revit 2010 design

I found working in plan and section useful for design. I think this is more like doing architectural drawings to create a 3d model, while sketchup is more like building a 3d model to create architectural drawings. I found bouncing between the programs difficult, but switching to revit post midterm payed off. I was able to create all my views early on and then go in and modify them with VG to refine them when my model/design was done. This allowed me to push design further into the term than would be prudent otherwise. I plan on using revit in future endevors.

studio final

I used revit 2010 for the entirety of my studio layout.

ecotect

images from top to bottom
1-sketchup pro gbxml eggshell of 1st floor rendered in radiance


2-ecotect wire frame perspective of complex gbxml model from revit with data plane.


3-the 2nd floor from gbxml model out of revit in ecotect


4-the 1st floor revit gbxml in ecotect






these images were created in Ecotect from a gbxml file generated in Revit 2010. I had to modify the model slightly in the Ecotect 3d editor, i think it still has some glitches. I also had to change the default location to Eugene OR, and set the date to 12/21/2010(worst case scenario). I began an import to Radiance Desktop 2.0 but after 6hr of rendering the computer was still working, so i have included an early experiment with a SKP generated gbxml, all the surfaces were triangulated but the simpler model worked in radiance. I'm not sure if this was due to a model glitch or a setting. I adjusted the max Daylight Factor on the Ecotect lighting analyses, and tried using a denser grid than originally, i found that these two factors played a huge role in the legibility of the information. Increasing grid density increased rendering time proportionately. I'll be spending more time refining the gbxml model and materials before my studio final, and i would like to experiment with using ecotect in the initial schematic design in my next studio.

parametric fireplace

well i finally got the parametric(note 2 versions above) fireplace done, i likely overcomplicated it by creating many interlocked layers/reference planes (rough opening,exterior finish, exterior brick, 2" air space, interior brick) all in the fire box component. These were created in a wall hosted family so that i could create parametric openings in the wall it is hosted in. The intent being that the nested chimney and the fireplace would create a wall opening, but i found that if the chimney is placed in front or behind the wall, an unsightly opening is still created. This is not such a problem as i am planing on placing the chimney mid wall. I was able to make sure that the fireplace assembly would parametrically re size from the centerline, i this way the left and right assemblies (rough opening,exterior finish, exterior brick, 2" air space, interior brick) will not overlap.

I found that using handles(arrows) to modify parameters caused the family to shift position on the hosting wall; whereas entering the parameters numerically did not, in both cases the parameters behaved symmetrically(as designed).

I ran into some troubles with voids not cutting through masses, even though the masses were created before the voids. I created a work around by modifying the masses/extrusions so they were perforated...this took 2 hrs and i was able to create mass and voids in another test file with no trouble. Revit is a little frustrating, and mysterious.

Another little mystery has to do with a handle on the nested chimney family moving the family in the opposite direction than anticipated. I was unable to sort out why, so after an hour i decided to let it be and just move the handle in the opposite direction, i would like to fix this.

I think i'm most proud of getting the openings in the wall to be parametric to the rough opening reference, as well as the chimney void. I also found it is possible to copy parametrized reference planes along with their dimensions, then paste and rotate them as a group. This was a time saver as it helped in the creation of my left and right side planes. I've locked in the 1" finish 4" brick 2" air gap 4" brick dimensions, so these do not change as the fireplace dimensions are shifted.

I do like many of revits features, and particularly like the reference plane method of working.
I'm sure with more time and use i'll get the hang of this.

project 1

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.



top 2 images scanned from "Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian Homes" by John Sergeant, published by Watson-Guptill


After some initial unrewarding attempts to use the massing tools to create the buttressed roof form of the Sturges house by Frank Lloyd Wright i decided to use another usonian home the Winkler-Goetsch house. It is built on a simple 4x4 grid is single story and has 2 flat roofs. The MASSIVE chimney proved to be problematic, both from the standpoint of its construction as well as implications for the roof plane. I used masonry walls to construct it, but had to offset the base of one wall up above the 1st floor view in order to keep it from showing on the plan, also i had to cap the closed section of the chimney with a small roof, though in hindsight i could have placed a short wall segment at a level 1-2' below the top and then used it to fill the gap. I edited the standard roof to a zero slope inorder to make it flat, and then edited the bounding lines to make the overhangs. I discovered through trial and error that rather than creating a roof plane that was articulated to follow the walls it was more efficiant(at least wit the flat roof) to make a simple rectangle and then make vertical openings that blocked out the unwanted portions. Another challenge was the patio stairs, I used 3 floor planes to create them, as the stair tool was not appropriate for this use. Plotting proved problematic, but i managed it via exporting jpg. to photoshop then printing.

The resources i've found most usefull in this class are the GTFs inclass workshop, which im my opinion could use more time. It may work better if its possible to have some full class time workshops, with the (very informative and much welcomed) guest lecturers and other class disscusions/activities all being done on the other class day in the week. The onlie and offline help/hot_help is excellent.

I think i'm most interested in exploring the use of the massing tool as well as the importing of simple sketchup massings for in model editing of planes into walls roofs floors. This could be a huge time saver for those already familiar with skp, and seems to follow the real world aplicatio of revit. I would also like to use these revit-ized skp files to import to ecotect.

To be honest one of the more unusual/uncomfortable ellements of this class is the blog, i can see it has potential but am as of yet not a bloger nor do i think its something i will pursue outside of the class, although i did frequent BBS in my youth i'm not yet sold on the digital diary...but this may change should it prove useful.

bim diary 4

I think using BIM will give me an advantage when it comes to looking for a job. Its likely that as 15 years ago learning CAD gave a similar advantage to students graduating at that time. My hope is that i can get into a firm which will allow me to develop my skills further.

BIM diary 3

in this week i used revit to create a rough massing model. It was difficult to use at first but later in the term i found revit to be a useful design tool. it may take a while but i feel confident that with more time invested i will be able to use revit to its full capabillity. I still think i'll be using paper and pencile, and posably sketchup for the initial design phase, but plan on moving my designs into revit soon after. The key will be to create my own families and not to just accept what comes in the kit of parts.

Tristans BIM diary 2

The feeling of operating left handed is still present, but I’m finding some similarities to architectural desktop, such as drawing walls clockwise and counterclockwise affects the bias of finish facing. The thing I found most useful from the classroom was the discovery that the selection method differs from other programs, in that control is used to add to the selection, and shift to subtract. This has saved me a lot 1 of time, and was a prime source of confusion/frustration. I’m researching Usonian homes for my first assignment. I like think the regulating grids should help when it comes to drafting in revit. BIM programs have a lot of potential, they allow multiple disciplines to work on a single model; so revisions to the model are available to everyone more or less immediately. This aids in avoiding complications, such as unforeseen intersections of plumbing or electrical with HVAC. But in some ways BIM is still an emerging technology, and promises of easy cross platform file transfers, are somewhat dubious. We have no universal standard. Also the programs are processor intensive, and the control interfaces are evolving so hardware must be updated and employees trained and retrained in the latest BIM applications. I have no doubt BIM will become as commonplace as CAD in architectural offices. Certainly for large projects the benefits over hand drafting and or even CAD are evident, but the environmental modeling tools in BIM programs are useful on smaller projects as well as large office towers. Processors will catch up with the programs soon, and ram becomes cheaper and faster as often as hemlines rise and fall. So the hardware problem is being solved in time. The programs will likely go through successively less dramatic changes from version to version, and this should aid in the development of a common file type, or a solid standard for cross platform import/export; until then it seems a little wild west.

BIM week 1(new)

I have had experience with mechanical drafting in high school. Later i took classes in autocad 2007 and architectural desktop. Arch desktop reminds me of revit in a number of ways, primarily the way one draws lines then defines wall types. Also in the way it can generate documents, although i believe revit will add in symbols to drawings, whereas in cad or architectural desktop the symbols are elements which are constructed of lines. The various views in revit seem like viewports generated by scripts in cad. The nestleing of information within objects was somthing done in cad but it seems streamlined i revit. There are no Xrefs to keep track of. in short alot of things which could be done in cad with scripts,blocks,and xrefs are handled "under the hood" i revit. I look forward to using revit in studio to rapidly generate drawings as well as trying out the rendering engine. I'm familiar with sketchup, but revit "feels" different than cad or sketchup. The active tool bars are something i'll have to get used to. I wonder if there is a way to generate a custom tool pallet which could always be called up, with non applicable tools "grayed out"and applicable tools available, regardless of which object or tool is selected at any time.