The Engineers Guide to Drinks – Continued

After my last post about The Engineers Guide to Drinks I got lots of nice reactions, tips and suggestions. The coolest thing was Shaan Hurley making a blog post about the project on his Between the Lines blog. Meanwhile I have done a bit more work on the first glass as well. One thing I wanted to do is be able to tag the different liquids with their material and their volume, which I was not able to do with the family I had as it was just 1 family with everything in it. I had given this a little thought and Aaron Maller over at confirmed what I was thinking. So I was going to need separate, shared, nested families for the liquids. The hard work was already done, so I had to take my glass, remove all the geometry except the one layer of liquid, remove the formula’s load into my main family, link parameters and DONE! Well that is the short version at least, took a little longer, but after a few hours I had a working glass again and was now able to tag the liquids.The Engineers Guide to Drinks - tags

Unexpected help

To my surprise more people had been working on their own project as I found out when I got an email from Melina Vlachousi:

Hello Robin,

I had tried to work on this as well but it kinda fell through. I managed to build a few families for the glasses and some of the ingredients, maybe they can be useful to you and to others who want to work on this project.



She also send me the families she had been working on, for us to use:

The Engineers Guide to Drinks - help

Pretty sure I will be using the Fruit Squeeze, Fruit Wheel and Cherry and the glasses are a good start for the overall shape, but will need a lot of parameters, but they are a first step.

Added all the materials from the CAD file into my Revit project and setup the first batch of drinks. As you can see did not add the fruit and the way of sturing the drinks yet, but so far this confirmed that everything works well so far.

The Engineers Guide to Drinks - cocktails

Adding fruit

Next was the fruit I got from Melina. They were a little to large for my glass, so I scaled them down a bit and added them to the family with a visibility parameter. Rearranged the dashes a bit too, so it all is a bit more compact. We are slowly getting to the end of this glass, when we can start to clean up things a bit and maybe do some things a bit smarter.

The Engineers Guide to Drinks - drinks with fruit

Now what?

As you can see in the previous post, there are a few more glasses to be build and there needs to be a project made with all the glasses and materials in it, so we can build each cocktail we want. So, if you want to help out in any way, let me know with the reply form below, the contact form on this website, Twitter, Facebook, or on the Revit Forum and we’ll figure out who can do what.


Previous Post: The Engineers Guide to Drinks

Next Post:

The Engineers Guide to Drinks – Revit edition

Most of us will have the need for a nice drink after a hard week at the office once in a while and some of us will choose to make ourselves a cocktail, or go out and have somebody make one for us. This cocktail will give us some relaxation, but it can also spark our engineering brain. How is this cocktail mixed, what type of booze is in it and how does that relate to the dimensions of the glass it is in and can I streamline the process of making a cocktail. Well a while back @Autodesk made this tweet:

Which was about a CAD file that is known as “The Engineers Guide to Drinks” which is a drawing of different drink in the way an engineer would make the drawing. Different hatches, symbols for various things. It looks very nice and has the feel of a construction drawing.

I had seen the file before and thought is was pretty cool then and still did this time, but wanted to know a bit more. So, I ended up at the blog ‘Between the Lines‘ by Shaan Hurley. He was the one that did the CAD drawing based on a drawing made in 1972. Over the years there have been multiple changes to the file. One that is very cool is an old hand drawn one from 1974 which is in the US National Archives for some reason. Find out it’s story here.

The Engineers Guide to Drinks_1974

Cocktail construction file found in the US National Archives.

On his blog Shaan set the challenge (well that’s how I see it anyway) to make the file in other CAD programs, Revit being one of them, and that triggered me to give it a go, thinking it should not be that hard.


First try

The first task was going to be the cocktail glass, nice cone shaped, with simple dimensions. So I looked up the size of a cocktail glass and modeled that in Revit, which was an easy task. Needed to fiddle a bit with it to get both the dimensions and volume right, but in half an hour or so the glass was there. Next task was to fill the glass with booze, started off with 3 layers and used trial and error to get the the right volumes and the glass looks pretty nice.

