Revit Seminar

Discussion (7)

  1. RL390

    Agreed. At a previous job I worked for a HUGE office in Texas and I was designated as ‘that’ guy. Needless to say the office was very badly managed.

  2. Anon

    I don’t understand why people think that you can get proficient at using software after a training course. No software training will make anybody a “user”. It would be better (and cheaper) to just buy everyone a training book.

  3. JimmyFu

    I agree with Anon, and it’s something we’ve been kicking around here at our office. Our firm provides a 3-day workshop on Revit. But that was literally three days of just learning the program – which I thought was absolutely necessary (what the buttons do and don’t do).

    It did NOT go into how to do a project in Revit; didn’t go over startup, where to go for families not pre-loaded…the best practices/how to actually use on a job.

    We’ve kicked around the idea of handing out “Revit 201X – No Experience Required,” and having staff go through that. It’s a good idea in theory – until you get around to figuring out how much TIME it’s going to take to go through the book. Who’s going to pay for that time? Will it be required to be done off-hours? Bottom line is, we barely break even on jobs that staff are on 100% – and now you want to start reducing staff time to 90% or less? (Poor project management is a topic for another day…)

    Because of this necessity of 100% staff utilization (where’s the time for research?), transitioning to REVIT from scratch (ie, not hiring an employee who already knows it prior) is a HUGE timesink/investment. And it’s a big concern for all of those CADders who are employed currently, but don’t know REVIT…(myself included)…

  4. TerribleTim

    I just wish people would stop reffering to AutoCAD as “CAD. Last time I checked “CAD” meant “Computer Aided Drafting”, which Revit is also. So when people in my office ask me “Is that project in Revit or CAD?” I reply “Yes.”

  5. gonk

    Technically, Revit is BIM – which one could argue is only peripherally “computer aided drafting.” It is true that you are using a computer, and you are creating drawings of the building, but the nature of the “drafting” process (defining the entities by what they are, not using lines and layers as a digital form of mechanical drafting) is different enough that I feel comfortable classifying BIM as a different animal from traditional CAD.

  6. E Architect

    There is an odd paradox that happens in the office whenever we have attempted to “implement REVIT”. Because REVIT is a BIM program one needs a good understanding of building construction to assemble the pieces as it where, something that the seasoned AutoCAD users understand. The younger REVIT experienced users lack this and inevitably have numerous conflict and incompatibility alerts which erodes away any added efficiency or time savings from using REVIT. We have probably had three or four honest attempts at getting REVIT integrated into the office and they have all stalled out. I agree with JimmyFu above and it all stems from REVIT not really being CAD but BIM.

  7. Clinton

    Anyone who is looking to integrate to Revit shouldn’t just be going onto a course and then try to work on it. I firmly believe the course is necessary to understand the software but you also need to get hold of an Implementation Specialist. There are number of them around although you think that your spending a lot of money on them, the return of investment will far out weigh the cost.

    Once you have specialist set up a process for them to visit you everyday for 2 weeks and then twice a week there after. Also don’t send the whole office, send only a select few and get them to start on a completely new project. This is fairly crucial as it will be far easier to start on a new project than trying to do an existing project. This way the user can learn from the ground up and can see for themselves what that process is. Over time you will see that user become very proficient and will easily be able to start a new project on their own.