project spark - revit it?

[Tristan]

the new spark project was released on the autodesk labs site. are we at the antechamber of a hypothetical revit architecture lt?
http://autodesk-revit.blogspot.com/2011/08/project-spark-quick-overview.html

 

[gfrank]

It seems so...
I do not see the usefulness of it, unless it is a cost of resible purchase, if it is put on the market, compared to the older brother

 

[Tristan]

I do not see the usefulness of it, unless it is a cost of resible purchase, if it is put on the market, compared to the older brother

if they keep the same policy (see inventor lt suite) you could, with only 1800 euros, take you home autocad lt + revit lt!!! :finger:

 

[enri]

But there was no vasari like "revit lt"? :

 

[Tristan]

But there was no vasari like "revit lt"? :

no, vasari is another thing...it is basically the modeler of conceptual masses and energy analysis used in revit. spark instead has own revit commands for architectural design

 

[Tristan]

interview with nicolas mangon, autodesk senior director aec strategy and marketing: "to further promote the bim approach to those who think it is too complicated and too expensive, autodesk will launch a version of revit lt, which will be released at the same time autocad lt for 200 € more, or a total investment of € 1 500..."
http://www.industrie.com/it/plm-auto...e-du-bim.12697

trad. google translate

 

[roberto 2011]

nicolas mangon, autodesk senior director aec strategy and marketing

have not yet understood that it is not difficult to use revit... It doesn't really work the program!!

If it worked at this time we had thrown all autocads to the nettles and we had all become blunt makers...

 

[Stefano.bp]

I'm sorry, no irony, but what do you mean?
Yes, it is not like pulling rows...but beyond the bim speech, instant review is by itself a nice advantage...do I say bad?

 

[Tristan]

have not yet understood that it is not difficult to use revit... It doesn't really work the program!!

Fortunately, not everyone thinks like you:wink:

If it was working at this time we had thrown all autocads to the nettles and we had all become glowing makers....

but revit does not want to be a replacement of autocad (not for this now adsk pushes solutions, alias suites, and no more products) and is not made for renderings. After that, of course, everything is better!

 

[roberto 2011]

They sell you the program saying that you will do exactly what you will do in the yard. That's not true. to make a cave in a loft you have to invent a lunar procedure.

You are forced to put the plaster if you want a sufficient effect but the odds on the plaster throw out the urban measures that you must absolutely respect with the commune.

with more variants on the same building is tangled and weighs everything down.

the external land goes crazy and not to let it enter the garage floor between the existing building and the future are super pains... not to mention in the presence of many variants.

It's very difficult to give the structure. beams and floors.. .

the joints of the walls if too close and of different thickness is always the program that decides... caxxo.

the "architectural" pillars that merge and the "structural" pillars are an incomprehensible finding that only serves to drive people crazy. in fact on the visibility of the pillars there is a lot to...... .

spiral stairs: niet

normal scales: what are they made of?

I think that's enough for now, but there's another fundamental thing. once you enter the revit you must continue to pay even if you do not use it anymore. are willing to renounce the autocad sub because you pay everything or you will have nothing.

who knows what European commercial norm they refer to... :redface:

 

[Tristan]

They sell you the program saying that you will do exactly what you will do in the yard. That's not true. to make a cave in a loft you have to invent a lunar procedure.

mhm... making a cave is a real minkite. It is nothing but a vacuum that pierces the floors. Why do you say we have to invent a lunar procedure?

You are forced to put the plaster if you want a sufficient effect but the odds on the plaster throw out the urban measures that you must absolutely respect with the commune.

In reality you can also quote to the crude. quotas are also attached to the individual layers.

with more variants on the same building is tangled and weighs everything down.

Well, that hangs down is inevitable. the variants of revit that I know do not use in many in Italy; seems to prefer phases.

the external land goes crazy and not to let it enter the garage floor between the existing building and the future are super pains.. .

I'm doing a project built in canton ticino that has a very complex topography. When I come to the point, I will see whether or not to give you reason:
... jokes aside, on the ground some problems are known arches, someone by-passable someone less

It's very difficult to give the structure. beams and floors.. .

certainly it is more complicated than drawing it in 2d (most of the times wrong!!) but also here depends on the complexity of the structure.

the joints of the walls if too close and of different thickness is always the program that decides... caxxo.

he proposes you a "configuration" of default joint. If you don't like it, you can change it by managing your head, cutting or team joints.

the "architectural" pillars that merge and the "structural" pillars are an incomprehensible finding that only serves to drive people crazy. in fact on the visibility of the pillars there is a lot to...... .

use the structurals if you do not want to "fonder them" with the existing wall, vice versa adopt the architectural columns if you want to merge them. I don't understand the difficulty...

spiral stairs: niet

normal scales: what are they made of?

in the next release things change. Anyway... .
http://ctrl-alt-cad.blogspot.com/2010/01/scala-chiocciola.html

 

[Stefano.bp]

excuse the answer a little ot....
thank you all!! :smile:
To read you during the various comparisons is for me a continuous formation, towards problems that, if not already met, I will have to face.

 

[roberto 2011]

mhm... making a cave is a real minkite. It is nothing but a vacuum that pierces the floors. Why do you say we have to invent a lunar procedure?

If in a loft that you don't have to demolish and rebuild you have to open a cave in my time you had to open it and close it already in the existing phase.

In reality you can also quote to the crude. quotas are also attached to the individual layers.

And you can imagine that messing up when you don't even have the crosshairs to control the alignments in flight. . .

Well, that hangs down is inevitable. the variants of revit that I know do not use in many in Italy; seems to prefer phases.

