Revit for the entire team?

[Wes Macaulay]

Having completed training a few offices now, I'm being asked if Revit will eventually replace AutoCAD in the offices of architects and engineers. Revit has tools for architectural and structural at present; the structural tools, as it is fairly well-known, don't always do what you want and the structural people have to come up with work-arounds that frankly, work pretty well.

In one firm with whom I'm currently working, arch and struc are working together in the Revit model. They're both fairly happy with Revit (they say they've had a lot to learn, and it hasn't gone as quickly as they hoped), but they wonder if their other disciplines would ever want to bother with the learning curve, and would they want to abandon their library of data and knowledge of AutoCAD.

This is one rare firm where all disciplines are under one roof, and you could contend that they would benefit the most from everyone working in Revit when the mech and elec components come out for Revit in a few months (I don't know exactly when).

In several firms I have people who are learning Revit slowly, as they say they did with AutoCAD. Do you people think that some people just can't handle Revit - having to deal with 3D CAD issues rather than just 2D CAD issues? I'm not sure - I think you'll need some high-end users in every office, but can less advanced users get along in Revit?

So the questions are:
1) How could the other disciplines benefit from the Revit building model? And how might that model be shared, esp. if the consultants are in different offices? Do you think Revit for all disciplines is a realistic goal?
2) Do you think Revit is hard to learn?
3) How do people who struggle with computers and CAD in general fare in Revit?

I think these are important questions to the success and wider adoption of Revit.

[PeterJ]

Wes

No comment on your number 1. It doesn't affect me much yet, though it may come to do so in the future.

2 - I think Revit is pretty easy to learn, but one does have to be careful to develop good habits. These comments specifically relate to refurb work, but are probably true of new build too, I have only done one new build with Revit so far so I am less up to speed with it. On a number of occaisions when first using the package I would draw out a plan, sketch over it quickly with some hand drawn amendments for a client and wow them with the speed at which I could knock up some drawings. Of course when I came to produce elevations I had used generic windows and doors and had to get all the families right, maybe making new ones, and had to make the roof and in doing so would have to check that all the levels were correct etc. That failure on my part to work from the correct first principles can cause difficulty and lead to abortive work, so you do need to be disciplined.

I also think that you need to think from the outset in 3D to some extent and that can have a profound effect on some users who are less comfortable in 3D, that's not to say that Revit is difficult to learn but that different people have different spatial awareness. Possibly that means they will benefit enormously from Revit as a stair cutting through a space, for example, will show very readily and may make them think twic about it's location. For all that though the interface is pretty intuitive. I don't find the massing tool in Revit or any other package I have yet used terribly useful but it does seem to mimic the way we typically think about design as does the more detailed modelling process. One places system families which can host other elements, thereafter one inserts families and other hosted elements which build up a detailed model and I thinkmost users at any level will tend to think in that logical sequence when looking at a building project so it should be easy enough to follow.

3 - When you refer to lower functioning CAD users it sounds pretty damning and I'm not sure it is the choicest piece of language. Do you mean people who take someone else's drawings and apply blocks and symbols, such as people marking up electrical installations would typically do? That doesn't make them low functioning in terms of their possible ability, just indicates that they are using the tools available to them at the appropriate level to their needs. To continue the electrical installation theme, my experience suggests that many of the consultants designing these installations deal with the clash detection issues by working with the architect's sections on a visual basis only, the same seems true to a large extent with Mechanical and HVAC people.

It appears to me that these groups will be slow to adopt the full modelling capabilities of Revit, in whatever incarnation it is offered to them, but would benefit very readily from the ability to apply detail drafting components, filled regions etc to a plan and also very specifically, from the ability to produce an instant section at any point to check for clash detection without necessarily wanting to model the ductwork, light fittings or what have you. On that basis it seems they will be able to continue to use the tools available to them at a level appropriate to their needs.



I'm far from politically correct so I don't want to carp on this but you might try and find a term that doesn't call to mind Huxley's Brave New World or people with learning difficulties.

Pete

[Steve_Stafford]

Wes,

You asked... :D

The firm that employs me is just such a firm, we've got every discipline under one roof and across three offices. (including industrial hygiene)

I've said it several times before in various forums/ng's, I could make Revit work right now (our office), no changes, across all disciplines except site. The big qualification of course is that the disciplines that currently design and draft in 2D continue to do so for the most part with the introduction of some 3D families.

