ADT -> Revit ...Our Evaluation is .

[mjkaia]

What we have found in evaluating the Revit package is a bit discouraging. When importing an AutoCAD drawing the issues are not as profound and when importing Architectural Desktop drawings.

First, we have been using ADT for quite some time. Our firm has built up a database of almost 50gb of files since 1987. Many of these files are tenant improvement drawings for suites in mid and highrise office buildings. As tenants move in and out we have to update the drawings (architectural, as well as MEP) with renovation changes. These working drawings become living documents that span many years.

What I am finding is that when importing ADT drawings Revit imports the drawings fine. When I attempt to explode the drawing, Revit returns a "Can't Explode File" error message and no other explanation. I then exported the ADT drawing as an AutoCad 2004 file. This modifies the 3d ADT objects to simple AutoCAD elements.

Now Revit will explode some drawings but not others, and not all of the lines, walls, symbols show up.

I would think that although Revit is a different package than AutoCAD, Autodesk would have developed a drawings exchange utility that would allow for a better transfer of drawings, especially for those of us that have huge database archives of large office building type projects.

New projects are not an issue, it is the 20 or 30 building we currently have under contract on an ongoing basis. My dealer tells us to keep a copy of ADT to continue working on these projects. Not a viable option as it appears that a two software solution would be cumbersome and a PITA.

After being told by our dealer that ADT will be phased out in the near future, I am left with a quandry and a concern. Do we continue using ADT and continue the subscription path, or do we at some point move on to another CAD solution.

Obviously, personnel training is an issue with programs like ArchiCAD or Vectorworks. Revit just appears to be intuitive and easy to use. After just 2 days, I was able to create a full set of working drawings.

Are there any firms out there that do tenant improvement work on a continuing basis who have found a way to make Revit work for them with respect to an archive of ADT files?

On the edge and feeling a bit uneasy.

Mike

[Scott D Davis]

Mike,

When importing ADT drawings into Revit, you must use whatever means necessary to get all of the ADT objects out of the file, whether it be enablers, exploding, etc. The file must be a vanilla AutoCAD type file, just as if you were going to open it in plain AutoCAD. Then import into Revit, and everything should be fine.

[Wes Macaulay]

After being told by our dealer that ADT will be phased out in the near future, I am left with a quandry and a concern. Do we continue using ADT and continue the subscription path, or do we at some point move on to another CAD solution.Near future? Like maybe ten years! We have heard nothing about a phase out of ADT.

[PeterJ]

Take a look at exporting as a dxf file, these can also be imported to Revit but don't carry the same baggage and should not therefore require exploding.


After being told by our dealer that ADT will be phased out in the near future, I am left with a quandry and a concern. Do we continue using ADT and continue the subscription path, or do we at some point move on to another CAD solution.
That is not Autodesk's published line, they have many major clients with a alrge investment in ADT and show no sign of wishing to upset them. Sounds like your dealer was shooting from the hip.

[aaronrumple]

..should Revit get IFC in the rummored near future, importing ADT could be simplified.

[J. Grouchy]

We also heard in our training session from the dealer that ADT would be phased out eventually once BIM became the norm. I suppose that is a very vague statement, but mjkaia is not the only one to hear that. What we were told is that Revit is (or at least is a long way towards) what ADT was always intended to be, so why would they continue two parallel paths when they could devote all of their resources to just one?
Again, I honestly don't know AD's plans...just relaying what we heard as well. I really don't miss ADT. We had it, but almost never used the more advanced functions. It never was useful or easy for us like Revit is and I don't understand why AutoDesk would bother to develop a ship that people continue to jump. Maybe some of you more experienced or devoted ADT users could enlighten me.

[Danny Polkinhorn]

Mike,

You probably had the same transition issues when you moved from AutoCAD to ADT. You have 2d lines in AutoCAD that you need to make into walls doors and windows in ADT. You'll have the same process for Revit (currently).

The company I used to work for had the same dilemma. We did a lot of hospital work, and we had the same clients for 25 years. Tons of legacy data, Microstation, AutoCAD, now ADT. The reality was that the firm had to eat the cost of the transition of data from 2D to ADT. Because of this we strongly suggested to both ADT and Revit developers to come up with a translation tool. The reality of such a tool will probably always limit it functionality, and will never quite work right. They may rely on IFC as Aaron says, but that is certainly not ideal either. If you're able to create a set of working drawings in Revit in 2 days, I would consider that a great transition time. You will certainly gain that time back down the road as you work in Revit.

If you don't mind, forward the names of the resellers you're working with to julian.gonzalez@autodesk.com. They shouldn't be telling you that ADT is going away despite their love of Revit.

