Revit Interns II

Discussion (9)

  1. DavidK

    Penny wise and pound foolish. A decent introductory course is not inexpensive, but should pay for itself by shortening the rather steep and long learning curve that comes with Revit.

  2. Florian Heise

    Lynda! Cheap and offers so much.

  3. rpiboy

    Interns = Revit Teachers if you want Building = Lawsuit or Project = Overbudget

  4. Sonnenbrille

    Teaching the older people in our office everyday something new in Revit for 2 years now…

  5. iGet It

    Interns usually only know how to use Revit as a modeling tool and not a documentation tool. Best practices will be overlooked, processes will be unknown, and documentation efficiency, which is the first major advantage of the program, won’t be considered.

    Sure it will look pretty, but since there will be no data, it could be made of marshmallows…

  6. miguel

    really the intern know more about it?

    lol architects indeed

  7. CADirk

    Getting interns interested is’t that bad, but get some other people involved as well.
    Just make a simple return of investment calculation.
    Revit itself is about $5500 per seat, send one person on a $1500 course (add some because instead of the course they could have been working, so make it $2000).
    I’m not really sure what the average hour rate is, but when it’s around $75/hour, you need to save about 100 hours or 2.5 working weeks in total for a working year.
    It’s not impossibe to do that, even when you’re just up in the basics.
    Practical annoyance because the tools and families don’t work the way you want them to, might trigger some individual reasearch, tinkering and improvement.

    • Dru

      The seats of Revit we pay for (subscription based now, yay) are $2k/year ($2.7k/yr for the Construction Suite). Our use local meetup and professional groups for a lot of training and make sure we hire people who know the software. A big key is to make one reliable person in charge of Revit standards and training and give them a small team to migrate standards through the office and each project. Just like how you would upkeep CADD standards on projects as new details and software changes come in.

      There was a learning curve to set best practices and sometimes I have to have a “coming to Jesus” moment with some of the staff when they stray too far off path but the time saved in every phase of the project is worth it. We don’t have to build multiple models for presentation, we can verify sections and plans during design, and we can do quantity take-offs during SD, DD, and CD to make sure we are coming in at our guesstimated budget. We found we broke even on hours spent on the first project, everything after that allowed more design time and quicker turn-around. Not dealing with paperspace ltscale issues itself is completely worth it.

      I’m a little sore on the subject as we are working with a consultant that only uses CADD and that particular project is stuck on my deck. I seriously want to murder someone every time I have to work it in. Drawing plans and elevations and sections and presentation docs all separately? WTLF?!

  8. Central Standard

    Sure there are clients asking about it. That ends when they find out the extra cost is not worth it.