ACA vs Revit

[dbaldacchino]

haha thanks guys, brain-freeze

[pheadpro]

I must take issue with some of your characterization concerning those ACA users and BIM. I am a department representative on our company CAD Standard Committee; I have 20 years of experience in Architecture and have used every version of AutoCAD since 2.5 to my current use of AutoDesk Architecture 2009. Our CAD Manager is a member of the National BIM standards committee this year and what we have noticed is that no one has a good practical application definition of BIM. So far, the email discussions we have received consist of various professionals at different levels and in different disciplines arguing about the definition of BIM. Some want to float around up in the clouds making lovely fluffy statements about how BIM will 'redefine the industry' and 'the paradigm shift of design'... blah blah.. While others are wringing their hands about convincing more people to embrace BIM. A few have actually tried to dissect BIM and expound on its meaning.
However, Not One has broached the subject of the real world Nuts-N-Bolts application of how do you take all the skill sets in AutoCAD other any other design package that have been developed over years & years of work, as well as the customizations in menus, blocks, styles, & office standards, and transition all of this into an entirely different style of design interface (without the entire company ending up in a padded cell).
I have seen several books over the years like “Microstation for AutoCAD Users” and similar tutorials. In my exploration of Revit up to this point (and I have been learning it for about 2 years now on my own), I have not seen much solid information in the configuration help that bridges the gap between AutoCAD and Revit. It seems that no one wants to accept the challenge of telling all the AutoCAD users, ‘this is how you take your configs in AutoCAD and here is where to find the same stuff in Revit’. Until someone steps up with this kind of information, there will be a lot of skeptical users out here that will resist Revit.
The other thing that the Revit-vangislist need to do, is to expand the presentation of Revit to include engineers and the subjects that mean things to them. Revit and Building Information Modeling is great, but without the Civil engineers backing the effort up, it will only go so far. They really don’t care how wonderful the building management information is; they want to know can that same power be applied to land development. Industrial, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing and all other types of engineers need to be included as well. They will want base line real world data to prove the benefit of Revit and BIM. They will require case studies that detail the application of this data that they can analyze and question. It will require some real proof to win over this group, but if you want to compress the time frame of adoption, get the engineers onboard.

[cphubb]

I must take issue with some of your characterization concerning those ACA users and BIM. I am a department representative on our company CAD Standard Committee; I have 20 years of experience in Architecture and have used every version of AutoCAD since 2.5 to my current use of AutoDesk Architecture 2009. Our CAD Manager is a member of the National BIM standards committee this year and what we have noticed is that no one has a good practical application definition of BIM. So far, the email discussions we have received consist of various professionals at different levels and in different disciplines arguing about the definition of BIM. Some want to float around up in the clouds making lovely fluffy statements about how BIM will 'redefine the industry' and 'the paradigm shift of design'... blah blah.. While others are wringing their hands about convincing more people to embrace BIM. A few have actually tried to dissect BIM and expound on its meaning.
However, Not One has broached the subject of the real world Nuts-N-Bolts application of how do you take all the skill sets in AutoCAD other any other design package that have been developed over years & years of work, as well as the customizations in menus, blocks, styles, & office standards, and transition all of this into an entirely different style of design interface (without the entire company ending up in a padded cell).
I have seen several books over the years like “Microstation for AutoCAD Users” and similar tutorials. In my exploration of Revit up to this point (and I have been learning it for about 2 years now on my own), I have not seen much solid information in the configuration help that bridges the gap between AutoCAD and Revit. It seems that no one wants to accept the challenge of telling all the AutoCAD users, ‘this is how you take your configs in AutoCAD and here is where to find the same stuff in Revit’. Until someone steps up with this kind of information, there will be a lot of skeptical users out here that will resist Revit.
The other thing that the Revit-vangislist need to do, is to expand the presentation of Revit to include engineers and the subjects that mean things to them. Revit and Building Information Modeling is great, but without the Civil engineers backing the effort up, it will only go so far. They really don’t care how wonderful the building management information is; they want to know can that same power be applied to land development. Industrial, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing and all other types of engineers need to be included as well. They will want base line real world data to prove the benefit of Revit and BIM. They will require case studies that detail the application of this data that they can analyze and question. It will require some real proof to win over this group, but if you want to compress the time frame of adoption, get the engineers onboard.

