Use the Front Door

I find myself looking for metaphors as I help people learn Revit. We rely on them all the time, work them into our speech without even thinking about it. Lately I've settled on another to describe the various ways Revit lets us do things. There are usually at least a couple ways to start something or solve something in Revit, like life.

I'm frequently asked which "way" is the best or the correct "way". It seems to me that Revit provides any number of "doors" to access information and tools.

Let's take the notion of working with materials. I have a desk and I'd like it to have a specific material. These days I can select the desk, click Type Properties and, assuming the person who made the family provided a parameter to manage its material, I can click on the material value, which exposes the sneaky "Browse" button. This is a "side door" that lets me select and possibly alter material settings. If I don't find a material I want I can make one while I'm here, click my way back out of the dialog and have a desk that looks great (hopefully).

In the past, if I didn't like the material and there wasn't one listed that sounded like one I wanted I'd have to bail out. Once out of the family's Type Properties I'd open the material dialog and create it. Then I could go back to the desk and assign the material. They created the side door access so we could avoid that inefficient back and forth process.

I run into people that think the side door is the only way to create materials. That's how they learned to do it and they keep doing it that way. The "front door" for materials is really on the Manage tab, the checkered globe button. This front door is the administrative task minded entrance while the side door is more the "spontaneous task" minded access point.

Another example is changing the number of a sheet. We can select the sheet view name, right click and rename. We can open the sheet view and select the title block family which in turn let's us select and edit the sheet number. We can select the sheet number parameter in the properties palette too. Then again we can deal with it in a schedule instead. Keeping count? That's four "doors", a front, side, back, and "secret" door to accomplish the same task.

That might seem like too many options, which one should I use? Easy, which one is the closest to you? Where are you? In the back yard? I'd pick the back door then. Not in a sheet view and needing to renumber a bunch of sheets? I'd pick the "secret door" and use a schedule.

Nearly everything you need to do has at least a front and back door, and very often more. Pick the one that best fits your circumstance. When one door closes another opens...or something like that...

Due Diligence

I was musing about a recent conversation where one guy's position was that BIM is hype, unnecessary and worse really just being foisted upon our profession in a scheme to get more money from "us".

If I was seriously ill and a surgeon proposed cutting into me without considering using an MRI, CT Scan, blood testing etc. I'd be a bit on edge and worried about the outcome. More worried at least. Using an MRI or CT Scan doesn't supplant a surgeon's skill, training, knowledge, intuition or purpose. Years ago neither diagnostic tool existed yet today would it be appropriate to operate without them?

It seems to me this notion of using Revit (BIM) and "us" isn't all that different. Sure we could get our job done using our existing tools, we used to be able to pull it off with a pencil and paper too. Is it responsible to ignore advances in technology, improvements in our tools and process? We shouldn't get lost in our admiration of them to the detriment of our profession but ignore them or devalue their role? I don't think so...

Ready for Hard Work?

Seth Godin wrote yesterday that there is a difference between Long Work and Hard Work. I immediately thought how his comments related to how I worked in the past (using AutoCAD and Microstation) and how I work today (Revit and Navisworks). The long work meant showing up, doing repetitive tasks and not really challenging how or why we did things. The hard work is hunting for something better, being dissatisfied with just doing yesterday again today. It took effort to start using Revit back then and it takes effort today. Interested in doing Hard work? It's necessary... Btw, there's Hard work to do even if you've been using Revit for many years too.

As it happens Phil Read also wrote something interesting yesterday, about where "we" stand today after ten years of Revit existence. The hard work I'm referring to is what he is suggesting is needed now/next, where do we go next, what solutions are required next? Read on...worth your while!

Ribbon Tab Dance

I'm growing weary of the Ribbon Tab feature that allows you to cycle through the ribbon display options if you double click on a tab. I say weary because I've been using a Intous 4 for a few months now and I find that I occasionally double tap when I think the software is lagging or didn't accept my first tap. The result is a new ribbon format. During training it is annoying. During remote access of another pc it is even more frequent because of the inherent lag between my screen and theirs. I'd love it if there were a "switch" that let me disable that feature.

I recorded a little video of it if you haven't had the pleasure?

Space Naming Tool - In the Box Please

Revit MEP users are hopefully aware of the available (via subscription only) tool cleverly called Space Naming Utility. I've been places though that are not and they deal with the unpleasant disconnect between Revit Architecture's Rooms and Revit MEP's Spaces, without the tool. Quite frustrating to have to coordinate these. The tool makes that process much simpler, if you know about it that is. If you didn't, now you do.

