Abu Dhabi - More

Got to visit the Marina Mall the other night courtesy of the client who was heading that way on another errand and I tagged along! BIG!

Every mall has a little sculpture in key places, this one is no different!

And a nicely made scale model!

This is a model of the Formula 1 racing park under development. They are starting to sell tickets to the first race ranging from 1200 dh to 2400 dh and up.

A poster in the same exhibit and advance ticket sales area.

Dept. of Why? Grids Don't Mind Piling On

I often wonder why some objects can't be placed on top of another while others just don't mind at all? Grids are one of these that really shouldn't be placed on top of one another but don't seem to annoy Revit at all when they are. Then we are left to figure out why a Grid number isn't available but we thought it was. Then it turns out that someone accidentally added a grid on top of another one and we can't see the grid value of the one hidden beneath it. A little head scratching and we are back on track.

Still, wouldn't it be more effective if Revit at least said, "Umm Steve, I hate to distract you but you just put a grid on top of another grid. Would you mind getting a clue and a life and fix it for me?, Cheers mate!". Better yet if it said it out loud in the voice of Mrs. Emma Peel (Diana Rigg). I can take criticism from her surely!

Dept. of Why? Auto Ceiling and Multiple Ceilings

I should start an informal poll on how many users have created multiple ceilings in a room because the Auto Ceiling function does not discriminate against multiple ceilings in the same location. When you try to put other elements in the same location as another Revit howl's in pain but not the ceiling tool. It's says, "Go for it dude...make as many as you like! It'll just confuse you later and it'll be like..kewl...I'm so like sitting back here and chuckling at you!"

I think something like twenty was the worst I've encountered. It goes something like this..."Steve, why can't I delete this ceiling?" I use a crossing selection window and filter out the other elements and find 20 ceiling elements. I tell them they placed 20 ceilings and they WERE deleting them just not ALL of them. I then wonder how many he deleted and how many there were originally?!?

He says,"How did I do that...oh wait? I placed the ceiling but I didn't see it at first so I tried again, and again and again and again..." This happens the most with the GWB ceiling type that doesn't have a material assigned to the GWB which means you can't "see" it. You aren't convinced there is a ceiling so you keep clicking! Remember a definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly expecting different results.

I'd like the ceiling tool get a bit smarter, a bit more discriminating. Which reminds me the ceiling tool ought to be able to detect columns just like rooms!!

Are you a Good Sketch or a Bad Sketch?

Aah sketch mode. What a picky feature! It wants nice clean perfect sketches. It is a pass/fail proposition, it works, it doesn't. I think of electrical circuits when I think of sketch mode, as in "open circuit" and "short circuit". I also think of tool paths for a CNC machine or the laser cutter/etcher you use for model making (some of you). I also think of Jeffrey McGrew and his Shopbot "Frank". Yes he named his machine. Anyway these devices like clean endpoint to endpoint sketches. A bad sketch means damaged work or in some cases even a small fire?

In yet another life of Mr. OpEd I worked for the theater equipment manufacturer J.R. Clancy and we had a sub-contractor that used a CNC machine to cut the side plates, out of steel, for the rigging loft and head blocks (pulley assemblies), among other things. They used to be fairly casual about who could create the drawing for them to use to cut these steel plates until someone sent one with a "Bad sketch". After the shop foreman and management apologized profusely for the trouble it caused only ONE person could do the job thereafter. No...thank goodness it wasn't me that caused the problem, I think?!?

Here's a graphic of good and bad sketches. Be a good sketcher, keep Revit happy!
It would be nice if Revit would fix bad sketches since it is smart enough to detect that a bad sketch exists! See? One of a few versions of this complaint.

It does however try to show us where the problem is and then waits for us to figure out how to resolve it. That's something I suppose.

Abu Dhabi at Night

I took this shot last night from the beach at the hotel before wandering over to the Pub for dinner. The food and drink was great but the service was, well, slow. It took twenty five minutes to get my bill and have it processed. It would have taken longer but I finally tracked down the waiter and handed the bill to him to process. I shouldn't complain but it was the "highlight" of an otherwise quiet evening.

This a construction site and is the same site as the shot I took from a slightly different angle from my room during the day and shared in a earlier post.

Revit 2010 Musings

I haven't said much about the upcoming release of Revit. That's because I'm not supposed to disclose that I've been involved in a program that I'm not supposed to disclose that I'm part of. I've also been busy doing some technical editing for the Mastering Revit Structure 2010 book for authors Tom Weir, Jamie Richardson and David Harrington and their publisher Wiley/Sybex. So much for my true dream of being a professional "Couch Potato".

Much has been said lately in blog posts, youtube and AUGI about the upcoming release's user interface and the new "wascally wevit wibbon" (Elmer Fudd saying it). Most of it blasting the new UI. Rather than pile on I have these thoughts.

I can't help but experience some irony having watched the Revit user community grow since 2003 at Zoogdesign and since 2004 at AUGI as well as during the RUGI and alt.cad.revit years "Before Zoog" (B.Z. = 2000-2003)

- Users and potential users complained relentlessly about the "rendering engine" - The last release has a new rendering engine and for the most part users are ambivalent about it.

- Users and potential users complained relentlessly about the "modeling tools" - now new modelling tools and now users are saying most of us don't actually need them.

- Users and potential users complained relentlessly about the "dated and clunky GUI" - A new GUI is here and now users are saying that the old one was better and more efficient.

Those are three pretty big items. Revit has been pretty consistently beaten up about these by users and competitors alike yet when they've finally taken steps to address them. They are met with ambivalence, animosity and even rejection...

I wonder will Revit users ever be happy?

Rhetorical question, the answer is no. We'll always want more. Besides our subscription theoretically entitles us to something more in every release.

It's possible, if you've read this far, that you think I'm making excuses for Autodesk...being an "apologist". It is just an observation and for the most part, accurate. If it is unreasonable to have "some" empathy for the developers who've spent the last couple years working on these things...then I'm unreasonable.

I do understand that each of my statements has a back story, a side story and multi-level tangentially related stories that help explain the user "reaction". On a simplistic level I can't help but wonder what Autodesk's reaction ought to be?

One could be, "See we gave them a new rendering engine and they don't really use it either". Another could be "See, they've been hounding us for more free form modelling capabilities and now they are admitting that a very small portion of the real world will use them." My fear is that they are "learning" from "us" that we have no idea what "we" really need!?! They've been listening to the cacophony related to those three items and are now potentially facing the ugliest of times as a result?

I'm glad they've been tackling some of the issues that they've been getting beaten up about over the years. There definitely are, however, a lot of "little" and "big" projects that I wish Autodesk would just take care of. The agenda for this release doesn't begin to live up to what my own agenda would have been, assuming I had a say. What concerns me the most is that I'm hearing for the first time ever that people are willing to "take a pass" on this release. This is bad for BIM, bad for collaboration, bad for Revit.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling... Only it isn't, I'll take what this release offers and find a way to make the most of it. Some might say, "Steve's a trainer, this release will be awesome for business!". Maybe...but I doubt it, at least not because of the UI. Experienced users will certainly have some anxiety about the transition and feel frustration getting acquainted but it won't last long. A few hours in and it starts to "fit". Keyboard Shortcuts can help you through assuming you use them at all now.

I recall the 2009 release seemed pretty banal when most people's initial reactions were offered up. Yet I found that I was unwilling to use 2008 nearly immediately. I suspect the same will be true of 2010. I just wish there were more subtle things fixed as well, as there was with the 2009 release.

Every release should address a distinct if not large portion of the "points of pain" that have been identified for many years now. It is important that Autodesk not forget this because a year is a long time to wait for the little things that can change a frustrated user into a thrilled, happy user that goes home at the end of the day happy to have been using the product. Oh, right...Revit users will never be happy. Let's shoot for nearly happy?

Save Locations and a little more Abu Dhabi

When you examine the Manage Links dialog you'll find the Save Locations button at the far bottom left side. I find that most people assume that this has something to do with the path of the file. It actually is related to Shared Coordinates instead.

When you change the position of a file that is using shared coordinates Revit will generate a warning.

If you click Save Now then you don't need the Save Location button this post refers to. If you click OK you can continue to massage the location of your link until you are satisfied. If you want to update the location now you can just Save the file and Revit will pop up the following.

Click OK and you still don't need the Save Location button. If you happen to be using the Manage Links dialog, or don't want to save your current project yet, now the Save Location button becomes useful. Click Save Locations in this state and you'll get the same dialog above which gives you the chance to publish the changed location to the linked file. Keep in mind that you can't save this data to the linked file if someone else is already working on the file.

In the spirit of "location" and since I'm far from my home location, here's a photo of the Abu Dhabi Mall, a pair of bridges that span the open air space between floors and the roof glazing system above.


I started out using my iPhone to take pictures, at the airports for example, but my computer refuses to let me extract them from the phone now. A problem to solve later so I've resorted to using the camera, which I actually remembered to bring. I still have to kick myself to remember to carry it with me. I envy others who seem to have the "I must take pictures" gene.

There are a lot of construction projects underway in the Middle East these days, though some are slowing or in some cases even halting in light of the economic pressure everywhere. These following images are of a quite large project that I can see from my hotel room window. These pictures are of the Al Reem Island development project, quite major development!!

Meetings - Change Them

I read a blog post by Seth Godin today. I think you probably should too. That's assuming you spend a lot of time in meetings, meetings that sometimes fail to live up to expectations?

I know an architect who's first meeting agenda item was "when is the next meeting?". I also once worked at a place that I had two mandatory meetings a week that the first hour I spent in it I contributed nothing and gained nothing. Fortunate for me after a few months of that I succesfully argued to be able to discuss my agenda items first so I could get the heck outta there and get back to the pile of voicemail that inevitably was waiting for me.

Seth's got some sage advice to literally change how your meetings are conducted, how effective they are and whether they happen at all.

On the Road Again - Abu Dhabi

Being a Revit fan and consultant has taken me further from home than anything else I've done in my lifetime. In 2006 I went to Sydney, Australia (to attend and speak at the Revit Technology Conference which is scheduled for June this year) and this week I am in Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates. I'm working with a CDV Systems client to help with their implementation and training. The closest I've been to here before was Turkey when I was a nine year old and that was a few years back. These two images are what I can see from an office window.

Location Line - Walls

The Location Line Options for wall placement is important in two ways. Initially when you place a wall and later when you decide that wall needs to be replaced with a different wall. Here is an example of generic (single layer) walls used to define "the third pigs" house (from the story of "The Three Pigs").
I've selected one wall to show where the Location Line is or appears to be at least. It is on the "outside" edge of the wall. Closer examination, if you had the file, would show that it is really assigned to the Core Face: Exterior. What is the difference? In this next image the walls are swapped for a more complex type that has multiple layers.
Note that the dimensions I placed are intact, did not change. That's because I was careful to choose the Location Line first. Consider this image where I was not so careful and let Revit use Wall Centerline instead.
These walls did not change as nicely and I now have some rework to do, or Undo. If I was careless or ambivalent about the Location Line initially I still have a second chance, just change it before you swap the walls.

When you change the Location Line setting it doesn't actually do anything agressive to your wall, it doesn't move anywhere. Revit just adjusts its understanding of the wall's setting and when you swap it out it will abide by the new rule.

Off Topic - Memory Lane

I've posted a couple times now about my past life as a lighting roadie. As it happens we moved in January and last night I was finally getting to the last couple boxes of things in my office and behold...some of my old tour stuff fell into my hands! So I shuffled a few laminated tour passes onto my comfy chair (no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!) and snapped a photo.


Proof! That this old roadie isn't imagining things, I actually did that stuff...I think. Now if I could just figure out what I did with my old itineraries and daily gig diary?!? What's in the picture?

My first tour working for R.A. Roth (Atlanta based lighting company) was with Frankie Beverly and Maze (bottom right).When I got home from that one I did some one nighters until 38 Special (middle row, third from left) left for eight months (six weeks on 1 week off roughly). During that tour I got to work with Huey Lewis and the News, Michael Stanley Band, Joan Jett, Eddie Money, Golden Earring, Night Ranger, Cheap Trick, Ratt...probably a few more I can't recall.

During a week off from that tour we tweaked the lighting rig and did a Donnie and Marie Osmond concert in Memphis for a convention that also had Barbara Walters as a speaker. During her talk one of the lamps over her head burned out audibly which unnerved her a bit, she looked up and then moved her microphone stand back a little. A few minutes later a circuit breaker in one of our dimmer racks "popped" too which caused her to move back even further, embarrassing as by now people were starting to look back at me as if saying, "what are you doing to her??". It was so quiet with just her speaking that such things really stood out in the room. Awkward!

When I got home from that one we prepped The Fixx (top right corner) tour that left for four months straight, left in August and came home in December. Then some one nighters until the Teena Marie (top row, second from left)tour left for a little over a month. I got to drive a 24 foot truck to California to start that one and at the end I drove it back, non-stop, by myself, from the west coast. Lots of coffee and by the end I was desperate to not drive for awhile! Yes the trucking industry frowns on that sort of nonsense. I was young...you finish the rest...

Somewhere in the midst of those was a brief stint with Rick James (top row, third from left). Next up was a short tour with Scandal featuring Patty Smythe (bottom row, first one), we toured the north east a bit and ended with a few nights at the Ritz in NYC.

Then we prepped for the Fresh Festival (middle row, fourth from left), which included nearly all the major rappers (Run DMC, Whodini, Grand Master Flash, Fat Boys etc) of the day as well as a dance duo called Shabadoo and Shrimp and a double dutch jump rope group. There wer two stages that cycled back and forth as groups switched out. The dance duo was fun because I did their lighting on the center house stage, an island in the middle of the audience. Their routine was a fast and furious demo/tour through dance styles for the last century ending with the current, for the 80's, break dancing. The spotlight calls took a lot of mental practice because their routine changed so quickly, sometimes a 10-20 second period.

Once that one wrapped up I did a bunch of one nighters including a very short run with Otis Day and the Nights, yes from the movie Animal House fame! It was a series of college Toga Party gigs! No laminated tour pass from that one though. Another one nighter was delivering some spotlights to a Kiss concert in South Carolina. I was pretty beat by the time I got there and a little before show time I curled up on a road case under the stage and went to sleep. I slept right through the entire concert!! Opening act and Kiss! Slept like a "rock"! I woke up to someone saying, "Has anyone seen that spotlight guy Steve anywhere?".

Then it was off with Kool and the Gang for a few months. They had opening acts The Mary Jane Girls, Ready for the World and a couple others I can't recall now.

During some time off at one point I got to hang out after a recording session in Atlanta with Foghat had wrapped for the day. My friend Lamar was doing their lighting at the time and he invited me along. I was a little more than in awe since as a lad I remembered sitting in my friend's basement listening to "Fool for the City" and thinking what a cool song!!

My last tour for R.A. Roth was Stevie Ray Vaughn (middle row, first from left). The Fabulous Thunderbirds (Stevie's brother Jimmie Lee played guitar for them) opened the show and I got to do their lighting for their show, cool! I got off the road when that tour went overseas. I was shocked and saddened to hear about losing Stevie in 1990 while I was working at a job site in Nyack, NY. In 1992 I got a chance to visit briefly with Chris (drums) and Tommy (bass) at a club where Arc Angels played.

Tens years passed and I found myself looking for a job suddenly. The very next day an opportunity to do a tour with Soul Asylum (bottom row, second from left) came my way so I signed on as their rigger! As it turned out I also got a job offer the following week for a full time job and fortunately they were willing to wait for me till I got back from the tour. One of their opening acts I really enjoyed was Matthew Sweet. The band I had been playing with for a few years covered several of his songs now and then. At the end of that tour the drum tech for Soul Asylum's drummer, Sterling Campbell, gave me some drum heads that he didn't like and some barely used sticks, but too used for him to continue using, to take home with me. I used those for a long, long time!!

The last pass in the picture (bottom row, third from left) is from the Soul Asylum tour too. They played the grand opening party for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, OH. Iggy Pop was there as well as a bunch of others. I got to visit with some of my friends with Clair Brothers Audio who had been there for several days already.Natalie Merchant performed too which reminds me that I once gave her a soccer lesson at St. Lawrence University in upstate NY.

I did a lot of stage hand work over the years after I stopped touring and I did the rigging for her show at the college as well as deliver some spot lights from the stage lighting company I was working for. A friend from the earlier Fresh Festival tour I did, the sound engineer, and I were catching up on things and at lunch he mentioned to her that I played soccer. She said she needed a lesson because a nephew/niece was starting to play and she wanted to be able to "talk the talk and walk the walk" so to speak. We spent about a half hour in the field behind the theater kicking a ball around. Surreal...

Surreal seems like as good a place to stop as any...thanks for letting me indulge my reminiscing!

That Other Side of Mr. OpEd - The Rod's

Once upon a time...back in those 80's I did some work with a group called The Rod's. The "internets" (a "Bushism") is/are great for dredging up stuff!

This album above is the one that I was familiar with at the time. This group was, then wasn't (broke up) and now is again, a three piece act based in Cortland, NY. If you've never heard of Cortland, it is 20ish miles south of Syracuse, NY...did that help? The color or lack of color on the cover always reminds me of the Led Zepplin album cover of the same title.

I worked for a lighting company called S.K. Lights for almost a year (flash forward 10+ years and I did another tour for SK Lights, new owner, with Soul Asylum as the rigger) and these guys were a relatively regular client that hired us to do their lighting. I don't remember how many clubs we spent time in but it seemed like a bunch. One particular highlight of working for them, for me, was their pretty amazing drummer, Carl Canady. Here's a link to a video of a solo he did during club date during 2008. Their song "Power Lover" is one that I remembered and was pleasantly surprised to see a bunch of their stuff on YouTube now. A year ago there was one video, now there is a bunch.

Some notable trivia - The group's guitarist David "Rock" Feinstein played in a group called "Elf" with his cousin Ronnie James Dio who was lead singer for Black Sabbath in later years and Ritchie Blackmore's Rainbow. Does the Rainbow song "Man on the Silver Mountain" resonate?). Also interesting is that they (The Rod's) were scheduled to do a UK tour with Metallica as their opening act in 1984 and the tour was cancelled because of poor ticket sales. Hmmm, is that THE Metallica? Yep...

The heavy metal era doesn't die it just goes grey and gets louDER!

Off Topic - The Ribbon

Why off topic? I'm not going to write about how wonderful the ribbon is or isn't. I was thinking, about the Ribbon, that some people seem to have some trouble saying Revit. They say Rivet or the sound a frog makes, Ribbet.

Now with the ribbon we have more opportunities like this one:

The "Wevit Wibbon" (Elmer Fudd's voice)...

MEP Rough-In Families - Follow On Post

I received the following in a comment to an earlier post
.
The image above that I believe prompted these questions.

I'm trying to decipher the picture and I have a few questions

1) How did you connect the piping to the P-Trap?
2) How did you connect the toilet flange to the toilet?
3) how did you connect the Double-Y w/8th Bend to a vertical pipe?
4) Did you end the hot and cold water supply at a valve for each of the components?
5) Are you using Revit to calculate flow requirements or pipe sizes?
6) Is this process easier or faster than placing a new fixture?
7) How do you create a system with this method?
8) How did you make the rough-in connector.
9) How did you connect it to the fixtures?

I am just beginning to learn Revit and am not using it to it's full potential yet. So far, I'm still just drafting in 3D. I'm looking for anything that will help to speed up the learning curve. Sorry this is so long winded. Thanks for the help.

To start with the answer, this concept is derived from the fact that RME cannot connect to a family in a linked file. If an architect places a toilet in their file the RME engineering must place their own toilet to connect piping. This is an alternative to placing a toilet, instead placing the rough-in fittings where the toilet would require them to be. They still must be coordinated but the rough-in fitting, in my mind, is consistent with the work on-site.

Answers:

1) The piping and p-trap is part of the connector family itself.

2) The toilet is not connected to the toilet flange. They occupy the same location. The toilet flange has the data that RME needs to allow for connection and to create a system.

3) The tutorials that come with RME show how to do that.

4) Yes, the pipes stop at the hot and cold water valves at both the sink and toilet.

5) I am not doing pipe sizing, I am a consultant who does training so I don't "need" to. Engineers are telling me that the sizing is a bit too basic at this time to really rely on. This was a mock-up of an idea that I've pitched to several clients who objected to placing toilets and sinks themselves.

6) Not faster necessarily but, in my view, more consistent with on-site process.

7) A system is connected to the rough-in connector family, the data needed is defined in the family. The fixtures are in the separate file so they are inert, "dumb".

8) In the family editor. RME ships with several connector families to use for this approach, simpler than mine but you can extend the idea to your own needs. You can download my examples; Sink Connector and Water Closet.

9) The rough-in family does not "connect" to the fixtures, it sits next to, above, coordinated with them.

I hope these answers help you on your way!!

Steve

Dept. of Subtle - Family Editor Parameter and Formula

This is an "oldy" but "goody". When you add a new parameter in the Family Types dialog and then immediately attempt to use that parameter in a formula Revit generates this message.


To avoid this message just click APPLY or OK (which closes the Family Types dialog box) to commit the addition of the parameters to the family. Then return to the Family Types dialog and add your formula. You just need to let Revit get used to the new parameters first, then it will happily let you make the formulas you need.

Basic Design Bar Tab - Trivia Test

So why has there been a Basics Design Bar tab all these years?

a - Because user studies said it was needed
b - Because Leonid Raiz said so
c - Because Jim Balding said so
d - Because Basics just sounded good
e - none of the above

Well the true story was shared recently by Erik from Inside the Factory. He wrote:

"Lets take as an example the old Basics tab. Some users we tested indicated they liked Basics. But when pressed, they usually conveyed a story about not being able to find something as they grew with the product. A little known fact: Basics was originally designed to make the product easier to demonstrate; the marketing guy would not have to flip around too much during the demo. In reality, Basics becomes a crutch. After using it for a while, user find themselves asking, "Hmm, Floor is on Basics, but Floor by Face is not. Is it on the Massing tab or the Modeling Menu or somewhere else? " This results in a lot of wasted searching - even after learning where the tool is located."

The above is an excerpt discussing the motivation for the upcoming user interface changes we will see in the Revit 2010 products. I love little stuff like that and had to share it here...so what are you waiting for? Go read the blog yourself!

Revit Structure - No Ceiling Plan

Revit Structure does not have a tool to create a ceiling plan, not on the Design Bar.
Not on the Menu either...


The reason is that, for the most part, structural engineers don't use them. In another post I suggested that feature for feature we could get away with just owning Revit MEP and Structure and get everything that Architecture has. I mentioned the lack of ceiling plans as one negative and a comment left said that you can create a view oriented like a ceiling plan despite the lack of a specific tool for it. I finally remember to mention how... you create a new Floor Plan type and alter a setting as shown in this image.


"Ceiling Views" are looking "up"!

Back to Basics: Mark and Type Mark

Language...with Revit's parameter naming the follow is true:

Door Number = "Mark" (not the person but the signature, ID or identifying "mark")
Window "type" = "Type Mark"

Out of the box, Revit's tags are assigned to these as described above. A door number is unique for each door so its tag is using a label assigned to the "Mark" parameter. Windows, for the most part, are defined according to a "type", a common letter or number designation for each window of a given "type" or configuration, therefore a window's tag is assigned to the "Type Mark" parameter.

"Mark" is located in the Element properties dialog while "Type Mark" is located in the Type Properties dialog. Most of Revit elements have both. Some Mark values are automatically supplied based on the "last" value entered and many are not. Type Mark values are not supplied with the assumption that each project will have its own needs and will be defined accordingly.

If you don't approve of the out of the box setting, you can create your own tag so that you can properly identify an element according to your needs.

Inside the Factory - New Blog

From the initial post:

Welcome to Inside the Factory – a blog about designing the Revit user experience. I’m Tom Vollaro, Senior User Researcher with AEC Solutions User Experience Team at Autodesk. Myself and other members of the team will be using this blog as a way to connect with you, Revit users. This blog has two goals. First, we want to provide a window into how the Revit user experience is designed (a bit more on that later). Second, we want to establish a conversation with our users to improve the Revit user experience.

The "factory" is the term that users (at the Zoogdesign forums which merged into AUGI's in 2004) affectionately started using to refer to the Revit development team.

The authors at this time are Tom Vollaro, Erik Egbertson and Lilli Smith.

I look forward to reading their posts!

ABL Content - Hydrel and Peerless

I am a little slow but Acuity Brands Lighting blog announced that they have made these two brands available in Revit family form. Peerless was announced back in November and Hydrel more recently in January.

Dept. of Subtle - Matchline Constraints

Patrick Paige, an associate with Perkins & Will in Charlotte, NC, wrote to me suggesting this item fits into this department nicely. He wrote:

When adding matchlines something was bothering me about the parameters. I realized that they flipped the locations of the “Base Constraint” and “Top Constraint.” For walls, shafts, etc. the order is bottom-top. For matchlines the order is top-bottom.

I agree...subtle. I recall something else that is different in this way, perhaps it is the wall opening tool. I'll have to check!

Revit MEP - Pipe Fittings and Angles

Piping often must be contorted a bit to deal with field conditions. Sometimes this means that a lateral run must rise to another elevation and shift aside to clear an obstacle. I'm not sure what is going on here but I thought it was an "interesting" field condition (in a parking garage during a recent hotel stay).

Doing so may mean that a fitting needs to rotate about the axis of the pipe run. Fittings rotate pretty easily in 90 degree increments just by clicking on the little circular rotate icon when the fitting is selected. Keep in mind that once you've connected pipes to the fitting that you'll likely lose the ability to rotate it with the little icon.When this doesn't cut it another tool might make the process a bit "easier". "Routing Solutions" exists to offer a variety of duct/pipe connection options by simply choosing two pipes or ducts. Revit will think about them for a moment and if possible offer you some choices. Like this image:

When you really need to rotate a fitting at a specific angle it gets a little "harder". You could rotate the fitting in a 3D view but making sure the origin of rotation is exactly aligned with the centerline of the pipe might be harder. The surest way is to cut a section next to the fitting temporarily so you can rotate it precisely. A bit more work but doable.

Once your fitting(s) is/are rotated then you can sketch a pipe between them in the same section view as long as you are careful to snap to the fitting connector at each fitting. The trim tool often does the job too, just get the pipes in the correct locations then trim/extend and let Revit put the fittings in.

Build Checker - Free Application

Richard Binning of Beside the Cursor blog has created and is sharing an application that will check the builds that are installed on a computer without requiring you to open Revit. It finds all the installation of Revit software on a given pc. It also works on a 64 bit operating system too. Here is an example screen shot.


Visit his BLOG POST to download the application!

Last, if you find his work makes your life just a little bit easier he provides an easy way to donate to his "charity" on the resulting report. Thanks Richard!

Site Toposurface - Graded Region - Net Cut Fill

While attending a Revit Structure user group in San Diego (last week), my first chance to visit finally, Behzad was demonstrating some of the new extensions, the Bridge Extensions content available via your Subscription account at Autodesk.

He showed something that, on the surface (pun intended), doesn't dawn on most users. The graded region tool isn't the only way to get your Net Cut/Fill results. This is true because Revit really only cares that one surface is existing and another is in a future phase. In other words you can model one surface in an earlier phase and model another one in a later phase and the properties of the newer surface will show the net/cut/fill values compared with the earlier surface.

One condition: New surface must not be created outside the boundary of the earlier surface. If it is...it won't compare them, no cut/fill result.

Insulation Tool - RME 2009

Quick one - This tool exists in RME 2009 though it does not appear on the Drafting Design Bar tab. It can be found under the Drafting Menu. The answer is YES, you can drafting the traditional insulation when doing details using RME 2009. Yes, it is missing from RST 2009.

Math - Data Entry

Various parameters types will accept mathematical equations as valid data. This means you can do some "math" within a parameter instead of figuring what the value you need is elsewhere and then enter it into Revit. To do so you must enter the equal sign (=) first followed by the formula.

As an example: I have three items that need to fit within an available space that is 12 feet wide. I'd like the middle item to be centered between the other two. Yes, I could add a dimension between just the three elements and use the EQ control. But less obvious perhaps and the reason for this post is that I can enter a calculation into the dimension field instead.


Formula is this: =((12'-5')-2.5')/2
In plain english:

Overall Space minus two Desk Widths minus one Desk Width divided by two

The result:

Yes it is easier in this case to do this instead...just discussing possibilities.

Units of Measure - Data Entry

When you enter a length value Revit will accept the value regardless of the project units your project is using as long as you provide a unit of measurement symbol.

For example, if you are working in a metric project and the base linear unit of measure is millimeters you can type 2500 and Revit will assume that you intended it to mean 2500 millimeters. If you type 2.5m however Revit will forget the millimeter assumption and use Meter as your unit.

If you are in an imperial unit project you can still enter a metric value by including mm, cm, m etc. Same is true in the reverse...in a metric project enter 12' 6" and you'll get the soft metric (mathematical) equivalent of 12 feet and six inches.

This "thinking" can usually be applied to other units of measure as well, in different parameters.

Using Acad Details - An Oldy but Goody

I posted this in June 2004 at AUGI just after Zoogdesign merged with AUGI. Still true today with a couple of changes to Revit since, I wrote:

I was preparing a short discussion for our local Revit user group meeting, South Coast Revit User Group (SCRUG) to cover detailing with Revit. While not an expert at detailing as an architectural person by any means I have spent a fair amount of time working with acad details and microstation too...the following applies to AutoCAD detail files specifically but most will apply to Microstation as well.

This list was also assembled assuming that "you" are not abandoning the acad files in favor of Revit only based details. These tips will help you keep the details portable and useable in either application.

First, stay focused on your goals and choose common ground that helps you achieve them. Avoid statements that start with; "I can't..." We can't..." "I won't...."

Font and Dimension Tips:
DON'T use a width factor other than (1) in AutoCAD text styles (Revit now supports width factors in text and dimension styles but may not import them initially)
DON'T use custom symbols that aren't also present in the TTF font
DON'T use a custom leader routine and/or custom arrows/terminators

DO use a TTF font in AutoCAD OR
DO use Revit's shxfontmap.txt to map shx fonts to a TTF font in Revit)
DO use the dimension leader object in AutoCAD
DO use a standard arrow or dimension terminator
DO make sure that blocks with attributes follow these rules too

Project Mgmt and General:
DO put details in a project specific location and don't move them
DO Import and link details and check the "current view" option
DO consider a separate detail project if you are dealing with a large multi-building project
DO manage them in "one" place, for consistency (AutoCAD since that's what were talking about here)
DO use a detail specific layer structure to manage lineweights more easily if required
DO make sure your details are located near 0,0 (origin)
DO use custom programming routines to automate changes these tips require
DO make sure drafting views use the same scale as the imported detail
Do use hatches that are not too dense or too large (defining "too" varies unfortunately)
Do use hatches that are properly bounded and don't use line segments that are too short for Revit (<1/32")

DON'T move the details once linked
DON'T explode details (change them in Acad, if you want to keep them useable for both)

If you must explode (don't), do so in a separate project to isolate all the extra objects styles, line patterns and styles and fill patterns that will proliferate in the project after doing so. If you have many "line has inaccurate direction..." or "line is too short..." errors. Embed the geometry of the detail in a detail component family first. Then use that in your project, the errors will be trapped in the family and not burden your Review Warnings process, and finish detailing with Revit text, dimensions etc.

