Revit Architecture Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Revit Architecture Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Revit Architecture topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Modular product

10 REPLIES 10
Reply
Message 1 of 11
Anonymous
289 Views, 10 Replies

Modular product

I am very interested in moving from ADT to Revit. I only use AutoCAD of ADT,
etc same old story.

It appeaers to me though, that there are several posts requiring modular
options for Revit, i.e. inclusion of Structure or Systems, or both, with
Building - or vice -versa.

Autodesk has made teh decision of not offering this, insisting that users
purchase additional copies of the software, duplicating I would guess 70% of
what they are buying, assuming 30% of each product is the code for that
particular discipline.

Will Autodesk consider meeting customers requirements over their
shareholders ?

I have been a continuous user of Autodesk products for nearly 20 years now,
and will continue to do so, however the critic in me would answer my above
question - No. They still get my money....

Regards

Tiss
10 REPLIES 10
Message 2 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Tiss,

What is your question about Revit?

If it is why are there three versions of the Revit software, then I can offer some insight and clarity? If you are just airing your concern over Autodesk revenue stream and the requirement of architects to invest in three separate software solutions to design buildings and prepare their construction documents, then I can shed some light on that topic as well?

Let us know what's on your mind.

Mel Persin, AIA
Message 3 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

melarch wrote:
> Tiss,
>
> What is your question about Revit?
>
> If it is why are there three versions of the Revit software, then I can offer some insight and clarity? If you are just airing your concern over Autodesk revenue stream and the requirement of architects to invest in three separate software solutions to design buildings and prepare their construction documents, then I can shed some light on that topic as well?
>
> Let us know what's on your mind.
>
> Mel Persin, AIA
I think his complaint is justified. If you want to buy the complete
Revit package you have to repurchase the same base program 3 times and
pay 3 complete subscriptions, even if you are only one person. It is not
the way most CAD companies market their products. Have a look at
Vectorworks to see how it should be done. I think the question is: Why
does Autodesk need to do this?
Message 4 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Simply to generate more money on subscription fees. If you need all three
of them, then you will have to pay $15,000 +/- and a yearly $2,085.00
subscription fee; but at least you get Autocad for free ($4,000.00) if you
get the Revit Building series.

Also if you purchase Revit Buiding and want to change to Structures or
Systems, they charge a $500.00 fee just to change over.

They have always done this. Just take a look at AutoCAD and see what they
did with that product.
They have the base AutoCAD LT, AutoCAD, ADT, ABS, MDT, LDT and they should
have had a SDT (structural desktop); but they never created that one for
some strange reason.

--
From;
Edward Borg
Precision Drafting LLC
Http://Precisiondraftingllc.com

"J F" wrote in message
news:5362647@discussion.autodesk.com...
melarch wrote:

I think his complaint is justified. If you want to buy the complete
Revit package you have to repurchase the same base program 3 times and
pay 3 complete subscriptions, even if you are only one person. It is not
the way most CAD companies market their products. Have a look at
Vectorworks to see how it should be done. I think the question is: Why
does Autodesk need to do this?
Message 5 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

My question is, assuming say 70% of the base code of Revit Building is in
Revit Structure and Revit Systems, and the remaining 30% code is the actual
code doing the work of that actual product, i.e. Architecture, Structural or
M&E, then if I need all three products, why do I have to buy the same 70% of
code 3 times ?

Why does Autodesk not offer their customer the option of buying the modular
30% of code to add to their base product.

This would be in the interest of the users, as has been expressed in these
discussion forums.

Answer - because its not in the share holders interests.

Please dont get me wrong, I am saving to move from ADT to Revit, it looks a
really good product, but I pratice both Architecture and Structural
Engineering and am really disappointed that Autodesk continually put their
shareholders before their customers. Without customers, they would have no
need for share holders.

True, Autodesk have given their customers a new product, which looks to have
a promising future, but boy are we having to pay for it.....




wrote in message news:5362518@discussion.autodesk.com...
Tiss,

What is your question about Revit?

If it is why are there three versions of the Revit software, then I can
offer some insight and clarity? If you are just airing your concern over
Autodesk revenue stream and the requirement of architects to invest in three
separate software solutions to design buildings and prepare their
construction documents, then I can shed some light on that topic as well?

Let us know what's on your mind.

