bim ok, ma quale?

[atomorama]

start this discussion to have lumens from the forum experts: I want to start learning how to use a bim program (in the studio we have an unused revit license) but I don't know how to decide about the manufacturer.

revit seems to me the most used

allplan is used by various architects with whom we collaborate

I don't know Archicad, and I don't know what to say


I take care of mechanical plants (thermohydraulic) and electric.. .


Moreover there is also the concept of "open bim" which seems to be used by European software to confront.. .


Can you give me advice?


Thank you so much!

 

[gil]

bim is a methodology not a program, therefore independent from the program you use. more info qui. very useful site buildingsmartmany architecture programs implement bim methodologies. the choice depends on many factors, but if you already have a license, and considering that a further license entails a considerable outage. considering also that your "curiousness" is not known to what you learn. I suggest you use the program you've already paid, start there and then over time you'll see. Maybe try some demos and get you an idea of the industry.

 

[fabio.revit]

I think you need to carefully analyse what you need.
I have recently returned to archicad after 10 years of (satisfactory) use of revit.
ask you why, if I was satisfied, I decided to change: simply because the strategic direction taken by autodesk I think does not take into account the typicalities of European work and more still Italian.
is a software that is increasingly aimed at large studies with figures dedicated to the management of the bim process and horizontal integrations, little interoperability (to say, the management of the revit dwg is scandalous and ifc the indispensable minimum) and the indispensable minimum for open bim.
archicad, on the other hand, makes interoperability a strength (ifc and dwg management is science fiction) and the mother house invests massively on the relationship with the customer (with my great amazement called me last Friday a manager of technical assistance a little surprised that, despite a recent migration, I had not yet called them for help on something! )
While I work in another area (architecture) I recommend you, before choosing the bim, to analyze what types of work you do.
for my experience, for small studies autodesk solutions are not the most indicated.

 

[Tristan]

...to say, the management of the dwg of revit is scandalous and ifc the indispensable minimum) and the indispensable minimum. . .
archicad, on the other hand, makes interoperability a strength (ifc and dwg management is science fiction). .

I press that I disagree at all and dissociate myself in full. Do you make us understand this science fiction you're talking about? I'd appreciate it.

 

[lance]

without any controversy I would like to understand better..revit certainly has points on which it can and must improve but I would not put in the first place those you mentioned.... .

 

[fabio.revit]

I press that I disagree at all and dissociate myself in full. Do you make us understand this science fiction you're talking about? I'd appreciate it.

the management of import-export translators by archicad is based on preset but customizable profiles in a truly effective way.
before moving from revit to archicad I did several tests to see if I could export a ifc model from one to another not to risk losing the changeability of old projects (I have a fairly extensive customer archive and that cyclically asks me new projects).
to make it short, in archicad you can easily import a ifc of revit and to reuse it, keeping its consistency, especially if in revit prepare the model ad hoc with a bit of magheggi, the contrary you can not do it, but not only with the ifc files of archicad but also of other software (in so many they tell me that you only struggle to read the ifc of revit, for example).
As for the management of the revit dwgs...we have a pitiful veil, they have not even deleted the box "correct the lines slightly out of axis", to get a decent export you have to work hours on a file of config and unintuitive, management within the model, then, must be silky view for view, uncomfortable and cause unnecessary redundancies.
I know one thing: I know that now you will say that in revit you can do everything with the ifc as well as with the dwg, but the focus of my speech is how many resources require the user these gestures.
I make the architect, not the cad operator, and the comment of my speech is that for small studies it is better a product with a more oriented vision to the project and not to the return and/or managing as revit.
my 2 cents, of course, but I think I have a good knowledge of both software in the typical use of a small study that presents some dozen projects a year of different complexity.
then there are also other things, about import and export: Does it seem normal that revit does not import pdfs or does not have an internal stmapa engine to produce them?
While for documentation it is better not even mention the archicad layout files, it would become embarrassing.

