Tpopgraphy - Terrain Modelling

[Anonymous]

Is anybody doing serious terrain modeling in Revit Architecture? By serious terrain modelling I mean a 24,000 square metre shopping centre where I have to modify the existing toposurface to create the open parking areas on the site, cut buildings into the site crate embankments and all the usual site things. I don't know if I am stupid or not but Revit's Site tools are so unsophisticated it takes days even weeks to model a terrain. Sketchup has a much better terrain modeler despite its other obvious deficiencies. There appears to be no automation to making cuts and fills and fall offs from pads. Dragging around points or manually entering points to modify an existing toposurface takes forever. Am I trying to do too much in Revit Architecture? If the answer to this last question is yes then what good is a product that can only partially model the project. Do I have to buy another product to model the terrain more efficiently and then run the gamut of the problems of importing it into Revit? By problems I mean Revit's annoying habit of interpolating a toposurface from an imported 3-D contour line drawing by choosing to ignore the contour lines in some places and creating a toposurface that does not match the imported surface contours.Then there is the issue of phases in site works. I could go on and on. Please help me or point me in the right direction. I would welcome any comments or advise.

[Anonymous]

Is anybody doing serious terrain modeling in Revit Architecture? By serious terrain modelling I mean a 24,000 square metre shopping centre where I have to modify the existing toposurface to create the open parking areas on the site, cut buildings into the site crate embankments and all the usual site things. I don't know if I am stupid or not but Revit's Site tools are so unsophisticated it takes days even weeks to model a terrain. Sketchup has a much better terrain modeler despite its other obvious deficiencies. There appears to be no automation to making cuts and fills and fall offs from pads. Dragging around points or manually entering points to modify an existing toposurface takes forever. Am I trying to do too much in Revit Architecture? If the answer to this last question is yes then what good is a product that can only partially model the project. Do I have to buy another product to model the terrain more efficiently and then run the gamut of the problems of importing it into Revit? By problems I mean Revit's annoying habit of interpolating a toposurface from an imported 3-D contour line drawing by choosing to ignore the contour lines in some places and creating a toposurface that does not match the imported surface contours.Then there is the issue of phases in site works. I could go on and on. Please help me or point me in the right direction. I would welcome any comments or advise.

[Anonymous]

DB-D,

I completely understand your frustration. Been there, done that.

After delving into the way Revit creates more complex sites I have made this determination.

If it is a preliminary site model that does not require a lot of more advanced/complicated features such as curb and gutter that follows true grading then I use Revit. I know that Revit can model curb and gutter and other features like that but it becomes too cumbersome. Especially when I have other tools (3DS Max) that will do that kind of modeling much more easily.

If it is a site that requires more advance modeling, I'll typically do what I can easily do in Revit then export that to Max. Then I'll use the edges of my different surfaces to create my objects that need to follow true grades. By true grades, I mean the site is not represented as a flat plane. If, in fact, you can get by with modeling the site as flat then Revit will work fine, even with more complicated objects.

In summary, if the site topology needs to be accurately modeled and features such as curb and gutter need to follow the topology then I don't use Revit beyond creating the grading, parking, streets, sidewalks, etc.

If the site needs to be accurately portrayed, then I find it easier to use another tool in the tool box such as 3DS.

[Anonymous]

DB-D,

I completely understand your frustration. Been there, done that.

After delving into the way Revit creates more complex sites I have made this determination.

If it is a preliminary site model that does not require a lot of more advanced/complicated features such as curb and gutter that follows true grading then I use Revit. I know that Revit can model curb and gutter and other features like that but it becomes too cumbersome. Especially when I have other tools (3DS Max) that will do that kind of modeling much more easily.

If it is a site that requires more advance modeling, I'll typically do what I can easily do in Revit then export that to Max. Then I'll use the edges of my different surfaces to create my objects that need to follow true grades. By true grades, I mean the site is not represented as a flat plane. If, in fact, you can get by with modeling the site as flat then Revit will work fine, even with more complicated objects.

In summary, if the site topology needs to be accurately modeled and features such as curb and gutter need to follow the topology then I don't use Revit beyond creating the grading, parking, streets, sidewalks, etc.

If the site needs to be accurately portrayed, then I find it easier to use another tool in the tool box such as 3DS.

