Revit & Autocad

[nikpearce]

Hi folks new user looking for some expert help. Just before Christmas I had a chat with an architect about learning to do CAD, I was given a brief to learn AC and send some samples over. Well as I’m currently doing an engineering degree, I get access to everything.

so I started using Revit instead and absolutely love it, basically the architecture company doesn’t use Revit and I don’t want to go back to AC. 
Will it be possible for me to do my work in one and it will be compatible their end. Thanks in advance. 

[HVAC-Novice]

Most architects switched to Revit way before most engineers. so whoever you talked to, must be really old school. I know no single architect or engineering consultant working in design who still uses AutoCAD. 

No, the files aren't compatible. You can link the dwg-files and trace the 3D model on them. but this is a manual process. 

AutoCAD is a drawing software. Revit is a 3D Building information Model.

My advice is to focus on learning Revit and not AutoCAD. And don't try to make Revit work like AutoCAD. 

[RDAOU]

@nikpearce 

Technically speaking, you would be able to work in Revit and export to DWG for them to use your work as an Xref. However, you might need to set up the export templates and layer mapping (most of which are done manually) to match your firm's CAD requirements/specifications.

• AutoCAD isn't bad, offers a lot of options which Revit does not do, is parametrical, and many engineers—especially those using AutoCAD MEP, Plant 3D, or Civil 3D—will always prefer those over Revit.
• Revit, by design, was originally developed for architects. This dates back to around 1997, rebranded to Revit in 2000 and Autodesk acquired it from Revit Technologies in 2002  and has since expanded its capabilities to include structural engineering, MEP (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) design, and construction workflows, making it a comprehensive BIM solution for the entire AEC industry

While most of the added features in Revit are great; in some situations and on certain specialized projects (Data Centers for instance), Revit tools might just fall slightly short when compared to specialized applications for specific trades or disciplines.

I'm not sure which branch of engineering you're in, but if you find that the tools available for your discipline are sufficient and your office isn’t too strict on CAD standards, I’d say 100% stick with Revit.

[HVAC-Novice]

---

@RDAOU wrote:

@nikpearce 

Technically speaking, you would be able to work in Revit and export to DWG for them to use your work as an Xref. However, you might need to set up the export templates and layer mapping (most of which are done manually) to match your firm's CAD requirements/specifications.

• AutoCAD isn't bad, offers a lot of options which Revit does not do, is parametrical, and many engineers—especially those using AutoCAD MEP, Plant, or Civil 3D—will always prefer those over Revit.
• Revit, by design, was originally developed for architects. This dates back to around 1997, rebranded to Revit in 2000 and Autodesk acquired it from Revit Technologies in 2002  and has since expanded its capabilities to include structural engineering, MEP (mechanical, electrical, and plumbing) design, and construction workflows, making it a comprehensive BIM solution for the entire AEC industry

While most of the added features in Revit are great; in some situations and on certain specialized projects (Data Centers for instance), Revit tools might just fall slightly short when compared to specialized applications for specific trades or disciplines.

I'm not sure which branch of engineering you're in, but if you find that the tools available for your discipline are sufficient and your office isn’t too strict on CAD standards, I’d say 100% stick with Revit.

---

Just to add, where Revit falls short, the solutions isn't AutoCAD. The solution are your industry-specific standalone design software, or plugins for Revit. Autodesk doesn't give you a software for all situations. but they give developers the option to provide plugins for Revit to use the 3rd party tool within Revit. 

Maybe my brain is too small. but I personally would find it difficult to use both Revit and AutoCAD and be really good at both. Learning Revit is a life-long process. there are a millions of ways to "invent" new methods. 

[RDAOU]

Revit is a powerful BIM authering tool that can cover many aspects of architectural, structural, and MEP design, but it isn't a direct substitute for Civil 3D, Plant 3D, or Autodesk MEP in all scenarios. While Revit is versatile and can perform many tasks across different disciplines, Civil 3D, Plant 3D, and Autodesk MEP has features specifically designed and developed over the past 20 years for their fields that Revit still in 2025 cannot and doesn't replicate. When it falls short, it simply falls short...things which the the API do not offer no plugin can make possible. 

For full functionality in Structural, Civil and MEP design, it's often best to use the respective software in conjunction with Revit, especially for complex projects. The question of whether one can or is capable to master either or none vs mastering both defines clearly in which environment one fits Closed BIM vs Open BIM lots of users fail to fit in and integrate in the latter and excel in the former. 