Blue Moon

I figured out the height of different volumes of liquid and I could change the volumes pretty quick. But then it hit me, “This is not a very Revit like way of doing thing my friend”. Figuring out the height of the liquids by trial and error might be OK for that one glass, but I was not going to do that one glass, I needed to make a lot of cocktails according to the previous attempts, so I was going to do this the Revit way and parameter the hell out of the glass. Well, that sure sounded a lot easier in my mind then how it turned out in the end.


The formula

Being 36 myself and out of school for 16 years or so and never really needing to do things like this before I had to think really hard about what to do. I needed the height of the liquid level for each layer and I knew the angle of the glass and the volume of the liquid (I knew that the cocktail had for example 10, 20 and 30 ml  of liquid in it). So how to calculate the height in the glass? I tried a lot of different ways, looked all over the internet and even asked colleagues to help me out and we could not solve it. Finally asked another colleague and he said that his son would probably solve it in 5 minutes. I thought, “sure he will”, but can’t hurt to let him try. That night I got a message telling me he indeed solved it in a few minutes and a photo of the calculations he made.

Berekening cocktail glas_Page_1

The calculation made by Myron Timmermans

Going over the calculations they kinda made sense to me, but I also realized I could never have gotten to that solution myself, so I’m very happy with the help I got.

This is the simple looking formula I am using for the calculations:formula used

b = height of liquid in the glass
V = volume of added liquid
h = total height of the glass
r = radius of the top of the glass


Getting it in Revit

I now had the right formula, checked it against my trial and error approach and it worked! Now to get that thing into my Revit family. This gave me a new set of challenges of course, as there are things in that formula you do not really use on a regular bases in Revit, how to do the cubic root thing for example. This is where the great Revit Forum helped me out. In the thread Revit Formulas for “everyday” usage I found the solution:


At this point I had all the data I needed to build the glass with parameters, so started with the glass I already modeled and added the needed ref planes, ref lines and dimensions to be able to control the height and angle of the glass.cocktail-glass-parameters

Then all the needed parameters and formulas. I have chosen to convert all my parameters to ones without units to avoid the Inconsistent Units popup in Revit. Pretty sure that is not needed and I might change that in the end, but for now removing them and at the end adding them again works well for me. As you can see from the drawing above and the parameters below I have chosen to calculate each height from the bottom of the glass instead of doing one layer at a time. This means I have to add the previous layers of liquid to the next one in order to get the total height.


Polished the family a bit and I am pretty happy so far. Still needs some work, but good enough to add it as a download


Now what?

As you can see at the top of this post, there are a few more glasses to be build and there needs to be a project made with all the glasses and materials in it, so we can build each cocktail we want. So, if you want to help out in any way, let me know with the reply form below, the contact form on this website, Twitter, Facebook, or on the Revit Forum and we’ll figure out who can do what.

But should we stop with Revit, can we BIM this thing??


Next Post: The Engineers Guide to Drinks – Continued

A world without these people

Sometimes, when a famous person dies you think about what that person meant to you and what they did for you and the world in their lifetime. When a famous person dies too soon you think about what they would have done for the world in the remainder of their lifetime had it gone on for another 20 – 40 years or so. In the last few weeks we have seen Prince and yesterday Muhammad Ali die, both of which meant something to the world. Ali, was 74 and meant a lot for the sport, but also did a lot next to and after his boxing career, but in all honesty was not going to do more great things. Prince did a lot for music, not only with his own music, but also the music he wrote. If he would have been around for another 20 years or so, we would have seen a lot more great music, no doubt.


A little more back in history we have more great people that meant something to the world. Nelson Mandela, well you hardly have to say anything about that man, from battling regimes in South Africa and fighting against apartheid his entire life, to connecting people until his death and in general being a very likable guy. Though it is sad to loose a man like that, he was old and his greatest achievements were behind him.

