2013

Just today I was upgraded to the 2013 versions of ACAD MEP and Revit (which is apparently now a 'design suite' - I guess that makes sense...). 

While I always save my settings in case of a crash, I almost never import them - but thanks to having just set up ACAD 2012 on my new computer a few weeks ago, I had it 100% ready to rock in about 10-15 minutes (the only mistake I made when setting up the QAT was having 'extend' and 'trim'  backwards, which made me do a doubletake for a second the first time I did it.  A handful of other settings were easy to fix - getting a BLACK background (not washed out gray), right click as enter (all the time), up arrow displaying snaps instead of previous coordinates, turned off the 'ribbon', etc.

I will tackle Revit in the morning, which (if I am not mistaken) should FINALLY have the ability to modify the 'ribbon' so that I can at least get 'M' and 'P' crap out of my way (although I'm *this* close to eliminating any dependence on the ribbon through the use of keyboard shortcuts and the QAT).  I don't know if I can turn it off, but there is supposed to be a way to revert it back to pre-ribbon (I may or may not fuck with that - especially if I am able to modify the 'ribbon' to my liking (it's going to be minimized 99% of the time though).

It will take a few minutes to set up all of my Revit keyboard shortcuts again (I still don't understand why so many aren't set to anything by default...), but I have a list of the most important ones (it also helps that I can still access the 2012 releases of both programs if I need to see how I had something set).

I'm not holdng out any hope that this ths release of Revit will be any kind of noticeable improvement though.  Autodesk has already done what it set out to do - fuck over everybody.  In the meantime I'll keep cranking out jobs in ACAD, make tons of money for my firm, and laugh at all of the losers who get to spend all day with their dicks in their hands attempting to Revit.

It really would be funny if it weren't for the fact that I carry these idiots on most jobs - with any profits being eaten up by the time it takes them to model endlessly and pointlessly.  Seriously - fuck Autodesk, fuck Revit, and fuck these people.

Pro-Revit

I've gotten a lot of my chest, but I still feel I have barely scratched the surface - I really lack the words to explain exactly how much I despise Revit, so for a change, I'm going to talk about things that I actually like about Revit (this should be a short one).

First we'll talk about it from the design aspect.

Looking at some of the designs that  people have done with it, especially when they export them out to other programs to flesh them out, complete with textures, lighting, etc. (or even before that in some cases) - I have to be somewhat impressed.  They still strike me as being an inefficient way of making what basically breaks down to being a rendering - but I do understand the excitement of seeing your design 'come to life' in the digital realm.

While I complain about all of the things that architects don't understand about my designs, they are more likely to have to deal with the client.  They like to dazzle the client, and 2D pieces of paper (while they are still what ends up being issued for construction) just don't do that.  Giving them a walkthrough of a fully rendered design blows their minds - and the fact that it has 'intelligence' and can be manipulated in real time gives it a serious edge over a 'dumb' rendering.

The passion that somebody like 'The Revit Kid' (although, seriously - he can still go fuck himself) shows for their design work is awesome.  Even a fairly basic design looks considerably more impressive when you can orbit it in 3D - even if it isn't necessarily an elaborate piece of work.  If someone is really enjoying the way that Revit allows them to design - then more power to them.

It varies from firm to firm, but some architects only ever get to do a tiny handful of actual 'architecture' projects (if any), while they spend the rest of their careers cranking out boxes to pay the bills.  The same goes for me when it comes to lighting design.  I might get to slap a few decorative fixtures on a project from time to time, but it is rare that I get to break out the really cool fixtures (and even rarer that they don't get 'value engineered' out of the project (another topic for another day).

I guess the main thing about Revit is that it has the potential to be an incredible design tool - if its users would simply hold Autodesks feet to the fire and force them to back up all of their talk with a real set of software instead of the half-ass bullshit that the've been pushing.

Value? Engineering?

