Wednesday, May 18, 2016

Revit 2017 is a... thing?

Every year Autodesk shits out another version of Revit - and Revitards everywhere lap it up.  As I've said, with the compilation of all disciplines into one 'Uber Revit', specific disciplines like Electrical get pushed further and further into the background.  Reading the list of 'enhanced features' for 2017 is one of the saddest fucking things ever.

From some cocksucking dildo posting on:
an almost cut & paste of the advertisement from Autodesks website, with a few pathetic attempts at shoring up another fucktastic release (that everyone now has to switch to, or they won't be able to open anyone else's files.

Plenty of buzzwords with little to no substance:

'enhancements will help drive more efficient processes within an extended, multi-discipline building information modeling workflow'

Jesus Fucking Christ dude - just go balls deep on the Autodesk cock why don't you?

'Fasten your seatbelt - Revit 2017 is the fastest and best performing release yet'.

More like fasten your face to the Revit cock.

"More operations running with multi-threaded capabilities improve overall software performance by as much as 20%."

Holy fuck - 20%?!?!?! That's a... number.

"With multiple improvements and user-requested updates that simply help make features easier to use, Revit 2017 further contributes to user productivity."

I'm not even sure if the person who wrote those words has ever used Revit.

"Revit expert, author and trainer Paul Aubin experienced this running Revit 2017 for more than six days straight commented. “At the end of the week I realized, wow I never had to restart, and I fully suspect it would have kept running”

Mr. Aubin is impressed with the fact that he never had to restart... that's... just fucking hilarious at this point.

"Get more into-and out of-a Revit model"

Just... wow.

"Revit 2017 gives users tools to create models that even more accurately and completely represent what will ultimately be built, connecting design and fabrication workflows"

Okay - they are really getting on my nerves by basically repeating the same goddamned thing over and over with slightly different wording.  And nobody is using your fucking model to fabricate shit, so get your head out of your ass.

"Embed design intent in a model by using Global Parameters to drive dimension and element instance parameters."

'Global Parameters' is one of the only actual 'new features' I've seen touted - but damned if I can tell what the fuck it's actually supposed to DO.  

Mr. Aubin elaborates "The potential for global parameters is huge,” adds Aubin. “You can start creating design relationships between objects that aren’t even next to one another. They could be in totally different areas of the building, but you’ve got a global point of control.”

Well, that cleared that up...

 "With Revit 2017 designers can include the higher level of detail needed for downstream fabrication and building, modelling projects of any size and complexity."

Again with the 'downstream fabrication'.  Nobody that has actually worked in this industry for more than five minutes harbors any delusions that someone is going to hang their hat on a model that a first year intern shat out in Revit.  Every single fabricator in existence develops their own drawings (typically in ACAD).

 "Mechanical detailers can automate the fabrication model layout and convert design level of detail model elements to fabrication level of detail elements."

Did you get that?  It's almost like word soup.

"Structural engineers can improve the definition of design intent, or the level of detail for reinforcement modelling and documentation, to better connect steel design to detailing workflows."


From another Revit Dick-Socket's site:

A feature called 'depth cueing' (because god knows there weren't enough settings for depth/visibility in Revit already).  One buzzword (or buzzphrase) they keep using is "making your visuals 'pop'", which is what I'd like to do to the head of the person who first came up with that.

"'Text improvements'  - a top ten wishlist item since version 1.0"

That's no shit - although I'm willing to bet that the 'improvements' still don't address most of the major issues with the shitty text editor.

"Improved railing hosts"


"Global parameters bring the power of parametric families into the project environment to better capture design intent."

 Oh, we're back to this kind of shit again are we?

"Use global parameters to drive the value of a dimension or a constraint, associate to an element instance property to drive its value, or report the value of a dimension, so the value can be used in the equations of other global parameters. For example, a standard corridor width requirement can be associated with any dimension we use between corridor walls."

Not just back to it, doubling down on it...


This at least goes back to what the real reasoning behind modeling everything out is - giving your customer something they can look at.  Just like back when we used to... do renderings.  Walkthroughs are great too - you can 'ooh and ahh' your customer with a fully 3d representation of the building that they can't afford, won't have designed on time, and will end up having to radically alter to fit budgets/schedules.

"Reference Planes"

One of the most useful features in Revit - making it possible to put shit where you need to put it (the other guy that I used to work with used to damn near just coat any building he was designing with reference planes to prevent having to have anything be hosted on the building itself.

They acknowledge that anyone using Revit (not me thank god) might start to run into problems with the feature that allows reference planes to come into the model from families due to the inconsistent nature of various content developers (product manufacturers, etc.).

The list goes on and on - but fucked if any of it has any real meaning to the average Revit user who is just trying to get their project done.  I can't find it now, but one of the 2-3 electrical 'enhancements' (they aren't even bothering to claim they are adding new features anymore) had to do with being able to group electrical circuits the way they actually get grouped (i.e. 1,3,5 or 2,4,6) which should have been that way from day one.

It's just another sad release, crumbs tossed to the morons who love Revit, and more lies and empty promises to the ones who continue to struggle to do their fucking jobs while the Autodesk bootheel grinds down harder and harder on their necks.

Fuck Revit 2017.

Fuck Autodesk, Fuck Revitards, and if you don't like it - FUCK YOU.

Skullfuck Out.

(Next time - Branching Out)


  1. Unreal. We were just talking last week in our office about why doesn't REVIT group circuits. What's sad is that there is so much potential for Autodesk to facilitate electrical design, but yet they do none of it.

