Concrete Steps

Revit doesn't seem to like generating a smooth underside for some stair configurations. A post at AUGI asked about making what seems like simple concrete steps. Yes, they do look simple. The stair (and railing) features sure have a lot of buttons, dialogs and subtlety. There is definitely no easy button unless you are satisfied with whatever the stair looks like after you place two points to create a straight stair. This is the image that the original post included at AUGI.

Years ago I picked on Autodesk because the stair and railing features couldn't easily be used to make the stair in their building's own ground floor atrium/foyer. They've moved since and there aren't any featured stairs now. Coincidence? [evil grin]

Revit doesn't mind creating the steps if we choose the "Stepped" option.

This is what the sketch looks like.

Keep in mind that the "end" of a stair like this needs a riser not a boundary sketch segment. That's why the sketch line at the top of the steps is black, not green. Creating a stair that ends at a landing can be a bit counter-intuitive, I wrote a post about that condition some years ago too, it's called "A Flat Slope".

A little bit later I was doing something with a floor slab edge and it occurred to me that I could use a slab edge profile to create the steps too. So this is the result of a profile family applied to a Slab Edge type and then applied to three sides of the floor edge. I made the top step the floor so I'd have three edges to work with. If I wanted a joint between the floor slab and the step I could just make the top step a floor and create another floor behind it for the building's floor slab.

Here's the section through the steps and floor (on the left) and the profile family in the family editor (on the right).

The section of the step profile shows that it extends under the slab. I did that so I could use Join Geometry between them and clean up the lines between them. Assigning the same material to the Slab Edge type means that the concrete pattern flows between them nicely. The view from below the steps reveals the nice sloped slab edge that results from the slab edge profile. Compare that against the stepped version and this one looks more realistic from a construction perspective.

Now all I need to finish it off is a short foundation wall to close up the space behind the steps and the edge of slab. Something to consider for those little steps you need for your next project.

It is a Training Problem

I frequently get involved in conversations that start with someone wishing Revit would help resolve "x" problem. The essence of "x" is that somebody on the team keeps doing something that the team wishes they wouldn't. So we want Revit to fix a user, or make it impossible for a certain user to do something.

Usually it is just growing pains and those WILL subside after enough time is invested and experience is gained. That's the purpose of training, we can shorten the time required with training. Yes, I do work as a trainer but I'm not just saying that because I'm a trainer (the carpenter thinking every problem needs a hammer). The whole point of hiring a training consultant or going to classes (for anything) is to reduce the time it takes to become productive or knowledge.

We SPEND money to SAVE time and invest in our skills.

Too many firms don't invest in their staff (or if they do, they don't do it effectively). They expect or assume that their staff will just manage to get by on their own. Give them a book, they're smart, they'll figure it out. They probably are smart and they will figure it out...eventually. How long can you wait for that to happen? They might pay for training but then after three days in a class they've been trained and therefore are experts! At least that's the perceived expectation or assumption. After all, that's why architecture is such a easy degree to get and getting licensed is a snap, right?

Getting training is a piece of the puzzle. Putting that training to work is how experience is gained. The training makes it possible to shorten the learning curve toward experience. No matter which way you approach the learning don't underestimate the importance of the experience of doing the job, the project. You'll just enjoy the job or project more if you get some good training and spend less time getting frustrated.

If a firm really keeps track of how much time is lost to inefficient task completion and inexperience leading to rework. They'd find out eventually that hiring that consultant or training facility would have been a bargain. If we don't treat "time lost" as "money spent" we don't realize how much it really cost. So many firms behave this way, they don't pay attention to the money going out the door the slow and "invisible" way. It goes out so slowly they convince themselves it isn't happening. If you are serious about seeing a return on investment (ROI) you need to know what it costs to do everything now (the established or "old way") and then later after becoming proficient with Revit. As they say, you can't manage what you don't measure. Keep in mind that lots of data doesn't necessarily mean it is useful.

A senior architect mentoring an intern architect is the same thing, your experience helps the future senior architect become one. You can be a mentor in your office for Revit and bring people up to speed sooner too! So it's not just about hiring a great trainer, it's also about striving for better continuously.

We sprung for training and people are still making mistakes and they've been warned repeatedly!

Mistakes are one thing, we all make them. If people know better but keep doing the same thing over and over again you now know what they really think of you and the firm. They don't care! They don't care enough to "play along", be a "team player" (OMG, holy catch phrase Batman). Sorry but AEC is a team sport.

Messing up other people's work IS a training issue, until it ISN'T anymore.

If people are trained and continue to be RUDE and refuse to work well with others it is no longer a training issue. It's a HR (Human Resources) problem, yeah I mean "possibly cost them their job". A firm (and it's staff) shouldn't have to tolerate people refusing to work together well. That's easy to write, not as easy to work through, I know that. Someone once said to me, "Yeah we have a few people who should work for our competition". So I say, "why aren't they?" (big grin)

Ignoring the problem, yeah how's that working?

Plaaaaay BALL!

Revit MEP - Options Affect Parameters

Daniel Stine sent me this subtle issue the other day, thanks! He wrote that it affects 2013 and 2014. If you are using Revit "one box" but customize your user settings so that the Systems tab for electrical is off it will affect your ability to access certain parameter types. Here's the check box I'm referring to.

There are normally 21 parameters associated with the Electrical Discipline. If the previous image option for Systems tab:electrical tools is unchecked as shown you'll only get 6 parameters offered instead, like below.

Definitely subtle and a bit quirky. I don't think Revit should restrict this list just because I've said I prefer to not see electrical ribbon features. If you are making Revit content don't restrict the tabs as it might impact what parameters are available to you.

Training Resources or Options

This post is biased toward learning on our own and in a way a response to a question I was asked recently.

There are many many options available to learn Revit whether Architecture, Structure or MEP (and in no particular order):

• Autodesk Help Documentation
• Autodesk You Tube Videos
• Autodesk Resellers (there are many and vary from region to region)
• Autodesk Training Centers (usually associated with or are resellers)
• Consultants (like me)
• Virtual Training
• Colleges/University programs
• Community Colleges
• Adult Education programs
• Technical Universities
• Video Training
• Online Videos
• Blogs
• User Groups
• Web Sites
• Books

Some of those listed above are structured like a formal class and some are better tuned for independent learning than others. Some are very specific while others are "surface scratchers". Nearly all rely on your initiative. The tricky part about training is one approach does not work for everyone equally, there isn't a one size fits all solution, regardless what you may have been told.

A common approach is to throw students at the software in a classroom setting either at a reseller, training center or in your office hiring a consultant or reseller to come on-site. Considering my earlier comment about everyone, this approach at least hits the middle ground consistently. Students leave with a fairly consistent understanding of the software. The group as a whole makes a single "Uni-Mind" since collectively they probably took in everything delivered and can piece it back together later if they ever talk to one another about it again. Not much chance of the "Uni-Mind" working if it is in a classroom of people from different firms, such as a community college setting or reseller's training room.

Another typical approach is to throw software at the students without formal training/trainer, just go for it. This usually takes the form of a highly motivated individual or individuals opting to take it on with the hope of getting the rest of the firm on board. I've seen this work but it's hard! I've been down this road myself. In other cases some firms take this route, a passive training route that pretends it doesn't cost much as formal training to let people struggle and do things inefficiently, repetitively until they figure it out, if they ever really do. For that strategy to work long term it really takes some people with a strong sense of purpose and extreme loyalty.

Classroom instruction at the university/college is usually structured over a longer period of time, weekend class, one or two evenings per week for example. Finding these will depend heavily on where you are. There are several options here in Southern California but in Davenport, Iowa it might be harder. Your mileage will vary.

User Groups that meet monthly offer a meaningful way to discuss how to accomplish things if the group is structured that way. Some groups have formal presentation but leave little time for one on one or sessions for solving problems. Those that do put time aside for that can sometimes feel burdened, especially if only a few are really contributing to solving the issues the group brings forward.

The online resources available suffer from the lack of structure, at least when viewing them as all one thing. Individual online videos from a company like Lynda.com or Infinite Skills obviously have more structure and purpose than my own videos that are created because of circumstances and just because I feel like it. An internet search will yield a lot of things to read or watch but sometimes they conflict with each other, different viewpoints or in some cases just wrong. It doesn't take much to create a video explaining how to do something that you only know how to do one way, which happens to be "wrong" or just uninformed. If you spend five minutes watching that sort of video you'll just have more questions afterward than when you started.

Books are always based on the bias of the author or contributing authors, their own work experience as well as the kind of problems the book chooses to consider in the solutions or concepts it offers. I wrote in another post that we aren't limited to one Revit book on our book shelves so don't feel like you have to buy only the "best book" (whatever that is), buy several or all of them, you'll pick up useful things from any or all of them.

It's been written/said many times before, just because we finish attending school formally at some point, learning should never stop. What sort of person are you? How do you learn and retain information? Do you remember things somebody says more than when you read it? Watch it? Do you need to try something, experiment for two hours before things really start to make sense to you?

There are a lot of options! Figure out what sort of learning method works best for you and then find everything that fits that best. Don't shun the others but if you won't remember anything from a 20 hour class any better than by reading a book, by all means read the book! If your company is going to hire a trainer and you don't learn that way the best, say so, tell the trainer too. Find a way to benefit from the training, but in a way that'll ensure you retain as much information as you can. It's your class! Make sure it works for you, the trainer already knows the stuff.

Oh, you don't have to wait for your employer to "train you", what and when you learn is up to you too! :)

Three Laws - Family Content

This is repost of a post that I wrote in September 2008. I thought of it as I was working through some content tasks.

Not to be confused with Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics", I first heard of the so called "three laws or rules" of software development from my father who spent many years working at IBM. These so called laws simply represented a philosophy about how to get something accomplished as efficiently as possible for the least cost (not always in terms of cash either). When I read Code Complete by Steve McConnell he mentioned the "Buy-vs-Build Decision" that developers should consider as they design/develop an application. It might seem radical to buy a solution when you are focused on making something yourself.

I've personally kept these in mind when thinking about content for Revit and even AutoCAD/ADT/Microstation before that.

Law One - Borrow
Law Two - Buy
Law Three - Build

Law One - Borrow
I can hear the cynic saying, "you mean steal". I'm sure that has happened too often. However the idea of borrowing what has been shared made the early adopters of Revit very special to me. Their willingness to make something that took them several, many hours in some cases, and make it available to others was and remains refreshing, altruistic. Guys like Chris Yearick (Yman), Scott Brown (sbrown) and Chris Zoog (czoog) to name just a few, their AUGI usernames in ().

Have you used the "All Windows" families found at Revit City? Chris Yearick (Living Places part of The Pilari Group) made those many years ago now and posted them freely at RUGIE (no longer in existence) and they found their way into the Revit City content as well as AUGI's Exchange and other places I'm sure.

Scott Brown (now with Beck Group) shared his office template as well as many standard office/product detail components and views which short circuited the time someone need to spend on their office template substantially.

Chris Zoog (now with HOK) started Zoogdesign and created a vibrant community resource for Revit discussion. It eventually merged into the Revit community forum at AUGI.

More recently an AUGI member known as CadKiller has made an ftp site available to share templates in the same spirit.

Law Two - Buy
There is something to be said for the education of making something yourself but if you can't perform billable work during that time it may not make economic sense to do it yourself. It may not make sense to have anyone in your employ do it either for the same reason. Worse yet all too often I find that a firm's different offices have made the same content themselves without realizing that someone in their own organization already made it or bought it. So communicating what is available is pretty important too...and another topic entirely.

Law Three - Make it yourself
Like I wrote above there is nothing quite like making something yourself for both satisfaction and reaching a fuller understanding of the Family Editor. At times this is the best solution or perhaps the only "affordable" way to get precisely what you want. Just be prepared to apply these same "laws" to how you acquire any knowledge you lack, maybe in a different order?

Here's to being "Law" Abiding!

Edit: Realized that the people mentioned are with new firms now, revised.

Not Enough Time

My daughter plays soccer, it is one constant that she's stayed focused on since she was old enough to play. Jack, her coach, shared a bit of wisdom with the parents the other night during a team meeting. Now this is biased toward our daughters of course but I see some parallels that work for me too.

168 hours in a week
84 hours for sleep (12 a night, hah usually more like 6 maybe 8)
35 hours in school (for me it's work and probably a bit more than 40)
10 hours of homework (I don't have homework do I?)
7 hours for practice (drums?, or commuting in LA traffic)
5 hours "me time" (never enough me time)

Leaves 27 hours of available time for practice, extra effort

I guess that excuse, "I just don't have time to learn the Revit API" is a lie I keep telling myself?

Dear Mr. OpEd - Follow Up

When I read the letter I received yesterday I must admit I was already primed to overreact. During the last twelve months I've been aware of Autodesk's effort to police their trademarks. My initial reaction was a single tweet last night, a Facebook status remark and this morning's previous blog post. I also wrote a letter (very late last night) in response (to Autodesk) explaining how each site is used, why I created them to begin with and how I think they fit Fair Use.

This morning I spoke with Jennifer (an Autodesk Attorney) and she assured me that as far as Revit OpEd is concerned there was never any worry about it not being an example of Fair Use. Unfortunately Revit Inside (the domain redirect is currently broken (by GoDaddy)) and Revit JOBS were not as clear cut to them. They really wanted to know more about them. In my opinion the letter didn't really say that, at least not in a way that got through to my thick head.

In my defense I said that whenever you get a letter from a lawyer it isn't usually good news, not a "hey let's chat sort of message". I suggested that future communication with people start off more conversational when that's the goal. To be fair I went on the offensive quickly, I didn't give them a chance to respond, to explain their email more fully. As I mentioned before, I didn't read the message as open to conversation in the same way it was intended. Email is such a poor means for communication at times.

This morning I've described each blog's purpose and it appears that we are in agreement that each of the three domains meet their criteria for Fair Use.

I now understand that it is not necessary to offer or have a Fair Use Agreement in place to demonstrate Fair Use compliance. My three blogs carry a disclaimer at the top right column that meets their requirements, and that is sufficient. Advertising can be an issue when it is in poor taste, focused on competing products or reflects badly on Autodesk (Fwiw, it would reflect badly on me too). I only let Google Ads run on Revit Inside and Revit JOBS and I don't really have much control over what Google puts there.

I'm overwhelmed by the emails that I received in support, thank you! I'm sorry I got you all fired up, ultimately it was really a fairly minor issue. Thanks to Jennifer for talking me through it this morning!