In my view, the documentation features of Revit simply overpower the other applications and if for no other reason than that I lobby heavily for the other trades to begin using it. The other good reason to do it is the greatly enhanced way families can reduce drafting effort. There are many good reasons.

Question 1 - Yes, it is far easier to keep everyone on track in one platform and this is my biggest impediment to getting Revit deployed at all for real. The disconnect between A and everyone else is THE hot button at our office.

On two occasions the backgrounds have lagged behind enough that it was noticed and major complaining ensued. It could be argued that has nothing to do with the software and it would be accurate. But since the A in the equation is usually scurrying about trying to move things forward on many fronts, the rest are waiting patiently for us to finish things. The application divide makes that appear more damaging than it really is.

I say that this divide is more natural and actually important to prevent rework, but that's another discussion. (basically our MEPS teams tend to look at files and assume what is ready to work on instead of consulting with someone first, resulting in work overlaid on ideas rather than decisions, again, not the software's fault)

Question 2 - Hard to learn? Yes and No...as a software application it is very easy to understand. It is organized simply, too simply some say. But there are many aspects that are disorienting to new folks. The white background, selecting objects, what no layers and so on. I say easy but then I've learned 3 completely different cadd applications over the last 2.5 years. Not everyone is willing to do that. (I came from several years of AutoCAD to Softdesk 8, to Microstation/J, Triforma,ADT and now Revit)

Question 3 - I think I know what you mean when you say lower functioning, at least in AutoCAD that is...such a user struggles with retaining the knowledge to be productive in AutoCAD. They consisently ask the same or similar questions. They don't quickly understand "advanced" concepts. A further distinction is they never really understand the application well enough to discover workarounds to problems. That person will have the same difficulties with Revit, again not the software to "blame".

I believe a cog in the successful use of Revit is a REAL understanding of how buildings are built. I find that I stall when I encounter something I'm not certain how I'd actually build it. Once that's resolved I get back on track. This sets the stage for competency on two fronts, software and profession. Revit requires competency in the latter before the former and sadly it isn't always well balanced.

A couple of technical issues are "in the way" too...how well can Revit support a large project and a larger team...via worksets and having the necessary horsepower in the PC's we use. Since I'm not attempting to bring that larger team in on the current project I can't answer yet.

Hope my thoughts help...

[sbrown]

I just wish to speak to the topic of people "getting revit" I am starting to wonder myself. Revit clicked with me instantly and I was hooked, I thought everyone in my office would try it and never look back. Boy was I wrong!! Some people (who are excellent designers and architects) just seem to hit a wall every day trying to use revit. I've been trying to implement revit since release 2.0 in some form and still have problems with people just drafting with revit instead of learning to build the model correctly. This causes awful problems. I am currently having to work all weekend to get a job out by tuesday that was botched to nevernever land my inexperienced revit users. Whats the problem with these users, I'm really not sure but our firm is experiencing a very large problem. our users won't take the initiative to do all the training and experimentation it takes to understand revit. I'm hoping the training is the problem, but I have a sinking feeling in the back of my mind that some users just CANT use revit successfully. There is no logical reason for this that I can tell. I have no idea what the answer is.

I'm hoping/praying one day revit will click for those who just don't get it.

To me and others in our firm Revit is the easiest piece of software to learn and use for others its just like their brains don't work the same way and what do you do with that?

As for all disciplines usiing revit, that is the goal, it will take maybe 10 years for the total acceptance of the BIM but there is no other way to go in the long run.

[Wes Macaulay]

Some people (who are excellent designers and architects) just seem to hit a wall every day trying to use revit... ...our users won't take the initiative to do all the training and experimentation it takes to understand revit. I'm hoping the training is the problem, but I have a sinking feeling in the back of my mind that some users just CANT use revit successfully. There is no logical reason for this that I can tell. I have no idea what the answer is.

Your comments resonate. The best users around here haven't taken any training: they read the help manuals and figured it out on their own, with some questions to me and the newsgroups. They've got some great Revit tricks I would never have tried on my own, and they work! (Like the user who created a stair that looked like a multistorey stair, but in fact was drawn with the "Run" stair tool... she overlaid one run right overtop of the previous seven times... and it works!)