    I remember couple of years ago going to a Revit Electrical training. I was sitting in the class with 5 other young engineers/designers. We kept peppering the instructor with questions about Revit capabilities with regards to electrical and we were continually dissapointed. One guy actually thought that since we are defining how all new panels & transformers interconnect, Revit should be able to build out the single line by itself. HAhAHAHAHAHA. Of course it can't do anything even close to that.

    I personally still don't know if there is a way to actually "power" anything in the Mechanical model. I just put a disconnect/VFD/starter next to my equipment (usually on a reference plane) and that's my only association with the mechanical equipment. As Trump says, "sad".

    1. In regards to powering mechanical equipment, we do it the exact same way as you, although our motivation for doing so is solely out of mistrust of our mechanical engineers. The electrical characteristics within the mechanical families have a tendency to be a bit...inaccurate on occasion. I'm pretty sure that 500-ton electric chiller doesn't operate a voltage of 120V and have a load of 100VA.

    2. On almost every single project our mechanical designers would ask what voltage they needed to use (if they didn't ask, I would always offer it).

      And almost without fail, when they got around to selecting and scheduling equipment it would be the wrong voltage. They would re-select, then I would find all kinds of errors and inconsistencies with their MCA/MOCP.

      It was a mechanical designer that first tried to sell me on the benefits of reviting for coordination 'you will be able to just click on our equipment and it will automatically schedule!!!'.

      But after several years it still wasn't happening - and wasn't in any danger of ever happening.

  2. About 8 years I used the Design Master software package for Autocad. After a short learning curve I was up and running. I found we were getting a 20-30% savings in design time over just using regular autocad. The software paid for itself on the first project. I really hopped we would find similar savings with Revit MEP. NOT! I've been using MEP since the 2008 version and I can only remember making money on a hand full of projects. Mostly we finding that Revit take 40-50 more time than using Autocad with Design Master; 25-35% more than just using Autocad.

    It's really a shame, 8-9 years and it's still crap software. They really should hire the Design Master guys to finish writing MEP. I getting tired of having to always "Fake" something in Revit to get it to work.

    1. The problem is, at this point, to bring anyone in to fix it would be an admission that they had been foisting sadly underdeveloped software on the design industry. Instead, they will keep doubling down on 'Revit is the shiznit' and refusing to fix/include basic functionality.

      You can rest easy knowing that you aren't the only one having to fake it though - the wives of the developers of Revit are right there with you.

  3. "enhancements will help drive more efficient processes within an extended, multi-discipline building information modeling workflow"

    Looks like Autodesk is using the good old Web Economy Bullshit Generator:

  4. Holy shit that is hilarious...

    Now if you'll excuse me I need to revolutionize mission-critical functionalities!

  5. I found my way out of the latest big Architectural firm, where I hung on for a couple of years. I decided not to seek another similar position, mostly because of Revit. Thus caps off a 33-year long mostly successful career, beginning in basic drafting and working up to managing projects in the $2 to $12 million range. I'm starting my own small practice in residential projects [limited to that since I am not registered, or on a path there]. Been working like a dog for a month on startup and business development, and a couple of projects. Going to try hard to make this work. I own an Autocad LT/Revit LT 2016 suite, but the Revit part hasn't seen much use beyond just making sure it runs.
    Revit has obviously been a fool's errand for users -- at least veterans [younger people seem to love it]. Lately I am more convinced the same is true for large A/E firms. About a year ago at the big firm, the Revit Guru sent out a copy of a secret document to the staff that was sort of a draft version of a Project Score Card. The concept is, firms will be forced to make sure Revit contains all of the product/equipment data so it can actually be used by estimators, building maintenance managers, owners, et al -- which it was always supposed to do, but still coming up way short after all these years. I mentioned before that this isn't compatible with existing legal framework [who is responsible for which portions of The Woek] -- but it gets worse than that. The success or failure of a firm, hinged on the quality of a Revit model will depend on the supply chain [product data and Revit families provided by manufacturers and suppliers]. Multinational contractors [think Halliburton/KBR] could control the supply chain, either buying the few remaining large companies [there have been a lot of mergers and acquisitions the last few years] producing doors, windows, curtain wall, railings, air handling units, electrical equipment, all other components of a building -- or else, there will start to be a two-tiered access, with large companies getting most of the attention and smaller ones getting table scraps. With the Revit model as a deliverable, you can anticipate what happens next. The multinationals outperform the local firms, maybe even advising the Big Government client that the Revit model provided by the local firm is inferior. Sorry if all this sounds a little tinfoil hat -- but it is something to be concerned about. People get pretty comfortable in their little niche market without really seeing what is developing for what it really is. Anyway... enjoying my new lifestyle, hoping for success and better cash flow soon... and quite happy to be working with Autocad and Sketchup and not having to pretend to like Revit any longer. Thanks for telling the truth, SF.

  6. Best of luck Clark! You won't regret it.

  7. Love the article, can't agree more with most of it. However, my firm can (and does) go directly from the Revit model to a plasma cutter for ductwork fabrication. Don't get me wrong, it works like a pile of shit, but it works. And it's faster than manual entry by a long shot.

  8. I can imagine that would be useful - I used to work at a company that wrote software for designing 3d ductwork fittings to send to a plasma cutter - the user could enter duct size/shape, have it reduce/expand/offset/change shape,split/combine and add taps of any size/shape/offset/angle.

    It would lay out these crazy looking pieces (and nest them on sheets) but when they were formed up they fit perfectly (in theory at least), and the time/material savings versus manual layout was substantial.

    I would be curious to see what the process of getting the necessary information from Revit would look like - I assume the fittings/duct have to be exported individually in some format the plasma cutter table software could recognize.

    I could still see a fabrication shop being skeptical of information they receive from a design firm since changes typically continue to get made and that doesn't always trickle down to all parties involved - I know if it burned me one time, it would be the last time.