I have a simple request, let's have it "in-the-box" for the next release of Revit please? Why is an integral piece of the puzzle an "extra"?

I've been befuddled for decades now at the Express Tools part of AutoCAD. Why those weren't just rolled up into the application years ago... I've heard that people want "their" Express Tools so they've remained where they are as a "separate and special" addition so to speak.

Well I'd like no such thing, bundle-em-up! One installation please, no chasing off to subscription for more goodies. If it can't be done for this next release, at least give us a chance to deploy/install it at the same time??

Thanks!!

Buildz

Okay, I appreciate that people read this blog. At the risk of offending my readers, are some of you dim? Why is Buildz only subscribed to by 541 people (as of today) according to Google Reader?

This blog has 1331 subscribers right now. I've been blogging longer but really? Zach's contributions are pretty awesome and I just don't get it. Maybe some of it is a bit scary or arcane compared with the regular Revit stuff we do? Okay, maybe you aren't a subscriber but you check his site out regularly, you're off the hook. If you are reading this and actually aren't aware of his work yet, then don't eat lunch, don't take that phone call, stop putting it off...go there!

Subscribe or I'll throw a tantrum!

Freshly lifted angry baby from David Baldacchino's blog, Do you Revit? I Do! It's from his post, "Who's in the Central File?"

You may return to your regular scheduled activities...

AUGI Forums

I've been wrestling with this post. Obviously anyone whose read this blog knows that I've been involved in AUGI for many years. I served on the Board of Directors from 2006-2008 and little bit more when the election process hit a snag. None of the nominated members were approved. My term was extended until I was replaced by a new election six months later.

This past Wednesday night members found a new website for AUGI. They then noticed that the forums weren't online and then were stunned to find that the forums were not only offline but that when they resurfaced they were completely revamped and none of the legacy data is there. There is a seven year long back story that I won't get into since most people are just concerned with the forum data.

A very good friend asked me if I approved of what the AUGI Board of Directors chose to do: My answer was/is YES and NO. How typically political you might react? It's completely honest though.

My yes is tied to the legacy of the past seven years, my ten years as a member and volunteer, my 2.5 years on the Board of Directors and tons of minutiae. I've longed for the day that AUGI was truly free again to manage its own affairs and able to do what the members actually wanted to do. That is actually true today. AUGI is fully funded and it has complete control over its assets again. Except one unfortunate "loose end", the forum data.

My no is tied to how the Board chose to deal with this last item. I wish that it chose to put the gory details of the last seven years on the table so that members could decide how aggressively it wanted to deal with its forum data. It is the Board's responsibility to make decisions for the organization and having served in that role I do respect the burden. I do also think that the Board needs to put its trust in the members with really big decisions too.

Trust is a two-way-street and no Board in the last decade truly has fully deserved its members trust. I think that this one deserves recognition for facing very difficult decisions head-on, more so than any other board since 2003. AUGI was facing insolvency just a couple years ago and it is doing well today, that took dedication and some gutsy work. The members ought to consider extending a bit of trust their way too, even if they don't get to see all the details they've been wrestling with.

What now?

I believe the real value of AUGI is the members and their willingness to help each other, not just on past conversations (not just their posts). Sure they are great to search and find but more often than not people just ask the question all over again. Because that interaction is the value, that's what brings people back again and again. It is the quality of the members, their passion for the software, for sharing. It isn't just posts from 2003, 2006 or 2009... it's nice that they are/were there but not the sole value of the organization. If I go to a bar I don't go there to have the conversation I had last year again, I go to see people and have new conversations.

I'm hoping that AUGI can negotiate successfully for its forum data and that it can get migrated into the new web site as soon as possible. I hope that the members help reshape the new site since it IS a chance to start fresh in many ways. If we are honest there are many things about the old site that could stand a bit of rework. I'm prepared to get the heck out of the way too. I've been the Revit Community Forum manager for a long time. It's time (long overdue) for a new leader to step in and see things with fresh eyes.

For those of you who are feeling betrayed, I'm truly sorry...I can relate on many levels and not just because the forum data isn't there. On a deeper level, betrayed by people many of you don't even know. We can either keep moving forward or take the opportunity to do something else. There IS MORE to life than AUGI though I'm hard pressed to know what that is at times. Start something new, stick with AUGI, be the top poster at AUGI...you've got a great shot at beating me now, I've got zero posts now.

What will you decide?

Don't be a stranger...

