How much more efficient is Revit MEP vs AutoCAD LT for MEP design?

[Anonymous]

I work in a small MEP engineering firm that has been using AutoCAD LT for creating MEP drawings. We have just received word that our largest Architectural client is currently making the switch to Revit. The majority of our smaller architectural clients are also using Revit. I am trying to convince my boss that it would make since for us to switch to Revit MEP because it will save us time during the design process. Also, interference detection would save a lot of money being paid out for change orders due to lack of coordination with structural members. I've tried to find some actual data on how much productivity can be improved by using Revit MEP vs AutoCAD LT but I have not been able to find any online. Can anyone provide any insight on this topic or have any suggestions about where to look for this type of data? I need something to help convince my boss that the increased software cost would be absorbed by the increased productivity and savings.

Any information will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Alex

[RobDraw]

I'm not surprised that you haven't found anything that supports what you are saying. Making the switch to Revit us not going to increase productivity. Aside from the fact that there's no comparing the two platforms, they are quite different, there's a huge learning curve. Good luck, you've got a tough battle ahead of you simply because unless everyone is fully on board and is willing to start a completely different workflow, it's going to be a long time that there will be any increase in productivity.

[dyp4f]

Unfortunately, the adoption of Revit in a small MEP engineering office has 2 major problems:

1) Revit is very expensive. In Europe, the AEC Collection costs € 4.102/year (Including estimated VAT).

For American people to fully understand it, with the current exchange rate that amount is equivalent to: 4.840 USD every year.

For comparison, in USA the same Autodesk AEC Collection costs 3.115 USD.

Autodesk AEC Collection costs 55% more in Europe than in USA !

Let say you have a small MEP engineering office and you make 50.000 euros per year. Under the current heavy taxation you will have 30.000 euros available to survive for the whole year. Autodesk demands from you to pay 4.840 euros out of 30.000 euro. In other words Autodesk demands from you a percentage of 16% of your yearly net income ! This is clearly going to lead you to close your office !

2) Revit is very difficult to learn, to  a level of real productive work. For at least 1 year (and probably much more) you will try to learn it, facing myriads of questions and problems and trying to find solutions in several forums and youtube videos. At the very same time, you will have to face really strictly deadlines from your customers and cooperators, and you will be unable to catch those deadlines, because the Revit "learning curve" will be consuming a large (if not all) of your productive time and mental effort. The result could be a significant decrease of your net income, up to a point where you no more will be able to continue with your profession.

For the above reasons, I really don't see how a small MEP engineering office, especially in Europe, could effectively adopt Autodesk Revit in their work.

[RobDraw]

I totally disagree with the above comments by @dyp4f. He paints a very bleak picture that is not only off topic but it makes certain assumptions that are not typical.

As long as there is a market for MEP in Revit, even a freelancer can make money with it. Telling your boss that simply switching from LT sill make the office more productive is misleading at best.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the replies. I want to make sure that I am understanding what you guys are saying. It sounds like there is a large learning curve that will go along with a switch to Revit, which we were assuming. Our plan was to only take one person (most likely myself) and purchase a single seat of Revit and begin building our libraries, templates, etc. My thoughts on this is that it would drastically reduce the learning curve for all the other engineers and designers if we have the software basically setup like we want it before we transition everyone else. In essence, the first person would work out most of the kinks. The software costs are really not a big issue in my mind because of the potential savings from not having to pay for change orders due to errors that would most likely be caught during interference detections.

The one thing I'm having to hardest time understanding is that it sounds like creating MEP design drawings in AutoCAD LT is as fast or faster than creating them in Revit? I understand initially things may be slow but I would think that Revit MEP would have to be more streamlined than the way we are using AutoCAD LT. I guess the main question I have now, understanding the limited capabilities of streamlining workflows with AutoCAD LT, is Revit truly not a time saver over standard AutoCAD LT when it comes to creating MEP drawings once the software is "completely setup" for the end user?

[HVAC-Novice]

speak for yourself..... Did you actually ever work with Revit? 

I usually try not to comment on opinions, but I can't just let this misleading statement stand here.

What small MEP firm only makes 50K/ year? That is less than a single engineer makes. Do they only employ half an intern? 

Yes, it takes long to know all that Revit can do. Actually one will learn new stuff every day. But it doesn't take a year to learn Revit to a point to be more productive than AutoCAD. Unless you are a really slow learner. You also ignore the fact that an alternative software also would take time to learn and also would cost money. 

IMHO Revit can be more productive. But the real advantage is that you can do so much more and the quality of the design can be so much better. So the saved time you invest back into a better design. Just one avoided change order will make up for the cost of Revit. 

99% of the problems with Revit are in front of the screen. 

[RobDraw]

There is no definitive answer when it comes to productivity. That really comes down to workflow. Some people can put out quality drawings very quickly in LT. Revit could be used to put out those same drawings but not as efficiently. Revit's benefits are actually outside the realm of LT. So it's not really possible to compare them.

The team is going to need formal training and good support in the beginning. There really isn't a way to flatten the curve. Having ready made content that fits your standards can help speed things up but I learned a lot by trouble shooting and have used those typical stumbling blocks as training aids but that approach doesn't work for everyone.