As for continuing to use ADT, there are some workflows where ADT is a better tool, especially if the company relies on third-party tools that are specific to the type of work they do. Many companies have made significant investments in Max or Viz, and ADT's integration is better there. You also have to consider that firms made investments in ADT before Revit was around, and have learned to use it properly and it works for them. These are the firms that will continue to buy ADT, and keep Autodesk developing it.

Hope that helps,

[mjkaia]

Actually taking when going back and grabbing an old AutoCAD drawing and bringing it into ADT 2004 is a very fast simple process. We just pick the walls (which are only lines in AutoCAD) and ADT has a utility that changes them into wall objects with a width and height and other attributes.

There is virtually no expenditure of time on our part, other than some modification as we go along. Is there something similar to this in REVIT?

We have over 60,000 drawing files on our server. To say that converting or redrawing these is an investment we nee dto make is probably a wee bit of an understatement. We would be commiting finacial suicide. As a small 9 person office, the amount of time and monetary investment would be excessive and not possible for us.

I really think that is Autodesk is serious about Revit and intends for the averange small and medium sized architectural firm to come aboard (and the architecture world is made up of majority of these sized firms) they will have to develop a simple, efficient, and accurate dwg import/export utility.

With that said, we also regularly receive files from our large retail clinents created in AutoCAD and ADT. Utilizing these files appears to be the same issue, unless created in Revit the conversion may not be very good. It just seems like an issue that is not minor, but nature that is being glossed over. If we were a firm designing houses or one of a kind buildings, sure no problem, out next project could be done on Revit with little or no heartburn.

I wonder what percentage of architectural firms large or small utilize database legacy drawings for continuing work? Seems to me that on a world wide basis these firms might be a significant part of the market.

Thanks all for your thoughts.

Mike

[Steve_Stafford]

I replied to this thread at RevitCity and copied it here...




My earlier reply was focused on exporting data because your initial commentary and questions seemed to be concerned about that primarily. It now seems your real concern is using legacy data in Revit.

From your posts it sounds like you hope to explode imported legacy data and continue to draft in 2D in Revit? What else can you hope to achieve with this exploded data?

There is no "Silver Bullet" conversion routine yet to turn ADT intelligent objects into Revit intelligent families. I'm not certain that it will ever be 100% possible, so many variables from one object creator to another. But if one were to exist it would be a great help.

As much as I'd like to think you could succeed with Revit, perhaps you will need to remain using ADT for the forseeable future.

If you do prefer Revit and are determined to succeed, perhaps you can start slowly by doing new work over the top of legacy data, modeling only the new work, some portions of existing as they touch or relate to the new and otherwise not altering the underlying dwg data, just hiding what you don't want to see because of the alteration that is required.

Use time and each project to your advantage and slowly build the overall building in Revit. Get "buyin" from your clients too by "pitching" the data mining possibilities from a well developed bldg model, this is a deep well if only you can get some "mining" equipment to the "site".

Linking dwg files for use as an underlay is the primary relationship of dwg to Revit projects. Revit was never intended as a replacement drafting tool for 2D Autocad or to simply continue editing the 2D linework. 2D drawings are meant to be a byproduct of the design process...(all marketing "foo" you've heard before...)

Good Luck!

[gravelin]

Maybe the question is not to know if ADT will die or not.
But : in five (or ten) years and in the future, if you are in competition, between ADT or REVIT, wich will more help you to win ?
Of course the tools doesn't do all, but I think that Revit will be the better allied.

[mlgatzke]

Mike,

I would bet that the problem you are running into is related to the AEC objects in ADT. To remedy this, I would recommend using AECOBJEXPLODE (AEC Object Explode) on the entire drawing before using saveas. No export to AutoCAD is necessary. This commend converts any AEC object (like MultiView Blocks) into regular AutoCAD blocks so that everything in the drawing is normal AutoCAD objects.

This should solve your dilemma.

Also, I would say, use ADT for your existing structures if the conversion is too difficult and use Revit on the new projects as they arise.

[sbrown]

There is a bigger issue here, even if you could explode your files you wouldn't like the result in Revit. It is HIGHLY discouraged to explode dwgs in revit. They will turn into revit model lines, not walls,doors, and windows, etc. your files will be almost useless. Revit is not made to be used as a 2d drafting tool and so each line is "smart" every end point gets associated with other endpoints and when you go to move a line it will move other lines with it.

I would not recommend trying to take your old plans and use them as "working" plans in revit. If the projects are ongoing, I would take the time to recreate the buildings in revit. In the long run you will have a real data base to work from and can use phases etc.

Bottom line - Dont explode entire floor plans in revit. I've had issues with performance with just exploded details.