A very different kind of man was Ayrton Senna the 3 time Formula 1 world champion that died way to soon at Imola in 1994 at the age of 34. It is always interesting to think of what would have happened to Formula 1 had he not died that day. Would Michael Schumacher have been world champion that year (his first time) and the next year and if not, would he have ever been the world champion?

Steve Jobs. Not an Apple guy myself, but it is clear that Steve changed the way we connect to people today, but what would have happend if he was still around. Would we have the larger iPad pro’s that he thought were to large, would we have iPhone’s that are way more innovative than the ones we had the past year, with nothing really new and exciting.

And in my own country a guy like Pim Fortuyn, a politician on his way to become prime minister of Holland that was shot and killed before he could get to that post. No matter if you agree with his views or not, it was an interesting guy and probably was going to be the first openly gay prime minister of Holland with a few pretty extreme (for that time) views. I know that even after his death politics changed because of him, would have liked to see what he could have done when alive.

So, after a few  already dead people lets see which people would be a big loss to the world when they died today (Don’t get me wrong, each death is a big loss, but most are not a big thing on a global scale)

One could argue for presidents and people like that, but to be honest if one dies, another that is kinda the same will take his/her place, so that not really a big loss (again, if you look at it in the global scheme of things).

One that comes to mind is Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani girl that was shot in the head by the Taliban, survived and is nog traveling the world to talk about female education and even has a Nobel Prize already. Pretty sure she is going to do a lot of good things in the rest of her life (she is just 18 years old). She would be a big loss to the world for sure.

Someone else that comes to mind is Elon Musk (the guy from the rockets, electric cars and mission to Mars), what would happen if he died today. Will the Model 3 electric car ever see the light of day, will we still have cheap rockets to space and will we ever get to Mars? Watching an interview with him today there is a lot of other stuff in that guys mind that will come out into the real world at some point. The Hyperloop for example and neural lace to connect us to technology. I for one would like to see him try all that stuff.

But people do not just have a positive influence on the world, what would happen if for example Kim Jong Un would die today? Is there anyone to replace him? Would the regime crumble and fall apart? Would the North Koreans finally see what really is going on? Or would a look-a-like just fill in his place or some random guy claiming to be ‘The great leaders’ reincarnation?

There are a lot more people that do great things, but I can not think of many more that would really make a big impact on the world would they die today in either a positive of negative way. Feel free to comment and mention anyone you think should be on the list.



Iedereen verstand van Formule 1?

Jan Lammers plaatste dit bericht op Facebook over een uitzending van Voetbal Inside en het zogenaamde verstand van Formule 1:


Het gaat in het kort over dat de mannen van VI zonder enige kennis van Formule 1 het alleen maar afzeiken en doen alsof ze er verstand van hebben.

Hoewel ik wel het een en ander weet over Formule 1 (maar genoeg om aan de foto te zien dat het op Zandvoort is), ik kijk pas 20 jaar ofzo dus dan steek je wat op, ben ik zeker geen expert, maar ik wilde toch even reageren op de mannen van VI. Hier onder dus.

Goeie foto trouwens bij het stuk van Jan Lammers



De afgelopen 20 jaar die gasten nooit iets horen zeggen over Formule 1 (OK heb de afgelopen 20 jaar ook niet gekeken, maar daar ga ik voor het gemak maar even vanuit) en als Max nu een race wint (en binnenkort ook wereldkampioen is) hebben ineens allemaal mensen er verstand van. Ik ben bang dat we dit naast die gasten van VI nog veel meer gaan zien in de toekomst.

Het interessante aan F1 is juist dat je de achtergrond weet. Het is alleen maar rondjes rijden, dat klopt, maar als je weet dat Max bijvoorbeeld heel laat kan remmen zonder alles te blokkeren (want dat heeft hij tot nu toe veel laten zien) dan kijk je heel anders naar de eerste bocht na het rechte eind.

