Our primary client is in the process of deciding to switch Revit. This client accounts for about 90% of our workload so obviously this concerns us greatly. We definitely do not want to switch from using ABD to Revit. It's far too costly and we have been Microstation users for the last 20 years or so. They are saying that when they do switch, all files that are turned over to them have to be in Revit format. My concern is not of them switching to Revit but the demand that all the files turned over have to be Revit files. I'm sure that they will not be ok with us giving them iModels as these would be read only. I'm thinking that there might be a slight chance of them accepting IFC files but I do not have much experience with this format. Could someone with more experience tell me what kind of data is transfered with an IFC file? Does a beam know it's a beam? If so, does it know what size it is? Can they manipulate ductwork from an IFC file using Revit the same way they could if it was drawn originally in Revit? Any ammo that anyone could provide me to take to them would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
John K.
Revit has patchy support for IFC. A relatively recent write up: www.augi.com/.../myth-buster-revit-ifc
Thank you very much Dominic. A very enlightening article.
The question you want to ask is "what to they want the Revit file format for?"
I may be wrong, but I'm guessing answer is probably "so they can EDIT the geometry down the line with all its associative/parametric wizardry intact" - in which case you are in for a hard ride - but then the same would be true in the opposite direction. There just isn't a 1:1 correlation of wizardry from one application to another.
iModel, IFC, GBxml etc are essentially static snapshots of your model for publication. They are fine for federating into other applications for clash detection, reporting etc. but you will allways lose the specifics of your chosen softwares abilities to create/edit content in the translation process.
To my mind federation of whatever data is available makes the most sense during the design process, because so far in my experience every member of the design team will uses a different technology. However I'm not sure how reusable that data becomes when handed onto the contractor, or client, down the line who has different needs and technologies of thier own. The only way I'm aware of is a redraw of the data that needs editing, that means they are taking an active step in taking ownership of that data.
I think the reason why they want Revit files and nothing else is, that Revit can't read anything else.
At least that is the answer I got from our clients, working with Revit.
Robert made already the correct statement: What do they want to do with it?
If they like only to view you can use i-dgn but if they want to modify you need to provide them with .rvt files.
The problem is that most clients think when they use Revit they also need to receive Revit files.
What are you actually doing for your client? If it is design work I wouldn't give him anyway any file to modify, only view and check status. If you do only the 3D modeling for him, it most likely serves for clash detection where again the i-dgn is sufficient.
In the end there will be the need to produce 2D drawings out of the model which is a complicated task with .rvt files, you may want to check this with your client too. If the model is for FM usage, the .rvt file won't be helpful either.
Maybe you check with Bentley to send somebody there to talk to them, my guess is that they got a very good offer to switch to Revit which can be surely equalized by Bentley.
And by the way, you should always ask which version of Revit they need as they are not compatible between each other :-)
@dominic: great article and it proves only the incompetence of Autodesk to collaborate!