'Value engineering' is a misleading term used to describe the process of taking a project that has been painstakingly designed and specified - and because someone (or many someones) involved with the project can't comprehend the concept of 'budgets' - attempting to swap out low-cost 'equivalents' for various materials and equipment.

Sometimes this is due to money that the client thought they had not coming through - and so they are simply going to have to make do with less fancy light fixtures, wall treatments, etc. - although a lot of time it is because you handed someone a half-assed set of software, and had them waste inordinate amounts of time modeling it - only to find out that (way too late) that the thing they've been spending so much time nitpicking every detail of can't actually be built based on the budget set out at the beginning of a project.

I can't count the number of times that I have had a Reviteer come to me - over and over - wasting time working out every detail of some feature on a building, only to find out later that the feature wasn't even actually intended to be part of the design. 

Fortunately for my part, all I have to do is slap together some schematics, tweak them as they make endless changes, and then toss it off to the side (or save it into my detail library - I rarely throw anything away). 

On their part they have modeled it, remodeled it, fought Revit at every turn, figured out workarounds, and then... had to toss it.  Feasibly hours and hours of work - all because nobody was actually communicating, because they all had their collective heads up their asses playing with Revit.

This is most commonly a problem with less experienced architect interns or designers/drafters - and the result is immediately noticeable in the massive files that they generate - despite important information (like all of the walls or ceilings) missing or entered incorrectly.

A more talented and experienced architect with Revit will develop a different type of model - stripped back, fast, and most important of all - accurate. 

They know what is important to get everybody working and coordinating - and only worrying about pretty details, finishes, and lighting effects to make the model look like a rendering AFTER the important information has been put in place (if at all).

I have a theory that it's because the inexperienced ones are more concerned about LOOKING like they are doing something rather than actually doing it.  These will be the ones that have tracked down Revit families of chairs, desks, computers, phones, etc. to put in their model, but two days before the project is due, you come to find out that they don't have a single wall in the right place, the wrong kind of ceilings in most of the spaces (if any at all), and that they have made some fundamental errors at the beginning of the project that are now making it necessary to figure out workarounds for every single change they make.

Even if I'm not in Revit, this fucks me over, because they have to be to a fairly certain degree of completion before I (and other engineering disciplines - regardless of software) can be finished.  If I was chasing them around in Revit, they would get punched twice instead of only once.

Then I rush, get done, only to find out that all of the fixtures that I have carefully selected (in order to properly light areas - and know that they are of a certain quality - and have decent warranties) are going to be replaced with sub-standard fixtures that will not properly light areas (although - this won't stop them from coming back and complaining to me about the poor results).

Basically - if the design was the focus, and worrying about modeling everything to perfection was not - then the times we have to crank back the project in order to meet a budget would be reduced.  We often like to comment that they want to swap out lights, hvac, etc - but architects never want to give up their pretty windows, or other features that they have spent days getting 'just right'.

All this discussion of Construction Documents is making me sick...

All of this discussion of Construction Documents leads us to the next stage in every projects life.  One that many 'drafters' or 'Revit Monkeys' don't really have to deal with much, but which Engineers and actual Designers have to not only plan for - but actively get involved with if they don't want to get thrown under the bus for 'delaying' a project.

It is that truly magical time when drawings finally get issued - knowing that you have put your best effort into making sure that you crossed every i, dotted every t, and that nobody else managed to fail to mention items of major importance, even despite repeated questioning (or worse - told you incorrectly).

Tossing it up there, and seeing if it soars, or comes crashing to the ground.  It depends on a lot of people, not just 'cogs in a wheel', but actual thinking, intelligent, individuals working together towards a common goal.

Then it gets handed to the contractor.

Now, there are all kinds of contractors - big contractors, little contractors, smart contractors, stupid contractors, honest contractors, less-than-honest contractors, hard working contractors, lazy contractors, contractors who show up in suits and ties, and contractors who look like they just drug themselves out of the ditch near the bar where they passed out last night.

