Bentley Acquires RAM International

[Paul Andersen]

The article can be found here (http://www.bentley.com/en-US/Corporate/News/Quarter+4/RAM.htm).

[Steve_Stafford]

Makes me wonder what the future of RAM tying into Revit Structure is? :sad: Since they are gobbling up structural software companies, does this mean they've given up on Architecture?

[Tom Weir]

Should be interesting to see what happens. I doubt they can leave the growing Revit market without hurting RAM's prospects. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

I wonder if they will try to combine RAM's Cad Studio with Bentley Structural somehow in order to compete with Revit more aggresively.

We shall see what we shall we see...

Tom Weir
Los Angeles

[tsbykatherine60220]

First STAAD, now RAM??? That's two of our most used analysis packages.....

[jrichardson]

I have always thought that in order for the analysis portions of this to truly work flawlessly that Autodesk would have to acquire one of these analysis companies and embed it into Revit. Looks like Bentley beet them to it. Forget about exporting, provide an all in one solution. Of course you would have to pay more for the software. I hope Autodesk is talking with Risa or Etabs.

The bosses at work are a little bit concerned since Ram is our biggest analysis program and were waiting anxiously for Rams link files to be released. Somewhat obvious that this will probably not happen.

I still think that Revit has a great future which can do great things for our company and will still continue to use it throughout the office. However the true bidirectional link is one of the key factors that will make it pay off for us in the long run.

Looking forward to January 5th to find out what Bentley's Intentions are with the software.

[Terry Jordan]

For us it comes down to the fact that there are no other BIM softwares out there that compare to Revit Structure and there ARE other analysis softwares out there that compare to RAM Structural Systems. We've been a RAM using company for many years, but we've been an Autodesk company longer and we've made a commitment to RS. If RAM doesn't want to play we'll find someone else to play with, probably RISA. We already use RISA 2D and 3D and I just discovered RISA Building System yesterday which combines RISA 3D and RISAFloor. http://www.risatech.com/prod_rbs.asp

The fact is that most of our clients use Autodesk products and that will drive us to stick with Autodesk products. I can't see Bentley outselling Autodesk in my lifetime and adding RAM CADstudio to their lineup sure isn't going to do it for them.

[Paul Andersen]

Definitely two different approaches to BIM. I personally prefer the route Revit is taking. While RAM is one of the primary design tools at our firm and I am concerned about it's link to Revit, it's not the only tool that we use to get the job done.

My concern with Autodesk acquiring an analytical software company and incorporating it into Revit are two fold. By incorporating an analysis tool inside of Revit they instantly become competition to other analysis software packages. I believe there would be less incentive for other analysis software packages to then link with Revit. If that turns out to be the case and Revit doesn't have the functionality you need analytically to get the job done you are forced to do what many of us are already doing and remodel it in another software package.

Until an industry standard file format that meets the needs of all involved (design team, fabricators, contractors, owners / facilities managers . . . ) is developed which allows for all software packages to integrate seamlessly thus making what software package you use irrelevant as long as it is compliant with this format, I believe a true BIM solution needs to focus on interoperability with as many software packages and file formats as feasibly possible. To that end I hope to see Revit add more import / export file formats and continue to foster more and better links to other software packages. I also agree that the current links need to be better but considering their relative infancy I've been impressed thus far.

We have several Bentley users at our firm and will definitely be watching both products closely. It will certainly be interesting to see what pans out. The competition seems to be heating up which should make both products even better in the long run.

[Jos Arpink]

I agree that it would be a mistake for Revit to incorporate an analysis tool, as opposed to leaving it to 3rd party developers to provide links to/from their software. I think interoperability is key to being able to leverage all this technology in the design process. We use RAM a lot, and had been looking forward to the developement of a Revit link.

It's hard to know whether Bentley's aggressive acquisitions of late are strategic, desperate, or both. Those of you familiar with Tekla (XSteel) will know that STAAD is the analysis engine in that program. Makes me wonder whether Bentley has Tekla in its sights as well.

[jrichardson]

Points well proved. Revit would be better off to focus there efforts towards supporting many software packages. Autodesk is certainly not going any where in our office and RS will only continue to grow through out our company with or without Ram, or any other software that may go away.

[hand471037]

While I'm not a structural engineer, I've always thought that one of the big advantages of RS is that it can talk to multiple analysis packages from the same Model. Do you Structural folks do that, or do you mostly stick to one?

[Paul Andersen]

Our firm has two primary packages. One is used daily on almost every project that comes through the door and the other one is used to fill in the gaps missed by the first and tackle more complex projects beyond the first ones capabilities. We also have specialized software geared towards specific tasks that may be difficult or impossible to do efficiently in either of the two primary packages.

Many of the other firms that we are aware of operate in a similar fashion. There are so many structural analysis software packages available that essentially do the same thing (more or less) that it generally boils down to user preference. While most programs will produce the same results we've picked the platforms that we use based on user interface / ease of use, overall robustness of the software, comfort level with the results provided / overall format of outputted results and speed / productivity of the software.

I too believe that Revit being able to talk to as many other software packages (analytical and otherwise) is one of it's greatest strengths. The task at hand for a lot of us is either to wait for RS to link to a package that we prefer, jump in and test some of the valid options RS currently has or maybe you're one of the lucky ones that already use the software RS links to and are just having fun.

Using RS has forced us to reevaluate our workflow and I can already see it changing the way we evaluate our analytical software choices. As bi-directional links become more robust the need to remodel a project in another software package goes away and the user-interface / ease of use of the analytical software really doesn't factor into the equation anymore.

Bottom line: While these issues can be frustrating at times, I'm glad to be dealing with them rather than issues like "What layer should we put this line on?" :-).

[hand471037]

I too believe that Revit being able to talk to as many other software packages (analytical and otherwise) is one of it's greatest strengths. The task at hand for a lot of us is either to wait for RS to link to a package that we prefer, jump in and test some of the valid options RS currently has or maybe you're one of the lucky ones that already use the software RS links to and are just having fun.

Glad to hear what I thought is true. You never can tell.


Using RS has forced us to reevaluate our workflow and I can already see it changing the way we evaluate our analytical software choices. As bi-directional links become more robust the need to remodel a project in another software package goes away and the user-interface / ease of use of the analytical software really doesn't factor into the equation anymore.

You know, that's a constant it seems with Revit anyways, whether your a Structural engineer or an Architect just using Revit Building with no Analysis, so it's no surprise that your workflow and other software choices are changing because of Revit. For example, I never liked 3D Studio Max, but I'm learning it now, just because of it's easy link to Revit...

Thanks for the news! Here's to hoping us Architect folk start getting Ecotect-like analysis packages for Revit so we can join in the fun!

[david_peterson]

If the links worked for the 3 packages that have them we would. But it's not a 2 way street. I'm not sure where to point the finger on that. But YES! I would love to be able to have my engineer create his model the way he wants to and import it. But that doesn't work. From what I can tell, with Risa All you can do is change beam sizes when you export and re-import. I haven't played with E-tabs yet, but it sounds like their link is a little better. We have made many changes to the way in which our Ram package works, with the use of macros, but I don't know if we'd be able to run them, when and if Ram comes out with their link. I'm starting to think that RamCad w/ ADT link may be the better way to go. But that's a topic for a different thread.

[Paul Andersen]

I think this is one of the areas that RS will be having a strong influence on current workflows. RS's ability to generate a model quickly and accurately as well apply some loading information (if you choose to go this far) and then pass the information to analytical packages that analyze and size the members and update the RS model should eventually negate the need to generate a model from scratch in any of the analytical packages. With the possible exception of a few analytical packages I would argue that it is faster and more accurate to start the model in RS anyway with the additional benefit of getting your construction documents started that much quicker.

[david_peterson]

But from what I know, Adesk isn't going to do anything but say it's up to their "partners" to make the link and they have an open API. I just got done with the RS Webcast where I asked the question "Can you move/change/re-space the analytical model in Etabs or Risa and have the changes reflected when you re-import into Revit?" The answer was "Yes, there's a bi-directional link." From what I've read in this forum, that's not correct. From my understanding, if it isn't in the Revit model to start, it can't be added. And even if it is in the Revit model to start, it can't be moved. Can someone please explain this one. What's the real deal. We've got Risa 3d, and Etabs. They both have links, which one works they way it was advertised?

[Paul Andersen]

I believe the API has the ability to do most of the things you suggest although I will defer to those on the forum that are working more closely with the API than I to confirm this. That being said, in the testing we've done to date I have not seen the links be able to do much more than load, analyze, and resize members that update the RS model (which is no small feat in my book since it's more than we had a short time ago). It would be interesting to have better insight into whether the API in it's current configuration is hindering any of the analytical software developers from making some of these bi-directional features a reality or if they just haven't fully utilized the API that is available to them yet. I'm inclined to believe the latter to be true in most cases and that we will have these features as the analytical software developers further develop their links. I also wonder if major link upgrades are going to coincide with RS releases or if an aggressive developer would be able to grant all of our wishes if they were willing to devote the resources to make it happen all at once. In short I'm excited by what I see thus far and by the prospect of what's to come and I hope there are no unnecessary restrictions or bottlenecks in the pipeline beyond the drive and resources to make it happen.

[amacleod]

The tact for Autodesk to take is to make the programming link simple enough to encourage more third party structural analysis programmers to write the necessary interface. My analysis vendor told me that they considered a link to Revit but said its complexity made them decide to invest in other analysis and design improvements rather than link to Revit. This means I lose, they lose, and Autodesk loses. Simpler demands on coding will mean more third party offering which in turn will mean more structural seats.

Autodesk promotes Revit as a modeler first with drafting and analysis as outcomes. I need the drafting at least as much and more often much more than the analysis. Autodesk should concentrated its expertise in this area. Let the engineer programmers take care of the analysis, just make it easy for them to link.

[Terry Jordan]

It's been my experience that the guys at Autodesk have been working closely with the developers of analysis softwares to develop links to RS. They are by no means leaving it up to their partners to develop the links. While working on a beta to an as yet unreleased link (more of an export from RS really), I've found both Autodesk and their partner to be very responsive and very involved.

As for being able to change the model in analysis softwares, I guess I just don't see it as being a big deal. Make the change in RS, send it to the analysis software, done. It's a giant leap from where we were 7 months ago.

It seems like it would be very difficult to get a software to import what is basically the analytical model back into RS after members have been moved. How would it know how to relate the analytical model to the physical model? Maybe you moved a beam 2" off of grid in the physical model. How would the link know where you want that beam if you moved it in the analysis program?

[gkite]

I find this news more than a little bit puzzling considering that one of RAM's Regional Engineers was in our office today for the specific purpose of discussing our experience with Revit Structure and RAM's link to it. We discussed the beta release for their Revit compatible version that is due in January and RAM's progress with this project but Bentley did not come up once in the hour long meeting.

[Steve_Stafford]

...due in January and RAM's progress with this project but Bentley did not come up once in the hour long meeting...well that's encouraging then!

[Tom Weir]

I think we will be hearing from RAM shortly on their plans for Revit...

At my office engineers initially are more comfortable with the idea of starting the model in their analytical packages and do not seem to like the idea of working in Revit Structure.
Fair enough, they are use to the software they are using. The developers on the other hand want them working in RS first and exporting to the analytical packages. That's how the program thus far has been developed.
The big question is if the engineers will do it and how to move them in that direction. In that new workflow even the CAD staff could then be adding loads in RS and doing other tasks formerly only engineers would do.

That resistence to old habits has to be addressed in order to create a new paradigm of workflow in the engineering office.

Tom Weir
Los Angeles

[Rachel Ritchie]

Let me start by saying my company (a big A little E firm) has been using Revit since the beginning and long before Autodesk got involved. Let me also say that we didn't really start using it on projects thru CD's until rel. 5.1 and after Autodesk was involved. But now, many of our architects are using Revit Building for their design and thru CD's. To this date, we have not done a Revit Structural project, we've simply played around with the software. We use Ram, so up to this point, to use RS mean drawing it twice, and who has time for that? But the idea of our Architects in Revit Bldg, and our structural engineers in Revit Structural, and our MEP's in Revit Bldg. Systems(or whatever they decide to call it) is very appealing! All coordinating, and being able to run interferace checking all sounds great.