[MikeJarosz]

C'mon guys.... Despite what you might wish would happen, does anyone out there believe that ACAD will last forever? Henry Ford thought his beloved Model T would last forever, and he was determined to make it so. It took Alfred Sloan to outmanoever him in the marketplace. Ford Motors would have never changed if it hadn't found itself competing against a superior GM product (at the time -- I admit times have cought up with GM too).

Those of you who have never seen a CAD system you were using for years die, let me tell you, no matter what you hope, it happens. Acad may not desert you, but new users, especially the next generation, will. I spent 12 years on a system vastly superior to Acad, only to see it disappear. I found myself competing with new hires who knew ACAD better than I did, despite all my experience. The firm just wrote off all the accumulated computer files from the old system. I had to adapt, and I did.

Already Form Z, Rhino, Maya and others are the tools of choice for the college set. The designs they want to do cant't be done easily in ACAD. Imagine doing Gehry forms in Acad! In our office, designers on some projects use Acad only as a translator among various systems, not as a primary tool. And Revit is making inroads in design and construction documents. OK, so Revit may not be the one to pull the knockout punch on AC, but one day someone will. And I think Autodesk knows this. Their response so far has been like Ford's: the Model A. But how long can they torture the code to keep such antiquated features as solids (4 points max, entered backwards) relevant? But Revit is their hedge. $133 mil is an expensive insurance policy. They have to make Revit work or face the stockholders.

And what about the construction industry? Aleady clients and contractors are telling us what sofeware to use! But, that is another story.....

[Danny Polkinhorn]

Actually taking when going back and grabbing an old AutoCAD drawing and bringing it into ADT 2004 is a very fast simple process. We just pick the walls (which are only lines in AutoCAD) and ADT has a utility that changes them into wall objects with a width and height and other attributes.
This has really only been possible with ADT2004. There were errors with using this process in earlier versions. The walls would be slightly off orthogonally and wouldn't clean up. If you aren't having this issue, great. Also, using the pick lines process of creating walls still requires you to choose the line you want to convert. It is easier than drawing from scratch, but not much easier than tracing.


We have over 60,000 drawing files on our server. To say that converting or redrawing these is an investment we nee dto make is probably a wee bit of an understatement. We would be commiting finacial suicide. As a small 9 person office, the amount of time and monetary investment would be excessive and not possible for us.
I would agree. I merely mentioned it because in my experience, that's what we had to do. Converting from lines was not an option, and we had to re-draw. Fortunately, hospitals only renovate portions of a building at a time, so we would just redraw the parts that we were changing. Using smart objects made up for the lost time versus using lines for walls. Eventually the whole building will have been redrawn.


I really think that is Autodesk is serious about Revit and intends for the averange small and medium sized architectural firm to come aboard (and the architecture world is made up of majority of these sized firms) they will have to develop a simple, efficient, and accurate dwg import/export utility.

With that said, we also regularly receive files from our large retail clinents created in AutoCAD and ADT. Utilizing these files appears to be the same issue, unless created in Revit the conversion may not be very good. It just seems like an issue that is not minor, but nature that is being glossed over. If we were a firm designing houses or one of a kind buildings, sure no problem, out next project could be done on Revit with little or no heartburn.
As Steve said, as much as it pains us to say it, you're probably better off sticking with ADT until a conversion tool exists that doesn't make you "commit financial suicide".


I wonder what percentage of architectural firms large or small utilize database legacy drawings for continuing work? Seems to me that on a world wide basis these firms might be a significant part of the market.
Good question, and it's probably the reason those people stick with their Model T's and ADTs.

[hand471037]

As Mike points out, Revit is Autodesk's hedge bet' in the construction industry.

But what many here might not know is the history, and the possible (well, my thinking as to the) real reason as to why Revit was bought out so quickly, and it's getting pushed so hard.

If you look back over ten years at the Mechanical & Manufacturing Industry, their tools were about the same as everyone else's: Autocad, or some other 2D cad system. Sure, there were things like Catia, but for most shops it was more or less 2D. Then came along PTC technologies, who made one of the first viable parametric 3D CAD package for Mechanical Engineers and Manufactures called Pro-Engineer. It did a lot of 'Revit-like things', like figuring stuff out for them (like designing a mold for a cast part), automating drawings from a model, etc. It was pretty impressive for the time, and has grown into a very capable program.

Now, Autodesk only had Mechanical Desktop & plain old Autocad to compete with this new kind of tool. Their marketing tried to convince people that they didn't need that stuff from PTC or that it wouldn't really work. But lots of people jumped over to 3D parametric CAD, because it had real value and was worth the pain of the switch, and Autodesk lost so much marketshare that it had to write a competing program from scratch to even get back into the game. So Autodesk spent years and millions making Inventor, and now only has a part of a market I think it enjoyed a much larger piece of. Also Autodesk no longer *owns* the *de facto standard* modeling format for Mechanical Engineers.