One of them complains that he gets lots of what he calls "RTFM questions" from people who either don't know where to start in getting the answer, or figure it's easier to ask the advanced user the question.

So maybe it is true that some people will never "get" Revit. They're not interested in the time it takes to understand it... and I think this sort of user can do more damage to a Revit project than an AutoCAD drawing. Still, when I look at what a small team of Revit users can crank out... and all the crazy and wonderful things you can do in Revit, it's hard not to stay excited about the program's prospects.

The technical challenge to Revit for the whole team is how does everyone work live on the Revit model... a WAN of some kind? Then you're depending on the internet, which you know you can't do, and we all know how much Revit needs a fast network. I don't think multidiscipline BIM is going to happen for anyone but the multidisciplinary firms for some time to come - though I hope I'm wrong.

Steve, you mentioned that your site people aren't using Revit. Why not? Revit's site tools seem like they would be a great choice.

I've edited my initial post. Thanks for your comments, Peter! One never knows how things can be taken. "Lower functioning" was ONLY in regards to CAD. We all know that some of the brightest people out there can't use a computer to save their lives! I'm no alpha, anyway - I've sent too many e-mails talking about the attachment when none was sent. Doh! Pass the Duff, dear.

Frankly, I'm taking a hard look at how we train people on Revit. Revit produces good training materials, but they're big, and I need to get people into the software faster and using less paper... I need to get them aware of all of the tools somehow so that they can quickly refer to something that will tell them "I need to use the linework tool for this", or "I need to change the level head family". Or "I need to change my scope box so this grid line doesn't disappear in this view when I reduce my crop region". The real world of Revit.

[Steve_Stafford]

Steve, you mentioned that your site people aren't using Revit. Why not? Revit's site tools seem like they would be a great choice.

It's not that they aren't using it and others are. I am using it primarily for one project and have used a couple of other architectural staff to contribute. My comments about MEPS are theoretical but based on what I believe I know about our firms situation. I have been showing it to the various trades and a few that I expected to be most against it are actually impressed. Funny, but sometimes your allies in a quest turn out to be the folks you were most concerned about doing battle with. :shock:

I've been given a lot of rope with which to either hang myself or build a nice hammock. I plan to be swinging in the hammock :D

[PeterJ]

I've edited my initial post. Thanks for your comments, Peter! One never knows how things can be taken. "Lower functioning" was ONLY in regards to CAD. We all know that some of the brightest people out there can't use a computer to save their lives! I'm no alpha, anyway - I've sent too many e-mails talking about the attachment when none was sent. Doh! Pass the Duff, dear.

Good man!

Its interesting reading the feedback on all this and it reminds me of somethingn I had forgotten. I have two licenses here and my assistant used to look at jobs and decide this one is appropriate to Revit and this one is appropriate to whatever else, when I was trying to push him to use Revit for everything. He just could not get to grips enough with the concepts, though very computer literate, and would say 'this project is too small to be worth modelling in full' when my logic was 'do you need to draw a plan, section and elevation? Then it's appropriate to Revit.' The guy in question was not an architect and I think he though Revit was too much a design tool and not a documentation tool. I see it certainly as a documentation tool and possibly straddling the divide between design and documentation.

I don't know anything about the trainng side of things so it's interesting to read your comments on that, Wes. Maybe something like the much derided office assistants are what are needed, maybe an anthropomorphic drafting pen, instead of a paperclip. But ready to allow direct questioning at point of use, instead of requiring people to delve into a help file (or paper folder).

P

[Wes Macaulay]

I've come to the conclusion that in BNW terms, I'm a beta. Which means I know how to use reflexive pronouns properly, but I'm still never quite ready for release. Like most of my posts, ha!

It comes down to this: do you want to go 3D for construction documentation? Then, in terms of popular solutions, it's ArchiCAD or Revit. Otherwise, it's the CAD engine of your choice.

Some days I feel like I've become something of a Don Quixote flogging a solution to a problem a lot of people don't seem to realise they have. But having spent hours tinkering with the windmills of AutoCAD and Vectorworks et al., I've had enough. I just hope enough people also see what appears to be the light (but could the light be coming from San Rafael? Say it isn't so!) I'm obviously losing my mind, since the next time someone says "I can do that in LISP" when I demo Revit, I'm going to smack 'em!