Als je weet dat Hamilton en Rosberg al jaren niet de beste maatjes zijn, ondanks dat ze in hetzelfde team rijden dan weet je dat het een keer fout moet gaan, de spanning zit er dan dus in wanneer dat is (afgelopen weekend dus). Daarna zit er dus weer spanning in het feit dat het al mis is gegaan en de vraag wat er dan de volgende race gebeurd. Zal Rosberg hetzelfde doen, of laat Hamilton het wel uit zijn hoofd om in zo’n zelfde gat te duiken (wat mij niet het geval lijkt, want hij is een echte racer en will kosten wat kost winnen).

Als je weet dat Massa Max veel te jong vond en zelfs gevaarlijk, dan is het leuk dat je nu ziet dat hij helemaal zoek gereden wordt door Max die nog bijna niks heeft fout gedaan in zijn Formule 1 loopbaan (ook Monaco vorig jaar was niet Max zijn schuld als je het mij vraagt)

Als je weet dat Max voor het ongeluk in Monaco strafpunten heeft gekregen op zijn licentie, kan je je opwinden over het feit dat Alonso dit jaar voor een vergelijkbare actie geen strafpunten krijgt.

Als je weet dat diverse coureurs op diverse banen om het leven zijn gekomen tijdens de race of naar aanleiding van een ongeluk tijdens een race, dan geeft dat elk jaar toch weer een andere kijk op diezelfde race (Imola – Senna en Ratzenberger, Suzuka – Bianchi)

Als je weet dat er op verschillende banen grote ongelukken tijdens de start hebben plaatsgevonden dan zit je toch net even meer in spanning in de jaren erna.

Dit alles betekend dus dat je al jaren moet kijken om al die zaken te weten te komen en dat dit een schijnbaar saaie race toch erg interessante kan maken (hoewel er zeker ook saaie races zijn als je wel al die feiten weet).

Kort om, ik ben dus bang dat er veel mensen op TV zullen komen die vanaf volgende week pas de F1 zijn gaan kijken, omdat Max het afgelopen week zo goed heeft gedaan en dan direct ‘kenner’ zijn omdat ze op TV zijn. Ik hoop dus dat de ‘kenners’ ook daadwerkelijk iets meer weten dan “Hij is 18 jaar, kan goed racen, rijd voor Red Bull en zijn vader heet Jos”

We zullen zien.

Dive into the Dark Web

When browsing the web and watching the news these days you hear a lot about the so called Dark Web and the Tor network. This is a part of the internet (the largest part people say) that is hidden from the general public unless you have a special browser and know your way around. You are supposed to be able to find anything on there, from website that also have site on the normal web to sites where you can buy drugs and guns and site where you can hire hackers or even hitmen. You should be able to also find childporn and nasty stuff like that on there, but for obvious reasons I did not look for that and I will not go into that.

Other then the things mentioned above the Dark Web is also used for good, for example people in countries with a hostile regime are able to get news in and out of the country without the government knowing who they are. So, the Dark Web is used by anyone that wants to keep their identity hidden, for whatever reason they have.

Before I go any further let me start by saying I have no interest in using any of the illegal services I have found on the Dark Web, but it is interesting to me what is going on on that part of the web and it is fun to figure out how one would actually buy stuff from the Dark Web and most importantly keep your identity hidden while doing that.

So, how to get on the Dark Web, well you can not get on there with any of the regular browsers, like Firefox, Chrome or Internet Explorer, you need a special browser and the one to use is the Tor browser. Not sure if there are more, but this at least is the most well known. The Tor browser is basically a modified version of Firefox that routes traffic trough various servers and keeps you anonymity safe.

Getting the Tor browser is easy (and legal) just click the Tor icon above and it will take you to the website of the Tor Project (all on the ‘normal’ web). Just click the link on there and it will download the browser like any other piece of software and after that you can install it. After that you open the browser and you are on the Dark Web…well not really. You can not go into google and type “buy drug” or “buy guns” and expect to get on some website where you can buy that. Google on Tor is exactly the same google as on the normal web other then that you might end up on a google page from another country (I ended up at because my traffic was routed trough Norway). In face every site you go trough by typing the URL you are used to do in your normal browser, gets you on the same page you are used too.