 

[Tristan]

You know what I think I do? you don't need software for the bim process. to you this is tight, not revit...archicad (and it says the name) is still very cad-oriented, something that resembles (as a concept) to autocad architecture that is a software cad with primitive to use and consumption of the architect "poco computerized". continue to talk about various embarrassments but I think the reason is that you know little about the revit world, you have probably always used and only the same workflows without ever deepening that undergrowth of apps that would allow you to embarrass yourself less. Now you're thinking: "but why should I use external apps?" ... and why not?? is like buying the new nexus and leaving it like this, as is, without any customization or additional app. All right, if you want to use the phone just to call and text or consult the agenda, but now you know as well as me that smartphones are no longer just "phones".
Anyway, I don't want to screw her up, nor do I want to convince you of my reasons. everyone is free to think and use what he believes.
Good job!

 

[gil]

This debate between revit and archicad seems to me already widely debated in many previous discussions.

 

[fabio.revit]

You know what I think I do? you don't need software for the bim process. to you this is tight, not revit...archicad (and it says the name) is still very cad-oriented, something that resembles (as a concept) to autocad architecture that is a software cad with primitive to use and consumption of the architect "poco computerized". continue to talk about various embarrassments but I think the reason is that you know little about the revit world, you have probably always used and only the same workflows without ever deepening that undergrowth of apps that would allow you to embarrass yourself less. Now you're thinking: "but why should I use external apps?" ... and why not?? is like buying the new nexus and leaving it like this, as is, without any customization or additional app. All right, if you want to use the phone just to call and text or consult the agenda, but now you know as well as me that smartphones are no longer just "phones".
Anyway, I don't want to screw her up, nor do I want to convince you of my reasons. everyone is free to think and use what he believes.
Good job!

Dear Tristan, believe me that I am not one of those who fall in love with software and become a partisan, I consider them tools, to be used until you are useful and change when they are no longer.
revit I know him pretty well as I know very well the needs of a study "multipurpose" Italian style, and I think you are right...to 50%!
in the sense that no, archicad is not cad oriented, anything else: the management of reports the integration database/project and other features have the same underlying philosophy of revit .
What I think from an extra march in use in small European studies, however, is a greater localization and the decision, by the software house, to create a tool quite complete to allow the designer to manage the whole process within a single sofware.
I repeat: the biggest difference between revit and archicad, imho, is that the first to be used fully requires to be inserted in a design structure that includes dedicated figures, the second can be the instrument of the small study.
then they are both ferrari, only with the esrecitius, the passion and some talent you can push them to the limit.

 

[preben]

to the original question post: that is to choose the most suitable program, I believe that to today is fundamental the ease of interface with external collaborators.:smile:

 

[fabio.revit]

to the original question post: that is to choose the most suitable program, I believe that to today is fundamental the ease of interface with external collaborators.:smile:

if you consider that autodesk struggles to make its software dialogue within its ecosystem......

 

[Tristan]

we are talking about a software house with more than 80 products on the list...it is more than obvious that not everyone speaks perfectly with everyone.

 

[preben]

I explain: I am an architectural prog. and I must collaborate with the engineer strutturista and the construction company and the plumber, and all these are self-dependent; I don't see why I have to learn another ecosystem program. simple

 

[fabio.revit]

I explain: I am an architectural prog. and I must collaborate with the engineer strutturista and the construction company and the plumber, and all these are self-dependent; I don't see why I have to learn another ecosystem program. simple

is the exact opposite of my vision of the role of software in the architectural design process.
what I always tell the boys who do practice or internship in my study is not to let the software influence the design, in the sense that the biggest risk, when using for too long a certain program, is to find themselves to design according to what is easier to draw and not according to a prose tened to the maximum architectural quality.
This is why, despite beginning to draw with autocad in 1994, in 1997 I went to archicad, in 2008 to revit and now I returned to archicad (all original programs, therefore with high economic costs).
what other professionals do not care me at least, I am designer, non-operator cad, if the software I use and what they use others are well done must be able to dialogue with the formats of classic interchange.
If they don't, they're sulphate, and if that makes me trouble, I'm looking for a better fact (which is one of the reasons that led me to abandon adesk).