[bclarch]

My take on the training issue. There is no magic wand. Some people will get it and some won't, just like hand drafting. Those of us who started out when hand drafting still ruled remember that there were people whose fingers positively flew while drafting. You didn't want to get too close for fear of being cut by a flying triangle. Then there were the ones who always took twice and long and still never produced a drawing without a ton of errors. Different talents lie in different directions and there is only so much you can do with the raw material that you are given.

Having said that, I do feel that a well organized training program is beneficial. I have not had to train anyone else in the office yet but anitcipate that I will be doing so soon. As a result I have been giving some thought to the issue. Here is how I intend to proceed. As I said this methodology is thoeretical at this point but should provide fuel for the fire.

Step one will be a discussion (away from the computer screen) outlining the basic concepts and thought processes behind Revit.

Step two will be a detailed walk-through the interface. The intent is to at least show the trainee what tools are available. The hope is that when they are confronted with a given situation they will at least remember that there was a tool somewhere that should apply to this situation. I have come to this conclusion based on the many times that there have been questions posted to this and other newsgroups by newbies that were answered by someone simply saying "Go to menu A and click on B...".
They will also be required to review the tips and tricks binder that I have been creating. Every time (OK, 85% of the time.) that I see a post regarding a problem and a solution at one of these forums I print it out and file it in a binder. I found that by following these newsgroups I knew where the landmines were (complex roofs, stairs, etc.) and I was better prepared to handle them when I eventually had to deal with them.

Step three will be to have them do as much online training as our schedule allows. ( Yes, I can hear you all laughing out there, "Spare time in an architectural office?" I said that this plan was theoretical. :wink: )

Step four will involve creating a very simple project based on a quick sketch I will give them. Probably of a very simple house.

Well, so much for theory. Who knows what reality will bring. My 2 cents.

[PeterJ]

It's possible that I will have a new person to train up soon. So I'm watching this thread avidly.

I'm assuming that as you work for a reseller, Wes, it would be inappropriate for you to post your materials, which is something of a pity.

In my case a second will be a drafting person so in theory I should be able to just give them the tool and leave them to play for a day or two then expect something from them, but I feel a more structured route is probably better.

So I am beginning to think it all through. Thought swill be published later.

P

[Wes Macaulay]

Yeah, I'm working the reseller market as part of my mission to get Revit happening in Vancouver... I wouldn't have gotten into this otherwise, believe me.

The training material we use is provided to resellers only (it's the only way they'll ever have a leg up on the users!), and I suppose I can't post it. However, I still think they suffer from unnecessary prolixity. I would like to work on something harder hitting for today's shorter attention spans!

[JamesVan]

We are starting a long-term investigation into the "right" BIM solution for our multi-disciplinary office. The choice is clear for me, but not so clear for our engineers. Of course, we haven't even completed a project in Revit yet, so the playing field is level right now.

At Revit's last Customer Advisory Meeting and discussions with PB, the development of specific 'plugs' into the RVT database seems to be the future of multi-disciplinary coordination. Yes, it would be a wonderful world if everyone used Revit and Buzzsaw and we lived happily ever after...but in reality every practicing professional will have their own preference and working environment. Even within one firm in remote offices, you may not want to Save to Central over the WAN. Revit NEEDS the ability to import/export specific groups of data from/for specific analytical programs.

I completely agree with the fact that there will be many people in every office that just won't grasp the idea of working on a building, not a drawing. Part of every implementation process must include a cultural transformation in addition to technical training. Show people the demo videos, encourage them to attend lectures about digital design and BIM concepts, and gather as much NG and white paper data as possible and make it easily accessible.

:D BTW, thanks to all the users in this NG for providing valuable information as I try to prove Revit's worthiness before we actually start using it!

[Allen Lacy]

James, I'm not sure if you caught this thread http://www.zoogdesign.com/forums/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=180&highlight=webcast or the video, but it might help your case with regard to other disciplines.

[JamesVan]

Yes, I've watched that video over and over again. In fact, I happened to wander by the building-in-progress on my way home from our Chicago office a couple of weeks ago! Looks great, but somehow I expected to see troops of robots crawling around the site, all linked to the digital building database...

