SysQue Market Report 2014static.squarespace.com/static... · Summer 2014 SysQue Industry ... content for Revit MEP 2014 and 2015. ... As an author3 and research analyst, my objective

October 1, 2014

Page | 1

Summer 2014

SysQue Industry and Market Use Report

David E. Quigley

Emerson Research

www.emersonresearch.net

SysQue Market Use Report

October 1, 2014

www.emersonresearch.net Page | 2

I. Report Summary

Emerson Research facilitated this industry and market research study of user experiences in eight MEP firms that acquired, implemented, and used daily SysQue’s Revit MEP add‐in software.

The firms and individuals interviewed have been using SysQue 2014 since its release in January 2013. The analysis uses Geoffrey Moore’s Technology Adoption Lifecycle Curve to classify these businesses and individuals as Early Adopters.1 These users were willing to accept the risks associated with adopting a new technology because they believe that SysQue is better than existing technology. At purchase, these users believed that SysQue would satisfy their basic set of software needs, would get the job done dependably, accurately, repeatability in a linear process. This study focuses on how well SysQue 2014 has met these criteria.

The first task was to frame the research by using the “About SysQue” description on the company website (referenced below) as the primary basis for choosing the information to collect from each user and their respective firms about their expectations before they had purchased, learned to use, and implemented SysQue.

About SysQue

Now you can extend design intent to detailing using SysQue intelligent data content for Revit MEP 2014 and 2015.

SysQue managed data content, powered by Building‐Data.net, enables designers and contractors to design in Autodesk® Revit® MEP with real‐world, manufacturing‐specific content that’s ready for fabrication, and helps meet MEP contractors’ detailing, fabrication, manufacturing, and installation requirements.2

The second task was to compare these expectations to their product experience 18 months after the purchase.

Users shared their positive experiences and the issues they faced while implementing SysQue. Some of these issues required assistance from SysQue’s Support Team, and others were resolved with assistance from users inside and outside the firm who were equally engaged and using the tool.

1 Geoffrey A. Moore, Crossing the Chasm, (New York: Harper Collins) 2006. For more information about Moore’s theory, see Section V, Research Assumptions. 2 SysQue, “About SysQue,” SysQue website, http://www.sysque.com


October 1, 2014


A handful of the issues required a product patch and update, which are common in a version 1.0 release. A few issues were found to be inside the Revit MEP platform, and others were related to advanced user requirements and as such became product requirements for the next set of releases. The research did not identify a critical or major problem that prevented any user or company from completing work or using the tool on a daily basis.

As an author3 and research analyst, my objective is to publish an independent market report of SysQue from the firms and individuals who were the first to purchase and commit to this technology. The list below represents what I am able to substantiate with user testimony.

Since the release of version 1 (SysQue 2013), the company has consistently delivered excellent technical support to its users.

SysQue addressed its users’ learning curve by bundling a comprehensive Revit MEP online training program into its software package. Users who initially lacked Revit skills credit the online training program with their success in becoming comfortable drawing in Revit MEP quickly.

SysQue focused its engineering team on utilizing, whenever possible existing Revit MEP functionality and only adding software features that allowed the tool to meet the base requirements of MEP designers and construction detailers.

SysQue reframed and repackaged its content delivery program and bundled its MEP Building Data MEP library into the SysQue software package. By doing so, SysQue filled the MEP content “hole” that has existed in Revit since it was released in North America. SysQue makes it possible for design teams and contractors to work collaboratively on a single platform. The software is in its early years with a number of user requirements on the list to be addressed in a future release. However, contractors are finding success and are using it today to model, coordinate, spool, and fabricate. And at the end of the project, they are able to effortlessly satisfy the increasingly common contract requirement to submit a Revit MEP “as‐built” model. In addition, there is unanimous agreement from those involved in this research that the content in SysQue is what makes the application so valuable and what has finally made Revit MEP a real contractor’s model authoring tool.

Every user and firm remains committed to SysQue after their first set of projects were finished. Direct downloading is increasingly improving. The firms that are considering SysQue for direct downloading to CAM Duct will have an easier time than the firms that use the Vulcan CAM. Firms that have Vulcan and are having success with the process have added a QC (Quality Control) check that occurs before the job is nested in the shop. The 2D spool modeling for pre‐fabrication processes is farther along than direct downloading. Firms that are considering SysQue for 2D or 3D spooling will find that the tool is very capable of producing and managing large numbers of spools. There are a few known performance requirements for spooling that users are expecting to find in a future release of the tool.

