Jump to content

The end of upgrades


CADTutor

Recommended Posts

I'm hearing more contractors asking for Revit models. It's kind of a double edged sword at this point. On the design side, we are only responsible for making sure that it can be built and don't necessarily need to show all the pieces in the exact locations. Revit is putting more of that responsibility on us, as designers. Thus, doing it for the contractors. Fees are not following that course though. The contractors are still getting paid for that. Granted, the contractors still have an obligation to check the design layout and make adjustments but they definitely are getting some of their work done for them and are still charging the same. I'm sure it will balance out in the long run, but in the mean time we are doing work that has traditionally been done by the contractors and they are getting paid for it. For some projects, even though we are using Revit, we aren't providing the model for anything but coordination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • tzframpton

    28

  • ReMark

    24

  • steven-g

    11

  • Tuns

    11

Top Posters In This Topic

Since we got rid of a bunch of old-timers and brought in a bunch of younger skilled people (you know, the ones who were born AFTER computers were invented), we thought it would be best just to train the team leaders on how to look at the 3D files. This way you wouldn't have to train 100 different people and all of the direction was coming from their lead person. It turned out that some of the guys on the shop floor actually learned how to use SolidWorks when they were in school. That would have made the process so much easier.
This is becoming a lot more true nowadays. This may sound bad and I really don't want it to, but there is a generation gap at the moment that lots of companies are fighting.... hard. But it's kind of a weird time right now. For example: You have men and women in their 50s that are billable labor/production that are still very productive if you're doing things the same way ten or twenty years ago. But with recent technological advances in the last ten years (eg: design software, computers, the internet, phones/tablets, etc), things have drastically progressed at an exponential rate that hasn't been seen before. The younger generation have a step ahead because they grew up in this boom of technology, but hopefully companies will still value the mentor-ship in the experienced age groups.

 

Makes me think of what decisions I need to be making when I'm in my 40s and 50s.

 

On the design side, we are only responsible for making sure that it can be built and don't necessarily need to show all the pieces in the exact locations. Revit is putting more of that responsibility on us, as designers. Thus, doing it for the contractors. Fees are not following that course though. The contractors are still getting paid for that. Granted, the contractors still have an obligation to check the design layout and make adjustments but they definitely are getting some of their work done for them and are still charging the same. I'm sure it will balance out in the long run, but in the mean time we are doing work that has traditionally been done by the contractors and they are getting paid for it. For some projects, even though we are using Revit, we aren't providing the model for anything but coordination.
There's a guy I know who's been a licensed architect for 35 years now. Great guy. I remember having a conversation with him about four years ago where he reminisced on the "good 'ol days" where all these legal stances didn't dangle it's ugly head over everyone. He stated that there was a time where the architect, engineers and contractors all worked together diligently and respectfully to get the job done, without a lot of finger pointing and fee distributions.

 

Anyways, I also remember his saying that in those days the architectural design team really spent effort and time on coordinating the job and drafting the fine details. He felt people have gotten away from this, and whip out a set of plans that "should" work rather than "will" work.

 

With Revit, it puts that "once was" responsibility back on the designer, if Revit is used correctly. Plus it's really fun... Revit has made designing fun again for many people. I mean, change order has been something that contractors actually look forward to. So you might say that you're not seeing additional fee for the additional work, but I see it as opposite. The architect/engineer team is suppose to make sure it 100% works, and will fit. My question is this: If this is not the case, then why the high fees of consulting engineering companies? If I were paying a consulting architect and engineering team (aka: non design-build contractor) then I wouldn't be too happy if someone told me that part of my design fee doesn't cover a fundamental basis of design, which is it "will work", and I'll have to hope this doesn't rack up change orders after the bid to the contractors.

 

But on the flip side: You might not be seeing any additional fee for the extra labor in using Revit, but that's actually a good thing. Revit will catch things that 2D drawings can't, since Revit uses 3D geometry to reserve physical space in a virtual building model. So maybe it's not that you're getting shafted on fee, it's that Revit is catching things you once never would have before giving an illusion that Revit "costs more". Plus, with a better designed building, you're taking away a very profitable area of contractors, who (as we all know) love to bid a project low to snag it, only to have intentions on "making it up" with change orders later. So it's keeping contractors in between the lines as well, and overall a better building is being offered to the owner, as well as to the guys who are installing it, mitigating issues all across the board.

 

My $0.02 worth anyways. :)

 

-Tannar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be 54 this year. I walked straight into this present job, Got the offer at the first interview and started a week later, It's not the age that is the problem as such, It's attitude, I am learning everyday, but a lot of people stagnate after college or soon after. I can run rings round any of my colleagues as far as knowledge and use of technology goes. As far as I see it the younger generation are lazy have no interest in practical knowledge and expect you to wipe their noses for them. The trick is finding good people whatever their age might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, my generation is 10 steps behind the older generation. This generation is ignorant and doesn't care to learn from the older folk with 1000x the experience we have. Yeah, we have a technological advantage, but our overall advantage is nonexistent.

 

Steven beat me to it but yeah what he said. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be 54 this year. I walked straight into this present job, Got the offer at the first interview and started a week later, It's not the age that is the problem as such, It's attitude, I am learning everyday, but a lot of people stagnate after college or soon after. I can run rings round any of my colleagues as far as knowledge and use of technology goes. As far as I see it the younger generation are lazy have no interest in practical knowledge and expect you to wipe their noses for them. The trick is finding good people whatever their age might be.
Very true and a valid point. My boss and mentor is 44 years old, and an original pioneer in Revit, and he's also an architect. That guy can run circles around anybody in this field, primarily because he loves and embraces technology, and is passionate about his line of work. So a win/win, and (obviously) an individual situation basis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it has to be case by case, there are a lot of folks just putting the hours with 10 or 15 years still to go before their pension, I have absolutely no sympathy with them at all, throw them out and bring in a younger generation, but not because they are younger in age, younger in outlook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even want a younger outlook. I want to see things the way the older people see them. From my point of view, they see things that no one in my generation sees and I want to be able to do that too. Unless you meant something else by "younger in outlook". :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it has to be case by case, there are a lot of folks just putting the hours with 10 or 15 years still to go before their pension, I have absolutely no sympathy with them at all, throw them out and bring in a younger generation, but not because they are younger in age, younger in outlook.
Yeah, I think it also holds true with people going to "the daily grind" versus going to "a job they love". I love my job. Absolutely love it. God created me to love design and I saw it, and I embraced it. I followed my natural passions that I was born with and therefore I will always be good at what I do. Sure, I'll age and the better half of my career will one day start to be in the past, but I will embrace those times as well, embracing younger generations thirsty for knowledge and experience from me (eventually).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is this: If this is not the case, then why the high fees of consulting engineering companies? If I were paying a consulting architect and engineering team (aka: non design-build contractor) then I wouldn't be too happy if someone told me that part of my design fee doesn't cover a fundamental basis of design, which is it "will work", and I'll have to hope this doesn't rack up change orders after the bid to the contractors.

 

I can't say that I totally understand it. All I can do is offer my observations from the point of view of someone who is in charge of all the drawings from beginning to end and sees what the engineers work with.

 

BR (Before Revit), we would get 2D drawings, for the most part. (A major portion of our work is retrofit.) While we could guarantee that our systems were buildable with the information provided and would work, we also had to cover our arses because there was no way that we could design around things that were undocumented and not surveyable. There is a well established level of detail that we designed to. With floor plans at 1/8"=1'-0" and equipment rooms at 1/4"=1'-0", there are limitations as to how much you can actually draw in a 2D environment and still have it present well on paper. We do have details showing how the systems get connected to the equipment but they are very generic. It was up to the contractors to fill in the blanks.

 

DR (During Revit), we now have much more information, even at the inputter level. They no longer are drawing a line to a box and putting some text next to it, which takes about a second, but have to actually look at the architecture and structural aspects of the building and determine the "best" path. This puts a lot more on the inputter, of which we have quite a few. The company I work for has a lot of "non-designer" type inputters that don't necessarily know all the details. They can draft from red-lines all day long with "acceptable" output but are very lacking in knowledge of construction. These people are now being forced to model at a level of detail that they are totally unfamiliar with. Some of them are not capable and we now have to rely upon the drafters that really know what they are drawing, not just translate red-lines.

 

Now, here is the funny part, they don't have to worry about how it's going to look on paper. Revit (and the model manager) does it for them. (Uh, oh... where did that great drafter, who couldn't design his way out of a paper bag, go? There is no longer a need for that person.) That is forcing the engineering consulting firms to let go some long time employees and hire more experienced people for entry level positions. Not to mention the training for everyone else for those that very top of the food chain. I see those high fees getting much higher but with a higher level of guarantee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It goes for new work too, sometimes. It depends on the level of detail provided and whether or not the building or addition is built as designed. We don't get as-built drawings to work from. That would be impossible. If we are dealing with an architect who wants to give us tight spaces to work in, we can only coordinate to a certain LOD. If we have plenty of room, we can be more thorough. How often is a building actually built exactly as designed? The builders have to take some level of onus for some things that cannot be built as designed, real world vs. virtual world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...