If you follow these "rules" you will find that you can, nearly always, import a detail "as is" and minimize rework on libraries that will likely remain available for both applications. (stay dwg that is)

Remember the goal probably ought to be pure Revit details eventually so I prefer to think of this as a bridging activity instead of a long term solution.

If you compare this post with the AUGI post I've added a little bit here...

2008-2009 Visitor Statistics

I write this blog because I enjoy doing so. I admit it is a selfish pleasure. I didn't start out with that knowledge, I found that out as I went along. I don't remember when but I hooked up Google Analytics to the blog. I just decided to check the past year's statistics. This is the map of the 111,372 visitors who hail from 171 countries that stopped by my little corner in the blogoshere.


The countries that lack a shade of green are apparently countries that have not yet been touched by "Revit fever"? Well, regardless, according to Google Analytics people from those countries have not visited this site yet!

This is a capture of the sawtooth pattern of visiting going on...the spikes are roughly mid-week and the dips are the weekends. The greatest number of visits on a single day was 650.


I'd like say thanks to the readers that enjoy what I do here! It is gratifying to know that people like it. I also appreciate the comments and the chance to interact!

Cheers!

Dept. of Subtle - Triple P's

A user observed this the other day during a class and I recently read a comment by another user that saw it too which reminded me that I had this in my drafts!

You've got to look close... The spot elevation tool has some instance parameters for suffix and there are different ones for the upper or bottom portion of an element. In this case the word Upper...as an extra "p" as in Uppper. I assume it is there for emphasis!?! Yep it's pretty subtle, a perfect item for this department!

Autodesk Virtual Press Conference - 2010 Design Portfolio

Autodesk is getting the word out, I'm helping in my own little way so please pardon the "sales" intrusion. Revit users would love to get a peek at 2010...so maybe you can find time to see what they say?

Details/Agenda:

- Introduction and Strategic Trends

Overview and 2010 product demos for each:
- Building Industry
- Infrastructure and Transportation
- Telco & Utilities
- Open Q&A
- Conclusion

Please note that the Webcast will run from 12:00 - 2:00 pm EST.

To join, please use this LINK. Note that the site will NOT be active until tomorrow.

Let me know if you learn anything that I should know, I can't attend 8-(.

Dept. of Unfair - Rooms/Spaces Boundaries vs. Ceiling Boundaries

The ceiling tool cannot detect the room bounding capability of linked files or columns. When using Auto Ceiling the tool is oblivious to the boundaries that are defined by these elements.

Room tool seems fine:

Ceiling isn't fine:
I can't say that I was surprised since this issue has been with us all along but I had hoped with the release of 2009 that we'd see this fixed. Further I hoped that the linked file could also provide the same function. On the surface, to me, it seems like the "same" calculation for either tool.

The "fix" for the column condition is to let the walls trim "inside" the colums so they touch each other. The ceiling sketch will ignore the columns and be a bit bigger than need but the column will mask the ceiling. Not perfect but easier than sketching around the perimeter for each ceiling. If necessary you can still do that. For linked files you'll need to sketch the ceilings.

Dept. of Unfair - Revit MEP - Interference/Insulation

Justin wrote to me via a comment earlier today in another post so the inspiration for this post goes to him, thanks!

He wrote:

I've run into a little quirk and would like to pose the question. I'm trying to do multiple discipline coordination and ran into this problem. When we have a duct (Revit MEP) and use the insulation parameter to add onto it, "interference check" doesn't recognize a clash with only the insulation. Is this normal? Is there a workaround? As soon as the wall/beam collides with the duct itself, the "interference check" recognizes the clash. Any insight into this is appreciated. Thanks!

I replied. "Yes, that has been my observation as well, sorry!"

This one is insulation "being interfered with":


This one is the insulation and now the duct too:


I recommended that they contact Revit support to file a support request so that they either get another or get one if by chance they haven't already encountered the issue.

Yes, methinks it is "unfair"! Insulation deserves the same credibility that ducts get in Interference Check. Even better Interference Check ought to be "smart" enough to distinguish between a "hard" conflict and a "soft" conflict. My two tarnished pennies!

Off Topic - AUGI Beer Bust Mugs - AU 2008

Don't freeze your AUGI Beer Bust mug, it may "bust" when you add your beverage to it!!

For those of you who attend Autodesk University each year or have at least once you are probably aware that AUGI has given away a beer mug at the end of the AUGI general meeting (Sponsors pay for these mugs so that AUGI and you don't have to, they are listed on the mug too). Attendees then go to the AUGI Beer Bust in the exhibition hall to wander around and see what vendors are offering and to, yep you guessed it, drink beer.


This past AU was no different. Well there were mugs again but they were not glass as they were in previous years. This year the the hotel/convention services people told Autodesk/AUGI that they would not be allowed to bring glass into the exhibit hall. The only option to provide a mug and access to the beer was something other than glass. Thus this year's offering was a clear acrylic mug with a liquid that claimed to be "freezable" so that a beverage could stay colder longer.

We've had a few reports so far that mugs have "shattered" and "cracked" when they were frozen and then used. If this has happened to you please respond to this thread at AUGI and "vote" on the appropriate response in the poll. We don't know what can or will be done about mugs that have "failed" to perform. When we do we'll let "you" know too.

For those of you with a sense of humor about this, one member opined that maybe the vendor took the "Beer Bust" labeling on the mug literally?

(Note: You must be a member to view the thread and vote in the poll however.)

Department of Quirky - Stair Sketch in Workset Projects Update

I posted THIS back in March of 2007. I was visiting an office recently and we were chatting about this issue and one of them said, "Oh I found a way to fix that situation!" I said, "I'm all ears!" (not literally...it's a figure of speech).