I believe that SysQue has an incredibly bright future. The users were happy with their decision to adopt SysQue. They believe that it is not only the only software platform that can satisfy their

3 David E. Quigley, Achieving Spatial Coordination Through BIM: A Guide for Specialty Contractors, (Joint publication of the Mechanical Contractors Association of America, Mechanical Contracting Education & Research Foundation, National Electrical Contractors Association, Inc., New Horizons Foundation, Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors National Association), 2013.


October 1, 2014


requirement for working in Revit MEP, but is also a very capable content tool that addresses what is perceived to be the one major holes in Revit MEP as a 3D model design to construction platform. Every single user is genuinely committed to becoming more proficient at the software and to making their next project a major success for their firm.

II. Findings This section presents the major findings and the research that supports them. It includes a number of lessons learned, best practices, and perceived value that SysQue brought to the individual’s job requirements and to the company’s Value Chain.

1. Learning Curves: A background in Revit helps, and knowledge of AutoCAD hurts.

The users interviewed consistently shared their thoughts about the strengths and weaknesses of individuals in their organizations with respect to their progress in mastering SysQue. From these observations emerged patterns of skills and knowledge that can be useful in projecting the length of an individual’s learning curve. This information should be helpful to firms that plan to implement SysQue and are considering who in their firm to be trained first.

These patterns, or types, reflect the technical and software background, level of Revit MEP skills, and personal motivation of the individual. One quality that makes a detailer acquire SysQue competency quickly is not their knowledge of SysQue, but their working knowledge of Revit.

Type 1: Has moderate to extensive Revit background

Designers and detailers who start their training in SysQue with competence in Revit are far and away the best positioned to become productive in SysQue quickly.

Type 2: Has basic Revit background and is motivated to develop new skills

MEP detailers who have a basic understanding of Revit, can navigate within the authoring model tool, and consider their skills as beginner level can become productive in SysQue in short order. What also helps these users is a strong motivation to learn and change.

Type 3: Has extensive field trade experience with no CAD background

MEP tradesmen with no CAD or computer skills but extensive field experience and a high level of motivation to learn 3D modeling are well‐suited to learning Revit and SysQue. They may have much more to learn, but their success comes from having no allegiance to or reliance on skills for any AutoCAD‐based authoring tool.

Type 4: Has no Revit background and is not highly motivated to change CAD skills

MEP detailers who have no understanding or background with Revit, who are skilled using AutoCAD‐based software, and are not particularly motivated to learn Revit will have the longest learning curve. Their previous experience is a barrier because they spend a tremendous amount of time attempting to make Revit work like AutoCAD. When they abandon this approach, they can become productive in Revit or SysQue.


October 1, 2014


Table 1 presents the length of the learning period for each type. These timeframes should be used only as a frame of reference for establishing expectations within the organization.

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4

Minimum time

for competency 0‐2 days 2‐6 weeks 4‐8 weeks 8‐16 weeks

Maximum time

for competency 1 week 8 weeks 12 weeks 16+ weeks

Table 1. Timeframes for SysQue Proficiency Two users who learned SysQue and Revit describe the experience and the challenges. A user who serves as his firm’s BIM Manager said,

We were fortunate to have in the office an individual who had extensive Revit experience. He has played a critical role bootstrapping the rest of the team, who came into our first project with only two weeks of Revit online training assistance. The entire team was skilled at CAD MEP, and it was a very steep learning curve for all team members. In retrospect, we now realize that what we thought were challenges with learning SysQue were actually challenges we faced learning Revit.

Another BIM manager reflected on his company’s struggle in making the transition from CADPipe (an AutoCAD‐based CAD authoring tool) to SysQue and Revit MEP:

We were productive and proficient at creating spool drawings using CADPipe, and it was very difficult to learn an entirely different process. But what we discovered at the end of the process and our first project was that we were handing the client much more substantial information and data versus very little data and nice looking pictures using the tool we moved from. We knew then that the effort was worth the trouble and steep learning curve. We would never go back to AutoCAD.