Mel Persin, AIA
Message 6 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

If you are an architect who designs houses, you should be able to get by on
Revit building. If you are an architect who designs commercial buildings,
you should still use Revit Building and hire structural and mechanical
engineers each with their own Revit programs. I don't understand why you
would need three variations of Revit. I know one licensed architect with a
structural PE. I know hundreds who stick with their chosen career.

Arthur
===================================================

"Tiss" wrote in message
news:5363328@discussion.autodesk.com...
My question is, assuming say 70% of the base code of Revit Building is in
Revit Structure and Revit Systems, and the remaining 30% code is the actual
code doing the work of that actual product, i.e. Architecture, Structural or
M&E, then if I need all three products, why do I have to buy the same 70% of
code 3 times ?

Why does Autodesk not offer their customer the option of buying the modular
30% of code to add to their base product.

This would be in the interest of the users, as has been expressed in these
discussion forums.

Answer - because its not in the share holders interests.

Please dont get me wrong, I am saving to move from ADT to Revit, it looks a
really good product, but I pratice both Architecture and Structural
Engineering and am really disappointed that Autodesk continually put their
shareholders before their customers. Without customers, they would have no
need for share holders.

True, Autodesk have given their customers a new product, which looks to have
a promising future, but boy are we having to pay for it.....




wrote in message news:5362518@discussion.autodesk.com...
Tiss,

What is your question about Revit?

If it is why are there three versions of the Revit software, then I can
offer some insight and clarity? If you are just airing your concern over
Autodesk revenue stream and the requirement of architects to invest in three
separate software solutions to design buildings and prepare their
construction documents, then I can shed some light on that topic as well?

Let us know what's on your mind.

Mel Persin, AIA
Message 7 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Arthur MacLeod wrote:
> If you are an architect who designs houses, you should be able to get by on
> Revit building. If you are an architect who designs commercial buildings,
> you should still use Revit Building and hire structural and mechanical
> engineers each with their own Revit programs. I don't understand why you
> would need three variations of Revit. I know one licensed architect with a
> structural PE. I know hundreds who stick with their chosen career.
>
> Arthur
> ===================================================

What if you want to do more than "get by" with Revit? Because you do
not see a need for something does not mean that there is no need. It
just means that you do not see it. There are many designers who are
neither engineer nor architect. I wouldn't assume that only licensed
professionals use Revit.
Message 8 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

As a structural engineer, I will not speak to the Revit mechanical systems.
For those who are architects or designers, the Revit Building has everything
you need. You can make a complete model of a building. Revit Structures has
the same engine but does not have all the architectural families. It has
enough of the core program to model architectural systems useful to
structural engineering. It does have specialized structural families that
are meant to communicate with structural analyses programs. These programs
require an engineering analytical education that architects and designers
are not expected to get. So if you want the full benefit of Revit Structure
you would also buy an expensive structural analysis program and do the
necessary academic work to become competent in its use. You would become a
jack of all trades. This just does not comport with me as the way most AE
firms are organized in a world run on specialization.

If you think you are short changed, do you plan on buying a structural
analysis program? If you do what are your qualifications to understand
matrix analysis? If you don't plan on integrating structural analysis, why
bother to model these special structural elements? I assume the Revit
Mechanical variation also has an esoteric capability that goes beyond the
realm of architectural design.

I get the impression that Autodesk has designed their variations on Revit so
that each package fills an architectural, structural, or mechanical seat
common to most A&E firms. I think you are asking Autodesk to fill an
uncommon need.

Perhaps you are interested in structural libraries for detailing reasons?
You might be able to download and use those with Revit Building. I'm not
sure as I only use the structural package.

One of my pet peeves for the longest time has been the lack of a structural
CAD package until Revit Structure arrived. It's what I have been looking
for. I encourage Autodesk to keep on improving its utility. I don't use or
care about the other variations.

