Revit 2010 – Great Parametric Forms Tutorial at HOK BIM Solutions
Hey All. I just went through this tutorial over at the HOK BIM Solutions blog on how to create parametric forms within the conceptual mass environment of Revit Architecture 2010. Take a look:
http://hokbimsolutions.blogspot.com/2009/07/creating-parametric-forms-using-revit.html
Revit: Do You Proofread Your Prints Before You Show Them to Anyone? You should!
I’ve been doing something recently on my Revit project that I shouldn’t be doing. The fact that I do it actually reminded me of something I would do when I was in elementary school. I would have to write reports on various topics (two of which I have particularly fond memories were, “A Biography of Reggie Jackson,” and, “How the Television Works”) throughout the years and when I would finish writing, my parents would ask if I had proofread it. While my answer would be, “yes,” it was clearly not true.
Why am I telling you this, you might ask. Well, I have repeated this lack of proofreading when cutting sections of my Revit model. I’d cut it, quickly glance it over, fix any glaring errors, print them and show them to my project manager. While there were too many comments to list here, the majority of those comments were graphic-related. It wasn’t that I didn’t know that I was supposed to include those particular things in the drawing, it was that I was a little too anxious to get the it out.
Here’s the thing, while Revit might take your drawings 75% of the way, you still need to look them over. For example, when cutting a section, Revit will thicken the lines that represent the objects it touches. Often times, graphically, it looks better to fully fill those objects (ex. walls, floors, roofs, etc.) with black.
My point is, proofread your drawings before you show them to anyone. You’ll save yourself a lot of aggravation.
Can you think of any other examples of graphical techniques that Revit doesn’t quite do?
– Posted to CADuzer.com From My iPod Touch
Tags: BIM, Commentary, Revit
Have a Cup of Morning Revit…and don’t share it with anyone else!!
Sep 4, 2009 BIM, Customization, Revit
Hey All. As we prepare for the long Labor Day weekend, I had a thought: let’s stop selling Revit. I’ll be more specific: let’s stop “preaching” Revit. The different groups have been established and have pretty much dug their feet in. First we have the, “Early Adopters”. They’ve been using Revit since the Hoover Administration and bleed Revit purple (or dashed blue). Next, we have the, “Whatevers”. Their motto is, “You want us to use software package B now instead of software package A? OK. Whatever!” After them we have, “The Tryers”. These people recognize the benefits of it and are willing to try it. If they like it, they’ll not only continue to use it, but they’ll insist on using it for all of their projects. Finally, we have the, “Nay Sayers”. They don’t want to be bothered. They aren’t interested. To put it bluntly, they don’t care. From these people you’ll hear phrases like, “I don’t have the time,” or, “I’ve heard it takes too long to learn and use,” or, the one that gets my blood boiling the most, “I know Revit is a cool tool, but…”
As Ayn Rand once said, and I’m paraphrasing here, “I’m not here to convince you that this philosophy is the best one or is the one you must adopt. It is logical.” As James T. Kirk once said, “People can be very frightened of change.” (He also said, “What does God need with a starship,” but we won’t hold that against him because he also said, “FIRE!!” and “KHAN!!”). Anyway, the point is, do you think there’s anyone left who doesn’t know what Revit does or how perfectly suited for Architecture it is? Let’s move on to what it took us a long time to realize that AutoCAD needed: standards and best practices. Basically, what Revit needs to be pushed ahead is a better architecture firm framework within which to work and excel. Now, here’s the stimulus package-sized dollar amount question: Which of the previously mentioned groups are the best to do this? The answer is, “the Tryers”. They’re the ones who will adopt the software as time goes by and will tell the BIM Managers (who came out of the Early Adoptets group…you know who I am…I mean, you know who you are!), what features and standards they need. Their the ones who will develop the best practices simply by using the software everyday and participating in round tables and user group meetings. Also, they’re the ones who already work with the Nay Sayers, and know how to communicate with them best. Let’s face it, as Early Adopters (of which I am one), we tend to say phrases that sound to the Nay Sayers as, “You absolutely must use this! It’s the greatest thing since sliced bread! It can do anything and everything.” Clearly that’s not what we mean, but that is most definitely what they hear. Let’s try this phrase on for size, “You know what Revit does, I’m not going to try to sell you on it. Use it or don’t use it. And, if you decide you want to use it, I’m here to help.”
