Revit flaws and shortcomings

[jbecker-vector]

I find it hard to believe that anyone out there has successfully created a true BIM model. There are so many things that this program just can't handle.

1. Chiller plant with 3 chillers, 3 pumps, 3 cooling towers: nope.
2. Multiple coil connections to an AHU that use the same fluid (preheat and a reheat coil): nope.
3. Steam: forget it.
4. Outdoor Air: nope, if it isn't Supply or Return it doesn't know how to deal with it (picking Other is a mistake).
5. Got some FCUs circuited up but forgot one? Think you can just add it to an existing circuit: no, it will try to select every piece of mechanical equipment and try to put it on the same circuit.
6. Non-standard duct connections (field fabricated stuff when it is the only way): no it tries to put in the standard fittings and tells you it doesn't fit. No kidding? That is why I was putting in my own custom fitting.
7. Errors that tell you something is wrong but aren't really useful to fix the problem. System not well connected? Sometimes it will show where the disconnects are and other times it just does nothing.
8. Sloped Waste or Storm... be prepared to suffer as you attempt to get it to connect. Don't even think about trying to change from 1/4" per foot to 1/8" per foot because it can't handle the "angle is too small" change.

These are just some of the things that are driving me nuts. I haven't had to set sheets up in a while but that is nightmare as well.

The worst of it all is the waiting... and waiting... and waiting as this program grinds away on projects when they near 150 MB... and they will get there with ease. Edited by: jbecker-vector on Apr 2, 2010 4:16 PM

[Anonymous]

I would completely agree with most of these things. A true BIM model almost is not possible with Revit MEP right now. I still haven't figured out how to add ventilation air to systems.

However, are you using Revit MEP to try and do the full BIM analysis or are you using Autodesk Ecotect? Just curious.

[jbecker-vector]

Trying to create the model in Revit. I am not even doing the load calculation or system analysis. I simply want to create the systems as the are to be. I can create all kinds of pretty pipes, ductwork, and equipment. I can make them belong to their system, but it doesn't mean the program can form logical (at least to an engineer) systems. What is the point of spending all this time creating a 3D model if is is not as "intelligent" as it was sold to the owner. The owners out there, due to intense marketing by Autodesk and Architects, believe that they will be receiving a "living" model.... unfortunately the actual capability of the program doesn't live up to its hype.. yet.. maybe not even for a long time.

[Jrobker]

The whole intention of revit was sold to Architects whom work directly for owners.
If your an Architect than using this program is an no brainer.
Instant sections, materials for rendering, interactions of hosted elements, on and on and on.
Architects have no calculations that chug away, everything is relatively faster and easier.
This whole mentality has been sold to the owners. We weren't involved in that discussion.
Owners and Architects expect those same results from MEP because we too are using Revit.
Just because the name is the same doesn't mean anything. These are two completely different approaches.

For interoperability along came Structure. Same outcome. Simplicity. No brainer. I know structural engineers that use revit even when the project is in cad. It's fast, effective and simpler.

for interoperability along came MEP. Schreeeech. Whoa.
2008 (is this a joke?) Yep it was a joke.
2009 (chug-a lug-a ...crash) Sometimes I go back to a 2009 project to do an addendum and think to myself, "How in the hell did we deal with this." Holy pathetic.
2010 (OK, Adesk is listening) Much improved. Working with this platform was tolerable, after we got over the GUI issue.
2011 (the clouds are starting to break up) Now we are starting to get somewhere.

Your right though, everything is not possible. There are still ALOT of things that need to get ironed out.
You have to learn what you can and cannot do. Use the fudge factor button.

I totally feel your pain. I filled up 8 swear jars that paid for a vacation. The problem was, I had to work in revit late nights and during holidays, so I missed the vacation.

It is a monopoly, so essentially you are being told to use it. I had to bite my tongue and ride the waves.
On the bright side,the software is improving.
The MEP side is so much more complicated than Structure or Arch and I too wished that they could understand that.

[Anonymous]

I would agree. I feel like the program has made leaps and bounds from previous versions. 2008 was virtually unusable to do a project in. At least it does feel like Autodesk is making substantial progress.

[asommer]

They opened up Pandora's Box when they put those newfangled connectors in. I hadn't been the same since. now that the connectors & systems do some of the engineering, they will get hazed over what they don't do. Until then, I've got an expensive interference checking tool. It has taught me a bit about the engineering side of the MEP systems.

[Ghassan76]

Are you trying to tell me that this amazing Revit cannot do a chiller plant with pumps and cooling towers and expantion tank anl all the other accessories.