Getting What We Ask For - API

I recall in 2002 that I was against the idea of any sort of API (Application Programming Interface) being part of Revit. Why? I was tired of managing a pile of LISP, ARX applications for AutoCAD/ADT etc. I was tired of making and maintaining them too. The "promise" was if the application needed it, it would get put in the application...Revit that is. I was worried about Revit in the future becoming the "present" (the present back then) AutoCAD situation.

As I understand it, initially the rationale for excluding an API was for control and speed-to-market. No API meant that the code was isolated and safe from outside interlopers and no distractions from providing features. This meant that they could focus and do what was needed to be done without worrying about what someone outside might try to do with the code. I'm making some sweeping generalizations here and may be sweeping some facts into corners.

When Autodesk acquired Revit developing the API became a priority and it has been ongoing since. Each release has seen large strides forward in what can be done externally. Ultimately the scope of the API is much larger than the founders had in mind.

Getting back to my bias against doing this and my selfishness. I liked the simplicity of "one" application doing so much. I hated the idea that I'd have to buy this or that from one vendor and hunt for another tool from yet another vendor. I hated the idea that I'd have to beg someone to make me a "free" utility or worse learn how to do it myself.

Yet the development of Revit can't seem to keep up with our needs and dreams. My personal dissatisfaction (yes I am not satisfied) with 2010 has little to do with the new interface than the lack of substantial tools and finishing existing features. No insult intended to the new massing tools because they represent a significant shift.

There are so many other things that are needed NOW, not in another 12 months. They were needed 12 months, 24 months ago. To name just two...Railings and Stairs. They have not been "touched" since release 7.0. Release 7.0 came out in December 2004 and there have been roughly ten releases since then including "point" releases. That's almost FIVE years ago now without so much as a "look" or "tweak" at stairs/railings. That so much effort was applied to the user interface at their expense is extremely frustrating.

Enter the API. For many things we can contact a developer and pay them to make something we need now. We'll get it faster than Autodesk will "give" it to us too. It will (hopefully) work exactly the way we want it to. Except that the "future" I was afraid of is here. My user interface now includes tools from many different vendors. In 2009 it is a real mess of menus and toolbars. In 2010, they are at least clustered under "add-ins" on the Ribbon, so far.

Here we are in that "future" I was dreading where I can get 3rd party applications from more than a dozen places and spend anywhere from $35 to $thousands. Some applications are charging as much as 25% of of the purchase price of Revit for their tools. Considering how much Revit does for its price and how little by comparison some tools do that seems a bit aggressive and it can make it harder for a firm to seriously consider them. Price is a difficult thing to figure out. Price it light and sell a lot. Now you've got a lot of customers and the difficulties that brings. Price it high and you sell less but you have a smaller pool of customers to please.

The future is here. There are quite a lot of cool tools available now and the API has made MORE possible. I just wish that more of it could be part of Revit itself.

Modeling Serendipity

In the debate about should we or shouldn't we use Revit (or 3D etc.) people overlook the intangible stuff that is hard to quantify until you encounter it, the title of the post. I'm writing about that "thing" that happens when you create a 3D model of something you "understand". I'm not trying to be insulting because I know that I've created models of things that I thought I understood and then found I didn't fully appreciate the impact it had on other related items later on.

Once upon a time I worked for a theatrical contractor that specializes in stage curtains, rigging and lighting systems. One of the things I did back then was shop drawing for our projects. We were careful to show how our equipment interacted with the building. Yes...these were drawing done by hand on vellum/mylar and with technical pens/pencils. We eventually used AutoCAD too.

All too often a site visit would find sprinklers and their pipes suspended from "our" rigging steel, ducts in the path of travel of curtains and lighting, drains and other sundry items in the way of our other equipment. Not that we didn't try to coordinate this stuff. Things like this need some room!


Usually when I'd talk to a contractor the story was, "Never saw those shop drawings, wish we had! Well, our stuffs in, work around it!!".

This is where I'd get to be "theatrical" and be a "Prima don". In a job trailer full of angry contractors who have just been told that much of their work would need to be redone I calmly explained that the reason the building is getting built is so that the equipment we are supposed to install actually works. If "our" stuff doesn't work then we can save the client a lot of money and stop building the building, won't need it after all.


As you can see in the image above there isn't a lot of real estate available to just put stuff any old place you want in a stage area. Once supplied with the "bigger" picture, sighs all around and a few "who's going to pay for this?" and they worked it out so we could do it right the second time. This happened more than a couple times over eleven years unfortunately.

Fast forward to Revit and modeling buildings...if our submittal was 3D and their submittal was 3D and everyone's was...we could evaluate this coordination much more efficiently than sitting in a job trailer and arguing about who was right. The sad truth is that too often the 2D drawings in the field don't get in the right hands at the right time. There are great projects and teams and then there are others...it takes all kinds.