I just got off the phone with the CEO of Ram. We are their customer, I wanted answers, so I set up an appt. Very nice man! Anyway, he affirmed to me Ram's committment to creating a plug in for Revit Structural that will work with Ram Analysis products. He did mention the January timetable. I believe this will only be a beta not sure if it's available for all. But if you want to be a part of it, and you own the software, call them up.
Once we get the plug in piece, my company is going to work hard to make the current workflow that has been presented by RS work. That being, draw it in RS and then send to Ram (or other) for analysis. But you know what, you can bet that if this workflow just doesn't work, both companies will be hearing from us.

As for Bentley, my guess is they intend to get deeper into the engineering market. I guess it's been over a year ago that they purchased the Halstaad Civil anaylsis packages like PondPak and StormCad. Then, when I wasn't looking apparently, they purchased Staad. I noticed the Bentley name on our annual maintenance agreement for Staad. And now they've gone a purchased Ram International.
Don't look at this as a bad thing. I think it just might be good for all: Bentley and Ram and us. When Autodesk first purchased Revit, I didn't think that would be a good thing. But it's turned out fine. Let's be optomistic about the Bentley/Ram senerio.

[Steve_Stafford]

...Don't look at this as a bad thing. I think it just might be good for all: Bentley and Ram and us. When Autodesk first purchased Revit, I didn't think that would be a good thing. But it's turned out fine. Let's be optomistic about the Bentley/Ram senerio...Fair enough! Thanks for sharing your experience and info!

[KMGuillotte]

I have heard from 2 separate people yesterday at RAM. It is the Beta version that will be released in January... Here's what they had to say:

Contact #1 (directly working on the link): "Our beta release is running behind schedule, only in part due to distractions caused by the merger. I am hoping to get the beta release out by end of January, early February. Thank you for your continued interest in the link. I plan to contact everyone when we are ready to begin testing, but if we are still running late you don’t hear from me, please feel free to send me an e-mail. If the link is canceled, I will let all the beta testers know."

This was encouraging until the last sentence, but more likely to cover their behinds just in case.

Contact #2 (higher up in mgmnt): "I can assure you that our plans to link with Revit are not changed because of the acquisition. We have some press releases on the website (www.ramint.com) regarding our development of a Revit link, including some tentative release dates. We are working on it now and have been working with Autodesk to ensure they will give us the continued support we need to develop the link and they have assured us that they will. We are a bit behind schedule but will have a Beta Release out in approximately six weeks.

You will also be receiving an email in the near future discussing items such as this as well as answers to other questions customers have been asking.

Please feel free to call or email if you have any other questions."

This sounds more promising (even though they it sounds like a rehearsed speech)... So look for the Beta version to be out by the 1st week of February...(unless we hear otherwise on Jan.5th...)
--------
Hope this helps;
Kevin
Boston

[gtholmes44]

We have received an e-mail from the Ramsteel president Michael E. Markovitz stating that while his firm has been purchased by Bentley they are going forward with the link to RS.

This may be a lot of hooey, buy my experience with Bentley is they try to play nice with others and will probably make the link work better and produce it quicker than Ramsteel would.

As of the week before Christmas we were told the issued link would be delayed until the end of the first quarter of 2006.

Along with most of you my approach is simple - he who talks to me gets my company's work, Ramsteel is talking but not producing (yet). We are looking and testing the link with ETABs.

[tsbykatherine60220]

Bentley is holding a press conference regarding STAAD and RAM tomorrow, I don't know if it'll be interactive but I am attending. If anyone has any specific questions please respond to this and I'll try and get answers to post when the conference is over.

Rick McElvain
Arnold and O'Sheridan Inc.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

[david_peterson]

Is this open to all customers of RAM? How do you sign up? Is this a conference call, or more like a web-cast? The reason I ask is that I'm sure some of our engineers would like to here what Bentley has to say.

Thanks