The choice is always that of the knowledge seeker

[nikpearce]

They are looking at moving to Revit eventually I believe. I didn't spend long enough on AC before I started with Revit. Problem is I don't want to go back. 

[nikpearce]

I have started to look at the options for modifying the DWG export settings, just got to figure out getting some of the Hatches they use into Revit. 

Engineering wise I am just about to start in April, discipline wise I have not thought about to much yet. I have been on the tools as an electrician for the last 25 years so I am retraining to give myself a few more options. 

[RDAOU]

---

---

Revit is not as hard or complicated as many make it out to be. In a couple of months, you should be able to evaluate whether it actually meets your needs or if you need a bit of both worlds RVT and ACAD. Moreover, there are plenty of discipline-specific reviews online where you can learn more about the advantages and shortcomings of Revit across different fields. There is even a Revit MEP Forum - Autodesk Community forum where a few of the contributors there are very well experienced in both Revit and Autocad who might even be able to give more detailed insight and in depth advice.

As I’ve said, you shouldn’t need to go back. We work with many engineers who use other software, and even within our organization, there are engineers on some projects who don’t use Revit while the architects do. We use all the previously mentioned software and a few others, and I can guarantee that we have no issues whatsoever when it comes to collaboration.

The only hurdle you might face is the extra effort required to map Revit-to-DWG exports, depending on the standards your office follows.

[HVAC-Novice]

---

@RDAOU wrote:

Revit is a powerful BIM authering tool that can cover many aspects of architectural, structural, and MEP design, but it isn't a direct substitute for Civil 3D, Plant 3D, or Autodesk MEP in all scenarios. While Revit is versatile and can perform many tasks across different disciplines, Civil 3D, Plant 3D, and Autodesk MEP has features specifically designed and developed over the past 20 years for their fields that Revit still in 2025 cannot and doesn't replicate. When it falls short, it simply falls short...things which the the API do not offer no plugin can make possible. 

For full functionality in Structural, Civil and MEP design, it's often best to use the respective software in conjunction with Revit, especially for complex projects. The question of whether one can or is capable to master either or none vs mastering both defines clearly in which environment one fits Closed BIM vs Open BIM lots of users fail to fit in and integrate in the latter and excel in the former. 

The choice is always that of the knowledge seeker

---

I don't think anyone (not even Autodesk) claimed Revit would be a Civil Engineering or Industrial Plant design software. Revit is a BUILDING  Information Model software. So, it naturally is limited to the building (i.e. office, apartment, or the building a plant is in (but not the plant functions). Architecture, Structure, MEP, and FP. 

Revit only has rudimentary tools that deal with  the outside of the building or with special plant items inside the building. Civil and Plant features also usually are designed by different design teams than the actual building. 

I'm not familiar with AutoCAD MEP, which seems to be a plugin for AutoCAD. they don't provide any information besides saying it will make my life 85% better.  Is this supped to be better than using MEP tools in Revit? 

[Ric_Weber]

Your comment "Revit is a BUILDING  Information Model software. So, it naturally is limited to the building (i.e. office, apartment, or the building a plant is in (but not the plant functions)." is very timely in my mind. I recently was on a webinar, read somewhere, don't remember precisely, that the "Building" in BIM is a verb, not a noun.  That spoke to me.  They said that "Building" in this case was the act of building the "Information Model".  The key in BIM is the Information.  And that information can be regarding anything, the plant mechanics, piping, and equipment all the way to the information regarding the site work and topography and Revit certainly has much more powerful tools for MEP than it did 10 years ago even.  

I understand why they are doing it to a certain degree, but I'm not entirely sure why Autodesk isn't putting more of their eggs into the BIM basket.  In my mind, AutoCAD Architecture and AutoCAD MEP and heck, even AutoCAD in general should stop being updated.  Features that make Civil 3d better than Revit should be incorporated into Revit or possibly in Infraworks...  for infrastructure type projects.  I know there is quite a bit of connectivity between Infraworks and Revit.  Could Infraworks work as a Civil3d application that would better integrate and connect with Revit than Civil3d does??  I don't know for sure, but if so, put the research and development into Infraworks.

Between Infraworks and Revit, it could narrow Autodesk's focus to BIM related applications and we could get a real powerful pair of tools that could fully satisfy every need in the construction design world.  