Again I want to point out everyone is missing the point. BIM can be done with Autocad, it is just more difficult.

The other thing that the Revit-vangislist need to do, is to expand the presentation of Revit to include engineers and the subjects that mean things to them

Do you think this is not happening? We are using multiple consultants in BIM MEP, sructural and civil. Not all of them use Revit, but all understand BIM.

They will want base line real world data to prove the benefit of Revit and BIM. They will require case studies that detail the application of this data that they can analyze and question.

There is quite a bit of this already. Most engineers are ready to start using BIM if for no other reason than their architect required it.

I just want to reiterate that this kind of argument does disservice to the whole concept of BIM and shows how we get caught up in arguments that make no sense. This is not about Revit or Autocad or Microstaton or ACA. It is about a fundimental change in the way buildings will be designed and constructed. People can embrace that and move forward or stand stubbornly and become an anachronism

[pheadpro]

Hi cphubb,

I got carried away with my rant before reading your post. You make very good arguements for the broader subject of BIM as a process not a specific tool.
Thank you for raising the level of the discussion. You are correct that this is not an AutoCAD vs Microstation issue or any other program flavor. It is about taking what we do in design and moving it forward to a much more useful form.
The issue of getting engineers onboard does have some progress; you are again correct that there are many pursuing this goal. I am actually an architect in an engineering company (I'm doing my best to corrupt them, hee, hee ). We are using Civil 3D, AutoCAD Architecture, and CADWorx. We are very interested and involved in helping to promote, define, and learn what BIM means and how to 'do it' so to speak.
Thanks for shining the light on this discussion. I hope to learn more from you as we continue.

[misterarvin]

I have only been using Revit for a couple of weeks (in a Drafting class for college) but I find it to be very user friendly.

If your CAD literate, then i believe Revit is your friend!

I'm new in the Autodesk world too, and I enjoy this program.

goodluck!

[Heng562]

I'm currently using Revit and I'm learning alot of new functions that [simplify] the building process.

[Rob_Miller]

I'm the CAD Manager for a small Engineering firm and have faced the difficulties of dealing with Architects that are using Revit. What makes it so frustrating is that Autodesk hasn't put out a MEP solution that is even remotely viable. So we are faced with the task of moving forward with AutoCAD MEP (which, if used correctly can be a much more powerful tool than Revit MEP) while trying to extract information out of a Revit model.

I personally feel that the whole Revit "Rah-Rah" could be detrimental to the AEC industry ... instead we should be placing our thumbs on the necks of Autodesk, Bentley, and Graphicsoft to start to better talk with each other or adhere to the IFC guidelines. Most of our project headaches have been spawned from the exporting process from Revit.

Having seen ACA used to a level above just taking advantage of the 2D walls, I can assure you that ACA is every bit of BIM as Revit. Revit builds the model a little easier, but can't touch the flexibility of ACA. All and all, I believe we could have a very powerful tool if Autodesk would ever decide to do this whole software debate right ... combine the ease of use of Revit for design build with power of the AutoCAD platform.

I know that many would be excited about the thought of one great tool over that of two incomplete tools ... but the realities are that it would be easier to pull ACA and ACM up to the level of ARA and ARM.

Also, our firm has been fed the line of using Revit because our current projects are being done in Revit. But the fact is that an Engineering firm needs to be able to be more flexible than an Architectural firm. It's not uncommon for us to have jobs being worked on in Microstation, AutoCAD, Revit, and ArchiCAD. Revit doesn't solve the compatibility issue with the other possible BIM software.

[cphubb]

I'll have to disagree with a couple of points. First Revit MEP is usable and is being used effectively by a number of firms large and small. Yes it has a way to go to catch ACAD MEP but the current version is useable.

Second, ACA is light years behind ACAD MEP in terms of data storage and interoperability. The amount of work to get ACA where Revit is now is huge not to mention the whole Object Enabler nightmare and the fact that ACA is still stuck in CAD and therefore will not move forward as a unified model.

I agree that all consultants (structural MEP etc) will need to be more flexible than architects and will have to use the platform that their clients are using. I also argee that interoperability across multiple plaftorms is critical to BIM succeeding. However tyring to make AutoDesk and Bentley listen is like talking to a 2 year old. Not much love there.