Are you trying to tell me that this super gaint Autodesk software cannot do the simple engineering.

please answer me.. I am thirsty to know.

[Ghassan76]

Dear Sir, I know that we can do it. But my question is about if we can connect multiple systems sharing same equipment. Let me explain to you please, all my fan coil units are well connected to the main supply riser pipe and when I inspect the system here everything is okay, then the main risers are connected to 6 chillers in parallel through supply system but when I inspect here there is no flow and no pressure for branch connections to chillers and even chillers there is no flow, for the return system pipes from fan coil units to pumps everything is okay but when I inspect the system the total flow is correct up to the first pump and again the flow is zero also inside the pump there is no flow no pressure.
my main question is: how we include more than one equipment to the same system...(e.g. 6 chillers to be considered as one equipment and to be connected to the main supply pipes then to all fan coil units) as I explain earlier I already did the system and the connection but when I inspect or calculate the pressure inside pumps or chillers it is zero.

Thanks a lot for your response

[asommer]

Someone else to share our pain.  You are experiencing exactly what we have been for the past years.  I just wish a study would be performed by ADESK on REAL-WORLD MEP designs, not the simple straight-through one Equip systems.  (ADESK)Set it up, set the equipment connectors how they are required, and you will see where us users are having issues.

I will be posting a message displaying a diagram of some problematic systems soon, I just need to find the time.

[Ghassan76]

Waiting your next comments... I'm realy thirsty to solve this issue.

I'm honored to join to your research and your struggle.

[plawton5092]

I see your 8 and raise you 125: see attached PDF

[norcaljess]

Wow.  I haven't even read this entire list of 125 items yet and I wanted to cry.  I know Revit is lacking a lot, but when you have to spell it out like this it makes me want to give up!  (hehe)

[CoreyDaun]

That's an exhausting list. After skimming it, much of this I have encountered and some found ways around (not that it justifies the oversight/error). I have been using Revit since RMEP 2009, and I still have many outstanding issues to which I could add to that list. It was a bit arduous learning a program with flawed logic and programming. I was the one to pioneer our small company into this, learning it without any worthwhile tutorials or classes. (We had a 3-Day class years ago that was a joke and a half.) Even today, most of our users are relatively incompetent with it, and not [entirely] because of them...

[Jrobker]

---

@plawton5092 wrote:

I see your 8 and raise you 125: see attached PDF

---

Sweet.

I gave a list just like this to Brian Otey (revit director of BIM QA for autodesk).

He said this is exactly the stuff they were looking for.

Would you mind If I emailed this PDF to a few employees at autodesk?

Can I have your name and location for contact?

[plawton5092]

jrobker: 

My name is "Legion" and I am nationwide - seriously.  We engineers and engineering designers are forced to use this program because th architect likes it, not becaue it's good program.  It certainly doesn't save design time, just the opposite.  Utimately the owner saves money because of better coordination, but that happens just as effectively with AutoCAD and Navisworks.

Feel free to send the list to whomever you wish, add ytour owwn stuff - maybe we shoudl establich a website of our own:

DisgruntledRevitMonkeys.com

[NicholasWard]

A disturbingly familiar list. I haven't been using RMEP long enough to encounter all of these, but I've suffered through many of them and could write a whole other list about the electrical side... hold that thought.

[Jrobker]

If you have Electrical specific items please write them down and pass them along.

[NicholasWard]

I will... when I have that mythical entity known as enough spare time to finish everything I need to do.

[embolisim]

NicholsWard you slacker!

There are 24 hours in a day, and THEN there's your spare time...

[rmiller1973]

What really gets me is that the Architects have embraced this program and haven't called loudly enough for simple things like a respectable text editor. Considering they have been the driving force behind this product they should be held accountable for the mediocrity that is Revit MEP.

I'm really hoping that Autodesk has kept the AutoCAD verticals alive to hedge their bets or the hope of combining the two lines into one. I have stated before that I think it would be far easier to get AutoCAD MEP up to Revit MEPs level of 'BIM' modeling.

Considering the movement of Architects to Revit, why not offer a solution that gives true flexibility and coordination? Take Autodesk's own DWF format as an example. They have been trying to push that as a PDF and PLT alternative for years and what better way to get adoption than to allow DWFs to encapsulate the project as a whole? A combined 2D/3D DWF that can be used as backgrounds in both Revit and AutoCAD would revolutionize the industry.

Instead what we have is Autodesk's half-hearted embrace of IFC and two product lines that do similar things but no real solution for collaberation. The file sizes created are often bloated because of the way they are translated - add that AutoCAD MEP doesn't automatically apply appropriate IFC export categories ... what you are left with is a hassle.