[Anonymous]

Allenb1

Thanks for the advice.We use Viz as a rendering tool so I suppose the step up to Max won't be too painful, but isn't there a problem here? If we model the terrain in Max and bring it into Revit to produce construction documentation we start to degrade the intelligence of the model - e.g. adjusting building levels would require a rework of the terrain in Max and then an update into Revit.
I was hoping that there may be a product out there like "Revit Civil" or "Revit Terrain" or "Revit Site" if get my drift. The Revit series of products seem to cover all aspects of architecture and construction with the exception of site works and landscape (hard and soft).

[Anonymous]

Allenb1

Thanks for the advice.We use Viz as a rendering tool so I suppose the step up to Max won't be too painful, but isn't there a problem here? If we model the terrain in Max and bring it into Revit to produce construction documentation we start to degrade the intelligence of the model - e.g. adjusting building levels would require a rework of the terrain in Max and then an update into Revit.
I was hoping that there may be a product out there like "Revit Civil" or "Revit Terrain" or "Revit Site" if get my drift. The Revit series of products seem to cover all aspects of architecture and construction with the exception of site works and landscape (hard and soft).

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately no such "Revit Site". What you get in Revit Arch is the best you get out of Revit. Which, in all honesty is pretty good for an Architectural package. Name me a civil package that devotes as much attention to Architecture as Revit has devoted to Site.

I'm used to using multiple packages for various tasks. Mostly what I do is use the different packages to create my model that I then take into Max to render.

I have not yet gone from Max to Revit or even Civil 3D to Revit for that matter. Civil 3D is what the firm uses that I am currently assisting.

Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately no such "Revit Site". What you get in Revit Arch is the best you get out of Revit. Which, in all honesty is pretty good for an Architectural package. Name me a civil package that devotes as much attention to Architecture as Revit has devoted to Site.

I'm used to using multiple packages for various tasks. Mostly what I do is use the different packages to create my model that I then take into Max to render.

I have not yet gone from Max to Revit or even Civil 3D to Revit for that matter. Civil 3D is what the firm uses that I am currently assisting.

Hope this helps.

[Anonymous]

The ability of Revit to do sites is just luck! I mean that we can go on with
Revit's site tools because most of us don't do big or difficult sites...
Bigger companies with projects of more than twenty buildings for example
have problems with Revit's site creation.
I think it is all because of Revit's lacking of modeling tools. That means
lacking of serious development by Autodesk.
For example, a tool like Max's Terrain command would be great and with some
basic modeling and booleans you would be able to create complex sites. Also,
the creation of roads without beeing able to extrude is primitive modeling.
I know that site creation is not Revit's first priority... Maybe that's why
the name was Revit Building so far... Because Revit Architecture, could mean
that we would be able to create a bridge too... This is not easy with
Revit's 2-3 modeling tools.
What also makes me mad is that everyone has the idea "Export to MAX,
......" WHAT? Nobody told me that I have to buy MAX to do almost every
modeling work that is more complex than a cube or a cylinder! If we need
some tools of MAX in Revit, then BRING THEM IN REVIT TOO!
Sorry but there is nobody giving me money to buy software, I have not a rich
uncle from Australia, I work to make money so I feel I have to get what I
have been promised.
I can't even have a schedule in my language (greek) because I can't change
some footnotes or headings or descriptions!
(Grand total, Gross building area, etc... try to change these, you can't...)
No respect for non-english people I see!

[Anonymous]

The ability of Revit to do sites is just luck! I mean that we can go on with
Revit's site tools because most of us don't do big or difficult sites...
Bigger companies with projects of more than twenty buildings for example
have problems with Revit's site creation.
I think it is all because of Revit's lacking of modeling tools. That means
lacking of serious development by Autodesk.
For example, a tool like Max's Terrain command would be great and with some
basic modeling and booleans you would be able to create complex sites. Also,
the creation of roads without beeing able to extrude is primitive modeling.
I know that site creation is not Revit's first priority... Maybe that's why
the name was Revit Building so far... Because Revit Architecture, could mean
that we would be able to create a bridge too... This is not easy with
Revit's 2-3 modeling tools.
What also makes me mad is that everyone has the idea "Export to MAX,
......" WHAT? Nobody told me that I have to buy MAX to do almost every
modeling work that is more complex than a cube or a cylinder! If we need
some tools of MAX in Revit, then BRING THEM IN REVIT TOO!
Sorry but there is nobody giving me money to buy software, I have not a rich
uncle from Australia, I work to make money so I feel I have to get what I
have been promised.
I can't even have a schedule in my language (greek) because I can't change
some footnotes or headings or descriptions!
(Grand total, Gross building area, etc... try to change these, you can't...)
No respect for non-english people I see!