I'm sorry, I'll climb down from my soapbox now.  I initially just wanted to comment on the "building" portion of your comment and it turned into this diatribe.  I'm sorry.  Feels good to get that off of my chest though.  LOL  

[HVAC-Novice]

---

@Ric_Weber wrote:

Your comment "Revit is a BUILDING  Information Model software. So, it naturally is limited to the building (i.e. office, apartment, or the building a plant is in (but not the plant functions)." is very timely in my mind. I recently was on a webinar, read somewhere, don't remember precisely, that the "Building" in BIM is a verb, not a noun.  That spoke to me.  They said that "Building" in this case was the act of building the "Information Model".  The key in BIM is the Information.  And that information can be regarding anything, the plant mechanics, piping, and equipment all the way to the information regarding the site work and topography and Revit certainly has much more powerful tools for MEP than it did 10 years ago even.  

I understand why they are doing it to a certain degree, but I'm not entirely sure why Autodesk isn't putting more of their eggs into the BIM basket.  In my mind, AutoCAD Architecture and AutoCAD MEP and heck, even AutoCAD in general should stop being updated.  Features that make Civil 3d better than Revit should be incorporated into Revit or possibly in Infraworks...  for infrastructure type projects.  I know there is quite a bit of connectivity between Infraworks and Revit.  Could Infraworks work as a Civil3d application that would better integrate and connect with Revit than Civil3d does??  I don't know for sure, but if so, put the research and development into Infraworks.

Between Infraworks and Revit, it could narrow Autodesk's focus to BIM related applications and we could get a real powerful pair of tools that could fully satisfy every need in the construction design world.  

I'm sorry, I'll climb down from my soapbox now.  I initially just wanted to comment on the "building" portion of your comment and it turned into this diatribe.  I'm sorry.  Feels good to get that off of my chest though.  LOL  

---

Interesting, I never thought of that since I only use Revit for buildings. But I also heard of BIM for bridges etc. So you probably are right that BIM is about the act of "building" in general. 

BUT Revit specifically is advertised to "Design Buildings and infrastructure in 3D".  All the examples they show are buildings. There is nothing where Autodesk claims any Civil or Plant capabilities (outside the rudimentary tools Revit has). Revit also isn't a good tool to design a consumer product, like a car. 

I don't know about the feasibility of incorporating Civil and Plant features in Revit. My first question would be, who pays for the added cost if most current Revit users only design building features? Making a tool for everyone will lead to dilution of capabilities. Especially with Autodesk already way behind with fixing and providing the Building design features in Revit. 

I don't know Civil 3D or Plant. But I suspect they have their own ecosystem of users and plugins very specific to the specific applications and industries. Power plant, bottling plant, A driveway vs. a whole city transportation network or a whole sewer system up to the sewage treatment plant. That all seems to be very out of place for Revit. 

[mhiserZFHXS]

An architecture firm that doesn't use Revit, or some kind of BIM, should be a massive red flag. I would not work for one that doesn't use it. Someone working individually on small-scale residential... maybe... But a full firm doing larger projects? Nope.

It illustrates an inability or unwillingness to change and adapt, which will likely go well beyond what software they use.

I interviewed with a small firm after getting my masters. I asked what software they used, and it was AutoCAD and Sketchup. Funny enough, they also divulged to me that they don't do great financially and struggle to get larger jobs. This is not a coincidence. They offered me a job. I obviously said no.

[RDAOU]

Revit is an AEC/CAD software which is categorized under BIM Authering applications similar to Archicad, Allplan, VArch, OpenBuildings and to a very high degree (as development is still ongoing) Fusion 360, Autocad Architecture, AutoCAD MEP, Infraworks and Civil 3D and many other products from Autodesk. Any software/application which allows for data integration to allow elements to store metadata in some form and which facilitate Multi-discipline Collaboration and Interoprability 

• Edit: I know some will argue the term CAD and Revit is not a CAD software but in reality CAD is a general term for any software that is capable to produce precise drawings, technical illustrations, and 3D models irrispective if of its BIM authering capabilities 

Building in BIM is not an office building or a house as you stated;  the Building in BIM goes even beyong the entire construction industry. Over the past 10 years BIM has expanded beyond just the construction industry and is now being adopted in several other fields. Initially yes, its core focus was architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC); however, other industries have and are leveraging BIM methodologies and technologies for better data management and collaboration. This includes industries such as manufacturing and product design, milling, oil & gas, media & film Industry, automotive...even in AEROSPACE & SHIP Engineering.

And countrary to what @Ric_Weber proposed; if one look at Autodesk's road map, its traget points towards the exact opposit of what he suggested. They are bring all other products up to the level of competition rather than combining all in one. 