What do you think about this? Let me know.
– Posted to CADuzer.com From My iPod Touch (proof-read on my PC)
Tags: BIM, Commentary, Revit
Revit 2010: Think Long and Hard Before Linking Multiple Files Together
Sep 3, 2009 BIM, Commentary, Revit
Hey all. Here’s an update on my project. Within the first few hours of starting the project, I decided that since the were multiple parts to it (a site, four buildings, and walkways and courtyards which connect them all), I would separate them into 5 distinct Revit files. Specifically, the four building files would be linked into the site file. I actually started with a single file but thought that since not all of the levels were the same (ie. level 01 for one building was 110.5 meters while level 01 for another was 113 meters) it would be easier to keep them all separate. Well, that was a good idea for about two and a half weeks, which was when I had to do some serious printing of sheets. Trying to get the right things to show up on the right sheets was a bigger pain than I had originally anticipated. For example, I had to employ many work-arounds to get objects from a linked file to show as solid black where it was being cut by a section (and, yes, I did go into the “Visibility/Graphics” dialog box, overrode the, “by host view,” setting and set the cut pattern for those objects to black). Sometimes it worked, other times it didn’t. When it didn’t, I met my new best friend: Filled Region.
Another time I had to employ manual, almost AutoCAD-like, methods (oh yeah, I went there) was with grid lines and their associated bubbles. If the grid lines either didn’t show up or showed up on the wrong side of a linked file, I literally drew lines (with the “centerline” line style) and circles. I also created extra levels in the view so they would show up as I wanted them to. And, worst of all, all sheets were NOT in the main file (the site file), as I had originally intended. It was just easier to create them in each of the separate building files and link in, as overlays, the other building files (or even the site file in some cases) when they needed to show up. Of course the problem here would be that if I had over one hundred drawings (and it this case I didn’t), I’d have to open up each file individually to print the sheets located within it (which inevitably meant I had to keep an Excel chart of where each sheet was located).
Speaking of opening each file, often times there are problems with your model you might not notice until you cut a section or create an elevation. Therefore, I’d have to open each file each time I noticed a modeling problem in a section view where that particular file was not the actual one I was working in. You also get a bunch of errors when trying to open local files with linked in central files which might not be in their latest form because their local file counterparts hadn’t been saved to central (I’m sorry, synchronized to central) recently.
Anyway, yesterday I decided I had had enough and began the process of re-combining the separate files into a single file. I tried using the “Bind” feature to merge in all of the building files into the site file. For some reason this didn’t work (it appeared to bring in the file, but no actual objects showed up). So, instead, I very simply copied and pasted all of the objects in. I definitely ran into problems of the heights of things (ie. walls, columns, etc.), however, as I’ve been working it was easy enough to change their top constraints to the appropriate levels. Speaking of levels, specifically the fact that there would be multiple “level 01’s”, I made the names of those levels more specific. For example, I might have “Level 01 – BLDG A,” “Level 01 – BLDG B” and “Level 01 – BLDGs C, D & E”.
It should be noted that even after copying and pasting all of the files back into the site file, the entire model was only between 25 and 30 megabytes. Another project I know of, however, has 4 buildings and a site and is contained within a single file and is somewhere between 250 and 300 megabytes.
I think the practice of linking multiple Revit files into a single one is a very good idea. I also think, however, that careful consideration has to be made before doing it and a set of “Best Practices” needs to b established in order to avoid some of the pitfalls that I encountered
Id like to hear some of your stories regarding this topic. Let me know some of your Revit, linked model war stories.
– Posted to CADuzer.com From My iPod Touch (proof-read on my PC)
Tags: BIM, Commentary, Revit
A New Project…and a Revit 2010 Did You Know?!
Hey All. I’ve been assigned to a new project at my full time job (at SOM) and the decision about which software platform to use was left up to me. Needless to say, I chose Revit. The thought of doing a phase of a project (any phase for that matter) in AutoCAD gives me a headache. Anyway, without getting into any of the specifics of the project, it’s several small buildings on a university campus with a courtyard that runs, more or less, from one end to the other. I mention this to you because as I’m using Revit, and more specifically Revit Architecture 2010 (64-bit), I thought I would pass on some things I pick up as I ago. The first one is pretty simple and some of you might already know about it:
- If you want to orbit around a 3D view in Revit, you hold down the Shift key, push the middle-mouse button and move your mouse around. This causes the view to move around without anything in particular at its center. Well, did you know that if you select an object first and then go through the orbiting process above, Revit will orbit using that selected object as its center?
