roberto 2011
Guest
if for the rare problems of autocad you think about formatting, for revit that you should do? a punitive expedition in the United States!? I'm sorry.
lance
Guest
no, it's that you just can't see it!!!....any like me with autocad!!!!:tongue::biggrin:
roberto 2011
Guest
I have my reasons, which are also those of many others.
Tell me why revit doesn't take off?
For years now it's widespread with the maximum commitment from adesk, but if you take a tour of technical studies at the limit you find archicad, not revit.
Then, I repeat, it depends on what one has to do. for my needs of autocad campaign designer is like a ferrari! :
lance
Guest
the plan revit is spreading, on the fact that it is not taken off however I am quite agreeable, and I think that the cause is that they have not yet understood the potential of the bim (generally not specifically that of revit). I recently discovered, for example, that in the field public administrations do not accept projects for public works if not based on this system, they understood that it allows a greater management of the costs both construction and maintenance. .
ps:I apologize for the offtopic:tongue:
ps:I apologize for the offtopic:tongue:
roberto 2011
Guest
mah, I find the project in revit (bim therefore), very fake, think for example at the stairs, and very conditioned by the famous families.
the other day I saw an advertisement where there was an image of a building in perspective, probably made with revit. there were the usual subtle, subtle Persians, not found in our parts and perhaps throughout Italy. And then there was one of those things that made me very angry. the cover mantle instead of going out of a few cm. compared to the thread of the gronda, as in reality, it had even returned within about a dozen cm. as a narrow dress after the washing machine... then, probably, they used the technique that I used, that is double sole, one for the brick-cement and one for the coat of cover, because usually the covering loft in revit is unique, changes only the color for the alleged tiles, and generates that type of covers completely spanned in the air. :redface:
lance
Guest
Mah, look, I don't respond to these big problems....designing a parametric persian is operation a few minutes between the other, then you can reuse it in many projects. sunshine and mantle are actually designed separately as they are made in reality.The scales... until the module arrives (which by means must be arranged and is an unacceptable gap) well, where does not arrive I model the non-parametric scale and....for against the bim and exceptional. .quantity always up-to-date,perfect congruence between plants prospetti sections, instant modifications,preventive evidence of errors that otherwise would jump out only in the yard,improved communication of the project to the client,improved management of the logistics of the yard etc.
For example, the University of Turin is carrying out a project between research and practice in which it uses the bim system to manage the area of the entire university, both for the construction of new structures and for the management of historical buildings, and at the moment they are very satisfied.
I repeat I am not here defended by sword treats revit... but the bim yes! software is not perfect and will never be (what software can say such?) but it is the underlying philosophy that counts.personally I am willing to make a sacrifice to overcome some limits of the program to stay at the center of a revolution in which I believe a lot. the software will improve...or a better competition will come out:wink:
end of sermon:tongue: I'm sorry, but it's an argument that I'm "I'm" a lot.
If you want, we can keep talking about it. but perhaps it is better to open another discussion:finger:
For example, the University of Turin is carrying out a project between research and practice in which it uses the bim system to manage the area of the entire university, both for the construction of new structures and for the management of historical buildings, and at the moment they are very satisfied.
I repeat I am not here defended by sword treats revit... but the bim yes! software is not perfect and will never be (what software can say such?) but it is the underlying philosophy that counts.personally I am willing to make a sacrifice to overcome some limits of the program to stay at the center of a revolution in which I believe a lot. the software will improve...or a better competition will come out:wink:
end of sermon:tongue: I'm sorry, but it's an argument that I'm "I'm" a lot.
If you want, we can keep talking about it. but perhaps it is better to open another discussion:finger:
roberto 2011
Guest
I think this is a big limit. a family, in this case I mean a kind of persian to your liking and not only parametric (everything should be parametric...), commits you as a programmer and not as a building designer.