OK, so, let's look at a few years ago. Everyone in the Construction Industry uses AutoCAD, and some use ADT, and a few use other packages that aren't as widespread for various reasons. Lots bought ADT, never really used it as it was intended, and haven't really done much with it. It's a bit of a quagmire. Hard and harder to sell upgrades to people that don't want them, aren't gonna use the new stuff anyways, or see the cost being worth it. The other systems might be a little better, but there isn't a huge reason to go through the pain of switching.

Then along comes something that's pretty kick-***, even tho it's very young and isn't fully capable yet. AND IT'S MADE BY (some of) THE SAME PROGRAMING TEAM THAT MADE Pro-E. So Autodesk gets nervous, and as soon as Revit looks like it's going to be a viable product (around 4.5) they show up with $133 million and buy it out. That' s CHEAP in comparison to how they got there *** handed to them by PTC years ago, and if Autodesk's format becomes the future BIM standard, all the better too.

So, we've got Autocad for those that just want to Draw, ADT for those that want to automate things within Autocad and for the truly devoted do a little bit of BIM, and Revit for BIM. Just as in the Mechanical world there are still people happy as can be with Autocad, there will be future Architects who are happy with plain 2D. But Revit has real, immediate value for those that can swallow the pain of switching, and longer-term value then sticking with 2D ACAD or 2 'and a half, and sometimes' 3D ADT I feel. More Principals are seeing this, and seeing the impact the Revit could have on their bottom line (when they talk to other heads of firms that have made the jump) and starting to look into Revit...

But now Autodesk are stuck in a different, New problem, that they didn't have with Inventor vs. Pro-E. Namely that they told everyone just two years ago that they didn't need Revit, and that ADT would be able to do everything eventually, and that they should place their bets on ADT. Firms, even 'small' 20-person firms, spent up to five figures implementing ADT. that's a bitter hard pill to swallow, that now Autodesk is saying that, whoops, hey, wait, um, Revit really is the future, sorry about that all. Autodesk is really stuck now, for they want people to move to Revit, for it's better for them long-term if they do, without screwing over and ******* off all the current customers that bought into ADT. Also, Revit isn't (yet, it's almost there) up to the task for certain firms, like ones that need an API, or structural tools, or a HVAC add-on, so it's not like they can just say that everyone should use Revit, either. It's a complex situation, to say the least.

And yeah, the students like Form-Z. But a student I work with (now, new job, no longer at the reseller) who used to be very pro-From-Z can't imagine working with anything else then Revit, and she's only doing design work- not CD's. :)

BTW love the new spellchecker ;-)

Also, everything of the above it my own opnion, I'm not working for a Reseller anymore, and I'm never been privvy to special information or something anyways. So don't take this as gospel, and flame me all you want.

[Martin P]

I would not recommend trying to take your old plans and use them as "working" plans in revit. If the projects are ongoing, I would take the time to recreate the buildings in revit. In the long run you will have a real data base to work from and can use phases etc.

Bottom line - Dont explode entire floor plans in revit. I've had issues with performance with just exploded details.

Good advice Scott, exploding DWG files is not to be recommended. Use a linked DWG file and edit it in autocad, or keep using ADT to finish these projects. It will cause you less problems and stress I am sure.

[Wes Macaulay]

Yeah, Jeffrey I think you're close to the truth of the matter.

Working for a reseller I can more than ever affirm that ADT has not really been a success, not if you're looking to design and document with a virtual building. Our ADT clients continue to suffer for various reasons and we wonder how long it will be before ADT users look at Revit and decide to go 3D whole hog.

The purchase of Revit was no doubt a strategic move by Autodesk, a means to buy their way into the market that ArchiCAD and Allplan currently own in many parts of the world.

One product I know little about and would like to know more is Nemetschek's Allplan. An employee of a client with whom I'm working used back in her home country of Germany and says it's a great program, though it's not single-file based like Revit, and as such is probably more like ADT with layers and such you have to turn off and on.

[aaronrumple]

Working for a reseller I can more than ever affirm that ADT has not really been a success, not if you're looking to design and document with a virtual building. Our ADT clients continue to suffer for various reasons and we wonder how long it will be before ADT users look at Revit and decide to 3D whole hog.

Aye, There's the rub.
From Autodesk's point of view ADT has been a huge success. It is outselling Revit by leaps and bounds.

From the architect's prespective, ADT hasn't proved to streamline work flow and return the same porfits and revenue as ADSK is seeing.