 

[fabio.revit]

we are talking about a software house with more than 80 products on the list...it is more than obvious that not everyone speaks perfectly with everyone.

and then they don't do all the commercial pimps of the suites.
they sell you blocks of programs for an integrated design and then, every time it amounts something somewhere, spend time to unmadonna because something does not work or flows are not perfectly bidirectional.

 

[preben]

I go a lot more on practical! if I only use a cool program but that creates problems with interchange with other technicians then I remain isolated: I don't think the world will follow me... unless I'm an important name.............:wink:

 

[fabio.revit]

I go a lot more on practical! if I only use a cool program but that creates problems with interchange with other technicians then I remain isolated: I don't think the world will follow me... unless I'm an important name.............:wink:

I think that one of the revit sins is exporting and importing little and bad, if I understand well you think that you should adapt to the software or follow the current because it is more convenient.
personally it is precisely what I have no intention of doing, as I consider myself a designer and not a cad operator (with all the sacred respect of the cad operators, but they are another thing compared to the designers).

 

[gil]

I would like a software that makes me work well, and that can create interchangeable models. a ifc or stuff similar to the standards, able to do pdf prints (better if even pdf 3d) and maybe export to dxf of the 2d.

If I expect to adapt to the other risks of still being with the yard pencil to write on the cartoons found on the ground in the yard. Moreover the mass is quite heterogeneous, the use of the "dwg" 2d, is very widespread, but generated with the most varied programs and methods.

 

[preben]

I think that one of the revit sins is exporting and importing little and bad, if I understand well you think that you should adapt to the software or follow the current because it is more convenient.
personally it is precisely what I have no intention of doing, as I consider myself a designer and not a cad operator (with all the sacred respect of the cad operators, but they are another thing compared to the designers).

I should like to know that the debate pro and against a given programme is always on. so architect I try to put it down better: to the neophyte that must start from 0 I recommend starting with what gives it + security in data exchange and do not forget, in any technical support; then and then I say, in the course of the very long career one can very well pass to something different, again, according to their expectations and myre needs.:smile: so we agree with the fans of revit and the radar fans.:finger:

 

[fabio.revit]

I should like to know that the debate pro and against a given programme is always on. so architect I try to put it down better: to the neophyte that must start from 0 I recommend starting with what gives it + security in data exchange and do not forget, in any technical support; then and then I say, in the course of the very long career one can very well pass to something different, again, according to their expectations and myre needs.:smile: so we agree with the fans of revit and the radar fans.:finger:

I never did the last of any software, believe me.
in the architectural field, and in Italy in particular, I do not think that the orizzantale exchange of data is so important.
if you are not working for some big main contractor that has also contracted the executive design you do not have big clash detection and bidirectional flow requirements with other professionals: shoot some dwg around, reimport and overlap what comes back and the most is done.
fan companies and suppliers struggle to remember to open paper drawings, let alone if they care about something of the ifc.
However, there must be a minimum level, I think I can import a pdf to use as a base both the minimum nowadays, with revit instead I have to create a bitmap image and then import it and if I want to create an output pdf (and with the telematics doors you are obliged) you need to install a virtual printer specific. ..you will find that, in 2016, maybe it is better some less adaptive but some extra print routines!
what I try to teach kids who come to work from me is to develop an effective and efficient personal workflow, always keeping in mind that we have to dominate the software, and not the contrary
- - - updated - - - -

I would like a software that makes me work well, and that can create interchangeable models. a ifc or stuff similar to the standards, able to do pdf prints (better if even pdf 3d) and maybe export to dxf of the 2d.

If I expect to adapt to the other risks of still being with the yard pencil to write on the cartoons found on the ground in the yard. Moreover the mass is quite heterogeneous, the use of the "dwg" 2d, is very widespread, but generated with the most varied programs and methods.

I, too, and in fact, although in a bad way, decided that it was time to change. . .