Did someone in-house build that? or did someone from the big A?

Also, on many of our large projects, we have hiccups during STC (crashes, errors, etc.) and don't even get me started with regards to editing requests. Do you guys face any of that?

[Simon.Whitbread]

Once, the central file became corrupt and the team started to freak out. Within 10 minutes, we took the most recent local copy from one of the users and recreated the central file. Problem solved. The Central-Local setup is like built-in backup.

How many times has this happened?
I'm just in the process of implementing Revit for around 100 users. This will be a progressive roll-out over the next 6-9months. EVERYONE will be using worksets and working on teams of approx. 3-8 people. I might start getting worried if the Central file becomes corrupt on a regular basis.

[bsuccar]

How many times has this happened?
I'm just in the process of implementing Revit for around 100 users. This will be a progressive roll-out over the next 6-9months. EVERYONE will be using worksets and working on teams of approx. 3-8 people. I might start getting worried if the Central file becomes corrupt on a regular basis.

Hello there,
From my experience with central files in an environment of around 40 users, I only faced 'corruption' one time out of a dozen multi-user files. My definition of 'corruption' is "an irrevocable state that only Autodesk support can fix". There are other minor issues that might occur to local-central relationship that may require a fast rebuild (a save as) of the central file from any one of the local files. In a nutshell, if the user-defined Worksets subdivisions are well-thought of and if the local files are saved regularly to the central file (you need to develop and enforce a simple office-wide policy), each local file can replace the central file and thus corruption possibilities are very low.
Beyond that, your words remind me of the needless setbacks faced while implementing Revit 18 months ago. Because of those frustrations and with the shortage of BIM best-practices, I wish to caution you against the perceived implementation strategy you have just outlined. Deploying Revit with such a speed office-wide needs a more staged approach. How to best stage it is a long discussion….Multi-user collaboration in Revit (like other BIM packages) is not something you would want to jump into before establishing a momentum, skill base and adequate procedures. You certainly cannot compare the number of CAD users or project subdivision typical of an AutoCAD/MicroStation project to that in Revit (I’m not saying that you are). Second, the number of Revit users for the same type/size project will decrease as you start rebuilding your legacy data. Third, the number of team members within the same project has a saturation point depending on project complexity (not size). Fourth, additional members WILL NOT increase productivity proportionally to the increase in resource costs. Fifth, Sixth…
Congratulations on your move to Revit but make sure your implementation is well paced…Best wishes.

[JamesVan]

I would label myself as a Phil-Read-wannabe. So the families used for the curtain wall were particularly frustrating to look at because I knew that those things do magic once they're inserted into the project. The diagonal glazing lines warp with the twist of the building as the building ascends. The family has to pick up on that! Did someone in-house build that? or did someone from the big A?
It was a combination of in-house with troubleshooting from the A-Team. We had the geometric formulas already established and the linework was generated in Autocad (3D). Then it was brought into Rhino for further studies and some volumetric assignments (studies of tube radii and cable bundles, etc). Then the Rhino model was exported back to a 3D DWG and linked into Revit where we built some intelligent components such as truss outriggers and cable/bracket bundles. Revit was AWESOME in figuring out the complex access stairs and catwalks!

I have been constantly amazed at how quickly our adept designers pick up on Revit and can model quite complex components. The team modeling the cable-net structure did that in the first week after training.


Also, on many of our large projects, we have hiccups during STC (crashes, errors, etc.) and don't even get me started with regards to editing requests. Do you guys face any of that?
We wish it was faster, because the 5 minute STC isn't "as instantaneous as saving an Autocad drawing." But please realize how much data you have open at any given time! There were a few hiccups as I described above, but nothing that ever halted the project. Editing requests become cumbersome if you don't have your worksets organized like your team. We got them setup reasonably well so it minimized ER's, but there was the occassional problem when elements from different worksets were joined like floor slabs to shear walls. Our team begun using MSN Messenger to facilitate the extra communication. You'd see little IM's like..."Request?"..."Granted"

[JamesVan]

How many times has this happened?
I'm just in the process of implementing Revit for around 100 users. This will be a progressive roll-out over the next 6-9months. EVERYONE will be using worksets and working on teams of approx. 3-8 people. I might start getting worried if the Central file becomes corrupt on a regular basis.
This only happened once in recent memory, maybe twice in a year, but only on this project. It is the biggest one done in Revit so far.

[Wes Macaulay]

We wish it was faster, because the 5 minute STC isn't "as instantaneous as saving an Autocad drawing." ... Our team begun using MSN Messenger to facilitate the extra communication. You'd see little IM's like..."Request?"..."Granted"Thanks James.... good to know that we're in the same boat, generally speaking.

[MikeJarosz]

As James has indicated, the problems we have run into have all eventually been solved. I believe that Revit has proven itself capable of handling a project of this scope. Is there room for improvement? Yes, and we have offered our suggestions to the developers.

One constraint that still needs to be addressed is the resistance to BIM offered by architects. There is very little that Revit can do about that. Nevertheless, unless this is overcome, three dimensional modeling will never succeed. In fact, Norbert Young, president of McGraw Hill Construction and leading proponent of BIM, has said that he is changing his focus away from architects and towards building owners, who have the power to demand that their architects utilize BIM more effectively. His previous efforts at convincing the architectural community have met with little success.

You've seen it in this forum. Every once in a while someone announces that SOM has cut and run. Or SOM is using other software, or some other misinformation. One site claims to have a spy planted inside of SOM's 23rd floor. Beneath these remarks I sense that there are architects who don't really want Revit or BIM to succeed.

So, in the end it will be the acceptance of BIM that determines the success of Revit. Phil Bernstein, in his public appearances, has wisely focused on this point. Phil doesn't talk about nuts-and-bolts Revit features. He makes the case for BIM, fully aware that the future of Revit is linked to the entire construction industry embracing this radical new technology.

[LRaiz]

..I sense that there are architects who don't really want Revit or BIM to succeed...So, in the end it will be the acceptance of BIM that determines the success of Revit...the future of Revit is linked to the entire construction industry embracing this radical new technology.
It is not going to be easy or quick. Revit as product continues making impressive progress but Revit Technology Corporation became a victim of market adoption rate.

[hand471037]

Beneath these remarks I sense that there are architects who don't really want Revit or BIM to succeed.

I've always thought that BIM & Revit is a 'disruptive technology' in that, if used, it fundamentally changes the way in how you work and how your business is structured. Conversely, in order to really work you have to fundamentally change how you work and how your business is structured. Those that can take advantage of it profit (sometimes greatly) and those that can't fall way behind (and sometime go out of business).

It's a lot like the Internet, specifically the Web. I mean, when was the last time you went to a travel agent instead of booking your trip online? ;-)

Revit & BIM presents a big change in our industry. Change scares people. So some people resist it, and some people get so wrapped up in the 'old' (for their livelihood or identity is so connected to it) that they are completely blind the benefits or even the element of change itself, and can do nothing but tout the advantages of the 'old' without even looking at the 'new'. It becomes political, it gets dirty, and people do very stupid and silly things (I've personally seen and heard many such things because of Revit & BIM) to resist or bury the 'new' in the hopes that it will simply go away.

Which rarely happens, if there is real value to be had within the 'new' and it's not all hype. And I doubt that SOM would be able to hold up the Freedom Tower with nothing but hot air... :D

[mmodernc]

The comments I get from my clients are "how did they do it with 2D only?-must have been hit and miss."

[Shaun v Rooyen]

I remember a post last year. The vision still very clear.


A revolution in how computers are used to model buildings is taking place, and at the heart of this revolution has been a debate about what three letter acronym to use that best describes the technology driving the revolution forward. The default term is currently BIM (Building Information Modeling), although there have been many other attempts, and recently a proposal was made to call it PEN (Parametric ENabled) . The search for a three letter word is clearly tied to the legacy of CAD (which stands for Computer Assisted Drafting or Design) even though the essence of this new technology makes a decisive break with the CAD paradigm. That CAD can have such a grip on the thought process is evidence of a conservative tendency in the AE profession that manifests itself even at the high-tech fringe. The BIM apologists have begun to see and imagine new opportunities and methodologies as a result of emerging technology, but have fallen short when trying to come up with a catch-all acronym that rolls easily off the tongue and embodies a new spirit.

References to bygone tools have no place in the realm of next generation design tools. The world has moved on, the information age, the post-industrial society, is here and now, and continues to expand. The machine age, having run its course, is coming to and end. Likewise, the age of mechanical drafting and tireless abstract revisions is primed for extinction. The computer has been freed from the mundane task of representing lines in a banal coordinate space. No longer can the computer be thought of as a device that simply mimics the conventions of hand drafting. The floor plan is ceasing to be an end in itself, and instead becoming a mere by-product of a hyper-coordinated design process. The great modernist Le Corbusier stated that the plan is the generator of form. In the post-industrial era, it is form that generates the plan, and the section, and the elevation, and the perspective, and the schedule…on and on, all in real time. The list of possible deliverables and consequences of using the computer to truly model buildings is nothing short of mind blowing.

Today, we have new ways of creating architectural representations, and the information built into these representations exceeds the implied meaning of lines projected onto a 2D surface. Every object can be imbibed with and described by parameters that inter-relate with other objects and their parameters. The information, stored in centralized database that can manage and negotiate changes, allows the creation of “live” models that are always in sync, and represented as explicit graphical and textual controls. This technology enables the age-old process of building physical models to be intimately tied to all other means of representing a building. Now, 2D, 3D and 4D co-exist in single design environment and are all linked together.

These tools are the tools that can, and will ‘do it all’, tools that enable total collaboration across disciplines. Tools that provide total syncopation of a single database of parametrically related, intelligent components that can be analyzed, modified, and published--on the fly. A tool that can do that much--allow for creating truly virtual models of a system--is more than Building Information Modeling, it is HYPERMODELING. Model are referred to as HYPERMODELS, not BIMs. The Hypermodel is a way of interfacing with information, not modeling it. Who wants to model information? No, we want to Model, and have information become a dynamic expression of modeling. Also, the hypermodel is not reserved for mere “buildings”—it can be atomized. Is a window a building? No, but one can imagine entire companies that do nothing but crank out Hypermodel content. Hypercomponents that work in the context of a building, but are not themselves buildings. A photorealistic rendering, or walkthrough, is not really building information modeling—but clearly that is a critical piece of this new paradigm. Think of visualizations as an aspect of hypermodeling; or better, as an opportunity that hypermodeling provides.

The chains of the three letter acronym now broken, we can imagine a new paradigm taking hold. We can imagine a new generation of HYPERMODEL designers emerging, while simultaneously, ‘CAD technician’ becomes an obsolete pursuit. We can imagine a whole new definition of labor divisions, of highly collaborative design-build firms, of new types of hybrid AE companies coming into being. We can imagine using the HYPERMODEL to redefine how projects are bid upon, how they are won, how they are implemented, how they are administrated, how they are evaluated. Ask yourself this, do you want to be known a BIMMER or a HYPERMODELER? Will your firm gain leverage by promoting the use of BIM tools, or HYPERMODELS?

To embrace Hypermodeling is to finally take the step into the current of the Information Revolution: to take advantage of it, rather than shy away from it. In doing so, we open the door to new processes, new business models, new methods, and ultimately, a New Architecture.

[Wes Macaulay]

It is not going to be easy or quick. Revit as product continues making impressive progress but Revit Technology Corporation became a victim of market adoption rate.RTC burned out of dough and for that we can blame... Autodesk users! The lack of vision among a community that is supposed to be defined by it is a sad story.

So many people have talked about the Holy Grail of architecture being the 3D building model. ArchiCAD had it first in a half-baked fashion, and now Revit has a far better-baked solution. It's still purgatory - it's not AutoCAD hell, and it ain't perfect either. But we at Pacific Alliance sell Revit Indulgences, where for a few pennies we can spring your souls from the land of CAD (computer aided despair) and show you a place where all your work is done for you.

- Is this heaven?

- No, it's building information modeling.

[aaronrumple]

...we still have yet to see if our industry is smart enough for BIM/3D. We still may be replaced by design/build firms. Architects might become "nurses" to D/B firms rather than being the "doctors".

