There is a new technology preview on Autodesk Labs. It is called eTransmit for Revit. You should try it and let us know if this does the trick or not.
Initial thoughts, needs:
Thanks much for the feedback! Right now, eTransmit for Revit is able to process the files without actually loading them into Revit. If we did start deleting views or otherwise changing the contents of the model then creating the transmittal would become a lot slower. What kind of performance would you be looking for in processing the files (and what are your typical model sizes)?
Once the technology preview has been out for a few weeks we're planning to release a survey to understand what is and isn't working for you guys. We'll definitely do our best to include all of the suggestions we get in that process.
Initial thoughts, needs:
- Delete Sheets & Delete Views apart from levels (& maybe sections, elevations) for “Model”, not documentation, sharing. I want a BIM for design collaboration but do not want the entire documentation set its generating.
- Provision to add Transmittal Text (as the AutoCAD Etransmit allows). Eg I have a networked based text file with standard notes, transfer conditions, contacts & file/format info. AutoCAD etransmit automatically appends this to the project/file info it creates for the transmission
- Integrate with Project Nitrous/Bluestreak, Dropbox, Skydrive, iCloud for file sharing as you wont be emailing Revit files
Nice, simple, and very effective so far. Some things I'd like to see:
glad to see stuff like this happening. Honestly, if some of this Labs stuff (eTransmit, Neon) sees the light of broad release day, Labs is going to be the new ExpressTools in my mind.
1: The name! You can't have a Revit addon named after an AutoCAD tool! Ack! In all seriousness, I see where it came from, but it Revit use I expect I would use this 100 times more often as a project milestone archive tool, than to create something that I am "transmitting" anywhere. In the Revit world I just have no need to do that very often. 100% of process transmittals are single model files.
So to my mind, an name that relates to Archive, which is really what you are doing, makes a lot more sense. And the one occation I can see sending all the attached stuff too is a final deliverable to the client, which is a transmittal of the final archive of the project.
2: Installs. I think Labs needs to talk to the Revit team a bit, and understand some of the install tools that Revit uses. Because what I REALLY want to do with this is put the plugin on the netwrok, and have a manifest on each machine point at the shared Plugins folder. Dealing with MSI based installs for every user is a mess, and gets worse as firms get larger. I would love to see the Labs stuff work better with Revit in this regard, rather than taking the usual Microsoft approach of MSI files for install.
Beyond that, I will be testing this for project milestone archives, and post back with specific comments for that use case. I hope it works as well as I imagine it could, because we spend a lot of time archiving and still getting it wrong. A time saving, automated approach to that would be hugely bennificial.
I'm usually at the recieving end for models but know one of the pains senders have is removing 'sensitive" content. We do interior fitout so really only need the model. The "drawings" if needed could be issued in a controlled format like DWF.
If we did start deleting views or otherwise changing the contents of the model then creating the transmittal would become a lot slower.
Performance isnt probably an issue as people are doing this manually anyway. It would be good to have "Transmittal Profiles", like AutoCAD etransmit, where you can save an issue state (like strip sheets or not). Full transmit would be more like the current function, model transmit would cut down to model (not document based) transfer.
What kind of performance would you be looking for in processing the files (and what are your typical model sizes)?
The files we get are pretty small, for 10,000m² store say 100mb max, esp with all the "fluff" like embedded renders etc removed
Unike some I'm not adverse to the eTransmit name Autocad origins but wonder if slightly misleading in Revit context. It is almost certain the resulting package will be far beyond most email limits so unless you integrate with file sharing sevices there will be no "transmit".
Perhaps "Archive" or "Package" is a better term?
Thanks for your comments. I welcome all suggestions for a new name!
Revit Platform Feature Product Manager
Here are a few words that seem to fit the intended use. Any could use some combination of e, model, or Revit in the name as well.
I kind of like Revit Packager or Revit ePackage
I agree with most though, that eTransmit is a bit of a misnomer, and something new for Revit is in order.
Fantastic! Just what the doctor ordered!
One suggestion, it also needs to include texture images from custom materials too.