Speaking of orbiting in Revit, it would be really nice if the 3D mice from a company called 3D Connexion would support Revit. Truth be told, I think I heard that Autodesk wouldn’t release the Revit code to make this possible. Don’t quote me on that, but if anyone knows for sure, please let me know.
Turning AutoCAD-based Lines into Revit Lines
Feb 25, 2009 AutoCAD, BIM, Revit, latest
Have you ever wanted to take like work created in AutoCAD and not only bring it into Revit, but also convert it into Revit lines? In a recent instance I was asked about the possibility of doing this in order to bring some original building footprints from AutoCAD to Revit. Here’s how to do it with some basic shapes. You’ll notice in the image below that each line is on a different layer, in a different color with a different lineweight.
AutoCAD Linework
1. Import your DWG file into Revit using the following settings (notice that the Link option is NOT selected):
Import Settings
Notice that, when you select the drawing inserted into Revit, the type selector says Import Symbol : Drawing1.dwg:
Type Selector
2. With the drawing still selected, click the Full Explode button on the Options Bar.
Now, when you select one, or more of the lines, and click the Type Selector pull-down menu you’ll see 4 new types of line styles called Layer1, Layer2, Layer3 and Layer4:
New Line Styles
If you take a look in the Element Properties, you’ll see that the imported, AutoCAD lines are now System Family : Model Lines:
Element Properties
Have you needed to go through this process? It what situations?
Turning on Linked DWG Files within Linked Revit Files
Feb 15, 2009 AutoCAD, BIM, Revit, latest
When projects get larger and larger, it often becomes necessary to break them up into multiple Revit files and then link them together. Also, large projects usually involve many consultants who don’t use Revit. If they’re using AutoCAD, you’re normal process will be to link those received files into Revit and use them as underlays. If the Revit file you’re linking them into, however, will be linked into another Revit file, those linked DWG’s will be hidden by default. This tutorial will show you how to turn them on. Below you’ll see an AutoCAD file linked into the West Wing file of a large building (fig. 1). The West Wing Revit file will then be linked into an East Wing Revit file.
Figure 1 – Linked DWG File
At this point, if you were to link one Revit file into the other, you would get what appears to be empty space. Here’s how to make the DWG file visible:
1. Type VG on your keyboard to open the Visibility/Graphics dialog box and switch to the Revit Links tab. Here you’ll see the West Wing Revit file linked in.
2. Under the Display Settings dialog box, click the By Host View button (fig. 2). This opens the RVT Link Display Settings dialog box.
Figure 2 – By Host View Button
3. On the Basics tab, By Host View is selected. This means that whatever visibility settings are set by the view in this actual file (the East Wing file), that is how the linked file (West Wing.rvt) will display. Click the Custom option (fig. 3).
Figure 3 – Custom Display Settings Option
4. Click the Import Categories tab.
5. Click the pull-down menu next to Import Categories (fig. 4) and choose <Custom>.
Figure 4 – Custom Display Settings for Imported Files
6. Click the check box next to the DWG file name. In this case A-FP01.dwg (fig. 5).
Figure 5 – Turn on DWG File
7. Click OK twice and you’ll return to the workspace where you’ll find the DWG file now visible.
The infrastructure of files (DWG, RVT, etc.) for large projects needs to be considered carefully. There are many factors to keep in mind such as file size, network speed and file sharing. What other factors do you keep in mind when starting a large project which will require multiple files?
My Reaction to, “Revit is Too Limiting for Conceptual Design Work.”