[JamesVan]

...we still have yet to see if our industry is smart enough for BIM/3D. We still may be replaced by design/build firms. Architects might become "nurses" to D/B firms rather than being the "doctors".
To me, I see a choice to be made in the coming years...
Either to become "architectural stylists" or "master builders"

You decide.

[luigi]

ha ha, you're funny Wes...but it's more though than a few pennies!!! and if I don't have enough of the pennies, no indulgences? There has to be another way to get out!!!! No, actually there isn't, we are talking about how our current world turns...

The last statement can get catchy....


RTC burned out of dough and for that we can blame... Autodesk users! The lack of vision among a community that is supposed to be defined by it is a sad story.

So many people have talked about the Holy Grail of architecture being the 3D building model. ArchiCAD had it first in a half-baked fashion, and now Revit has a far better-baked solution. It's still purgatory - it's not AutoCAD hell, and it ain't perfect either. But we at Pacific Alliance sell Revit Indulgences, where for a few pennies we can spring your souls from the land of CAD (computer aided despair) and show you a place where all your work is done for you.

- Is this heaven?

- No, it's building information modeling.

[Wes Macaulay]

Being from a family of beer-swilling Bible thumpers, I like riffing on religous content. When I die I'm going to be cremated so that when I get to heaven God can truly say, Well Done! :mrgreen:

[ejburrell67787]

Being from a family of beer-swilling Bible thumpers, I like riffing on religous content. When I die I'm going to be cremated so that when I get to heaven God can truly say, Well Done! :mrgreen:
No heaven for you Wes, it'll be Purgatory with a few Indulgences! ;)

[luigi]

Purgatory isn't a stationary place guys...you gotta know this stuff. It is a transitionary place...Final destination is either Heaven or Hell....take your pick...;)

[cosmickingpin]

And if I can get away with it I will pass it off as my own. The problem I see it is that innvoations in BIM will just take some time to allow for younger and more progressive approaches to drive the big clunkey caveman-autocad firms to the edge of extinction. It will happen in the market place. I wonder why autodesk is so timid in pushing revit to the general public? Where's Revit's add during the world cup or superbowl? How about a PBS Nova special about CAD in general and BIM? Why the folks at Popular Mechanics and Scientiffic America on the phone! Get some industrual cross-pollenation! SOM is gonna start eating up the competeion at the marco firm scale and each of us will be placed in a dominat position within our niches, give it five to ten years when the new grads have fooled with Revit in Architecture school. I know I have stayed working and watched scores of friends go on unemployment just because I know Revit. Lean and mean times will make reluctant revit users of many. The key is for architecture firm using revit to solidfy their market positions within their respective lient zones, and expand through repeat and refered clients. Autodesk could do a hell of a lot more about getting Revit out there in the general public eye (SOM and Freedom tower is a great start) but when we get to the point where there are a dozen high profile revit projects going on, then revit will have truly established a foothold on the market domestically.

I think the key will be China, if Autodesk can under bid Archicad in the east and get them off pirated Autocad14, then we will have something to talk about for the next 60 years.



When I die I'm going to be cremated so that when I get to heaven God can truly say, Well Done! :mrgreen:

[cosmickingpin]

Did it myself, no heavy handed moderator intervention...

Sorry Wes. You and my Mother are the only ones who can call me Cosmo BTW (just kidding who can get touchy about a cybernym anyway)

[Wes Macaulay]

Sorry Cosmo. We don't discuss religion or sex or any combination thereof in Revit threads. Go get a room in the Out There Hotel ;-)

[Andrew Dobson]

To me, I see a choice to be made in the coming years...
Either to become "architectural stylists" or "master builders"

You decide.

James, do you use Document Management software at SOM along with Revit, and if so how do the two work alongside each other, bearing in mind that all drawings are within the one Revit File?

Thanks

[rod.74246]

I liked this thread and thought I'd chime in. Particularly hot on the heels of an invite i got to see a speach by someone (can't remember who) speak about Revit and its implementation in the Freedom Tower in about a weeks time in Brisbane.