Some bid on jobs, some of these bids are public (usually depending on where the money comes from), some are sealed, some are selected by the client, some... well - some I have no idea how in the fuck they get the job, but you generally have to work under the 'lowest-common-denominator' assumption.  Someone once told me that you have to make CD's that can be comprehended by a four year old, because that might very well be the mental ability of the contractor who gets it.

With the economy tanked, they are much less likely to work with you on items (despite the fact that they are supposed to have contingency money for little items in their bids).  They used to be a little bit easier to work with - but even then they would bid a job low to undercut their competition, get the job, and then try to make up the difference with change orders.  You have to watch these guys, especially because they are going to be going through the architect for most of them, and since a lot of architects (or their lackeys) don't have any clue what is actually involved to change something electrically any more than I would know how much it would be to make a change to something architectural (although again, I do know quite a bit).

I've had a girl walk up to my bosses desk and say 'they are moving two outlets from 18" up to 48" where we added a countertop - does $3,000 sound about right?'  These attempts to slip things past us aren't necessarily always due to dishonesty - they are often getting it in the neck for other things, and simply trying to make up the difference.  Some things can dick over a contractor - breakers for example.  They are cheap as hell if you order a panel loaded with them, but to buy one by itself, the manufacturer will rape you for it.

Another quick story - we had a bank that was designed by one of the guys who got laid off.  It was under construction, and we had run into a handful of minor mistakes on his drwaings that we easy to correct, and then they noticed that he had shown an electrical panel in the elevator equipment room (which is typically sacred space - reserved only for elevator equipment).  The solution was easy enough - the architect created a small closet on the floor above it, and I moved it there.

The contractor came back with a price of $10K.

Now - keep in mind, the panel hadn't been installed yet (I don't think it was even on-site), but they were trying to claim that 'all of the conduits/wires (which hadn't been installed yet either) are going to have to be longer'.  We requested a line item breakdown of the $10K, and then went to work seeing what all was actually involved.

Okay - the conduit/wire feeding the panel did have to longer by about 10', and there were one or two HVAC on the lower levels that were going to have to extend the same distance, but the rest of the circuits (and the most massive) it was feeding were all on the roof - and the panel had just gotten 10' closer to them, basically making it a wash (or based on my calculations, that they needed to give the customer a refund - although we didn't push that issue since it was our designer who fucked it up in the first place).

Technology Smechnology

We're going to veer off course here for a minute - but this is a related topic that I feel very strongly about.

You always hear (at least since the beginning of the industrial revolution) about each generation, and the greater levels of technology that they are exposed to. The assumption is always that children who are exposed to this technology, and become used to it, also gain an inherent understanding (or 'savvy') of how it functions, and how to use it.

Older generations are - of course, inept, clinging to outdated ideas.  Any ability they have to comprehend or use modern technology is due to having it explained to them by someone younger, and therefore 'savvy'.

There is never the consideration that they used to do things a particular way for a reason, or that the way you are doing them now might have unforeseen consequences.  This isn't just a 'respect your elders', 'back in my day', or 'get off my damn lawn' rant - it's something to take into serious consideration.

The fact is - the average 'kid' today knows about as much regarding technology as a caveman knew about particle physics.  They can turn on devices, and use them - and that's about it.  Despite access to instantaneous communication, there is a lack of actual communication ability.  E-mails (especially hastily assembled ones can often confuse or anger the person you are sending them to because you lose tone of voice, gestures, etc. that communicating in person prevents your words from being misinterpreted.

There is a fascinating amount of new technology being developed every day, but what gets marketed and sold to consumers under the auspices of making them 'smarter' or more 'high tech' is often just that - marketing.

Legal Eagle

So - liability.

On top of the liability that a firm can run into if it doesn't get drawings issued on time (a lot of Revit cheerleaders also don't know anything about contracts - and what happens if you do not fulfill them), there is also the liability that an architect or engineer takes on when they issue construction documents. 