To find any of the hidden pages on the Dark Web you need to find a page with an .onion extension. So like .com or .nl the .onion extension is especially for the Dark Web and can only be accessed by the Tor browser. The problem is that you can’t just go to www.buyanillegalgun.onion as most url’s are just a random set of characters. For example lets look at the DuckDuckGo search engine (The search engine that doesn’t track you). On the normal web you can find it here: but on the Dark Web you will have to go here: https://3g2upl4pq6kufc4m.onion/ which is not a reals easy URL to remember. There are websites on both the normal web as the Dark Web that contain a list of .onion websites, one if which is The Hidden Wiki, which has a rather large list of interesting sites. There are of course a lot more sites on the Dark Web, with all sorts of stuff you might not want to know about, but I’m guessing that even the Dark Web has a Darker Web with even more nasty and scary sites, but they will not be listed on a easy to find list on the web and will most likely be on invitation only.

So, what can you buy on the web if  you know where to look? Without looking too hard I found pages to buy drugs and guns and a page I could hire a hacker to hack anyone or anything. Drugs and guns send to any address you want and I assume you give that hacker a name and that’s it you would just have to get them the money they want for their goods of service. You have been taking steps te be untraceable until now, so it is best for both you and the seller to not use a credit card to pay them, because that is not ver anonymous. The way to pay on the Dark Web is by using Bitcoins.

Bitcoins are a so called crypto currency, which is money that is not linked to any bank or country and can be transferred without cost and most importantly, for the products I talk about above, anonymous. To use bitcoins you have to create a virtual wallet where you can store them. Assuming you are indeed buying a gun or drugs, I guess you are creating that wallet with information not leading to you. Next you have to add money to that wallet, which can be done by credit card or iDEAL for example, but again you might want to keep yourself hidden and find other ways. There are services that give you bitcoins for cash money or money transfers, so keeping yourself hidden might take some work.

Next would be making the deal which, strangely, will be done by email, which is not the most secure way to communicate. All of the sites I found with shady business used encrypted email and all of them did this with a program called GPA is the GNU Privacy Assistant (GPA). This piece of software translated normal text to gibberish (encrypted text) which you can send over email to the seller. The seller has published a his own public encryption key on his site which you will need to use to encrypt your message. To that public key is linked his own personal key which he (and only he) can use to decrypt your message to normal text.

As an example I encrypted a piece of text: “this is a piece of text”

Which will end up looking like:

Version: GnuPG v2




and only the one with the private key that goes with the public key I used can decrypt it

So that’s another step in the process of buying stuff you are not supposed to buy from the web, next is the shipping. This can of course go to your house, but again, not very safe I’d say. It seems this might be the most tricky part of your ‘operation’. It might be pretty safe to send stuff to your house, but what if you do not what the seller to know your address, just in case? A P.O. Box is an option, but you need some kind of identification to get one, so you could pay someone to get one for you and give you the key, or get a fake ID, which would give you the same problem of getting it send to you without it being traced to you. You can send it to the postoffice for yourself to pick it up, but I assume you need to show some sort of ID when picking up a package and if you do not have one for John Doe you will not get your package.

It looks like staying totally anonymous will take some time ans work, but possible I’d say, it all depends on how much you want or need the item you are buying I suppose.


If for some reason you want to send me an encrypted email, use my public key below.

Version: GnuPG v2



[icon name="fa-globe" class="icon-1x"]
Creative Commons License

Formula 1 Qualifying 2016

The 2016 season of Formula 1 is in it’s second race weekend and there is some discussion about the way the qualifying is going. With the first race in Australia the Q1 and Q2 were OK to watch as there were a lot of cars on track to begin with, but Q3 was done with 7 minutes still on the clock. It seemed to me that the teams did not get the new system as a lot of drivers went out of the pit with no chance of setting a time, it looked to me that they thought they were able to finish the lap they were on when their time ran out, which was not the case, some teams learned quickly and did it right in Q2 already, but some still got it wrong. Social media blew up with people saying the new system sucked and it needed to go back to the old system, which worked and was exciting to watch.


