While there is so much debate about the introduction of the Ribbon interface in the 2010 versions of the Autodesk applications, I thought that I’d highlight the fact that there is a useful new item in each of the ‘Help’ menus that should ease the transitional headache somewhat.

It is titled simply, ‘Where is my command?’ and is available in each of the AutoCAD and Revit platform-based solutions.

This actually lets you navigate to the required function in the help navigation bar using the same route that you would have taken in the old user interface.  In the list you will see the menu and Design Bar headings from the previous versions and when you select these you will receive a handy reference to where these are now located.

Although I don’t use this a lot now, as I’ve persevered to adapt to the new interface and am now getting used to it; I must admit that I found it a great help on a number of occasions when I just couldn’t find some of the less commonly used tools (especially those on the Ribbon flyouts that you can’t see).  It will certainly come in handy for those of you who are making the transition and want to avoid a lot of unnecessary exploration!

Although this is the first attempt at changing the Revit interface since it’s inception, I for one am fairly happy with this effort; and  although there are some notable frustrations with certain aspects of the way it works, I’d safely say that the benefits easily outweigh the annoyances.  I know that there has been a lot of debate over the lack of a ‘classic’ mode but I have to say that I am somewhat relieved that this has been left alone and that they can concentrate on developing a single interface that can meet the demands of both existing and new users effectively.

With the AutoCAD solutions, most of the old methods are still available but I would recommend that the Ribbon be used wherever possible as there are a number of benefits to be had.

For those of you lucky enough to be using Autodesk Inventor, you will have access to a more interactive ‘Command Locator’ facility, that allows you to select any command or function from the previous version:

Then it will provide a visual indication of exactly where the selected tool can be found in the new interface:

Excitech recently hosted our first Mapping User Group, which was something of a gamble as we really had no idea what level of interest it would attract. However, I am pleased to say that the number of users who attended was probably just about right for our first meeting, and there was some very positive feedback following the event.

As well as showing the latest features in AutoCAD Map 3D 2010, we presented a short session on OS MasterMap data, a topic that always sparks interest as users begin to understand how this new mapping format can work for them. We were supported by AIT, who showed how MapGuide can be used to create a powerful web applications to publish all types of mapping information to the internet, and allow the general public or indeed internal users to access mapping data very easily. Mark Spence from AIT also showed some of AIT’s custom applications, explaining how MapGuide can be extended to allow editing and data input – the Eye-Tree application developed by AIT allows local authorities and similar organisations to map and manage their trees and shrubs for maintenance, attaching data to the trees including photographs, videos or other documents. This presentation was echoed by our end-user presentation from Bader Al-Sheibani from the London Borough of Merton, who used Map 3D and MapGuide to develop a web application to publish parking information for the borough to the general public. Bader did a great job of showing some of the issues involved in getting this type of project out of Map 3D, through GIS and into MapGuide – he got a lot of questions from other attendees whose organisations who want to create similar projects.

Adam Jull and his colleagues from IMS used an internet link to show how Map 3D can be deployed and used on Citrix XenApp. This application delivery system is generating a lot of interest from larger organisations who want to centralise the management of their applications. AutoCAD Map 3D is the only Autodesk CAD application that is supported under this environment, and has the advantage of allowing remote users to run Map 3D on handheld devices. They were even able to show us Map 3D running on an iPhone!

There were some comments during and after the event that has prompted me to think about the direction that Autodesk have taken with the development of new features in AutoCAD Map 3D.

I’ve always been a big fan of the RPC (Rich Photo-Realistic Content) Plug-In which I’ve used since the early days of the original 3d studio max & Viz days.  Almost everyone who uses 3ds max for architectural visualisation will be aware of this plug-in and most of those using Revit Architecture will be aware of its native ability to render RPC content.  However, what I’ve realised lately is that the majority of AutoCAD Architecture (& AutoCAD MEP) users don’t know that they can also integrate the photo-realistic content in their scenes on these platforms.

Since the introduction of the ‘Mental Ray’ rendering engine in the 2007 release of AutoCAD, people have gradually cottoned on to the fact that they can produce excellent quality presentation images in the AutoCAD platform.  This can literally save hours, not to mention the cost and learning of additional software, by not having to export and prepare information in another environment.  Most people eschewed the old rendering engine in AutoCAD as the crude results were often not worth the pain of setting up but the new tools are a breath of fresh air, and quality images are well within the reach of any AutoCAD operator.