Let us not say that families are simple. Maybe for some I am but not for everyone. I remember when I imposed myself to change the arrows that indicate the sections, it also helped me The ivan but in the end they were very little localized and quite brute. You will converge with me that the section arrows in revit are larger than the same plants in the building... and above all to the town he doesn't give a damn about the numeretto regarding the plotting, as the U.T. simply wants the indication of where you made the x-x and y-y sections.
then the stairs is not only a problem of "realization", not to mention the ones to the spiral..., it is that they do not have a structure.
the other day with my revit 2012 I reopened a project to reprint it, well, I couldn't. the plotter kicked and never left, I tried to make the computer work without spool but it was the same, I tried how to pull out a pdf, but I didn't really find the command. A disaster.
with autocad stamps flying all you want and do all the pdfs you want. You will tell me that in autocad are 4 lines and that it does not have to take down the whole building and the circus. Right. That's why I say I have a different need. at least until the u.t. will not ask us a plan table with the perspectives and rendering.. .
Incidentally said, and I conclude, pass the dwg to the strutturista or make us pregeous and docfa is a fly. with revit you should first review the "views" to autocad...
:redface: 
lance
Guest
just to conclude then I would say that we can remain happily each of our ideas and if it happens to go drinking a beer.....:wink:
is the customer who wants them therefore....
to date revit is the best exporter towards autocad and in 2012 it has improved again...poi sincerely in a world where much material comes to me still printed from the space model, all on the zero layer, with plants not congruent to the prospects (if you make them catch them immediately), loft quotas, it is not a superimposed line that creates me anxiety
Last thing and I close....it is not written anywhere that revit must be an easy program (excluding autodesk vendors) because it is easy not to design a building.domarlo requires years, like all high-end software (max ps and I presume also catia sw etc) but at least in my way to see it is a step forward towards a more efficient design.
Hello and good work!
What is a big limit for you is a huge advantage for me, that of being able to reproduce quite faithfully any job in my project and be able to extrapolate any information about it. Then you talk about programming maybe referring to the parameterization but I remind you that it is about drawing objects by following some logical point, no programming languages or other.
dolente note of revit and for more atavica: mad:, granted.... but I have always come out, sometimes with sacrifice, and should not be so, but what software does not spit a little blood in some of its areas? Look at this discussion from where it goes!
I don't follow you here. .. always printed all correctly, only shortness to keep the updated pl drivers, if then steps from pdf (pdf creator goes that it is a splinter) even better...... perspective and rendering if it is not u.t. (who always willingly accepts them. . .when you do not ask me expressly: mad
is the customer who wants them therefore....to date revit is the best exporter towards autocad and in 2012 it has improved again...poi sincerely in a world where much material comes to me still printed from the space model, all on the zero layer, with plants not congruent to the prospects (if you make them catch them immediately), loft quotas, it is not a superimposed line that creates me anxiety
Last thing and I close....it is not written anywhere that revit must be an easy program (excluding autodesk vendors) because it is easy not to design a building.domarlo requires years, like all high-end software (max ps and I presume also catia sw etc) but at least in my way to see it is a step forward towards a more efficient design.
Hello and good work!
roberto 2011
Guest
Well, it's not like making a car crash. You have to unmatch a lot before you find a solution.
and the famous computs!? ?
but with what I pay I must also use a third program like pdf creator!?
and that's why retailers when they let you buy it and then sell you the subscription that you can no longer cancel should be a bit more correct and warn you of what you go to.
revit has nothing to do with the "design of the building" that lies in the head of the designer technician and the same could be said of autocad, what remains instead is the lunar engagement and the standardized and conditioning results that gives you such a program, after for years many have searched in various ways, forum in primis, to make adjustments of which autodesk has never responded for inability or Italian Menphremism.
Good work to you too. to resent us... :smile:
architekno
Guest
I get into the discussion.
for those who do not know me I am an architect of 65 years and now since 2002 I use revit.
I have decided to change in addition to the instrument also the way of working, I have employed many economic and mental resources to dehydrate such concepts.
throughout the process I use revit architecture is I decided to find collaborators who used tools around my revit.
so I also changed my colleagues I wanted strutturisti based on revit structure and robots, implantists on revit mep, I found them and now we collaborate as before I was doing with the strutturista under the house .