As a designer, I do not immediately take on this liability - however my boss does, and if he gets it square in the nuts because of a mistake I make (though he is responsible for reviewing everything I do) then even if I was going balls deep on the Revit cock I wouldn't be here much longer.  Everybody makes mistakes, but all it takes is one major one that leaves either he or the firm exposed to liability, and it's 'GTFO' time.

Most of these major things don't come up until the building is under construction - or indeed, until after it is built.  Once (hopefully) clear, easy to understand, and hard to misinterpret construction documents get issued, then they are immediately torn a new asshole by all of the people involved in the next stage of the project.  They are subject to approval by Fire Marshall's (Local, State, Federal - depending on project), Electrical Inspectors (same), and other Authorities Having Jurisdiction or 'AHJ' that are specific to the project - like the FAA for example (for projects in or around airports), local utilities, telephone/cable, etc., etc.,  and of course - the contractors (who will get their own post soon) bidding the job.

I have always found it amazing that the Fire Marshall's offices can review and review, make comments, request corrections/alterations to designs, but then when they show up in the field, it's like you are dealing with a completely different organization.  Often it's not the same guy who reviewed it - and despite being fairly good at their jobs - I have run into at least one problem where a NICET 4 certified Fire Marshall inspector was making erroneous claims (that my NICET 5 certified fire alarm installer buddy slapped down).  They usually get whatever they want, but not that time.

At any rate - a Fire Marshall can come into a completed building, point and demand tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment be installed, and withhold the clients certificate of occupancy.  Guess who they are going to blame?  The Fire Marshall?  No.  The contractor?  No.  It's coming directly back into the lap of the engineer (and/or the firm he is partnered with).  The same goes for any other AHJ, and if schedules get screwed up because of it - then it's going to get ugly.

Liability And You

Wow - we've covered a lot of ground. I say 'we' in the royal sense - since I don't know (or give a fuck) if anyone else has taken the time to read any of my rants. With an internet overflowing with peoples idiotic opinions (and porn), this is probably more therapy than anything else. I accept all criticisms and comments that anyone might like to share (unless you work for Autodesk - in which case you need to go fuck yourself).

Today we're going to talk about something that I mentioned early on - the reasoning behind doing things the way that I (and others) do them. Like I said then - not that I need a reason, but they are many, and mostly revolve around little things like liability. Anyone who has worked in this industry for any period of time understand the importance of Construction Documents that are accurate, easy to read/comprehend (more on that next time), easy to reference, easy to modify, and difficult for anyone else to fuck up for you.

Some have managed to accomplish this task with Revit, and I applaud them their successes - they have been hard won.  While almost none of those I talk to on a regular basis would ever consider going back to ACAD, most are painfully aware of the shortcoming of Revit.  Some have decided (not altogether un-wisely in these trying times) to simply 'go along to get along'.  Autodesk was extremely lucky in this scenario - besides making it easier to frighten firms into being 'left behind', it also made it easier to demand a radical change in the way their employees were doing things, otherwise 'we fire you'.

Ironically, at least 3-4 Reviteers (or willing victims if they weren't already on-board) from my department were axed, while the remaining team (including myself) was staunchly ACAD - and still demanding that Architects be responsible for exporting and updating all necessary drawings for reference.  One was brought back when things picked up a little, and had picked up some Revit training in the interim - and the rest have been more or less forced into it, leaving me as the single 'hold-out' (read: guy who manages to juggle 2-3 times the workload of the rest of the team (or anyone else in the firm for that matter). 

A lot of co-workers can't figure out how I've been able to manage keeping my middle finger up at Revit for this long and still have a job - the answer is in the money.  I make money for my firm hand over fist.  I have seen some VERY impressive Revit models cranked out over the last couple of years - but the time and effort involved (and the coordination problems still plaguing these projects in the field) definitely don't work out in the cost to benefit analysis.  From the get go - my main concern was, what happens when someone jumps into Revit with both feet, and despite a good attitude, resources, training, etc. they simply cannot complete projects on time or on budget?

I was told that since it was Revit, it wouldn't be a problem because it is so awesome.  Reality tells a much different story.