The new lights and materials are extremely easy to work with and exterior scenes are a breeze due to the option to have the sun provide the main light source with the sky set to illuminate the scene more naturally.  As you can see from the example image below, the output of such a scene is much more realistic than most would anticipate with preparation time measured in minutes, rather than hours.

Excitech HQ: Model Courtesy of Scott Campbell & Paul Grimston, Excitech

The only thing missing here is some ‘entourage’ to make the scene come to life a little more and provide a sense of scale and context; and this is where the RPC plug-in comes into play

The eagle-eyed amongst you may already have spotted the availability of this plug-in, which appeared in version 2008, via the ‘Content and Plug-ins Catalog’ in the ‘Content Browser’:

However, if you look at this in AutoCAD Architecture 2010, it still states that the plug-in available is for version 2008:

Not to worry though, the plug-ins for each version can be located from the plug-in section of the ArchVision website:

http://www.archvision.com/RPCPlugIns.cfm

Once the plug-in has been installed, a new Ribbon tab and panel for inserting and managing RPC content will become available:

Although there are a few free content samples available from the Archvision website, there is actually a new content download for Autodesk subscription holders that provides a much greater range of content for AutoCAD Architecture/MEP users:

This provides a good basic selection from some of the main libraries, such as people, trees, cars and clutter; which should also be familiar to those who have experience of the RPC content provided with Revit:

There are a few familiar faces in amongst this lot that have popped up in many diverse locations over the years, so much so that I feel that I somehow know them; but there are plenty of new ones too, so mixing them up shouldn’t be a problem!

These can then be easily placed and positioned in any of your scenes using the ‘RPC Place’ option on the RPC tools panel: 

  With very little effort these useful additions can quickly bring your scenes to life more naturally by incorporating them within the context of the model:

Although I can’t see many building services firms using this plug-in initially within AutoCAD MEP, there are a lot of people now taking advantage of the rendering capabilities to help visualise system designs; so here is how a typical plant room might look with some people added:

Happy rendering!

We have just recently finished hosting our Civil 3D User Group here at Excitech – it proved to be a very popular event, attended by users from all around the country, from organisations both large and small. The intention of the User Groups is to provide a forum where users can learn from technical presentations about the technology, see how others are using the software on live projects, share experiences through discussion, and ultimately help drive successful adoption of the software.

We had some very interesting user presentations, with John Freeman from Kier Group showing how they had used Civil 3D for a number of projects, including a Rope Conveyor in Jamaica and a port redevelopment project. Tushar Meshram from Halcrow gave a very relevant presentation on how they are using Civil 3D to design underground services for a large development in the Middle East. This is one area of design that many companies are now carrying out in Civil 3D, and the workflows they are using were of interest to many of the attendees.

Jack Strongitharm from Autodesk “wowed” the audience with a demonstration of the latest features in the 2010 release. There are lots of good things in this version, but the new Intersection Wizard stole the show. A recording of Jack completing a junction design in Civil 3D 2009 (at around 15  - 20 mins, but speeded up!) was compared with the new release where a full crossroads intersection was designed in just a few minutes. It certainly got everyone’s attention and will no doubt have users asking their CAD Managers for this release. (If you want to learn about the new features, then you can view our 2010 Presentations On Demand). Paul Lloyd-Smith from Datech did an excellent job showing the surveying functionality – in particular the new linework processing commands, which now make it so easy to produce a survey drawing from field coding.

But back to the topic!

During one of the breaks I got talking to one of our customers whose organisation is considering their options for Civil Engineering design software. Yes, you guessed it, the MX versus AutoCAD Civil 3D debate!  The issues are often the same for any design house that has already invested in Bentley MX over many years:-

• Should we look to adopt Civil 3D?
• Can Civil 3D do the same job as MX?
• How much will it cost to implement Civil 3D?
• Can we afford the learning curve?
• What do we do with MX if we decide to adopt Civil 3D?

As a proponent of AutoCAD Civil 3D you will probably assume that my advice would be “Just do it!”, but that’s simply not a professional approach to this issue. The fact is that MX does a good job, and although it has its quirks, it is a tried and tested solution. In fact, for an experienced user of MX, it is packed full of features that any similar software package would struggle to match.  So when I get asked these questions, my response will be different depending on the client that’s asking them. In my opinion, Civil 3D can certainly do the work that MX does – but it makes no sense for an organisation just to ditch MX if it has loyal, experienced staff who know how to use MX and can produce designs efficiently with it. On the other hand, if the pool of experienced users of MX is dwindling, and they are considering hiring or training staff, then it makes good sense to look at a more efficient alternative. Civil 3D has a great plug-in, available on the Autodesk Subscription Centre, that allows users to import and export MX data directly. This makes Civil 3D a great tool to implement alongside MX.

How about considering:-

• Keep MX for the experienced, trained MX users – you’ve already invested a lot in that resource. As these users decline, through retirement, perhaps, or simply because they move around, then you can gradually run down your installed MX software base
• Implement Civil 3D for the new blood that you bring into your design teams – they are often graduates, and will probably feel more comfortable learning a product based on the AutoCAD interface. They may even have already learnt to use it at University
• Use Civil 3D to remove bottlenecks in your design processes. If you have engineers waiting on information to come back from the MX team simply because of their workload, then clearly you cannot be working efficiently. Civil 3D can be used to perform many of the design tasks that MX is being used for – it is particularly efficient for drawing production (long-sections, cross-sections etc) where you can work natively in AutoCAD. If you are going to keep MX, use it for the very large transportation schemes that it is good at.

You’ll notice of course that I don’t advocate doing nothing! I am not alone in voicing concern over the future of MX – and there is a gulf of difference in the amount of development effort that Autodesk are putting into Civil 3D, compared with Bentley and MX. And it is the future that you must take a serious look at when considering the MX / Civil 3D debate. Civil 3D gains market share daily, it has many 3rd party solutions that have been developed for it, and a network of dealers that can support and train in it. It’s future is secure, and I’m not sure anyone can say that about MX.

Following on from my previous post, I decided to get a bit more adventurous with conceptual form and create a family based on David Fano’s hex glass panelling.

As you can see, this appeared to work well on my conceptual roof form and allowed me to create a series of different options:

The next thing I thought to my self was, “wouldn’t this look good if I rendered it”; but this can only be done at the moment within the context of a project file so there was only one place to go.

Having loaded the family into a project file, as I’d done several times in the past, I was a bit shocked to see the mess that it made of my panels:

This one had me scratching my head for a while, and investigating my interpretation of the curtain panel family, until I asked the Autodesk expert on these matters, Zach Kron, who kindly blogged the following answer:

http://buildz.blogspot.com/2009/05/flip-flop-fly-apart-panels-workaround.html

Apparently this is just a bug, which I can forgive them for now amongst all of this new stuff; and it relates to the following surface parameters in that if both are not set to the same value, the aforementioned problem will occur and the panels will fly out of position:

It is sometimes necessary to use these parameters to get the panels positioned correctly within the divided surface, so you may just have to work the grid settings a little harder in order to ensure that both of these settings can remain the same.

Upon setting both of these to be ‘ON’, and reloading the form family, the panels fell right back into position and rendered up quite nicely:

It also gave me the perfect excuse to try out some soft shadow rendering:

Hopefully this will be corrected in the not-too-distant future but hopefully this will be enough for you to avoid the issue until then!

AutoCAD Structural Detailing has been included with Revit Structure Suite for just over a year now and the latest version, 2010, includes a few gems to help with the creation of complex modelling in Revit Structure. One of the weak points of Revit is the inability to easily position complex steelwork through 3D space other than using plenty of reference planes and a liberal amount of cursing!

Revit Structure 2010 now includes a two way link with ASD which is found on the Add-Ins tab on the ribbon. Yes, you do need to be on subscription for these tools. This tool will enable you to update your Revit Structure model from ASD or send your model to ASD for further detailing.

The first step is to start AutoCAD Structural Detailing 2010 and make sure you are using a Steel Project. The screen should look like this. If you are not in the Steel Project then you can select the ASD Start tab and click the steel button.

It is now time to dust off your AutoCAD 3D skills and create a wireframe model of your proposed steel layout. You need to make sure that you only use lines as ASD will not recognise a Polyline as a valid wire. I have also found that curved members are not transferred to Revit Structure so for now you are limited to straight sections.

Once you have created your wireframe model you then can start to convert the wires into structural members. Start by selecting the profile command on the ASD Model tab.

You will then see the following dialog box. In this dialog you can select your profile and then click the Insert by Line command.

You can now begin to pick all the wires that you previously created.

Once you are happy with the model you then need to switch back to Revit Structure. If you have ASD installed on a different machine then you can save the model and use this file to update Revit Structure.

Once in Revit Structure you then select the Add-ins tab and choose Integration with AutoCAD Structural Detailing (Steel)

You can then update the model from Structural detailing or tick the use a DWG file and import the model from a dwg. Notice that you can also send the Revit Structure model to ASD. This is good for generating fabrication details and then linking the drawings back into Revit.

You should then see your model in Revit Structure! Any changes to this framing should be undertaken in ASD and transferred back to Revit Structure. A pretty neat workflow!

So far I’ve been really impressed with the new conceptual form modelling tools in Revit Architecture/Structure 2010 and managed to find some time to get my head around the various components of this new design process while preparing for our recent Revit User Group.

The new modelling tools are currently available exclusively in the conceptual mass editing environment, which can either be accessed by using the new ‘Conceptual Mass’ family template file or by defining an in-place mass within a standard project.

For the same reasons that I would recommend defining separate family files, rather than create an in-place family, for certain regular family types; I would also lean towards this approach when using the new conceptual design environment to develop and evaluate a proposed design.

As an example, the following image shows a conceptual family file containing some familiar family elements , such as reference planes, reference lines and various dimension parameters.  However, what we also have now are ‘Reference Points’, ‘3D Levels’ and ‘3D Reference Planes’ that allow us to make much more flexible and freeform models.

As a significant added improvement, we can also now adjust any custom parameters by directly manipulating the geometry that relates to each parameter; whereas previously this had to be dialogue-driven.  In the image below, the reference point that defines the top of the end arches is driven by a common angle and distance parameter that can be manipulated by dragging the point on screen.

The parameters are still available in the ‘Family Types’ dialogue, which is still useful for controlled manipulation and particularly for defining multiple ‘Types’ so that various form iterations can be assessed within the project environment.

This skeleton can then be ‘skinned’ easily by using the new ‘Create Form’ tool, with either a surface or solid created, depending on the lines selected.

This form remains fully parametric and can be adjusted using the same parameters previously mentioned.

So we can create much more complex forms than before with the added benefit of parametrically controlled dimensions but that’s not all; we can also divide any surface into any of a series of geometric shapes.

In this example, the top surface has been divided into a notional rectangular panel roof surface for the specified form.

As well as the visual representation, the idea with these surfaces is that they are produced as something that can actually be built in the real world.  For example, at any time the divided surface can be selected and an accurate surface area will be reported.

The configuration of the chosen geometric grid can be altered to suit the desired layout, and there are a number of parameters and on-screen editing tools for manipulation.

The next step is to define and load a new type of family called, ‘Curtain Panel Pattern Based’ for which there is a specific family template file.  In the panel family file, you can add parameters as you would with any other family type to control the likes of dimensions and materials.

These can then be assigned to the divided surface to create a range of interesting and varied effects.

In the form family you can access the parameters of the panel family and make changes to see their effect on the divided surface configuration.

Once the desired panel family has been applied any changes to the form family type parameters will reconfigure the whole surface and the individual panels.  This may take some time depending on the complexity of the geometry and how fast your workstation is; it certainly makes a 64-bit machine a much more compelling proposition!

Once you’re happy with the form and any types that you wish to specify, you can load the conceptual family into a standard Revit project environment.

These can then be placed in the desired location and any defined ‘Types’ will be available in the new ‘Type’ selector on the Ribbon.

In addition to being able to utilise these forms to generate otherwise potentially difficult production information, it can also be used to derive quantitative information using the option to schedule curtain panels.

It also goes without saying that the rendering tools in the project environment are a great help in evaluating each design iteration.

There are obviously a number of additional steps required at each stage, depending on your requirements, but hopefully this gives a useful insight into the basic workflow and who knows, it may even inspire you to give these tools a try!

The inaugural MEP User Group, held on the 30th of April 2009, covered both of the Autodesk solutions for the building services industry, namely AutoCAD MEP and Revit MEP. This was extremely well attended and generated lots of positive feedback. Participation from the audience was excellent throughout and ensured that it made for an interactive experience for all those involved.

The session commenced with an introduction and informal discussion on the current situation regarding the positioning and progress of both AutoCAD MEP and Revit MEP. This generated some early contributions from the audience and set the tone for the rest of the session, as well as provided some early insight into the technologies being used by those in attendance. Most of the audience were actively using AutoCAD MEP in some way but there were representatives from a few organisations who have started to implement Revit MEP on specific projects.

The first main presentation was on the updates to the 2010 versions of both products by Dave Shepherd of Excitech. This covered the enhancements to both AutoCAD MEP and Revit MEP. Most of the improvements that were highlighted related to AutoCAD MEP and these received a very positive response, in particular the introduction of true sloped pipe and fittings for modelling drainage and public health systems. Although there have not been a great deal of changes to Revit MEP that are immediately relevant to the UK market, there were a few positive areas of improvement such as the Ribbon interface, the improved gbXML transfer and the automatic space generation option. There was also a discussion on the use of the ADSK file format to transfer manufacturer parts created in Autodesk Inventor and some of the practicalities and limitations of this potential workflow were highlighted.

Following this opening session, we had the first client presentation from Steve Rudge of MPS on their adoption and application of technology. This started with an overview of their design process and mapped out the various tools that they use and how they initially set out to co-ordinate the various aspects of their designs. They then talked about the structure of their teams and how they managed the production of their information. This was followed by examples of how they zoned the building and split the various elements into separate reference files. He also stressed the importance of managing the files properly and explained how critical Navisworks has been for them in managing these projects.

Overall, this was an excellent presentation delivered in a very open and honest style that highlighted the realities of adopting this method of project delivery. The presentation itself lasted around 20 minutes but there was easily the same time used for questions thereafter. The audience were clearly interested and Steve was asked numerous questions about their methods, procedures and operational framework.

The last session before lunch was the eagerly anticipated presentation of the EastCoast fabrication solution for AutoCAD MEP. Dave Quigley started by briefly outlining their strategy for the development of a fabrication solution that was integrated inside AutoCAD MEP. He also described their strategic partnership with Autodesk and how they were working directly with the core MEP product development team at Autodesk.

He then handed over to his colleague, Randy Swaim, who proceeded to demonstrate the capabilities of the current EastCoast fabrication solution. He started off by showing the fabrication components as they are presented within AutoCAD MEP and then loaded in some UK manufacturer catalogues from the Part Manager. He proceeded to create a generic pipe layout and then was able to swap this over for a layout defined using specific manufacturer fittings and specification data. He then defined a pipe spool and automatically produced a spool drawing complete with material and quantity schedules.

He then performed a similar exercise with a generic duct layout before numbering each segment and then defining a pickoff list for the fabrication exercise. Next he opened the EastCoast DuctMaker program and proceeded to load in the pickoff list and demonstrated how each component could be accessed and edited prior to machining. The DuctMaker programme allowed the individual segments to be refined manually if required and it was also able to automatically ‘nest’ the faces of each component, to ensure that the cutting of the sheet metal was done with the least amount of waste.

This demonstration seemed to capture everyone’s attention and there were many people scribbling notes throughout and at a number of stages there were audible ‘gasps’ from the audience. As anticipated, there were lots of questions at the end of this session and many in the audience were asking about availability, cost and evaluation software. The overall feedback from the audience was extremely complimentary about the functionality of the fabrication module, as well as the inherent capability of AutoCAD MEP.

After lunch, John Phyall of Excitech presented a high-level overview of his work with a major government project and how they were managing the process at such a large scale. He was able to highlight how they had built upon the methods developed during the T5 project and adopted the CDE (Common Data Environment) approach in line with the revised BS1192. He also outlined some of the challenges that they had faced in managing information from remote design offices and also in controlling the quality of information delivered so that it could meet their requirements for through-life management of data.

The remaining technical sessions were rolled into a fairly informal and interactive information workshop, presented by Scott Grant of Excitech. There was a Tips & Tricks session for both Revit MEP and AutoCAD MEP. Due to the fact that few in the audience were using Revit MEP then the tips were used to highlight some of the benefits of the software and raise awareness of some of the key operational issues that people need to consider when adopting the platform. There were more tips and tricks for AutoCAD MEP, which most people seemed to find very useful; and in most cases made people aware of basic functionality that they were not utilising.

The final session relating to the use of systems in Revit MEP, provided the chance to highlight some of the key differences in the approach that Revit MEP takes to the traditional design and production process, compared to AutoCAD MEP. There was an outline and quick demonstration of how the design information is captured and manipulated inside Revit MEP, along with a discussion and overview of some recommended content development strategies.

Yet again, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to our guest speakers and equally, to all of those who attended and contributed to make this such an eventful meeting.  We hope to see you all again soon and please feel free to contact us with any suggestions for the next meeting!