What have I earned from all this? Now I enjoy time, project 10 times more is I have 25% more time off. . .
lastly personal considerations are always accepted in all forums but every time I hear complaints .... They forced me to buy it..... they cheated me with the sub......the program does not do what they said etc.
seems that such forum journals having failed (in this case on revit)
They must seek and impose that everyone must fail, for the sole purpose not to feel failures .... .
you make choices, you make expenses, the responsibility of such actions is only user not others.
I apologize to all those who felt offended by that post.
for those who do not know me I am an architect of 65 years and now since 2002 I use revit.
I have decided to change in addition to the instrument also the way of working, I have employed many economic and mental resources to dehydrate such concepts.
throughout the process I use revit architecture is I decided to find collaborators who used tools around my revit.
so I also changed my colleagues I wanted strutturisti based on revit structure and robots, implantists on revit mep, I found them and now we collaborate as before I was doing with the strutturista under the house .
What have I earned from all this? Now I enjoy time, project 10 times more is I have 25% more time off. . .
lastly personal considerations are always accepted in all forums but every time I hear complaints .... They forced me to buy it..... they cheated me with the sub......the program does not do what they said etc.
seems that such forum journals having failed (in this case on revit)
They must seek and impose that everyone must fail, for the sole purpose not to feel failures .... .
you make choices, you make expenses, the responsibility of such actions is only user not others.
I apologize to all those who felt offended by that post.
roberto 2011
Guest
But it is never the opposite.. .
you lose time to tell your experience only because it is hoped, utopianly certain, that the software-house puts a patch on the things that you think are not going.
If they force you to pay the sub, even if you don't use the program anymore, it doesn't seem like a news to keep hidden, as you should say otherwise if there was a trend reversal.
bringing his experience to the maximum is told to the other "beware" since everything is propagated as the maximum attainment and total abandonment of the old autocad, not certain that they must "fall" them too.
but for love, wish everyone!! :tongue:asalalp
Guest
quoto lance in everything.
bim software will be more difficult to use but give huge benefits.
bim software will be more difficult to use but give huge benefits.
roberto 2011
Guest
Now that these posts have been moved into the revit section, creating an ad hoc discussion, I think I will only meet enthusiastic users or almost of this program :tongue:
For example, I would ask those who merely say "all lance" to argue their position a bit and, if they wish, to respond to my critical remarks, always "seriously and peacefully" :biggrin:
Since there was another discussion with some important posts on the same topic, I will try to make a copy and paste:originally written by uluwatu_74
. (revit fortunately for very short time...but I understood the dramatic situation!). ... Azzz, I'm not alone then. I'm not an isolated fool! ! !
from tristan:
you are dinosaurs!! ! the truth and that those who propose revit always say that problems come out because utonti (not users but utonti) do not know the program well. in practice they always give you somaro.
I, who I don't feel so lost if for over 30 years I have been a freelancer, I have used it for 2 years and in the end I had to retrace all my projects on autocad, where at least 2d you can do and..... print with closed eyes.
revit does the project, it is not he who decides how to wrong on the joints or when he impunities not to give you the surfaces or when he compels you to climb the Everst to have a caxxxo of plan table to present to the commune.... .
best wishes to all those who use revit are also forced to make families... So many wives and many children. . .
last post glued:Revit updates everything automatically. change a plant and you find yourself all right, as well as a prospectus etc.
but while with autocad you can put on various floors one above the other, with the same origin of coordinates clearly, with revit, while having all the building inside, you can not align, for example, the windows and doors between one floor and the other.
another diavoleria are the automatic quotas. first: if you have a wall with the plaster over the structure the quota will teach you 33 cm. instead of 30, it means to high all the compendium (!!), second, if you turn off or eliminate the reference the quota disappears. . .
a good day!! :smile:
For example, I would ask those who merely say "all lance" to argue their position a bit and, if they wish, to respond to my critical remarks, always "seriously and peacefully" :biggrin:
Since there was another discussion with some important posts on the same topic, I will try to make a copy and paste:originally written by uluwatu_74
. (revit fortunately for very short time...but I understood the dramatic situation!). ... Azzz, I'm not alone then. I'm not an isolated fool! ! !
from tristan:
you are dinosaurs!! ! the truth and that those who propose revit always say that problems come out because utonti (not users but utonti) do not know the program well. in practice they always give you somaro.