2. Users value the managed content of Building Data and the integration with Revit MEP.

SysQue developers capitalized on existing Revit MEP functionality by focusing development efforts on MEP content, new features, and extending Revit functionality. The Early Adopters recognized this and are very appreciative of the deep integration with Revit MEP. They had long believed that the Revit platform lacked the basic functionality that a commercial MEP contractor needs. They believe that the No. 1 contribution SysQue makes to the designer or detailer is the complete Building Data library for Revit MEP. To a beginner or someone with minimal Revit skills, it appears that SysQue is providing all of the necessary functionality to complete their work. In fact, 90% of the functionality and tools that SysQue uses is actually Revit MEP functionality. This additional 10% from SysQue is what makes Revit MEP a genuine MEP model environment for MEP design and construction. One user described it this way: “Revit had a hole and SysQue filled it.” Another user observed that “SysQue is a godsend to those designers that have been desperate for an MEP solution in Revit.”


October 1, 2014


Interestingly, it is this 10% that leads one user to believe that when SysQue tries too hard, existing model data gets changed. That user expressed the desire to turn SysQue on and off and to let Revit manage a specific portion of a task. The primary contribution that SysQue makes to Revit is its content. The “hole” in Revit was “real MEP content.” Most of the early adopters believe that SysQue complements Revit very well, and that SysQue’s content represents a marked improvement over generic Revit. For a Canadian contractor, the combination of Revit MEP and SysQue met the firm’s requirements. Before using SysQue, but with a Revit requirement, the firm had attempted to use Fab MEP with the Revit and Design Line module from Autodesk. They had minimal success with that tool, and when SysQue was released three months later, the firm bought it. Their goal was to do everything once in Revit, which SysQue has allowed them to do. What this contractor needed most from SysQue was to do a layout in Revit and generate a material take‐off reflecting center‐to‐center on all connections and materials. The field foreman and crew needed this information to complete the installation. The process has been a success. This firm is not pre‐fabricating and has yet to use the spooling capability of SysQue.

3. New users can learn from the Early Adopters The experience of Early Adopters offers valuable insight into what is needed to come up to speed with SysQue and the competitive advantages that their firms are reaping.

a. To learn SysQue quickly, learn Revit MEP first

A key user suggestion or best practice (when time is not critical) is to spend your initial study time learning to work with the primary design and detailing tools that come standard inside Revit MEP. Go as far as time permits to learn the ins and outs of Revit and then, once you become an intermediate Revit user, tackle the functionality and content that SysQue brings to Revit. Most users noted how well and how quickly someone with Revit skills can learn SysQue. Some even say that if they knew of this approach to learning the tool before they themselves began to learn it, they would have done so.

b. Start training long before you are awarded a project

If you delay training until you are awarded your first Revit MEP, BIM, or Integrated Model Required project, you will be playing catch‐up throughout project. Issues, problems, and low margins can be traced to that decision. More government and client work is being issued with a BIM and a Revit component, especially the large complex commercial jobs. These jobs are only going to increase over time. If a company believes that this type of project may arrive shortly in their region for bidding, now is the time to purchase a seat and develop a Revit MEP expert on your team; that person will then be able to be productive in SysQue in a couple of days.

c. Set up the project and the Revit base template completely before you begin the project

Being thorough and taking the time to set up the project’s SysQue systems and naming conventions properly before a project starts ensures a smooth and seamless design and spatial coordination process. Firms must understand how best to create SysQue systems and the structure of project’s Revit base template. Literature is available on the Internet about the construct of MEP SysQue systems.


October 1, 2014


4. The secondary benefits of SysQue are significant. Take advantage of them.

The transition to the SysQue/Revit MEP system has yielded competitive advantages to the firms that took the plunge early. a. New opportunities

One user noted that by “adding SysQue and Revit to our list capabilities, the firm has opened up a number of new conversations with firms and owners, which we wouldn’t have had without Revit MEP. It’s through these conversations which has fueled and positioned us as the MEP construction leader in our region and as it applies to BIM, for sure.” SysQue has also motivated many firms to move from AutoCAD to the Revit MEP platform, which was the primary and the only legitimate contractor CAD authoring tool available to contractors prior to the release of SysQue. Another user stated that the decision to adopt SysQue and Revit as the design and construction platform made the firm one of the few contractors in the eastern United States that was asked to bid on large government construction jobs that include an Integrated model and a BIM requirement.