Feb 13, 2009 3DS MAX, AutoCAD, BIM, Commentary, Revit, SketchUp, latest
I was asked this question in my class last night as I delayed starting in an effort to convince my students that Revit was the most important next thing for them to learn. The quick answer is, “just wait until Revit Architecture 2010. Things are about to get a lot more interesting.” The long answer is this, however, “so don’t use it for conceptual design work.” Autodesk owns enough software that it won’t be insulted if you use one piece of its software for one thing and another of something else. That being said, if you want to use non-Autodesk software, use it! We need to remember that the end goal here is good design and not loyal software use. When I was in grad school we had several computer labs whose workstations has differing specs. My department’s IT staff would continually say, “the right tool for the right job.” In other words, don’t use the fastest, most powerful computer in the school to write a document in Microsoft Word. In a recent meeting of Revit specialists, this concept was agreed upon, but one other point was added: all data must end in Revit.“ The reason for this, which I also agree with, is that Revit can calculate, quantify, coordinate and document. It’s relatively easy to bring data from most other pieces of software into Revit. In fact, SketchUp, for example, can be brought into Revit in it’s native form (ie. it requires no conversion). When I’m working, I like to think of what I’m using as a simple piece of software called, “Design.” It happens to have all of the individual pieces of software I use within it (Revit, AutoCAD, 3DS MAX, SketchUp, etc.) and they all have their own windows and icons. As an example, I often tell my students that 3DS MAX is not a drafting program. If you need to draw a two-dimensional shape with a high level of accuracy, and you’re familiar with AutoCAD, draw the shape there and bring it in. With an end goal of good design, use software that does two specific things, (1) offers you sophisticated, yet easy-to-use, tools that stimulate your creative juices and help you advance your design process efficiently and, (2) allows you to organize, analyze and document your data for easy recall and presentation.
What do you think?
The Bigger Picture
Jan 28, 2009 3DS MAX, AutoCAD, BIM, Commentary, Revit, latest
Hey All. I’m sorry I haven’t written in a few days but I was on vacation to the happiest place on Earth. I wrote the majority of this post while in mid-air on the way down, but, due to an Internet restriction imposed by my wife, for the duration of the vacation, I was unable to post it. Anyway, in trying to decide what to blog about, I’ve begun thinking about the larger purpose of spreading this knowledge (mine, yours or otherwise) and the answer is really to help us design better. Sometimes I think us techy people forget that because we hear that 3DS MAX (or any other piece of software) can do this cool new thing, or something like that. Last Thursday night the class I teach at the Pratt Institute in NYC started again and I, once again, altered it a bit from previous semesters. When I first started teaching it about 4 years ago it was called Architectural Visualization Using 3DS MAX. It was a 15 and 10 week introductory course that taught the architecturally-related features of 3DS MAX. That is, user-interface through rendering. 1 or 2 of the classes throughout the semester, however, would be about AutoCAD. It was during these classes that I found people were really paying attention. Their eyes would light up because suddenly there was an aspect of the new topics I was laying out that was familiar to them. After a year or so, I modified the class and renamed it Architectural Visualization Using AutoCAD and 3DS MAX.
Now, the time has come once again to modify my class. The reason? In a word, Revit. Since many of my posts go into the gloriousness of that which is BIM, I’ll refrain from repeating that here. What I will say is that Revit works (or can work) just as the design process does. The key word in that sentence is process. They don’t teach you software in architecture school as the main focus of your education. They teach you how to identify and develop your creative process. My problem will be that I can’t call the class Architectural Visualization Using AutoCAD, Revit and 3DS MAX. That’s just too long (and, no, I’m not ready to abandon AutoCAD, so it can’t be removed from the title just yet either). Maybe…hmm…this is going to be harder than I thought. Either way, Revit is helping to move the class back to the architectural process and away from how do I do task A in software B, so I think that’s a good thing. I write all of this to remind us of the process and the fact that the software is a means to help us think better, design better and work better.
Tags: 3DS MAX, AutoCAD, BIM, Commentary, Revit
FOLLOW UP – Adding DWG Floor Plans to Different Levels in Revit
Jan 21, 2009 BIM, Revit, latest
Following up on my earlier post, Starting Your Revit Model from a 2D AutoCAD Drawing, a comment was posted asking how to insert multiple floor plans from AutoCAD to their correct levels in Revit. When you’re ready to import the first floor plan, switch to your first floor plan (or level 1) view. Then, click File –> Import/Link –> CAD Formats… and within the Import/Link CAD Formats dialog box, notice at the bottom-left it says Current view only (fig. 1). Select this option and click Open. For the next floor, switch to that view (floor) and repeat the process. Be aware that the inserted DWG’s will ONLY be visible in the views that you imported them into.
 |
| Figure 1 – “Current view only” Option |
Thanks for the comment Bessa!