I, who I don't feel so lost if for over 30 years I have been a freelancer, I have used it for 2 years and in the end I had to retrace all my projects on autocad, where at least 2d you can do and..... print with closed eyes.
revit does the project, it is not he who decides how to wrong on the joints or when he impunities not to give you the surfaces or when he compels you to climb the Everst to have a caxxxo of plan table to present to the commune.... .
best wishes to all those who use revit are also forced to make families... So many wives and many children. . .
last post glued:Revit updates everything automatically. change a plant and you find yourself all right, as well as a prospectus etc.
but while with autocad you can put on various floors one above the other, with the same origin of coordinates clearly, with revit, while having all the building inside, you can not align, for example, the windows and doors between one floor and the other.
another diavoleria are the automatic quotas. first: if you have a wall with the plaster over the structure the quota will teach you 33 cm. instead of 30, it means to high all the compendium (!!), second, if you turn off or eliminate the reference the quota disappears. . .
a good day!! :smile:
lance
Guest
I'm sorry, but these are these statements that leave me perplexed. .
with revit not only can you align the windows between one floor and another but you can even create a bond between them so that if you move one another automatically follows it without you having to worry about aligning them again. Besides if you know how to use the families the reference to use for alignment you create it.if a wall is from 30 and from 30 if it is from 33 it is from 33 point. you can take as reference of the quota any layer of the wall so do not count the plaster or coat if you prefer, but do not draw from 30 a wall that will be from 33, that is cheating, and as much as it can make convenient to a certain type of clientele, is always and however cheating, and you can not ask that a software predicts this. besides fury to put quotas loots on the right and missing then you work twice in the yard.
My idea of course....
Tristan
Guest
Forgive me roberto, I only raise you a humble criticism...in 2 years of revit use nobody explained how to align the windows from one floor to another?? This is very serious, but I am sure it is not your fault
roberto 2011
Guest
I aligned (in the past...) the windows and doors on the prospects, but never came out an analytical thing. autocad has many systems to place (measures up to 20 decimals), on revit there is always a few cm. dancer.
on the speech of families and constraints confirms me a certain complexity that you have to consider well whether to stay there or send everything to that p.....
My idea of course:
on the quotas according to the last norm I can go in derogation from the distances and thicknesses of the walls, if I do not remember badly, up to 20 cm.
It goes as if I declared on the municipal project plants with the executive walls I would go quietly out of the prescriptions such as indexes of manufacture, cubation etc.
so it was and today it is even more; the municipal project cannot be equal to the executive, respecting also the law.
a pillar 30 x 50 if I put on the plaster I will give the strutturista a smaller pillar, if we died the plaster (or other...) will kick all the official quotas.
In recent times I had given up the plaster but in that case the problems of external paint increase. not to mention when you have demolitions and reconstructions. you can find yourself with the old color on a new wall, which is new only because it is retracted and not because I demolished it and rebuilt it.
in this regard another "vanto" of revit is to make the project as the building will be built in reality. Good. explain then why sometimes I have to demolish and rebuild even if I don't really have to.
If in a loft I have to open a caveat I will have to have executed and reattached in the existing one and then be able to say in the future state "to take that part of the loft".
It's hard to work like that!
:frown:
on the speech of families and constraints confirms me a certain complexity that you have to consider well whether to stay there or send everything to that p.....
My idea of course:
on the quotas according to the last norm I can go in derogation from the distances and thicknesses of the walls, if I do not remember badly, up to 20 cm.
It goes as if I declared on the municipal project plants with the executive walls I would go quietly out of the prescriptions such as indexes of manufacture, cubation etc.
so it was and today it is even more; the municipal project cannot be equal to the executive, respecting also the law.
a pillar 30 x 50 if I put on the plaster I will give the strutturista a smaller pillar, if we died the plaster (or other...) will kick all the official quotas.