In my opinion, Revit in near the future will be decomissioned and there will be in new product from Autodesk that will replace it. Not next year or the next but its certainly on the way and I am sure I will see it before I retire. The only uncertainty is if whether they will use the same brand or rebrand.

[HVAC-Novice]

---

@RDAOU wrote:

Revit is an AEC/CAD software which is categorized under BIM Authering applications similar to Archicad, Allplan, VArch, OpenBuildings and to a very high degree (as development is still ongoing) Fusion 360, Autocad Architecture, AutoCAD MEP, Infraworks and Civil 3D and many other products from Autodesk. Any software/application which allows for data integration to allow elements to store metadata in some form and which facilitate Multi-discipline Collaboration and Interoprability 

• Edit: I know some will argue the term CAD and Revit is not a CAD software but in reality CAD is a general term for any software that is capable to produce precise drawings, technical illustrations, and 3D models irrispective if of its BIM authering capabilities 

Building in BIM is not an office building or a house as you stated;  the Building in BIM goes even beyong the entire construction industry. Over the past 10 years BIM has expanded beyond just the construction industry and is now being adopted in several other fields. Initially yes, its core focus was architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC); however, other industries have and are leveraging BIM methodologies and technologies for better data management and collaboration. This includes industries such as manufacturing and product design, milling, oil & gas, media & film Industry, automotive...even in AEROSPACE & SHIP Engineering.

And countrary to what @Ric_Weber proposed; if one look at Autodesk's road map, its traget points towards the exact opposit of what he suggested. They are bring all other products up to the level of competition rather than combining all in one. 

In my opinion, Revit in near the future will be decomissioned and there will be in new product from Autodesk that will replace it. Not next year or the next but its certainly on the way and I am sure I will see it before I retire. The only uncertainty is if whether they will use the same brand or rebrand.

---

Yes, I remember in the 1980s when in school we learned CAD/CAM (Computer Aided Design / Computer Aided Manufacturing) was the "future". Basically a prediction of 3D printers... 

So yes, Revit is a sophisticated CAD software. But since there also is a product called "AutoCAD", most people mean that by saying "CAD". Or people call someone using Revit "drafting" (it is MODELLING!!!!!). Many people also think because many products are owned by Autodesk, they all magically interoperate fluently. I'm mostly talking about building related designers. I'm sure car designers (also some sort of CAD/CAM) have their own lingo traps. 

I wouldn't care what a new product would be called. But I wouldn't be afraid to learn whatever comes after Revit. i don't know if you have a real source, but maybe Autodesk gave up on Revit because of a new product they are working on? that would explain a lot about the slow development of Revit..... 

[nikpearce]

As mentioned in my OP I have only been using CAD software for about 2 months. I have no previous experience with any type of drafting or 3d modelling, i have been on the tools for the majority of my working life. 

[Ric_Weber]

@HVAC-Novice you stated, "Revit also isn't a good tool to design a consumer product, like a car."  I would agree, consumer products; cars, appliances, tools, etc. would best be designed in the realm of Inventor, 3ds Max, Fusion.  Those products that are part of the Product Design & Manufacturing Collection.

You also said, "I don't know about the feasibility of incorporating Civil and Plant features in Revit." and you're right in regards to the Civil definitely.  That is why I was talking about InfraWorks being a possible option there.  Not knowing all of the capabilities of InfraWorks and Civil3D, I am unsure, but I would believe there would be enough overlap to combine the functionality into one application.  An application that could seamlessly integrate with Revit.  

Plant features, in my experience is basically, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing items (machines, electricity distribution, and pipes and valves and regulators).  So other than being larger, what would the difference be between that and MEP modeling.  The information would just be different that is plugged into the items modeled.   I could say that I could see a day when the MEP/Plant functionality within Revit could become a separate extension that users could choose to install or not install.  That could take us back to the days when Revit Architecture, Revit Structural, and Revit MEP were separate applications.  Not a bad option as long as they continue to work seamlessly together.  

Your statement, "My first question would be, who pays for the added cost if most current Revit users only design building features?" confuses me a bit.  Don't most engineering and architectural firms already subscribe to the AEC Collection for their users?  All of these applications are already available in that collection.  Therefore we are already paying for them.  By consolidating the applications we would essentially also be applying all of that manpower into one application instead of across several.  Therefore the cost to Autodesk would not increase and update production could theoretically increase.  Which is kind of an answer to your comment of "Especially with Autodesk already way behind with fixing and providing the Building design features in Revit." with which I definitely agree.  In my "roadmap", if you will, Autodesk would have a lot fewer products, but equal if not higher capabilities.  Focus would be narrowed. 