Serendipity is when you realize that you didn't fully understand something. It comes when a collection of models means a dozen players solve a problem in an hour instead of spending several hours just trying figure out if there IS a problem. Consider that this usually meant flipping sheets and asking questions like, "What's the bottom elevation of the beam again?" "What's the duct size again?" "It says Top of Steel is 28'-0" but the finish floor is "27'-8", what gives?"

There are so many good reasons to do it...even some you haven't considered...yet. Climb down from the "fence"...

Credit is due for the images above:

The first image above is a custom winch assembly to lift a 22,000 lb. media screen at the Newseum in Washington, DC. The winch couldn't be mounted above so it "self-climbs" and had to be built to lift 34,000 lbs instead, its own weight plus the screen. An aside, I dealt with the sale of a similar winch and did the shop drawings for a project in Seoul when I worked for JR Clancy. The winch had to lift a prop, a small car, very very very fast so that it could arrive in the scene during a change and then disappear during a subsequent change. Oh and that's Rod Kaiser, an all around good guy. There is little he hasn't seen or done in his many years with JR Clancy.

The second image above is a capture from a magazine article featuring the Alden Theater in Maclean, Virginia. The magazine is Stage Directions. The article was written by Kathleen Burke and is called Revving Up. The theater contractor/consulting firm, Pook Diemont & Ohl was hired by the awarded contractor/consulting firm Barbizon Capitol. They used the equipment manufactured by my past employer JR Clancy.

Separate Checks Please - Off Topic "ish"

As a consultant I travel a bit. I have 150,000 miles on one airline alone...so perhaps more than a bit. I eat in a fair number of restaurants because I have to. I know, poor Steve...he HAS to eat in a restaurant all the time, poor baby. Well if you want to lose the 10 or so pounds that I gained a couple of years ago and they just won't go away no matter how hard I don't diet or exercise you'll understand.

Where am I going with this?

Traveling and eating alone can be a bit like the movie trailer for "Getting Over Sarah Marshall". The one where the poor sap is dining alone and the waiter makes a big point of it, Dining ALONE!!??!! Table for ONE!! And in "P.S. I love You" a big scene of removing the extra flatware and dishes when the guy gets up and leaves the girl at the table. Yeah I see movies on the plane that I probably wouldn't see by myself normally. And yes...my eyes welled up a couple times during P.S. I Love You"...softy! But I was really careful to pretend there was something in my eye so I don't think I was busted.

Where am I going with this?

Tonight I was sitting in a nice pub in Chicago, Miller's Pub. They have a great chicken pot pie (thanks David! for the recommendation) that is only available during lunch unless they have a couple left over and the last two times I've been here...they did...which means I got one. You have to know to ask because the menu says only available for lunch. Kind of like the family editor! It's a secret!

Where am I going with this?

Sooo I overheard the waiter tell a table of two behind me that it is the policy of the restaurant to not split checks, sorry...then he caved and said that since he wasn't really that busy yet he'd do it. It made me think about the service industry in general and why a restaurant would make a customer care about what is inconvenient for the waiter. Seems to me a restaurant is all about making food and pleasure easy for its customers, not burdening them with well it isn't convenient for us to do "that"... I'm not blasting Miller's, they are entitled to make their policies and choose to enforce them or not. It just seems to me that it can be a negative experience, however slight, in what could be an otherwise excellent night out for people.

Where am I going with this?

So what kind of negative experiences are we casting out to our clients based on our choice of Revit as a software or platform? How are we marketing that to them? Are we burdening them with "Revitese" or "BIMese"? Do they care what software we use? Well some do and some don't.

As my friend Wayne used to say to me when we'd have the proverbial Rev/auto/station talk,(paraphrasing) "Steve, if you are cutting my grass I don't care whether you use scissors or a $10,000 tractor as long as you get it done in the time you promised and for the price you promised...so why do I care what software you use?" Now Wayne enjoys playing point - counter point and his firm is a full fledged Revit capable design firm with an office in NY and NC, so no worries there.

I suppose we have to gauge what our clients appetite might be for this sort of knowledge? Then tell the ones who care and don't burden those who don't. Bottom line? "We" sell knowledge and expertise. We know how to get them the building they need and we happen to use some really great software to do it too. Just try to make sure the experience your clients leave with is a positive one! Don't make them remember you for being inflexible about splitting the check.

So there was where I was going, glad I finally got there!

Btw, I wholeheartedly recommend the chicken pot pie at Miller's Pub, just don't expect them to split your check! Cheers!!