[Rob_Miller]

I'll have to disagree with a couple of points. First Revit MEP is usable and is being used effectively by a number of firms large and small. Yes it has a way to go to catch ACAD MEP but the current version is useable.

Second, ACA is light years behind ACAD MEP in terms of data storage and interoperability. The amount of work to get ACA where Revit is now is huge not to mention the whole Object Enabler nightmare and the fact that ACA is still stuck in CAD and therefore will not move forward as a unified model.

I agree that all consultants (structural MEP etc) will need to be more flexible than architects and will have to use the platform that their clients are using. I also argee that interoperability across multiple plaftorms is critical to BIM succeeding. However trying to make AutoDesk and Bentley listen is like talking to a 2 year old. Not much love there.

Sure there are MEP firms that are using Revit MEP, but how many of them are relying on AutoCAD or AutoCAD MEP to handle certain key functions of their deliverable? Revit MEP as a two year old program has too many holes in it right now to be able to not also use one or two other programs to complete a whole MEP job. The program is usable, but it's not viable from the stand point that it can't be used for some basic functions of a job (already been mentioned about how conduit isn't even an option in Revit). Even Autodesk recognizes the deficiencies of Revit when it comes to creating construction documents.

I still believe that ACA is closer to ARA than ARA is to ACA in capabilities. Revit is a Mac, while AutoCAD is a PC. Some don't like Revit because it's not flexible enough, while others dislike AutoCAD because it's too flexible. I just hope Autodesk understands that both can be right and will work on making them talk to each other.

Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, don't Object Enablers only come into play if you are trying to open an ACA drawing and you don't have a vertical package? If so, a Revit file would face the same issue for a user without Revit (I don't believe there is a viewer for Revit files).

Data storage in ACA is really no different than AutoCAD MEP ... property data sets can be applied to any type of object. Is that a capability in Revit? Once a property set has been defined and applied to an object, as long as you take the time to learn how they work it not too difficult to pull information to schedule.

As far as Bentley and Autodesk goes ... our money is what they both are looking to earn. In the end they can only succeed as long as we continue to purchase and use their software. Effectively they work for us ... plus they have begun to talk with each other more than in the past. I believe the European market has it right, in so much that they are pushing the IFC format. It's time for us in the States to do the same, instead of getting caught up in the software debate as BIM is a concept not a software.

Hopefully, I don't come across wrong ... cheers.

[mitch.cornelius]

Maybe I'll chime in.

Sure there are MEP firms that are using Revit MEP, but how many of them are relying on AutoCAD or AutoCAD MEP to handle certain key functions of their deliverable? Revit MEP as a two year old program has too many holes in it right now to be able to not also use one or two other programs to complete a whole MEP job. The program is usable, but it's not viable from the stand point that it can't be used for some basic functions of a job (already been mentioned about how conduit isn't even an option in Revit). Even Autodesk recognizes the deficiencies of Revit when it comes to creating construction documents.

I do see several companies working on projects in RME from start to finish and any architects or engineers that I have spoken with about Revit agree that Construction Documentation is where Revit really shines.

I still believe that ACA is closer to ARA than ARA is to ACA in capabilities. Revit is a Mac, while AutoCAD is a PC. Some don't like Revit because it's not flexible enough, while others dislike AutoCAD because it's too flexible. I just hope Autodesk understands that both can be right and will work on making them talk to each other.

Agreed. The interoperability thing kills me...how can we expect Bentley and Autodesk and ArchiCAD to work together if their own programs don't really work with themselves?

Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, don't Object Enablers only come into play if you are trying to open an ACA drawing and you don't have a vertical package? If so, a Revit file would face the same issue for a user without Revit (I don't believe there is a viewer for Revit files).

Object enablers are huge for working in other software packages besides AutoCAD. Any program that is trying to open a .dwg file from another program is going to require object enablers for it to work properly. The biggest issue for us is in NavisWorks.

There is a viewer for Revit (kind of). Just install Revit and wait for the 30 day trial to run out, it becomes a viewer.

Data storage in ACA is really no different than AutoCAD MEP ... property data sets can be applied to any type of object. Is that a capability in Revit? Once a property set has been defined and applied to an object, as long as you take the time to learn how they work it not too difficult to pull information to schedule.

The extraction of that information is where Revit works the best. The database export from Revit allows for a lot of incredible functionality.

...instead of getting caught up in the software debate as BIM is a concept not a software

Amen.