:shock:

...but, anyway...

In my 'spare' time :lol: I have created my own website on our firm's WAN that is a compilation of documents, videos, articles and everything I've found so far on BIM and Revit. Unfortunately, our engineers are a "believe it when they see it" kind of people. When it comes down to the single database vs. "federated," they're on one side of the fence and the architects are on the other. It will be interesting how it plays out in our offices.

[trombe]

"I believe a cog in the successful use of Revit is a REAL understanding of how buildings are built."


The comments being expressed in this general forum site are interesting and really insightful, and it is excellent to see a forum relatively devoid of the kind of sniping usually present in Bulletin Boards et al.

I think you have noted a very salient point with your above sentence.
I do not know the varying professional backgrounds here, however, I agree that it is crucial to be able to "see" in 3D and 2D simultaneously.
We were taught at university to work in plan and section together all the time - in thought and on paper ( then).

To understand a building, I think you must "see it" in plan section, elevation and detail simultaneously , or at least be able to readily switch in and out of a mix of all these at any moment in time.
It is surely this ability, this need , which allows us to move from concept to sketch design and continue developing the construct throughout the process of working through CDs, and construction itself.

Being still part time on LT and self training on Revit ( sole practice), I am constantly amazed and delighted at how intuitive Revit actually seems to be.
From a design point of view, the power to be able to conceive and model in a few minutes and, in the various modes and check instant sections / elevations / terrain and perspective views is not so much "nice", as a big step forward for pure design thinking and testing.

For people who are software vendors, software Trainers, project managers maybe, the QS ? etc. , the need and or ability to be able to "see" parts and or larger parts and the whole of a building is not as important as for Architects, Designers, Graduates and Technicians.

For the Architect , the architecture Graduate this ability is crucial.
For the Technician, this ability is quite important and I would have thought , implicit.

I think that a lack of understanding of how things go together, how they relate to each other and to the whole - practically and conceptually, is partly an innate human power, and partly a learnt thing. The Teacher, can often be the difference or at least a significant influence.

As an ex Carpenter by trade of more than 14 years, and at least half of that self employed, now ready to sit registration as an Architect after a heavy university programme and 5 years self employed, I feel that Revit has an enormous amount to contribute to the development of my business.

For those who might be finding diiffuculty in learning Revit, I suspect it is possibly due to only a few factors. I suspect also that Steve Stafford and others are right on the button saying that some of the users have problems with other programs - what is their motivation ? , do they get enough sleep ? , are they stressed out at home ?, is their health or family OK ? is their pay **** ? what sort of person is the boss ? is the labour / staff, matched to the office dynamic ? personalities of others ? are they often out late at night / have a very full social life ? and maybe do not value their work contribution as much as they might , or find the employer does not value their input / contribution much, particularly with regard to simple courtesy, pat on the back, or movie tickets or a bottle of red after a major hand-in ?

Surely some of this must come down to "drive" and why they are doing the job at all. Happy people, who like what they are doing or at least like the people they are working with and for, are generally happy and productive.
Revit is very easy to use in the basics mode, but severely lacks decent written Help Sections and my local support is ****.

I find the programme superb and am happy to have made the choice to run with this when there are few users in NZ - certainly less than 50 , unless a large firm got into it recently and bought 40 seats.
A risk for the self employed , but one which I think is worth the investment in time and money even though the main rival to Revit is well established here and sole practitioners find it very hard to invest the cost up front - its as much a mental leap as a financial one - our market is smaller than in the US by god knows how many factors, and the number of sole practitioners is relatively very high.
You you probably guessed it, the next closest rival to Revit and its nearest competitor , is getting a bigger share at $3000 NZ+ $1000 for RenderWorks plug-in. Revit struggles to pass the cost test, but I suspect these people have not "seen" the bigger picture.

For anyone having trouble teaching others to grasp how Revit works, the user really needs to "see" what it is they are trying to draw. If they cannot do this and you do not care or have the time or drive to mentor them, you had probably better get other staff who can "see" .
They will find Revit intuitive and this will be productive for them and for you.

I apologize for the long posting here, and invite any other comments with interest. Thanks for reading so far.
regards
trombe
Wellington, NZ