I am in Australia and share the often dubious but glorified post of CAD Manager as well as one of four directors of a 38 staff architectural firm. My first experience with Revit a number of yeras ago was positive and i adopted a "wait and see approach". I managed to concivince my partners a few months ago to invest an awful lot of capital and do a complete reinvention and bought revit licenses for all of my staff. All i can say is wow.

Issues and bugs abound, we have had many problems which we have fought through over the last couple of months and SOM's documentation has given us hope that what we are acheiving so far on our smaller projects will continue to our larger projects as we progress. I come from a background of use in ACAD, ADT, Microstation, Archicad and Cadvance (wonder if anyones heard of that?). But primarily i am a design architect. Revit is the only peiece of software to date that i truly can say has potential of handing the traditional CAD role back to our desingers and documenters.

Most other issues aside, i found that my staff with limited experience in other CAD software picked Revit up with ease and are outstripping my other staff in production. The old ADT and ACAD guys seem to struggle more. The only issue i have had to date is collaboration and we seem to be working around it. A job the size of the Freedom Tower using it succesfully makes me feel a lot better with the issues we have had to date.

Alli can say is in the Australian market Revit is almost the weapon of choice,m Most firms are resisting for a number of issue. Cost of change, implementation downtime, acad diehard CAD managers not willing to change, and to be honest fear of change. However the reluctance in Australia seems to be a lot less than the US is experience. I do not know of any other competitors here who aren't trailing licenses or changing wholesale. From experience all i can say is I hope tey do sort out ome of the issues, but what we have encountered to date is far less than what we had with ACAD and ADT. At a rough guess even with no experience and severe collaboration issues within the office productivity is up significantly.

Can't wait to see the talk from SOM.

[JamesVan]

James, do you use Document Management software at SOM along with Revit, and if so how do the two work alongside each other, bearing in mind that all drawings are within the one Revit File?
We don't have a unified Doc Mgmnt system as of yet. We do have a custom intranet site that allows us to upload a spreadsheet with our issued drawings to populate a drawing register database. We can export the drawing index out of Revit to a CSV file, then upload it to our intranet, but we are currently exploring the possible use of ODBC export directly to the SQL server (like ESpecs) so we can harvest information direct from the source.

[Andrew Dobson]

Thanks for that, I am interested in how an organisation as large as yours manages their data as my company "cant cope" with ours and we only have 120 staff (40 max per office)

We only use AutoCAD, at the moment. I am looking for ways where we could use Revit (potentially) within our EDMS.

We are implimenting a system called Conisio that always keeps files with the same name, and you save a new version of top of previous files adding a version comment or revision number in the case of issued drawings. This keeps Xrefs working properly through revisions.

I am trying to figure out how this might work with Revit (as all the drawings are in the one file). The only way I can think of is by saving out PDFs or DWFs from Revit to fit into the document management standard.

Is this what you do in order to keep record copies of issued drawings and past revisions?

[Wes Macaulay]

An EDMS looking at the Revit central file is going to have its hands full - there's a folder for each workset on the project (and you can have hundreds of these), and inside this a small workset backup file that records each change to that workset over the last number of saves as defined by the file's number of backups.

These backup files work in conjunction with the main central file to allow rolling back to a previous version of the central file. I just don't know how an EDMS would be able to understand this system...

[hand471037]

We don't have a unified Doc Mgmnt system as of yet. We do have a custom intranet site that allows us to upload a spreadsheet with our issued drawings to populate a drawing register database. We can export the drawing index out of Revit to a CSV file, then upload it to our intranet, but we are currently exploring the possible use of ODBC export directly to the SQL server (like ESpecs) so we can harvest information direct from the source.

James, I've been trolling through the API's help files, and it appears that there are classes that might allow this to become an automatic thing. So that a user could go to Tools -> External Tools -> 'Publish to Intranet' and Revit would do the export and upload for you...

I wish I knew more Visual Basic or C# :-/

[GuyR]

Jeffrey's right, API's are the way to go. Document management with Revit takes on a whole new meaning. You're no longer managing 'dumb' drawings or even models, but object data. Much more powerful. Versioning is a separate issue.


I wish I knew more Visual Basic or C# :-/

Don't worry Jeffrey you may not need to know either in a little while :-)....

Guy