Arthur
===================================================

"J F" wrote in message
news:5363675@discussion.autodesk.com...
Arthur MacLeod wrote:
> If you are an architect who designs houses, you should be able to get by
> on
> Revit building. If you are an architect who designs commercial buildings,
> you should still use Revit Building and hire structural and mechanical
> engineers each with their own Revit programs. I don't understand why you
> would need three variations of Revit. I know one licensed architect with a
> structural PE. I know hundreds who stick with their chosen career.
>
> Arthur
> ===================================================

What if you want to do more than "get by" with Revit? Because you do
not see a need for something does not mean that there is no need. It
just means that you do not see it. There are many designers who are
neither engineer nor architect. I wouldn't assume that only licensed
professionals use Revit.
Message 9 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

You assume that all the people using Revit are somehow involved with "AE
Firms". This is not the case. There are many people using Revit in
residential design. A single person may design the building and the
structure. Engineers are often, but not always involved. Quite often the
building designer must deal with drafting the structural elements (many
engineers are not CAD literate). Responsibilities are not always so cut
and dried as they might be in a large AE firm.

Arthur MacLeod wrote:
> As a structural engineer, I will not speak to the Revit mechanical systems.
> For those who are architects or designers, the Revit Building has everything
> you need. You can make a complete model of a building. Revit Structures has
> the same engine but does not have all the architectural families. It has
> enough of the core program to model architectural systems useful to
> structural engineering. It does have specialized structural families that
> are meant to communicate with structural analyses programs. These programs
> require an engineering analytical education that architects and designers
> are not expected to get. So if you want the full benefit of Revit Structure
> you would also buy an expensive structural analysis program and do the
> necessary academic work to become competent in its use. You would become a
> jack of all trades. This just does not comport with me as the way most AE
> firms are organized in a world run on specialization.
>
> If you think you are short changed, do you plan on buying a structural
> analysis program? If you do what are your qualifications to understand
> matrix analysis? If you don't plan on integrating structural analysis, why
> bother to model these special structural elements? I assume the Revit
> Mechanical variation also has an esoteric capability that goes beyond the
> realm of architectural design.
>
> I get the impression that Autodesk has designed their variations on Revit so
> that each package fills an architectural, structural, or mechanical seat
> common to most A&E firms. I think you are asking Autodesk to fill an
> uncommon need.
>
> Perhaps you are interested in structural libraries for detailing reasons?
> You might be able to download and use those with Revit Building. I'm not
> sure as I only use the structural package.
>
> One of my pet peeves for the longest time has been the lack of a structural
> CAD package until Revit Structure arrived. It's what I have been looking
> for. I encourage Autodesk to keep on improving its utility. I don't use or
> care about the other variations.
>
> Arthur
> ===================================================
>
> "J F" wrote in message
> news:5363675@discussion.autodesk.com...
> Arthur MacLeod wrote:
>> If you are an architect who designs houses, you should be able to get by
>> on
>> Revit building. If you are an architect who designs commercial buildings,
>> you should still use Revit Building and hire structural and mechanical
>> engineers each with their own Revit programs. I don't understand why you
>> would need three variations of Revit. I know one licensed architect with a
>> structural PE. I know hundreds who stick with their chosen career.
>>
>> Arthur
>> ===================================================
>
> What if you want to do more than "get by" with Revit? Because you do
> not see a need for something does not mean that there is no need. It
> just means that you do not see it. There are many designers who are
> neither engineer nor architect. I wouldn't assume that only licensed
> professionals use Revit.
Message 10 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

This is very true. You can hire a structural engineer just to calculate and
stamp the drawings for you. You don't need them to model the structural wood
framing for your residential house.

I do it all the time for my steel stair work. In most cases the Architect
nor the Engineer of record, want to be responsible for the stair design.
They end up passing that down to the builder. Unfortunately for me, neither
program can model, engineer and detail complex steel stairs (even simple
steel pan stairs) to a high level of detail. They only provide stairs at a
macro level and you have to use detail components to get them to the micro
level; which isn't that easy and takes alot of time to setup properly.

Soon they will come out with Revit Civil, Revit Mechanical, etc. etc. They
really need a Revit Residential version that will have some features from
Revit Structures and Revit Systems. Where an Architect, designer and or
builder can provide a complete set of drawings for a residential home with
one license and be able to produce plumbing, electrical, structural and HVAC
drawings.

--
From;
Edward Borg
Precision Drafting LLC
Http://Precisiondraftingllc.com
Message 11 of 11
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I do both, in fact I do three. I offer clients a full surveying,
architecture and engineering service.

I have a Geodimeter direct reflex, robotic (one man operation) total station
for land surveying purposes, which in direct reflex mode is also good for
measuring elevations of adjacent properties, ridge heights, etc without
touching them. We can produce full contoured surveys and elevational
drawings. We hire local GPS where the need requires and have done the odd
hydrographic survey.