In recent times I had given up the plaster but in that case the problems of external paint increase. not to mention when you have demolitions and reconstructions. you can find yourself with the old color on a new wall, which is new only because it is retracted and not because I demolished it and rebuilt it.
in this regard another "vanto" of revit is to make the project as the building will be built in reality. Good. explain then why sometimes I have to demolish and rebuild even if I don't really have to.
If in a loft I have to open a caveat I will have to have executed and reattached in the existing one and then be able to say in the future state "to take that part of the loft".
It's hard to work like that!
:frown:asalalp
Guest
then one of the advantages of the bim is to always have plants, prospects, sections and related computations.
another advantage is to have at the same time a 3d model useful both for renderings and to understand the shape of the building.
then it could be useful to integrate the model with bim for plants and structural calculations.
the problem is that too often you see plants, prospects, sections not corresponding to each other. and that is unacceptable. 3d models are not connected and should be changed every time, having to resort to specialized rendering studies (additional costs).
to conclude on one thing I give you reason, the difficulty of moving to the bim, even parametric families can be difficult without adequate training. and anyway you will never have the ease of autocad that is as if you were drawing on a sheet of paper. But you have to keep up with the software and how a graphic designer has to master all the creative suite of adobe as well as being very creative, an architect must know 2d, 3d and bim software.
another advantage is to have at the same time a 3d model useful both for renderings and to understand the shape of the building.
then it could be useful to integrate the model with bim for plants and structural calculations.
the problem is that too often you see plants, prospects, sections not corresponding to each other. and that is unacceptable. 3d models are not connected and should be changed every time, having to resort to specialized rendering studies (additional costs).
to conclude on one thing I give you reason, the difficulty of moving to the bim, even parametric families can be difficult without adequate training. and anyway you will never have the ease of autocad that is as if you were drawing on a sheet of paper. But you have to keep up with the software and how a graphic designer has to master all the creative suite of adobe as well as being very creative, an architect must know 2d, 3d and bim software.
gfrank
Guest
I moved the discussion into the forum of competence ...
gfrank
Guest
I contribute to the discussion...
without entering into personal evaluations, I believe that the use of the program is proportional to the personal knowledge of the sw.
I know that "learning" the use of a software, costs time, effort and "soldi", but without training, in my opinion, it is not possible to make an overall assessment of the sw.
Obviously, the evaluation parameters can be different, and if the sw meets these parameters, of course the user is satisfied with it.
someone indicated the saving of time, others the possibility to make 3d and rendering with a single sw, others the possibility to create families (objects) without knowing any programming language.
By reading in the forum, there are some users who use it "only" to model the 3d and make rendering.
of course, there are other users who have expressed negative considerations: obviously the sw did not "return" to their expectations.
It is also evident that a "complete" use of the sw is more problematic than a "partial" use.
I quote you for example. you claim to be satisfied with autocad, but I ask you: use it 100%.
I do not know it (I use it again, when needed, lt) but it seems to me that in autocad full is understood the design 3d, the application of the materials, and with lisp (and here else) it is possible to do many other things. Do you use them all?
I add that I am not an "office defender" of revit.
I confirm that the development of revit, in some cases, has been still for years (see scales) is natural (as has said lance), we look for the way to overcome the hippo, as has been developed for other types of functions (free form - adaptive families) that I will probably never use, however finding that their use is quite simple.
Moreover, in my opinion, revit is not a bim (complete), as it is necessary to use it with other sw. I believe that with the offers of the "design suites" autodesk is beginning to propose tools for a complete management of the bim, but with the restrictions (licenses) to use such sw vertically (one machine only).
For this reason, before moving to the various suites of autodesk, I am waiting for the release of the new product of the acca, as it interacts (as much as it is publicized), in a direct way, with all sw of the same house.
of course, they will be to evaluate the characteristics of the product (edificius).
without entering into personal evaluations, I believe that the use of the program is proportional to the personal knowledge of the sw.
I know that "learning" the use of a software, costs time, effort and "soldi", but without training, in my opinion, it is not possible to make an overall assessment of the sw.
Obviously, the evaluation parameters can be different, and if the sw meets these parameters, of course the user is satisfied with it.
someone indicated the saving of time, others the possibility to make 3d and rendering with a single sw, others the possibility to create families (objects) without knowing any programming language.