She said the key is to draw the boundary lines continuously, don't stop them at the top of a run and the beginning of the landing. In other words don't draw them from point to point along the sloping part of the sketch draw them from the bottom of the first riser up to the end of the landing and repeat for each side.

In the image above I show one of four sides that would need to be done this way. After you sketch in this way, use the Split Tool to split the boundaries into the required segments. The sketch will finish without complaint. Certainly easier than pasting into a stand-alone project file or building the stair in the stand-alone file.

This deserves to be in the Dept. of Strange but I don't want to start another whole department. I'll have to place an ad to get another reporter and Freddy has been so unreliable lately I just don't have the patience.

Aligning Views between Sheets

This is a common question that the answer, for some, causes angst. Stated in the words of one user, "whaddya mean I can't align the view on one sheet with the view on another sheet exactly??!!??"

With other software people are accustomed to orienting their work with a notion of a Cartesian coordinate system (X,Y,Z) even for a sheet. With Revit the sheet is a bit nebulous. This is just a view that a title block family is placed in automatically when you create it AND can also host other views, a special version of a regular view. There isn't a coordinate system in this view, there is, but it isn't obvious to us. The title block family provides this reference for us but if it were to be deleted you'd be lost with no way to determine where you really were looking relative to another sheet.

Technically Revit just uses the outer boundary lines of a title block family to define the scope of the view to print. I'm referring to the rectangle boundary lines you find in the title block templates provided by the installation. It really doesn't matter where you put the views on the "sheet", well....not to Revit.

What is the objection? People want a floor plan on one sheet to sit directly above the floor plan on the next or subsequent sheets so that it doesn't "walk" back and forth or shift its location as you flip from page to page. Revit's "attitude" on this has been..."close enough is good enough". This is the characterization that drives some people crazy. I too was a bit perturbed years ago. I guess I've mellowed some since.

Here's my take on it. In a set of many sheets the portion of the set that will benefit from such precision is probably a relatively small number. Plans of the same scale certainly ought to be positioned on sheets so you see the project from the same "viewpoint" for each. As soon as you start showing partial, enlarged or other plans the relevance of the alignment between sheets is lost or at least less relevant.

That might seem an excuse to not bother to provide the ability to align them? I suppose at some point it might have been a factor in the decision to devote time to it from a software developer's perspective. In the scheme of things they probably thought that a roof tool would bring more value or importance than aligning views between sheets, so it dropped somewhat in the "To Do List". I imagine somewhere, in some office, they are wrestling with this sort of "can we do this or can we do that" argument every day.

What are your options then?

A view placed on a sheet is very much like a piece of paper on your desk. You can slide the paper around your desk (assuming it isn't cluttered) but there really is no point of reference between the paper and the desk. On the real desk eventually the paper will fall to the ground if you push too far. In Revit there is no real edge except for those lines in the title block family, outside of those Revit stops trying to print your work.

Two sheet views are a lot like two separate desks with their own paper and no real relationship between the two at all.

If you want these views to "stack" on these sheets you need to provide some point of reference and that reference can be the title block family itself. Some users will draw a detail line from a fixed point on their title block (in the sheet view) to a location on the sheet where they'd like their plan view to "sit". This line is then copied to clipboard and then Paste Aligned/Current view in the next sheet view. This gives you the same point for reference. Unfortunately the model visible in the plan's view port will not snap "through the view port" to this line so you are back to "close enough is good enough". If you zoom in you can get it so close that it won't be noticeable unless you export to dwg and then externally reference those files together, which does happen now and then.

Another technique is to provide a set of lines in the title block family itself that can be turned of by using a yes/no parameter associated with the Visible parameter for the line(s). Imagine the detail grid of the NCS/UDS (National Cad Standard / Uniform Document System). You can also store a "cross hair" somewhere or in several locations for this purpose. Think a little outside the proverbial box and you can get much more satisfying though not precise results.

Remember that "close enough is good enough" happens all the time...our tolerance for it just changes depending what the activity is.

Space Room Update Tool Available from Avatech

I approached Beau Turner with Avatech prior to Autodesk University 2008 about creating a routine to manage the relationship between spaces and rooms in Revit MEP. It has been a good month for extensions as I very recently posted that Autodesk released one too! While the Autodesk tool is good the Avatech solution does a bit more. Autodesk's is available to subscription members only while Avatech's is free to anyone! You'll have to judge for yourself.

Some features of the Avatech solution:
a) You can change only those spaces you have selected (filter first then run the tool) and choose that option.

b) Handle projects that use phasing.
c) Handle situations where there is more than one space in a room (common for analytical purposes) and provide a configurable setup so you can input your numbering standard (ex. Room 101 with 2 spaces becomes 101.A, 101.B (or whatever scheme you need to use via the config file).

d) Once run it will tell you how many spaces it changed/updated
e) Once run it will inform you whether there were any spaces that could not be updated (typical of UnPlaced Spaces created in schedules similar to Rooms)

f) This does not require a subscription account to access
g) This can be installed via batch script to multiple users

Download it NOW!
Scroll to the bottom of the page. Thanks Avatech, Beau and Matt!

Reviteristic - Revit Links are More Important?

When we link a Revit model into another project file there are number of instances where the linked model seems to interfere with selecting elements that are actually native parts of the model. I encounter this the most when I'm working with Revit MEP.

For example, using the Create System option for an Air Terminal the option to Select Equipment seems to only have eyes for the architectural model and it can be nearly impossible to select the very nice Single Duct VAV box right in front of you.

What to do? Well you could write a blog post like this and complain to start 8-).

If you change your view to Model Graphics Style: Wireframe you'll find that Revit is no longer as focused on the linked model. Another solution is to have a view with the linked model and another where the link is not displayed. When you are ready to create your systems just switch to the other "cleaner" view and no such issue.

Happy selecting!

Backward Compatibilty (or rather the lack of it)

Revit does not save backward. Said another way, you cannot save from "this" version to a previous version's format. It never has..maybe never will...but never say never?

One common concern or comment is based on working with consultants, "What if my consultant is using the previous version of Revit? What then?"

The only thing preventing a consultant that is currently using 2008 from collaborating with "you" using 2009 is their subscription status (that and a willingness to install it). They can work with you using 2009 even if all their other projects are in 2008 as long as their subscription is in force. Technically all they'd need is a single seat installed for 2009 (for each user) and a valid subscription for that seat, even if they didn't have a valid subscription for their remaining seats.

(I should clarify that I'm not a reseller and you really need to make sure that your firm is in compliance with the Autodesk End User License Agreement(s), EULA for your products. You really don't want a visit from the piracy folks. Please don't make such decisions on the basis of my post alone! Agreed??)

This means for "your" project the consultant would need to renew their subscription for each necessary seat to get the current version up and running apart from the "EyeTee" department exerting some effort. How much cash is required depends on how many people will need to work on the project and how long ago they stopped subscribing.

Note: In effect a Revit firm that abandons subscription is truly deciding NOT to collaborate... Autodesk definitely has us coming and going on this point.

A "team" of firms using Revit really MUST agree WHEN to upgrade to another version. One part of the team arbitrarily deciding to do so will unfairly burden the others with the timing of an upgrade. It is not necessarily a hard thing to do, normally, but it is very likely to be inconvenient depending how soon the next deadline is.

No backward compatibility has been and continues to be motivated by a greater urgency for moving forward than working out the complexity of supporting firms that don't "want" to upgrade. Anyone trying to truly collaborate with all disciplines right now will agree there is MUCH that needs to be done for every discipline to allow greater and tighter integration of our data.

Some might say that Autodesk "likes" or "enjoys" this situation, being necessary to maintain subscription, and perhaps there is some truth in that. The reality is that in order to progress they must be able to focus forward. If we demand that each release must save back to earlier releases then a considerable force must be applied to make that possible.

Consider that features added in 2009 might not be possible to create in earlier releases at all. A Swept Blend did not exist in an earlier release, what shall it become when saved to an earlier release? Just delete it? Recreate it unfaithfully because the geometry can't be represented? Create an ACIS "exported" and then "imported" instance in the model that can't ever be altered? I imagine that whatever elements are affected by such conditions that the resulting form(s) will not have the same fidelity as the original which calls into question the logic of doing so at all.

An enormous amount of effort would be necessary to permit this when the much "easier" (for Autodesk perhaps) solution is for customers to use the same release. Compare the few hundred dollars for a subscription per seat required of the customer as opposed to the kind effort required to make this possible in any fashion and you'll see it isn't a very motivating project for them.

Seth Godin wrote about Love and Annoying the other day. He wrote this:

...The goal is to create a product that people love. If people love it, they'll forgive a lot. They'll talk about it. They'll promote it. They'll come back. They'll be less price sensitive. They'll bring their friends. They'll work with you to make it better.

If you can't do that, though, perhaps you can make your service or product less annoying...

Read more...he goes on to say that Apple makes products people love as an example and that an Airline ought to work hard to make air travel less annoying. Seems to me that this issue and Revit as a product is on that "fence" now. People have been and continue to be passionate about Revit and willing to forgive its quirkiness. Increasingly many users however are more interested in it becoming less annoying.

Seth closes with this:

...Put a sign on your office door, or send a memo to the team. It should say either, "Everything we do needs to make our product less annoying" or "Everything we do should be idiosyncratic and engage people and invite them to fall in love with us. That's not easy, which is why it's worth it." Can't have both. Must do one...

It might seem that I am apologizing for something that Autodesk should just "do". Perhaps. At this time I am much more interested in Autodesk spending time and resources to add functionality so that firms can collaborate better. Every penny spent to support backward motion is "negative equity" and as we know that sort of equity has been contributing to the current state of our economy in a fairly significant way.

That Other side of Mr. OpEd

You may have read this EARLIER POST? Obviously I've been a bit quieter on the blog than previous months.

I took the Holidays off and then some! I got sick during the Christmas Holiday, my daughter and then Wife followed. In the midst of all that we also moved, not far, but moved nonetheless so the kids could "keep" their current schools. Folks without kids may not be able to relate to that. It seems like I've had enough to distract me already but then this "other" thing came up and I've been doing that too (being secretive...sorry).

But the REAL reason that I've been quiet on the blog is THIS!

I finally get to cross IT off the To Do List! I picked it up on clearance just after Christmas when the music store was getting ready to move to another location and they didn't want to have to move it and I was willing to move it to my house. Now I have a problem when I walk into my office (when I'm actually home that is)...play drums or play blogger? Well you know how that equation has worked out so far! No worries, work is forcing me back into Revit mentally again, unfortunately you'll be hearing from me again.

Revit MEP - Space Tool Available via Subscription!

Well I complained about spaces and rooms and every other Revit MEP user I've met has too. In the "they are listening" realm of things they have and have provided a tool specifically aimed at helping RME users deal with the disconnect between space numbers and names and their counterpart rooms. As sports fans sometimes say, hooray!

I do hope that it will be rolled up into the RME product release for 2010 naturally so a separate installation of software won't be required for such a relevant task. I suggested that they provide a separate tool via subscription so it could be done much sooner than waiting for the next release and I'm sure others did too.

I'm really glad they did!

Thanks!!

Visit the subscription site to download your copy!

Stephen Roth, Revit MEP's Product Manager posted the following at the AUGI forums today:

I am happy to announce that a new add-in is available for the 32- and 64-bit versions of Revit MEP 2009. The Space Naming Utility software is an intuitive tool that automatically assigns the names and numbers from architectural rooms to Revit MEP spaces.

By downloading the Space Naming Utility software, you can eliminate the need to manually assign names to the spaces helping save a tremendous amount of time and simplify your workflow.

Specifically, it does the following:

1. Can both name and number the spaces similar to the enclosed architectural rooms.
2. Can automatically name/number all spaces in a model, or by specific level.

Moving or Dragging Multiple "Ends"

I received a question this morning asking if it is possible to select and change the position of ends of more than one wall by dragging them at the same time. When I read this I imagined that the walls are parallel but they don't have to be.

The answer is, sure, hover over the end of a wall and use the TAB key to highlight the "shape handle" of the wall. This end line/edge of a wall is called its Shape Handle. Repeat that process and by using the CTRL key you can add the other shape handles to your selection till you are done.


Then either drag them or use the move tool. Dragging is not precise unless there is something you precisely you can drag "to". Move can be more precise because you can specify a distance.


Then again the Trim/Extend tool might take less effort?