b. Productivity Improvements

Note: Most beneficial to Type 1 and Type 2 users. From another perspective, SysQue and the construction documents the tool generates contributed to a reduction of an 18‐month drawing and coordination schedule to 14 months. The CAD Manager responsible for this project attributed the integration of SysQue with Revit MEP to this reduction; the hospital is now in the final stages of construction. Not all users and firms can point to much gain in productivity considering that many continue to be on a learning curve with the software. Keep in mind that the tool has been on the market for only 18 months. It is important to set reasonable expectations when starting with a new software tool. Some firms in this study did not experience productivity gains when they first switched to Revit and SysQue. A user with five years of experience using an AutoCAD mechanical software package noted that the pace for creating equivalent spools in SysQue was slower. He can create spools in his other program faster. He did point out that this was his first project using Revit and SysQue, and that his competence and speed increased as the project went on. That makes sense. In the same breath, he noted how much he appreciates that all of the objects he is now detailing with are intelligent BIM objects, which will provide that productivity gain along with a number of other data exchange and process flow benefits.

c. Gives Firms a solid reputation as a regional leader in BIM Another Early Adopter couldn’t really say whether the adoption of the Revit MEP and SysQue platforms had improved his firm’s competitive standing in its markets, but he acknowledged that,

What I do know is that we are about to complete three jobs working in SysQue, and we are about to start a fourth. On three out of four of those projects, we have received accolades from the prime contractor about our firm working in a Revit environment versus the other trades who are still working in AutoCAD. It really hasn’t been all that long since we adopted the toolset.

He believes that Revit and BIM are still considered leading‐edge technology. His firm is the only mechanical in the region that uses it; it is still seen as an oddity. He added, “To people who know what that means, it matters and it’s cool. To the majority of construction professionals in our region who don’t know what it means, I don’t know if it matters.”


October 1, 2014


5. Revit MEP is a stronger 3D model platform than AutoCAD Many of the individuals who were proficient in Auto CAD noted the features they value the most in a SysQue and Revit MEP environment over their previous CAD platform.

Revit’s construction documentation is significantly better and easier to build than in AutoCAD.

Revit MEP sheets are contained and available within the project; in AutoCAD, a user needs to manage the sheets either on his own or through another tool called Project Navigator.

Users can easily block out a title block effectively and easily throughout a project in Revit MEP. In AutoCAD, if a change is to be made, the user must update the template and then re‐create all sheets that have been made with the old template.

Users can make revisions to hundreds of sheets in about a minute. This is not the case in AutoCAD.

Text in the model is always correct regardless of how it is being presented. For example, 3/32” text is always 3/32" text; not so in AutoCAD.

Users do not have to put ¼ scale dimensions on a specific layers so that that they won’t show up in 1/8 scale plan.

The Scaling feature alone is fantastic, and is not available in AutoCAD.

Section views are amazing; the section heads are always correct.

If you change the number of the detail or section on a sheet, that number is automatically updated in every place where your section head shows up on plan. That function does not exist in AutoCAD.

Sections are easy to manage in regard to the depth of the cut.

Pre‐setting view templates with the specific elements to be viewed or hidden.

6. Considerations and experiences worth sharing from an MEP trade perspective The valuable trade‐specific information that emerged from the interviews is presented below.

All MEP contractors When building a SysQue database, make sure systems are fully populated before starting a project Every MEP engineer has a different idea of what one system should be made of (e.g., seamless, steel pipe or ERW, types of valves, and types of fittings.) These systems are presented to the MEP contractor as a project specification or as a particular name. One user noted that within the government construction sector, different types, systems, and codes may be required by each branch, by each engineer in that branch, and by the state or county. This engineer felt he had to set up a pipe specification for each system but found that this specification varies from project to project. To do this right for each project, he re‐created each system before drawing the first pipe. Later on, he realized that he didn’t have some fittings that weren't in the original database. He believes that the fittings he added after the fact are the source of the problems the company had in the spooling process.

Problems with a drawing of the building

If an MEP‐engineered drawing is shared with you, before you waste any time, ask whether the MEP engineer used generic Revit families or created them. If these families were created by the engineer, don’t waste time trying to convert them. That said, if you do choose to convert them, you must convert them to generic Revit fittings first; then you can process them from generic Revit to SysQue. The success of this conversion depends heavily on how well the families convert to generic Revit. It is much easier to erase and draw new pipes from scratch. It will save lots of time.


October 1, 2014


Large equipment content

One user expected to find every bit of MEP content (large to small) imaginable, including large equipment. Although a significant library of the standard commodity objects was included, many of the large equipment objects, including real manufacturer pumps, boilers, and chillers, were not.

Work sets and work sharing One benefit of working on a BIM project that is managed by a single centralized integrated Revit model is the collaboration of the project participants, engineers, designers, and trade detailers. Users are looking for best practices and guidance on how better to anticipate potential issues with this type of process. There are two issues. The first is with the creation of specific systems in the XML file. One user described a problem that is manifested with a system freeze or with fittings switching out with another non‐compatible fitting, one that he encountered when he created a system based on a pipe construction specification. The problem occurs when multiple users draw with the same pipe type. Because pipe types are shared, for example, the cast‐iron pipes used in sanitary and storm systems, the only way around the issue is to create a different systems.xml file. The problem grows exponentially as the number of pipe‐type entries increases. The second issue is with work sharing. When many users work inside a centralized Integrated model, the process requires them to use the Revit MEP Synchronizing feature to update the model on occasion throughout the day with changes and additions. Users who have been using this method have opted out recently because of a lack of confidence when some fittings and systems were being altered. The issue was addressed by breaking the single model in to two models—a design model and a construction model and the problems are no longer impacting their workflow. All indications are that the issue may have less to do with SysQue and Revit MEP and more with an intermediate software package that was being used to exchange data between and over different participant firewalls.

SysQue and Revit MEP sometimes work too hard In describing how SysQue works, one user observed, “In SysQue, you’re drawing with generic Revit objects and when you finish the drawing commands and hit Escape, SysQue jumps in and tries replacing those objects with ’real world’ MEP objects.” The problem is that SysQue doesn’t necessarily always put things back the way a user intended them to be drawn. This user would prefer have the option to draw an object in a generic form and open its properties manually to select the real‐world specifics rather than leaving these choices up to the application.

Another user described a similar scenario, but attributes the problem to Revit MEP vs. SysQue. When he is in a model and touches an object to add or edit notes or to add a comments field, Revit wants you to reprocess all of the objects on either side of that single object. His experience (and frustration) is that this reprocessing has caused existing real fittings to disappear. This problem is a side effect of Revit MEP’s vigilance about keeping the entire system or run connected. He calls it “Revit’s artificial intelligence.” He wishes that he could just turn it off.

Mechanical contractors Using a unique process work‐around Like most software tools, SysQue has particular quirks in how users interact with it. In some cases, the tool reacts exactly how the user anticipated and expected it would. In other cases, the response is either slower than expected or produces a different result. These are the cases where a user searches for another way to get the job done.


October 1, 2014


For example, a sheet metal detailer responsible for managing his company’s direct download to a third‐party fabricator was having trouble with duct tagging and some of the PAC output file for the Vulcan CAM shop software. After a number of variations he was able to minimize many of his problems. His current approach for generating a reliable, repeatable direct download uses a workflow that is less time consuming and does not require retagging.

1. Group duct and tags (that’s important) 2. Go to the “Groups” in project browser and browse to the Model Group just created. 3. Right‐Click and select Save Group. This saves the group as a new Revit file. 4. Open the new Revit File, and check the duct tags to make sure there are no errors 5. Process PAC.

Another sheet metal user and shop foreman added a quality control step in between what was processed out of PAC and what is then nested in Vulcan. Both users believe the SysQue workflow is as good as anything they’ve ever had. They are confident that SysQue understands what they need on the sheet metal direct downloading side of the tool.

Problem fittings There are a few fittings in the direct downloading and PAC processing portion of SysQue such as 45‐ and 90‐degree offsets, square to round, and possibly a few others that are not downloading directly to plasma cutting tables without manual intervention. On pre‐release review, SysQue Product Management stated that working in collaboration with the CAM software team at Trimble, the Vulcan software was updated recently with an accurate mapping of SysQue’s fittings. As a result, they’ve stated that the issue is resolved.

Generic Revit fittings are geometrically wrong, so one user went into Revit and changed routing preferences to SysQue families Every detailer in North America looks for patterns in their work and in the process of drawing. This is also human nature. So it shouldn’t be a surprise that a detailer is going to look for shortcuts and faster ways to accomplish their work. This impulse needs to be balanced against its results. If a shortcut could also create problems downstream, a detailer needs to consider the true cost. An HVAC detailer who is critical of SysQue’s process flow felt that he was spending too much time waiting for SysQue to process generic to SysQue duct work. He wanted to draw ducts within a routing preference flow instead of following a SysQue process of drawing Revit generic duct, going to the palette to add a fitting from the SysQue palette, and processing the elements through SysQue, painstakingly repeating the process through the entire run of a system. He’s taken a different approach, which starts by changing his Revit routing preferences with SysQue’s families. He was told that this process was not supported and potentially could contribute to PAC‐associated errors. This user continues to generate a handful of broken fittings through PAC, and this breakage may be the result of issues in his template, multiple DLLs, large numbers of mismatches in families. The issue remains unresolved at publication of this report. This user continues to experience some direct download problems, but is working with SysQue support team to resolve them. It is important to note that he remains a staunch supporter of SysQue. During the interview, he referred to many positive experiences, and in two separate references he stated that, as an


October 1, 2014


HVAC detailer, there is no better design and construction software platform in the industry and has no plans to move to any other software.

Figure 1. SysQue Mechanical

Sleeves in Revit and SysQue Some users have noted an issue with sleeve layout and placement identical to control points. Similar to hangers, sleeve placement had to be tied to and associated with an object. One user drew in and added concrete floors to the model. They needed the concrete floors to attach the sleeves. With Revit, you provide the size of the pipe and then select the sleeve based on the size of the insulation. Revit determines the size of the sleeve. In this case, the user had a 1‐inch pipe and was adding half‐inch insulation to it. Either Revit MEP or SysQue made a decision that a 3‐inch sleeve was needed, which in most cases is correct. Unfortunately, nowhere in the model does it tell the user that it is a 3‐inch sleeve. A user could measure it and see it was 3 inches, but there was no data (BOM, schedule, etc.) that the user could generate to identify that sleeve. When he exported the model to be used with a total station, the sleeves showed up as half‐inch insulation.

Note: This problem also may be a training issue.

Electrical contractors SysQue Electrical has the potential to do something “completely awesome,” but basic requirements must be met first The one comment that impressed me came from an electrical user: “SysQue Electrical has the potential to do something completely awesome.” This user feels that Revit today has ”zero” content, and he’s had to build his critical content himself. But he noted that he’s not in the business of creating content. Revit’s out‐of‐the‐box content includes some pipe, light fixtures, and some boxes called “panels,” but in his view, this is totally insufficient. With many years of field experience, he fully endorses the concepts and methodology promised as a result of the BIM process. The problem, as he sees it, has been that there hasn’t been a platform with the right content and functionality to support that promise and also the unique needs of the contractor. He believes the base Revit platform along with SysQue Electrical offers the best chance to meet this need. One of the most important pieces of content this user has been asking for is Unistrut. It is an element that he uses in all of his models.


October 1, 2014


Another problem he sees is that Revit panels, and SysQue panels are designed to snap to a wall. On pre‐release review, SysQue Product Management stated that the company has updated its electrical families to provide users with the connection option to be faced‐base or at a specific distance from a face or wall. According to SysQue this issue and available for download at Building Data. As a result, they believe the issue is resolved. Panels aren’t strapped to a wall; they are bolted to Unistrut. Unistrut is anchored to the wall, and the panels are attached to the Unistrut. Most electrical code requires an air space between the panel and the wall, so he puts a horizontal 7/8‐inch strut across a section of the wall and attaches the panel to the strut. In addition, multiple panels are attached to a single Unistrut. A software platform like SysQue needs to match these types of requirements if SysQue wants to attract electrical contractors to their new Revit platform.

The challenge this users sees for SysQue is the electricians who don’t see the value of BIM and pre‐fabrication and are fearful that if it works, their work in the field will be reduced. They do not currently see that moving in this direction can position the company to acquire more work and keep individual electricians even busier. Spooling is different for electrical contractors than for mechanical contractors. It is much more involved specific to materials and presentation (See Appendix B).

The benefits of Revit MEP One user’s firm recognized last year that the world was moving to Revit. After spending the time to learn Revit, he realized the potential Revit offers the electrical contractor. Revit’s construction documentation, exporting features, and ability to slice up models into different views is incredible. But this power user is really excited about Revit as a database‐driven product. He believes once his systems are set up properly with the content he needs, he will be able to collect, organize, and manage so much information (BIM Data) about the project; he believes that he’ll be able to offer his customers a level of service that he can’t offer now. He is completely confident that with Revit and SysQue (and with his requested electrical content), he’ll be far ahead of where 99% of the electrical contractors in North America are today.

The value and benefits for the electrical BIM 3D modeler One powerful feature SysQue offers the electrical contractor is the ability to take the estimate from a project that was just awarded and to compare it against the time the estimate projects it would take to fully draw out the electrical systems. A rule of thumb is to take “total field labor hours” and establish a percentage somewhere between 4% and 5%. Whatever that number is represents the time it takes to draw the electrical 3D model. If it takes longer, someone should raise a “yellow flag” with much more detailed comparison between the estimate and what the model are both representing. Quantities and materials may have been missed, and the start of a project is the best time to make any changes need if in the two data sets are incongruent. In addition, the process of creating the model allows the detailer to find all possible pre‐fabrication opportunities and determine exactly how much confidence to place in the field labor estimate. In a recent project, the detailer found that the estimate missed 30% of the total man hours that the CAD model projected. This was all done using generic Revit. This detailer expects that with the content and the basic additional functionality that he’s requested from SysQue, his detailing man‐hours will drop by half.


October 1, 2014


Plumbing contractors Allow users to customize spool schedules with industry‐standard naming conventions Different people use different names to describe the same MEP object. The same is true of manufacturers, content providers, software publishers, engineers, designers, detailers, shop foreman, and field installers. Two users identified a need for functionality that would allow them to add naming or product description fields to the BOMs generated from SysQue. The difficulty was being restricted to using the element’s long description name, which is not necessarily the industry standard‐naming convention that a shop fabricator understands. And, once a system is created, it is difficult to change the name in any way. For example, for a Weldbend CS (carbon steel) system that contains a 90‐degree elbow, the user wanted the spool to generate the industry standard name “welded long radius 90” not “CS Elbow LR 90.”

Hangers on gravity pipe and control points Hangers on gravity (or pitched) pipe have been a problem for some users, but they noted an improvement after SysQue 2014. They’ve had difficulty placing hangers next to fittings, and in some cases the spacing wasn't always correct. A few users who came from CADMech are looking for SysQue to place the hanger at the exact elevation while providing the exact run of the rod. Users who mentioned this issue have not been able to manage that specific level of placement in SysQue. They do note that SysQue does a good job with hangers on small batches, i.e., along a run and each hanger is at the proper elevation. What hasn’t been possible is to place a hanger at a specific spot and elevation. The two users acknowledge that it may be a learning‐curve issue. One user noted that he was unable to place under‐slab points needed to lay out ditches properly. For this firm and user, the software suddenly became inefficient. With under‐slabs, detailers need to place a control point at the invert of the pipe, not at the center, and the point needs to be at the end, for example, in the center of the fitting where it branches. The user was unable to get it to work. Revit does not seem to allow users to place control points in space; instead control points need to be attached to an object or face of an object. This user’s AutoCAD software could place control points anywhere in space, but points have to be tied to an object in Revit and SysQue.

Angle of Deflection ‐ Pulling pipe from a sloped run When you have drawn sloped pipe in Revit, SysQue converts it properly to real pipe, maintaining the slope across the run of the physical object. The trouble begins when a user needs to bring pipe out perfectly vertical but the managed content doesn’t have enough tolerance (called angle of deflection) to allow for that angle, even though in the physical world, that would not be an issue. SysQue is aware of this reported user requirement. Fixed. According to SysQue Product Management the company recently updated SysQue to no longer allow slope on a vertical run. The product update is located on the company’s Zendesk site and available for download.


October 1, 2014


IV. What it takes for an innovation to create change In 1963, social science researcher Everett Rogers shared his theory that described how, why, and at what rate new ideas, technologies and innovations spread through society. He reported his findings his book, Diffusion of Innovations.4 Rogers identifies five qualities 5 of an innovation that have the most impact on whether it is ultimately successful and adopted by a large segment of its intended users:

1. Is it better than what it is replacing? 2. Does it meet the current and basic needs of users? 3. To what degree is it perceived as difficult to use? 4. Is it available to experiment with on a limited basis? 5. To what degree are the results of using the innovation visible to others?

Using Roger’s framework as a means to forecast SysQue’s long‐term impact for nurturing much needed change with its innovative technology and content delivery software industry, consider these conclusions all of which are based on feedback received from user data collected during the research.

1. Sysque is better than what it is replacing, i.e., generic Revit MEP. 2. SysQue is meeting the needs of Early Adopters. 3. Users who start their training in SysQue with Revit MEP skills have almost no difficulty learning and

becoming proficient at the software in less than a week. For two users the learning curve was measured in hours.

4. Autodesk offers a 30‐day free trial of Revit MEP, but currently the “Supports” portion of SysQue is available for a FREE 30 day trial. It does not require SysQue and can be used to provide bracing for all Revit MEP content. It can be found on the Autodesk Exchange Store.

5. It’s premature to expect conclusive evidence for the fifth quality. There is not enough data or results available for people to judge. The development of technical white papers, case studies, and industry papers and reports like this one will eventually provide the visibility for the industry to develop a level of confidence in posted results that are credible and can be trusted. All considered, the SysQue model design and construction platform is definitely making its early customers extremely happy, motivated to continue using the tool, and committed to SysQue’s success.

4 Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 5

th ed. (New York: Free Press, 2003)

5 Everett Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 5

th ed. (New York: Free Press, 2003), pp 15‐16


October 1, 2014


Appendix A – Users Interviewed I want to express my sincere and deepest gratitude to the 10 individuals who generously contributed their time

and their expertise to this report. They are truly innovators in their field and will be recognized as Revit and

SysQue pioneers. I believe that their open and honest interviews, which were full of valuable experiences from

their 18 months of using Revit MEP and SysQue, will help the next wave of users who adopt this platform.

‐ David E. Quigley

1. Peter Brown, BIM Manager Atlantic Constructors Most recent project, Fully Integrated collaborative Design Assist Project, using Revit MEP and SysQue

2. Ian Roff, Primary detailer using Revit since 2009

Besterd Mechanical Western Ontario Canada Construction types: hospitals, colleges, universities, water treatment plant Not using SysQue for pre‐fab or downloads at this time, not required

3. Don Bailey, Designer and Piping Detailer

Bell Company Rochester, NY Over 200 employees

4. Charles Goin, HVAC Detailer

Bell Company QC and responsible for processing PAC for digital downloads

5. Russell Greenfield, BIM Manager

Fitzgerald Plumbing and Heating Greater Metro Atlanta area Firm has been using SysQue for 14 months

6. Tom Fuller, MEP Designer

Skanska,

Indiana, Southern Illinois and Kentucky

Once known as Industrial Contractors Incorporated (ICI) and

Professional Consultants Incorporated (PCI)

Premiere full‐service contractor in Southern Indiana, Southern Illinois, and Kentucky.

7. Herb Yamamoto (CEO)

CADD Connection LLC, Oregon

CEO of firm providing BIM and VDC services in the Pacific Northwest.

8. John Williams, MEP Modeler (BIM Team)

CADD Connection LLC, Oregon

MEP designer (used SysQue on recent medical, higher education and industrial projects.)


October 1, 2014


9. Ray Couzens, MEP Designer

CC2BL INC Denver, CO

10. Steve Schrader, MEP Designer (heavy emphasis on electrical)

Symphony Consulting & Management Indianapolis, IN

11. Al Beckes, CAD Director J S Mechanical Contractors Inc. Draper UT

12. Ryan Strickland, Detailer Southern Piping Company Wilson, NC

13. Brandon Cobb CM‐BIM, Cad Manager Southern Piping Company Wilson, NC

14. Jimmy Foxx. Shop Foreman

Southern Piping Company Wilson, NC


October 1, 2014


Appendix B ‐ Screen captures of SysQue models Figure 2 SysQue Support

Figure 3 Sloped hanger 2

Figure 4. SysQue Plumbing – 33 floor high rise


October 1, 2014


Figure 5. SysQue Plumbing Fittings

Figure 6. SysQue Mechanical, Holmberg Plumbing Model

Figure 7. SysQue Mechanical Room Model


October 1, 2014


Figure 8. SysQue Duct Model, PACE

Figure 8. SysQue Plumbing Model, Joel Lundenberg, BIMBOX

Figure 9. SysQue hanger families

Figure 10 . SysQue piping


October 1, 2014


Figure 11 . SysQue pipe spooling





October 1, 2014


Figure 15 . SysQue electrical

Documents

SysQue Market Report 2014static.squarespace.com/static... · Summer 2014 SysQue Industry ... content for Revit MEP 2014 and 2015. ... As an author3 and research analyst, my objective