By reading in the forum, there are some users who use it "only" to model the 3d and make rendering.
of course, there are other users who have expressed negative considerations: obviously the sw did not "return" to their expectations.
It is also evident that a "complete" use of the sw is more problematic than a "partial" use.
I quote you for example. you claim to be satisfied with autocad, but I ask you: use it 100%.
I do not know it (I use it again, when needed, lt) but it seems to me that in autocad full is understood the design 3d, the application of the materials, and with lisp (and here else) it is possible to do many other things. Do you use them all?
I add that I am not an "office defender" of revit.
I confirm that the development of revit, in some cases, has been still for years (see scales) is natural (as has said lance), we look for the way to overcome the hippo, as has been developed for other types of functions (free form - adaptive families) that I will probably never use, however finding that their use is quite simple.
Moreover, in my opinion, revit is not a bim (complete), as it is necessary to use it with other sw. I believe that with the offers of the "design suites" autodesk is beginning to propose tools for a complete management of the bim, but with the restrictions (licenses) to use such sw vertically (one machine only).
For this reason, before moving to the various suites of autodesk, I am waiting for the release of the new product of the acca, as it interacts (as much as it is publicized), in a direct way, with all sw of the same house.
of course, they will be to evaluate the characteristics of the product (edificius).
roberto 2011
Guest
@gfrank
Maybe if I hadn't lost 2 years and a few tens of thousands of euros behind revit I would have learned also the 3d autocad. even if in 2007 I think it was more acerbo (they tell me) than the current one.
I was disappointed with revit because I update after update the only most striking thing, which however forced me to other useless efforts, was the passage to the ribbon-type menu.
But do you think to make a low window with niche for the radiator you have to hang with the floor? It seems to you that when you find a hallway with doors that almost touch you should decide him what joint of the plots (wrong!!) put? ?
Well, I could also say that I'm still terrified of inadvertently touching something that can make me find all the crazy project. ...
or that to the third, fourth variant on a building risks that you will not be able to print the first condition, perhaps already delivered to the municipality, because inadvertently you went to change something even backwards... could not consolidate the latest version of the building? ?
and the land?? How many steps do you have to come up to not find the ground in the garage? (Finally you opt for a nice little bim net). and when, always revit, he decides to correctly show 7 pillars on 10.... where in the end even there opt for a nice gray net... .
on buildingsus I have some perplexity since a giant like adesk fails to pull out a program easily usable. then that softhouse with the question of Latin names makes us buy 10 programs to pull out a normal study activity.
of course the safety of the yard must be divided from the program on energy consumption but from us it is said "who pulls too much the stucco" (rompe).
thanks for your intervention... :smile:
Maybe if I hadn't lost 2 years and a few tens of thousands of euros behind revit I would have learned also the 3d autocad. even if in 2007 I think it was more acerbo (they tell me) than the current one.
I was disappointed with revit because I update after update the only most striking thing, which however forced me to other useless efforts, was the passage to the ribbon-type menu.
But do you think to make a low window with niche for the radiator you have to hang with the floor? It seems to you that when you find a hallway with doors that almost touch you should decide him what joint of the plots (wrong!!) put? ?
Well, I could also say that I'm still terrified of inadvertently touching something that can make me find all the crazy project. ...
or that to the third, fourth variant on a building risks that you will not be able to print the first condition, perhaps already delivered to the municipality, because inadvertently you went to change something even backwards... could not consolidate the latest version of the building? ?
and the land?? How many steps do you have to come up to not find the ground in the garage? (Finally you opt for a nice little bim net). and when, always revit, he decides to correctly show 7 pillars on 10.... where in the end even there opt for a nice gray net... .
on buildingsus I have some perplexity since a giant like adesk fails to pull out a program easily usable. then that softhouse with the question of Latin names makes us buy 10 programs to pull out a normal study activity.
of course the safety of the yard must be divided from the program on energy consumption but from us it is said "who pulls too much the stucco" (rompe).
thanks for your intervention... :smile: