Is Advance Steel going to be merged with Revit?

[robertnowak]

Hi,

Recently, I heard rumors from one of Autodesk trainers, that Autodesk's long term plan for steel detailing software is to include all Advance Steel's functionality into Revit and stop developing Advance Steel as a separated application. More or less like it happend to Advance Concrete. What makes me believe in rumor is that Revit gets a lot of new "Steel detailing" functionalities with every new version, while Advance Steel is not changing that dynamically anymore.

Anyway, if merging rumors are truth I find it a change that might be very good for all detailers, but would be good to know some things about it in advance:.

1. First of all - If that merge is a real thing?

2. If it is, then when can we expect it?

For those who like to be up to date with new software versions it would be helpful to know earlier about that possible change. I, for example, would start to learn Revit in nearest future just to be familiar with new software environment. 

I would be glad for any feedback from Autodesk staff or anyone that knows something related to the topic.

I also invite you all to the discussion about that potential "fusion". Do you think it would be a good step?

Best regards

Robert

[Anonymous]

First of all the merging of Advance concrete is a different thing because concrete design is usually done by the Engineers and fed back to the Architect and usually concrete companies do not do shop drawings so the merger in this case is a responsible thing.

Having Advance steel connections in Revit has some merit because it would help the Engineers to provide connections on their drawings which they do now but are usually generic and the detailer has to interpret and create. This would also mean that connections created by the Engineer in Revit would be Advance Steel compliant and easier for the detailer to detail. I can see no value for an Engineering company to apply connections to every joint because they don't get paid to do that and I don't see the Architect doing the same. 

As to the detailer using the Revit interchange to bring the model into Advance Steel, applying connections and sending these back to the Engineer for checking and signing off, there could be some value there but in the real world the Engineer will again say that isn't his job it is the job of the fabricator to get the steel right. The Architect won't be bothered doing this either because his argument is the connections are the Engineers responsibility. This is all assuming that the steel has been positioned accurately in the first place by the Architect and then by the Engineer.

Merging Advance Steel into Revit will take a lot of resources to do as there would need to be a numbering and drawing creation aspect built into Revit that is not there at present.

The next point is that Advance Steel users are detailers dedicated to a single piece of software using  AutoCad as a base. Revit on the other hand is not AutoCad based it is a standalone piece of software and has a totally different logic and layout. So for Advance Steel users it then means they will need to learn new software and start from scratch making users unproductive and disillusioned and more than likely go back to Prosteel, Tekla or whatever other detailing package they left to become Advance Steel users.

Architectural design, Engineering and steel detailing are 3 separate entities and just as an Engineer does not pretend to be an Architect the opposite is also true. Steel detailers are tasked with interpreting the elements of the Architects intent with the Engineers constraints and producing drawings understood by the Architect and Engineer, but most importantly for the detailers customer which is the fabricator. The person who makes the steel is not interested in anything more than producing as much steel as he can that is accurate, with minimal wastage and maximum profit and then going onto the next job. He has no interest in the mechanical side, or the electrics. He has no interest in what type of window or door is going into the building just the opening size. Advance Steel is a detailing software package that is very good at detailing and giving the fabricator what they want. Revit is very good at what it does for the Architect and Structural Engineer.

Is the merger a real thing? I have no idea, but to me it would be a silly thing to do for the reasons outlined but also because no single piece of software will be able to do everything. If Advance Steel was to be merged then merge Plant and Electrical as well. Autodesk may as well scrap AutoCad as Revit can do anything AutoCad can do. The program would be so large and cumbersome and laden with bugs.

Adding it the AEC collection will at least educate Engineers and Architects as to its existence because the majority still think Tekla for detailing and don't know anything about AS.

So in my opinion Architects and Engineers will not use AS as a standalone or if it is integrated into Revit, they won't produce assembly or single part drawings so there is no reason to do this. The steel fabricator will not buy Revit for detailing when they can choose from other detailing packages that give them the drawings they want.

So what do we have left. We have a steel detailing package that does what it is supposed to on top of AutoCad used for detailers working for fabricators. Yes there have been no major advancements as far as tools, but I believe they are working to make it more stable, kill the bugs and add some wishlist items.

We have Revit that does what it is supposed to producing Architectural models with some steel implementation and some connections to make the Engineers job easier which will help the AS detailer further down the line.

Will they merge? I don't think so and I hope I am right.

Gary

[pawelpiechnik]

We at Autodesk would like to share some words about our future vision for Revit and Advance Steel as it relates to structural steel. We think this is an important discussion to have. While meeting with customers over the past few years, many of the same questions have been talked about at length. We would like to share a few key points about the questions raised, what we are doing and why.

First, it is true that we have been expanding Revit to be more than a design coordination and documentation software. Based on many industry drivers and the request from customers, we started extending Revit to be a common BIM environment for architects and all major engineering disciplines and their related trades.   For structural this meant expanding Revit to better connect structural analysis and design and structural detailing downstream, into Revit. 

Today, we have building professionals using Revit for both design and detailing of mechanical services, concrete rebar, precast, timber and cold-formed steel. We also want to extend this vision for structural steel by automating the detailing process through a tighter integration between Revit and Advance Steel.

It is a valid point to hear “why put this all in Revit when different professionals do these tasks.” That is a valid point that we’ve been asked, especially by engineers in North America where engineers don’t detail steel or concrete. When looking more broadly geographically and into the future, we expect our customers doing both design and detailing to be working more collaboratively. That will require a new level of collaboration that is only possible working on a common platform.

The last point that I want to make about our steel strategy for Revit is that we are not intending engineers or architects to detail unless they have the skillset to do so. We see customers’ different business models emerging that include both design and detailing services. Delivering those services will still require different people to perform their specific tasks, but in a much more integrated way.

A second point that I would like to make is that Advance Steel provides a key part of our future BIM strategy. We see a continued demand for AutoCAD based steel detailing and we have many examples of existing AutoCAD verticals with similar, parallel capabilities on other Autodesk platforms. Therefore, we see Advance Steel as a viable steel detailing solution to service the AutoCAD based workflows that continue to be used across the globe.

[wassim_said_said]

Dear Pawel,

Thank you for these valuable clarifications.

I need to know more information about the structural analysis and design strategy in Autodesk since you mentioned :

"For structural this meant expanding Revit to better connect structural analysis and design and structural detailing downstream, into Revit."

I am structural engineering using Autodesk robot structural analysis for the structural analysis and design for more than 18 years, and as you can easily

search the Robot forum lot of users asked for the future of this good software.

May be I put my question in this forum since we did not get any official reply from Autodesk about our concern of the future development of RSA.

 For example refer to these links: SAVE OUR RSA  &  RSA petition and many other threadsyou can find about this subject in this forum.

If you can give us roadmap or  strategy explaining clearly the intention of Autodesk for the structural analysis and design future as you gave for AS in this thread,

this may gave us some hope in our domain.

We believe that structural analysis and design is obligatory for the BIM process. (Before beginning of detailing we must simply design the structure!).

Thank you for your understanding and I Hope to get some clarifications in this forum or in the RSA forum.

Wassim

[acbsdesign]

'Looking at a broad picture'...this is bunch of mallarkies. For how long we will pay for Revit to be expanded etc. I want to pay for Advance to be developed.

[acbsdesign]

Give us a real steel detailing software, not this bunch of mallarkies.

[acbsdesign]

Anchor bolts, railing macroto be fixed, light gauge material, good document manager...so many things are missing and you guys are talking how important is Revit for steel connections. What a shame.

[acbsdesign]

Our competition works for the STEEL DETAILERS' software, and they work hard, with less mallarkies. We are paying for the 'overall picture' to be improved. Does not make any sense.

[acbsdesign]

"It is a valid point to hear “why put this all in Revit when different professionals do these tasks.” That is a valid point that we’ve been asked, especially by engineers in North America where engineers don’t detail steel or concrete. When looking more broadly geographically and into the future, we expect our customers doing both design and detailing to be working more collaboratively. That will require a new level of collaboration that is only possible working on a common platform."

-CAN YOU PLEASE TELL US WHAT THE H*** "A COMMON PLATFORM" MEANS?

Is it Revit or Autocad Platform?

It is not clear, it is bunch of mallarkies typical for the present Product Manager.

"The last point that I want to make about our steel strategy for Revit is that we are not intending engineers or architects to detail unless they have the skillset to do so. We see customers’ different business models emerging that include both design and detailing services. Delivering those services will still require different people to perform their specific tasks, but in a much more integrated way".

-Now you contradict yourselves-You do not expect the designers using Revit to do detailing. But expect a broader collaboration.

Well-this is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN DUE TO BUDGET FOR DESIGN, BUDGET FOR CONNECTIONS AND BUDGET FOR DETAILING - these are completely different items to be paid in the real world.

"A second point that I would like to make is that Advance Steel provides a key part of our future BIM strategy. We see a continued demand for AutoCAD based steel detailing and we have many examples of existing AutoCAD verticals with similar, parallel capabilities on other Autodesk platforms. Therefore, we see Advance Steel as a viable steel detailing solution to service the AutoCAD based workflows that continue to be used across the globe."

-Again-another huuuuge bunch of mallarkies-"We see you guys want autocad based software, this is why we will keep it. Otherwise we will get rid of it and do Revit only."

Something is very, very wrong in this overall picture.

You either make Advance a solid, really good software, DONE BY DETAILERS FOR DETAILERS,  not by LOUSY PRODUCT MANAGERS for potential Revit users who may one day decide to provide models (accurate models, having legal responsibilities)  to the detailers. 

Or just kill it. 

Something in between is a joke.

You either decide to listen to real users, or keep the lousy decisions for years to come.

The patience won't last for a long time, we pay with a hope for improvements, new features, less bugs, and mainly-for a software called Advance Steel.

I would kindly suggest Autodesk get to the big table again and re-think all the mallarkies written above in bold.

[acbsdesign]

@pawelpiechnik

@Drawtech

I completed a 3 day course with Revit, including import of steel connections and working with families.

I also called 2 respectable Engineering offices with request for comment about having connections done in Revit.

The bottom line is: Engineers DO NOT WANT to do the connections, it is time wasting procedure for them, and usually fabricator (detailer hired by the fabricator) will do them per their standards and common practice rules.

First of all-designers and detailers have to be one company in order to do it.

Second-connections are done far easier in Advance than in Revit.

One Engineer said-he did connections only between two beams in order to show typical connection for the entire project.

Beams are usually created with Beam System option in Revit for massive large floor plans, and in order to create an Advance Steel connection we have to explode the Beam System.

Dealing appr. 24-28 hours now with Revit, and calling around led to the following conclusion:

-Engineers are not willing to provide model having all beams and columns and bracing, etc., pour stop, shear studs, lev. plates, anchors, ... done

 -Engineers are not willing to provide model done with connections

 -Please watch this video and try not to laugh ( I can't stop laughing)

-it is a complete waste of time for something we do not want, and we do not want to pay for.

Have fun:

http://au.autodesk.com/au-online/classes-on-demand/class-catalog/classes/year-2017/revit/msf122200#c...

Talk to your supervisors, and get on track with your competitors. 

I believe Advance Steel can be the best overall software for steel detailing-you have the budget, we have the desire to help and make suggestions, report bugs etc.

The only thing that is really missing-a full desire to head 100% towards improvement in the overall steel detailing process.

Find the "bottlenecks" of the following main steps:

1. Modeling-where the modeling slows down. Take Railing macro for example-we cannot explode it into 6-8m (20') sections-there are 13+ lines in the idea station. Moment connections-most of them are not even mentioned in your connections vault-ref. the idea station.

Take the missing anchor bolts / threaded rods macro-is it so hard to make a macro that will help us? Number of nuts / washers/ thread length, hook info-ref. idea station

 2. Numbering-how is the numbering done-(sadly not per shape, plate thickness etc.-we cannot output a decent Advance BOM with preliminary numbers and material sorted without wasting time to select each size and run the numbering)

 3. Any further improvements in drawings styles

3.1. Beams are almost perfect--copes can create multiple dimensions to be cleaned, instead of only two dimensions, otherwise overall are o.k.

3.2. Columns-drawing style is perfect if we have a simple base and cap plate and shear plates. Having moment connections and skewed shear plates-this is a heart-breaking disaster.

We also need work planes somehow referenced in column drawings. (T.O.S. let's say 3" above first hole of a shear plate) And possibility to differentiate galvanizing holes form regular holes.

Any dimension referenced to outer edge of a W-column shall be eliminated-this is a rule. Your Product Manager does not know this, and did put my idea in the archives, but it is a very common practice.

3.3. The way now we create sections in erection plan / elevations and send them to other drawings-it is a WWII process. No link between section done on one drawing and shown on another drawing, it is very primitive-have a look at Revit-it is done with automatically labels and call-outs, updating between drawings sheets if section view number is changed or deleted.

3.4. Cameras-well-these are great, but not there yet-ref. idea station

3.5. Cloning modifications of one detail to another-one of the best ideas so far-ref. idea station @iwafb

3.6. Documentation for drawing styles sucks-especially about the default dimension requests.

Only a Two part video done in YouTube, with " AHMMMM, HMMMMM, MHHHHH, HmmmmHmmmmm, Aaaaaaaa, ......come on guys-no one to make a professionally presented video?

The best represented video was so far done by @bukko

A real user shared very helpful ideas-bring more of these so we can all benefit

 4. Drawings clean up-now dimensions are more stable (THANK YOU) and labels (fingers crossed ) won't move (THANK YOU).

Section views in beam and column dwg styles-these regenerate and move during update, and it may get ugly on some dwgs.

Section View Labels move upon update. 

 5. Document Manager-This Fellow needs an overhaul-Ref. Idea Station. Batch plot lists form document manager, choose destination folder for plotting etc.

 6. But not last-MARKETING-where the hell is the Marketing? 

It is not here-some fabricators have never heard about Advance Steel. 

What happens here is the users make the advertisement, not your Marketing Director.

Yours is probably talking about VR and AR in LinkedIn. 

No advertisement in AISC Modern Steel Construction-not a word.

 Regards

[acbsdesign]

@Anonymous

Gary, I think they may be heading this way, please have a look at this screen shot. This is Revit's roadmap as of 10/2017:

[markhubrich]

Hopefully this doesn't happen until I'm retired. I will finish off my years mowing grass if it does. 

[Anonymous]

Makes no sense, obviously they have bigger brains than us detailers and are trying to make Revit a program that can do everything. Coming soon Maya modelling tools in Revit. Users are comfortable with the Autocad format, my main reason for going to Advance Steel and moving away from Prosteel as I didn't want to learn Microstation.

Revit is a powerful tool and can do so much and very well, but having specialised programs is also a good thing. I can't see the day when Microsoft Word merges with Photoshop, it would be pointless and obviously a stupid idea.

Autodesk has spent a lot of time and money wooing detailers to AS and then to merge it into Revit, which is a program we don't usually use is again disenfranchising their market audience. The other sneaky thing they have done is to do away with perpetual licenses and badgered us onto subscription so that we can no longer use our software without paying for it every year. We invest the money in the software, invest time and money in doing training courses, develop some level of skill and dependency on their program to then be made to learn Revit to do our work. Sounds a bit like what they did with ASD a few years back. This pissed off a lot of people then who reluctantly went over to Advance Steel.

Are these same people prepared to make the shift again or will they take their anger out on Autodesk and go to Prostructures or dare I say it pay the premium and go to Tekla and become part of the elite steel detailing community recognised by Architects, Engineers and Builders around the world.

I would dearly love to hear from an Autodesk person (we know you are lurking out there), to put our minds at rest or describe in plain language their plans, but at the moment the crickets are really loud.

[acbsdesign]

Gary, 

I wouldn't say their brains are working better than the detailers' brains-they had ASD, couldn't improve it despite all the money they had,

and despite Autocad is still present in probably close to 100% of engineering or detailing offices.

The bigger the company is, there is more room for ignorant employees to co-exist in it.

Put an incompetent person in a key management position and you get the picture.

Link between top management, and lower management is easily broken too. 

[Anonymous]

Agree with ABC... What's the point of adding a ton of connections to Revit, that Revit users don't really need/want? When models in Revit get so big that adding tons of connection data only makes the performance that much slower/unusable.

Why not focus AS on being what it's claimed/meant to be?... A parametric detailing software.

I understand that it's originally a Graitec product, however, the shear number of bugs in release 2018 (my first experience with AS) is mindboggling at this point... especially when it now comes from the guys behind AutoCAD and Inventor (2 programs I have enjoyed using for years).

2019 should theoretically be released soon, and yet 2018 still acts as though it's in beta. I'd rather they used the funds from my paid subscription to stop implementing new features for a while, and focused on fixing the existing ones, to get this program to run the way it claims it does/should... 

If they want to add new features, how about basic usability: Why does one need to practically be a programmer in order to resize a box so that you can actually read a pulldown list in a connection? Why do 1/2 the features/connections move parametrically, but the other half don't? Why are labels/dims still jumping around on GAs (less so, but still happening too often)? Why am I forced to update a 1000 drawings that didn't change? Why is there no way to lock a detail view/drawing/part once it's in an approved/released state? So many "automatic" features that work so poorly, it's just easier/faster to do them manually instead (like the revision notes)...

Maybe it's my lack of experience with AS, but when people with far more than I, are repeatedly discussing these same issues... 

[bjur]

As a structural engineer that uses both Revit and Advance Steel, if the technical issues could be worked out, I would hope they could be merged.  The current integration is close but not quite there yet, although I've found enough work arounds to make it work well enough.  I would imagine there may be some significant issues in doing what we do in advance steel, inside Revit (ucs vs workplane for example).  Connection design is done by the vast majority of engineers West of the Rockies.  Engineers east ofthe Rockies tend to off load this task to the detailers.  Even in its current form (two separate programs), it is much more efficient to detail the project as the engineer of record than to pass around 2d paper drawings back and forth in a modern version of the game "Telephone".  In the time it takes me to thoroughly review a set, I could have detailed the whole thing (and got paid more).  On the financial side, we get to extract more dollars out of the revit model, reusing the data we already had in Revit.  It's a no-brainer.  We submit steel shop drawings for review when the building gets submitted for permit.  It's a huge timesaver and I sleep better at night knowing it's right.  Some of the local fabricators can read the NC1 files that Advance Steel creates.  This makes the process even faster and less error prone by reducing the amount of information someone has to physically read off of a paper drawing.  A python machine can process all of the copes, cuts, and holes in a beam in 8 minutes, something that would take a normal guy an hour to do.

Again my hope is that they either completely merge the two programs or make the data transfer completely seamless.  Years ago we tricked revit into producing shop drawings but some internal software issues with parts attached to faces made this not feasible.

With Revit wanting to be the central repository for the entire building model (BIM by definition) it seems that having the shop drawings in Revit would be the next logical path.  Sorry east coast guys, I think you're nuts for off loading the details to some one else.

[leslie.lees]

I see the new forums don't include AS.....

[AntDrt]

Hello,

for the forum, it always been like that, have to enlarge list of forums.

Concerning REVIT, this software himself start to be a little old, and if they don't make any big changes in next years he will die too.

In my office we're looking for an alternative with 3Dexperience/Solidworks develloped by DassaultSystemes

Or the classic Tekla with Trimble.

2019 will be important for us.

Chairs begin HOT autodesk...

[philippe.bonneau]

Here is the link to the Advance Steel forum (which exists since 4+ years):

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/advance-steel-forum/bd-p/2056

[Anonymous]

Here is an update to the original posts on this thread.

A lot has happened in the industry since this thread was started 12 months ago. Revit has had quite a few changes and updates with 2019 release, Advance Steel has had a minor bug fix, no service pack, no new tools, no major fixes. This means one of 2 things.

1. That the developers of Advance Steel feel the product is as good as it is ever going to be, or
2. the 2020 version coming out  (in April) will be full of all the things we have been asking for and all the issues sorted.

The 2019 release was quite uninspiring with a couple of things improved like the deployment tool which we use once when we upgrade and then never touch again, there was the Shared Views tool which is A360 under another name and a change to the section tool. There was also the bolt cage macro that was added with no recognition as a new feature that works OK but needs more done to it.

I am not writing this to put down Advance Steel as that is far from my intent. I love the program and I use it everyday as a detailer and as a trainer in Advance Steel.

As I have traveled and worked with new users who come mainly from a Prosteel background I am finding that there are different types of users out there. Of course there are the structural detailers, whether working for steel fabricators or for plant users who need to model platforms and supports. I am finding however that there are a number of Structural Engineering companies who are using Advance Steel as part of their pipeline.

Increasingly (in Australia), structural engineering companies are also providing as part of their service to their clients a full design and detailing package so the client can then get fabricators to price without shop drawings necessary. This is cheaper for the client in money and time as the drawings provided are already approved, there is no need for RFIs and the detailing costs are paid by the client and not hidden in excessive tonnage rates.

Interestingly, the Engineers are using Revit for the collaboration with the Architect, however, all connections are done in Advance Steel because it gives final output, better modelling speed and the drawings are produced by detailers in their office so they make and save money at the same time.

This to me is a clear indication that end users prefer this approach, Revit and Advance Steel as separate programs each doing what they do best. As a detailer I never get asked to provide or work with anything Revit related. The main request usually is can I convert these Tekla files, which is more trouble than it is worth so I say no.

Advance Steel developers also need to sit back and take notice of what is happening with Bentley, (I am speaking from an Australian perspective). Users are disillusioned with the lack of growth of Prostructures, the massive increase in the cost of licensing of the program as well as requiring an Autocad license as well, coming from an Autocad base they are not happy about being heavily encouraged to go to Microstation, the fact that there is now very little if any support for the product in Australia since anyone who knew anything has jumped ship. I am hearing this from Prosteel / Prostructures users who I am meeting in training classes which seem to be the majority of attendees.

Advance Steel has the opportunity to dominate the market, Tekla is too expensive (their latest highlight is folded plate development), but I am also finding companies using Tekla for extremely large projects but using more and more seats of AS for the rest of their work. For too long AS has catered to the small to medium size project, but that is not the market out there, AS can do all size work. The thinking that tonnage is what defines a big job is silly. You can have a 1,000 tonne project with 50 connections so it must be done in Tekla, whereas a 50 tonne job can have 1,000 connections and is done in AS. This is also the reason I refuse to quote a tonnage rate on any work.

Will Advance Steel merge with Revit?

I don't know... but it shouldn't.