I provide full architectural services and structural engineering. I do 2D
frame and 3D space frame analysis, RC detailing (using CADS RC and am
learning steel fabrication drawings usings CADS Advance steel (worked for a
fabricator using StruCAD but know AutoCAD better)). I use QSE Plane frame
and Space frame analysis as I have the concrete and steel design modules. I
use Limcon3 for steel connection design as it is very thorough, although I
do have all the green books to do by hand if necessary. For most quick
designs and checks for hand calcs, I use TEDDS. For timber roof conversions
I use QuikFrame as this is the only frame analysis application I have found
which is good for timber design (although it doesn't check deflection
criteria automatically, which is part of the code and something I regularly
remind the software agents). Alot of my work is loft conversions although we
do light industrial and have been asked to do multidiscipline work on large
housing schemes £10's M

For Arthurs benefit I understand matrices but daren't try them long hand,
hence the software.

I have a B.Eng Hons degree in Civil Engineering and BTEC HNC in Building
Studies, I am chartered with a few Institutions and pursuing the others. I
have about 20 years industry experience.

I am a director of a local housing association, Chairman for the local
branch of the Chartered Institute of Building and Secretary (again) for the
local branch of the Chartered Institute of Architectural Technologists.

I am interested in working with a local M&E contractor, who will do full
design service but probably not buy Revit M&E. If I could buy this module,
rather than complete application, I am reaching the goal I am aiming for -
complete 'model' design service (albeit M&E would be draughting only).

Most practices do only one of the above disciplines. I offer all three based
primarily on client demand, although I do surveying and/or structural
engineering for architectural practices, who can't do these. From a clients
point of view, they come to me and I do The Job. I survey it, knowing what
is important for the future design, I design it knowing the site, knowing
about structural frames, foundations, etc and when I have received planning
approval, I do the engineering and in most cases the engineering never
compromises the architectural design...

But I do rely on alot of tools to help me do the job and it costs me
thousands of pounds per year in maintenance...

Without the tools, on a time basis I wouldn't be competitive.

Revit Structure is no use at present, it does matrices via links to other
apps, it does pretty stuff. It doesn't do 80% of the work, i.e. the
detailing. For example it doesn't do reinforced concrete detailing, it
doesn't do schedules. You can however 'draw' them if you like - but thats
not real world. Autodesk have bought RoboBat so I'm hoping a usable solution
will present itself. Until then I'll continue to use CADS RC (Beta testing
v9). I did try AllPlan and AllPlot. This does do 3D CAD Detailing and
scheduling, but it isn't Autodesk and I'm committed to using true dwg
compatible software because I need to communicate with others and don't need
the hassle of file transfer incompatibility.

My issue, which is maybe too strong a word, is that the clever bits of
Revit, the Building or Structural or M&E or FM, etc... are not available as
modular items. I am interested also in FM for asset tracking, as I do
architectural and engineering work for companies that would use the service,
I have the model... I need another new application with only 30% being what
I need - see initial comment.

I do appreciate my work throughput may not be Joe average, but reading the
various threads, I am not alone with a request for modular apps.

Regards



Tiss




"Cadkiller" wrote in message
news:5364207@discussion.autodesk.com...
This is very true. You can hire a structural engineer just to calculate and
stamp the drawings for you. You don't need them to model the structural wood
framing for your residential house.

I do it all the time for my steel stair work. In most cases the Architect
nor the Engineer of record, want to be responsible for the stair design.
They end up passing that down to the builder. Unfortunately for me, neither
program can model, engineer and detail complex steel stairs (even simple
steel pan stairs) to a high level of detail. They only provide stairs at a
macro level and you have to use detail components to get them to the micro
level; which isn't that easy and takes alot of time to setup properly.

Soon they will come out with Revit Civil, Revit Mechanical, etc. etc. They
really need a Revit Residential version that will have some features from
Revit Structures and Revit Systems. Where an Architect, designer and or
builder can provide a complete set of drawings for a residential home with
one license and be able to produce plumbing, electrical, structural and HVAC
drawings.

--
From;
Edward Borg
Precision Drafting LLC
Http://Precisiondraftingllc.com

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report


Autodesk Design & Make Report