It's tristan. variants in the building and stages in revit. :biggrin:

he proposes you a "configuration" of default joint. If you don't like it, you can change it by managing your head, cutting or team joints.

the problem is that revit does not sleep at night to return to you the joint that you by force of click the polls. Just iron something but also between a rescue and another you can find yourself with the modified joints. He's too smart. He understands everything. he designs for you...

And like all those who are too "understood" would be choked by little...

 

[Tristan]

If in a loft that you don't have to demolish and rebuild you have to open a cave in my time you had to open it and close it already in the existing phase.

I'm sorry, but I don't follow you on this... why open it and close it?

And you can imagine that messing up when you don't even have the crosshairs to control the alignments in flight. . .

:biggrin: no comment

the problem is that revit does not sleep at night to return to you the joint that you by force of click the polls. Just iron something but also between a rescue and another you can find yourself with the modified joints.

to me never happened but this thing I've already heard... maybe a bug of a "old" version

 

[roberto 2011]

I'm sorry, but I don't follow you on this... why open it and close it?

So, I have a loft in a "existent" building phase. in the variant project I have to open an ics x ics vault to put a spiral staircase.
How do I proceed? At the time I cut the existing loft and closed it with a patch. in the next project phase, I took off the patch and found myself with the vault.

Now it is not that I remember so much, so, well, but the procedure indicated also in 3dsmile was this.

Luckily, I'm far from those nightmares.

now to make a building, of course only plants section and prospects, with autocad I put 1/20 of the time I had to put on with revit, but above all I am no longer with the anguish and fear of not being able to represent what I had to... :smile:

 

[Tristan]

So, I have a loft in a "existent" building phase. in the variant project I have to open an ics x ics vault to put a spiral staircase.
How do I proceed? At the time I cut the existing loft and closed it with a patch. in the next project phase, I took off the patch and found myself with the vault.

ahhhhhhh...ok! Let's talk about restructuring. then yes, you have to do just as you say, but only if you need to create the comparison table.
But you're just making spiral stairs? :biggrin:

now to make a building, of course only plants section and prospects, with autocad I put 1/20 of the time I had to put on with revit, but above all I am no longer with the anguish and fear of not being able to represent what I had to.. .

you are definitely good so they will understand you few mistakes or no one, but sometimes I get dwg 2d that between ground floor and upper floors is not that they don't speak, they don't see themselves! Not even the ladder compartment matches! !
with revit there is of course the defeat of the 3d (which then is a mindset, if you are accustomed to design in 2d you do not feel the need) but then the changes I make once only. In fact, in my opinion, the advantage is not in drawing a project (of course doing a 2d stuff with autocad takes away much less time!) but in the possible revisions and especially in the coherence of the views of the project. with revit it is impossible to have a ground floor that thwarts the first and vice versa!

 

[roberto 2011]

ahhhhhhh...ok! Let's talk about restructuring. then yes, you have to do just as you say, but only if you need to create the comparison table.
But you're just making spiral stairs? ?

But what... the caves for the normal stairs do not seem to differ :biggrin:

... I get dwg 2d that between ground floor and upper floors is not that they do not speak, they do not see themselves!! Not even the ladder compartment matches! !

This happens because my colleagues on one file put all the plants and everything. Just make a file for each floor that keeps the same coordinates and then upload them all to a nice print table, where you can also insert the last batch play and it will be all very precise.

following the speech that taught us at school and the practice on the drawing table, where until the appearance of autocad the sketch of the designer overlapping it with the transparent gloss paper. . .

with autocad you can not go forward precise and safe (8 decimals after the drive!!!).

I love autocad! what did you get?! :

 

[GiGa]

...but sometimes I get dwg 2d that between ground floor and upper floors is not that they do not speak, they do not see themselves!! Not even the ladder compartment matches!...!

.with autocad you can not go forward precise and safe (8 decimals after the unit!!!).

I'm sorry if I interfere, "mechanical" I'm not in my environment. . But reading certain statements I would like an opinion on something in which, "we mechanics" we often fight... I don't want to, it's not a polemical or critical post!
having to deal with plants located in buildings (existing and not), I often get the drawings of the masonry in 2d... to make it short... In many years of activity, I believe that the times when I have arrived building drawings in which the walls (or the reference boards) were coincident among the various views can be counted on the tips of the fingers (of a hand)... practically always the walls are not aligned, worse still the reference boards, profiles of wrong carpenters not to count the measures... 8 decimals after unity yes... but all different among them! :biggrin:
... and away think of oversized adjustment systems because that wall could be there, but also 30 cm back. .
"we mechanical" we work in autocad units of mm and precision in the design is fundamental (the famous 8 units after the comma)... who does not draw so must quickly adapt. In fact, except for special cases (magari due to conversions between other cad or ucs balordi), the rule is quite respected. . .
"building jobs" worked in cm? possible that the cad does not "impoze" you to be more precise? :tongue:

 

[roberto 2011]

. .
"building jobs" worked in cm? possible that the cad does not "impoze" you to be more precise? :tongue:

for the mks system or yoghurt system the measuring unit is the meter. in the executives multiply for 100 architectures and find themselves working in cm but it is only for a comfort of representation of the measures.

my friend with me on precision wallpapers an open door... .

I thought you understood. :

 

[Tristan]

My dear giga, the problem is not of the tool (sufficiently accurate regardless of the units of measurement) but of the user of the tool. you mechanics are now accustomed to thinking and designing in 3d but in the building is still full of technicians that unfortunately besides not knowing or wanting to use the 3d does not even know how to draw in 2d! as it rightly says roberto, it would be enough to work for parts (xref) and assemble the project in a single file. at least see immediately if the walls are "allined". then we cheat on the fact that some do not even know how to draw prospectuses and/or sections but at least the plants make me match! all this results in various cases for those who make plants or structures or even for those who must actually build it I'm building cabbage! I wonder how the director works.. He's gonna have a little brandy on site...:frown: