Revit 2024 Roadmap
Doretta Castoe
Sooo.....AutoTable recently released it's 2024 line of program versions, and guess which ArchiCAD main rival just got a much much requested ArchiCAD user wish (in recent times) as one of their new features?
I guess it was always inevitable given the fact that most of the other programs already have dark themes. But I just found it funny from a "I'm convinced Autodesk and Revit developers read Graphisoft User Talk forums to mine for features they think they should add to their program - even if as a marketing ploy to appeal to disgruntled ArchiCAD users" theory that I've always had*.
Some of the features are obviously great or would be great to have in ArchiCAD, others are more surprising to me that they never had them before (like what we would refer to as SEO's or Boolean operations on any element - which we've had for the better part of almost over a decade and a half and have therefore taken for granted. Although,.....it seems like they've taken it a step farther and allow for true proper boolean representation in plan as well as in 3D. Again,.....they're listening.....)
Or stuff like landscape/topographic elements (terrain meshes for us) represented as solid geometry instead of just as skirt elements or simple surfaces - which we've also had in ArchiCAD since forever and taken for granted (.....again, seems to me like someone telling the Revit developers "we've always had this in ArchiCAD and it works great for these reasons, so why can't we have it in Revit as well"....and then they get listened to)
And then there's the features that would be great to have like Sun control setting available directly on their ribbon (instead of indirectly through a dialog box lacking interactivity like we have in ArchiCAD) or sun studies.
Others of course, I'd much rather do without, either in AC or Revit (like Structural Analysis model and load calculation tools which seems new to their version as well - although they DO have a Revit Structural so from this perspective it makes sense for them to have it rather than).
But more importantly I couldn't help notice that with each new feature page describing the feature, they call out and mention if it was a user wish that generated it's development (along with linking to the actual wish page) noting just how they are listening to their users and have the receipts to show it, or if it was simply something that was in their product roadmap (ostensibly generated by the developers themselves) and likewise link to the part of the public (and open) roadmap showing where it was.
Which just goes to show that an open public road map doesn't have to be the death knell to development that Graphisoft seem to believe it is, so much so that they're deathly allergic to publishing one.
But I can only imagine how much better ArchiCAD would be if Graphisfot developers were that invested in making their product better by directly engaging users both pre- and post-version release.
In hoping to keep this post on-topic, I'll create a wish to have sun control tools directly accessible (either through a dockable palette or a gizmo in the 3D window) with direct controls and interactive function (change a parameter and you see the change directly in the 3D window or in the shadow settings in elevation immediately as you're doing it and not having to close a window or change to a different view to see the result)
And while I'd hate to bash people who are certainly making an effort to do things for the better and to discourage the sort of engagement they seem to be initiating, I still have to point out that it's rather light on information and vague on specifics.
I would also really really REALLY wish they'd give the development on the Structural/MEP/DDASCAD stuff a break for a version or two and just focus on architecture-related tools, which, from our perspective as architects and designers, feel like they've been ignored for quite a while now or gotten the really short shrift while these other tools and areas are advanced.
ArchiCAD version 26 was the 3rd version in a row that saw significant improvements to the SAM tools, with comparatively lighter upgrades on architecture-focused tools.
Looking at that roadmap, it seems like there's more of the same headed our way in the next several versions or years.
And if you think I'm being overly dramatic about that, consider the fact that in the 'Coming Soon' tab, of the 23 total items listed, 12 of them are either fully Structural or MEP or a combination, and with no 'Architecture'
That's more than half.
And it's even worse if you include the ones with the combo Structural/MEP/Architecture and even much worse when you consider there's only TWO that are exclusively Architecture focused.
Are they making it nimble enough that they can re-focus their attention on some other area if the need calls for it? Or alternatively add new priorities or feature/tool research that might not have had attention before?
Or is it more or less set in stone and a "take-it-or-leave-it" type deal that we've all become accustomed to?
All in all, good start.
I hope this marks the beginning of a discussion and a conversation, if nothing else, as we all care for the best of the future of this software despite how hard we maybe on them sometimes.
Seems to me that archicad, or rather, its powers that be, want to become Revit. While Revit, with decades of a head start on structure and MEP modules, is focusing on what archicad should have focused since about 5 years ago.
I believe that as long as you are not actually copying the code from another program, which would not work in many cases anyway, there is no issue. Copyright is on the code, literary work, not the result.
My name is Piotr Pysz and I recently joined Autodesk as a Product Manager for Steel Structures. I graduated as a Structural Engineer from Cracow University of Technology. For the first 4 years of my career, I worked in a small Structural Engineering office. Then I moved to a big Steel Detailing company based in the US where I spent the last 9 years. I went through all the steps starting as a draftsman editing shop and part drawings, then moved to the modeling and connecting department, became a checker after a few years, and finally a team leader responsible for the international team of Steel Detailers.
In March last year, we announced that we will invest in future Structural Steel design to detailing workflows in Revit, AEC Data Model, and Autodesk Platforms services. To accelerate this plan, we have decided to transition Advance Steel into
I was looking for clarification regarding the generation of steel shop drawings. I read through the info provided and it appeared at first glance that Autodesk was going to focus on the modeling aspect inside revit. This would also allow for structural drawings to tag and dimension connections generated.
Here's where I wanted clarification. Is Revit going to be used to generate the individual shop drawings for all members and parts? If not, what software are we to use if advance steel is in "Maintenance Mode". Right now, Revit is too limited to provide all of the connections we use in our buildings. Because Revit can't do all of them, we just do them in Advanced steel. We bring this model back into Revit for coordination. The actual steel shop drawings are obviously done in advance steel right now. Looking for clarification if autodesk intends for us to use Revit for the generation of steel shop drawings for members and parts.
Yes, having the fabrication drawings (part & assembly) + NC files generated in Revit is our long-term goal.
Please refer to the public roadmap where there is a dedicated card called "Drawings & CNC Deliverables"
there is a new card recently placed over the fabrication beam within the revit workspace, I think that this is quite a high importance, because it is affecting the normal use of Revit, to users that are used to working with the standard Revit beam and then using a connection or other feature commands from the steel tab of revit, causes an irreversible change in the beam and this causes issue downstream for user creating the standard engineering outputs etc.
really think this is the first step, then connections etc, general tools, then numbering , until you have the model right any drawings at a part of assembly level are not achievable. Arrangements are also affected by this as well.
I was hoping a future version of revit will not replace the beam / column family with a fabrication shape but simply have it available to display if desired. When a connection is added, revit replaces the original structural member with a fabrication shape. This is the one thing that keeps us from detailing in Revit. We lose all control of the display of our beams / columns when this switch is made. There's do direct way to get rid of the fabrication shape once created other than a really strange workaround involving changing to a concrete member then back to the original family. The fabrication shape should be based on the original member but I'm hoping that Revit adds the ability to for the user to display them at the users discretion.
I second @bjur comment on fabrication exports. I work for a structural/mechanical steel fabricator. If this in the works, could you also prioritize steel staircase fabrication as part of your goal?
It would be good to have structural grating flooring at uk standard sizes (as a material so it can be applied to flooring/ stair treads etc) as well as options to add and arrange bolts, holes & plates. Also, could you look into developing hand rails for industrial purposes (uk standard sizes) that automatically avoid clashes (between bolts/stairs/plates) when hand railings are applied to stairs.
c80f0f1006