In a small office, it really comes down to the people. The more willing they are to cut the AutoCAD cord, the better it will go.

[iainsavage]

For roughing in a design Revit can be very productive if you make use of the generic families and simple routing solutions for pipes and ducts, especially if you use placeholders initially and then tab-select and convert to pipe/duct, use the automatic routing and then tweak the results.

If you want more realistic or tailored families then that takes a bit more effort.

I personally think though that its well worth it to get the extra quality output, sections and 3D views for “free”, clash detection, quick scheduling, instant updating of information (including tags and schedules) across the whole project, etc.

Autocad LT basically draws lines and circles.

Revit creates intelligent connected systems.

Bear in mind that the cost of the AEC collection also include full Autocad as well as other software.

It was tough in the early months getting up to speed and I still learn new stuff every day, but personally I wouldn’t go back to Autocad for anything but the most basic tasks - mostly now I only use Autocad for creating xrefs to import to Revit as underlays.

Hope this helps.

[andkal]

As for Revit vs Acad LT - It depends on what you do in your projects. If installations for houses or some small builtings LT will be sufficient and faster and you will rather not convince your boss to buy expensive Revit.
If you do medium size or bigger projecst or plantrooms then you will really appretiate 3D.

Revit is complicated and as dyp4f wrote it is difficult to learn.  As you already know Autocad the solution for you could be going for Autocad MEP or Autocad (full 3D version)+ Magicad or some other 3rd party application for Autocad. You wouldnt nottice too much of decrease of work efficiency.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the reply. The biggest reason that I am pushing for a switch to Revit is due to the fact that most of our Architectural clients use Revit and generate .dwg files to send to us. These files are only 2D and can sometimes be a bit confusing to understand exactly how the building is constructed so that we can design piping and duct routing. It really seems to me that if we were working in the same 3D model as the architects, our design time would be reduced and overall more accurate with less time spent making changes and site visits during the construction process. Our biggest issue right now is that our designers are not being detail oriented enough to catch the small errors that turn into change orders during construction. I believe that a product like Revit MEP  with a more streamlined approach, instead of lines, circles, arcs, text, etc., would greatly improve the quality of our designs by effectively eliminating most of the small errors that we end up with on our plans. 

[HVAC-Novice]

Most people here will be biased toward Revit.... but if the entities you work with use Revit, it is a no-brainer. I bet at some point those companies will be fed up creating dwg for you. and they just create dwg from views that serve their purposes, not the ones you may need.  I don't know what relation you have to them, but I bet they will start pushing for working with a company that makes it easy for them (BIM).  Maybe you don't know it, but you may already have lost contracts for that reason. A growing number of clients also require BIM. 

And the trend goes towards BIM. Better start now. Same with learning to drive a car. Probably good investment, unless you believe horses will make a comeback. I think the only reason to not start BIM now is if you are a year away from retirement or so. 

All the companies we work with use BIM now. Unless it is a really small standalone single-trade project, we probably wouldn't even look at hiring a firm that doesn't use BIM. 

Edit: also note, Revit got rid of the differentiation between MEP, structural and architectural. So what you buy as Revit will have ALL tools included. Until about 10 years ago they had separate versions, but fortunately got rid of that model. 

[robert2JCCH]

Ill try to avoid pitching in comments that the others have brushed on already. As you can see productivity in Revit is a perpetually lively debate.

For your immediate needs in this post, Revit comes installed with Revit Viewer which does not require a subscription to be maintained. It will not allow you to plot or save changes, but you can open isometrics, cut sections, and generally navigate the model. Try using this initially in your firm to test the waters on whether you can find immediate value in your workflow that could justify the initial productivity losses associated with learning, debugging, and constructing your standards.

[iainsavage]

---

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 It really seems to me that if we were working in the same 3D model as the architects, our design time would be reduced and overall more accurate with less time spent making changes and site visits during the construction….would greatly improve the quality of our designs by effectively eliminating most of the small errors that we end up with on our plans. 

You’ve hit the nail on the head there.

Many clients, particularly governments and other public bodies, insist on using BIM on their projects so that they get better coordinated designs and reduce variations during construction because variations cost them a fortune and delay completion. 

If used properly, BIM will certainly go a long way towards that aim.

It also sounds like you would benefit from using the design-to- fabrication capability in Revit to produce very realistic and accurate details.

PS: you can also output 3D .dwg drawings from Revit although that probably doesn’t help you if you’re using LT since its not much use for 3D work.

[kristofer.tatsch]

A few things to add:

1. Revit 3D modeling and BIM are not completely interchangeable terms. I have been modeling in Revit for years, but have barely scratched the surface on leveraging BIM. I would doubt that you'll go from AutoCAD LT straight to coordinating full BIM.

2. Efficiency isn't the right word, it's just different. That said, if someone asks me to do a quick AutoCAD sketch, I will do it in Revit every time. I still know many of the AutoCAD commands, but there's just not that much that I prefer to do in AutoCAD.

3. There will always be hold outs, but your firm will have to decide to stay back with the ever-shrinking group looking backwards, or get in the ever-growing group moving forwards. Profit may be hard the first year or two, but that's investment. The decision to not switch 10 years ago is different than the decision to not switch now.