These are just my opinions.  I doubt if Autodesk or anyone of any influence would ever listen to me, but this is how I think.   

[Ric_Weber]

@RDAOU, you said, "...if one look at Autodesk's road map, its traget points towards the exact opposit of what he suggested. They are bring all other products up to the level of competition rather than combining all in one."... I agree.  What I am suggesting is not what is on Autodesk's roadmap.  It is my opinion as to what should happen.  And as I said in my reply to @HVAC-Novice, I doubt if Autodesk or anyone of any influence would ever listen to me, but this is how I think.

You said, "In my opinion, Revit in near the future will be decomissioned and there will be in new product from Autodesk that will replace it. Not next year or the next but its certainly on the way and I am sure I will see it before I retire. The only uncertainty is if whether they will use the same brand or rebrand."  I really would like to understand your reasoning for Autodesk to mothball their flagship/shining star (in the AECO industry at least) application for something else.  I do foresee a future where all functionality of the Revit software is moved online however.  We're already seeing some signs of that with Forma, FormIt Pro, and AutoCAD Web.  If something like that is what you are envisioning, I can completely agree.  

[Ric_Weber]

@nikpearce, I sorry we have moved away from your original question.  I blame my own ramblings mostly. 

As a couple others have said, you could do your work in Revit, export to .dwg, and then be able to integrate your drawings with those of your colleagues.  As an architectural BIM Manager now who used to be working more as an architect or a drafter, I wish I would have spent more time continuing to work in AutoCAD as well as Revit.  As I like to say, "I have forgotten more about AutoCAD than I ever knew".   Although I am now an Autodesk Certified Revit Architecture Professional, I wish I could claim that same badge in the AutoCAD realm.  

So my answer to you would be definitely learn Revit...  but don't forget about her ancestor AutoCAD.  Try to stay fluent and up to date.  You don't need to be an expert, but at least try to use it enough that you can work your way around without needing to go to Google or YouTube every time you have to try to do something.   

As @mhiserZFHXS said, in your future in this career, I would definitely think twice about going to work for a firm that is not at least mostly using Revit.  As he said, "It illustrates an inability or unwillingness to change and adapt".  Even firms that are using Revit are often times stuck in their ways unfortunately.  "Make this look like we had in AutoCAD"...  ugh!  That statement always makes me cringe.  

As you can see, I'm very opinionated.  Sorry. 

[RDAOU]

---

@HVAC-Novice wrote:

---

I wouldn't care what a new product would be called. But I wouldn't be afraid to learn whatever comes after Revit. i don't know if you have a real source, but maybe Autodesk gave up on Revit because of a new product they are working on? that would explain a lot about the slow development of Revit..... 

---

They haven't given up on it, but its code is outdated. Users see new features being added, but the core code has either reached or is nearing the end of its lifecycle. There are no major changes or developments to its algorithm. It’s already a 28-year-old software with little room for further enhancement. Any new feature they introduce won’t be a significant breakthrough due to the limitations of the existing code. It’s like saying, “I’m still going to be using COBOL, PASCAL, or FORTRAN" in 2040....if you say that today people will tell you WTF!!

They will eventually have to transition to open, multi-, and hybrid-processing architectures, adopt more dynamic programming techniques, and optimize algorithms. For the past 25 year they managed to build the biggest customer base and the largest market share in the AEC industry but in many aspects Revit is startly starting to fall behind. 

I have been using Revit for the past 25 yreas and I do love it but how much did it really change from 2016 till 2025; I mean real changes/improvements and not introducing toposolid or aquiring UNIFI and rebranding it to Content Catalogue or changing a logo here or a UI there...

[RSomppi]

---

@RDAOU wrote:
They haven't given up on it, but its code is outdated. Users see new features being added, but the core code has either reached or is nearing the end of its lifecycle. There are no major changes or developments to its algorithm. It’s already a 28-year-old software with little room for further enhancement. Any new feature they introduce won’t be a significant breakthrough due to the limitations of the existing code. It’s like saying, “I’m still going to be using COBOL, PASCAL, or FORTRAN" in 2040....if you say that today people will tell you WTF!!

---

The same can be said for AutoCAD but it is still around and relevant.

I've been waiting for the next gen for for over five years but Revit (and the add-ins) keeps getting better. I've gotten to the point that I no longer see it coming before the end of my career. In fact, I don't want to go through another learning curve and the same nay-saying that happens whenever the next big thing comes out.