The powers that be decided during the next 2 weeks that they would give it another go in the next race in Bahrain, which was yesterday afternoon. Well, the teams did seem to get the system now, as drivers were going on the track at the right time and drove themselves out of elimination and pushed others in, but with 4 minutes to go in Q1 and Q2 all drivers were in the pit and nothing happened anymore. This is because the top teams got out in the very beginning of those sessions, set a fast time in 1 lap and went back in to wait it out. Q3 seemed to go the same as the first time, but because Hammilton set a bad time his first time around he had to go out another time, which caused other to try again too, but with 4 minutes to go everyone was in the pit again and it was done, this would have been 5 minutes if the red light at the end of the pit would have gone to green when the timer for Q3 started.

So, what needs to change? Going back to the old system does not seem to be an option for some reason, so whats my idea for a new qualifying system?

The elimination system is something that I think can be fun, but you need to give people time to react to times set by other drivers, so I would get rid of the 3 session system en just use 1 long session, lets say 1 hour (but that might need some tweaking). We start out with 10 minutes ‘free’ driving, so everyone can set a time, after that a timer starts, 90 seconds is OK (depending on the time it takes to do a lap, so that might need to change for different tracks), but people are allowed to finish the lap they are in when the time runs out, so when you are in the pit when your timer starts, you have time for the out lap and a fast lap. This would however mean that the top teams will set 1 fast lap in the beginning and would be done, but the times would reset after a set amount of drivers are out of qualifying, lets say each 5 drivers (22, 17, 12, 7, 2) which means that in the end the top 2 drivers need to do a shootout for pole.

With the teams understanding that the remaining of the 90 seconds will go to the next driver (as they seemed to do in Bahrain) I think we would see more people on track.

Formule 1 2016 – preview

Het is elk jaar weer een gat waar je in valt zo rond november en de vraag is, wat ga je dan doen met je vrije zondag, maar gelukkig weet je dat het in maart weer begint.

Formula 1 logo

Uiteraard heb ik het over de Formule 1 en hoewel er zeker minder jaren tussen zaten volg ik het toch al dik een jaar of 20. Zeker afgelopen jaar (2015) was natuurlijk weer erg leuk en dan niet zo zeer vanwege de vraag wie de race ging winnen of wie kampioen ging worden, maar omdat we eindelijk weer een Nederlander mee hebben rijden en één die in tegenstelling tot de heren die hier voor in de Formule 1 zaten, bij een team zit die een deuk in een pakje boter kan rijden en dan ook nog eens het talent lijkt te hebben (of is het de ballen of de onbevangenheid) om dat dan ook te doen, we zullen het in 2016 zien. Hoe dan ook heeft ‘onze’ Max er toch wel een spektakel van gemaakt en dat vinden niet alleen wij Nederlanders maar zeker ook de Britten (BBC en SKY-sport) en eigenlijk ook de rest van de wereld als je de social media mag geloven. Maar goed dat was 2015, onze Max moet nu gaan bewijzen dat hij het echt kan en het niet gewoon mazzel was.

Dus, wat kunnen we verwachten in 2016, of eigenlijk, wat zijn de zaken die ik verwacht en naar uit kijk.

Bij de teams lijkt er niet al te veel veranderd te zijn, er zijn wat namen anders Lotus => Renault en Marussia => Manor dat is het hoewel de verandering van Lotus naar Renault op de achtergrond natuurlijk een grote verandering is, maar op de voorgrond lijkt dat alleen een verandering van naam en we hebben natuurlijk ook het nieuwe Haas, een Amerikaans team met een Fransman en een Mexicaan als coureurs. Haas heeft natuurlijk al de nodige ervaring met racen en ondanks dat het nieuw is in de Formule 1 verwacht ik toch wel wat van ze, wellicht al wel een puntje hier en daar.

Bij de coureurs zien we ook voornamelijk dezelfde namen of namen die we al kennen in de Formule 1, bij Manor en Renault zien we echter 3 nieuwe namen of liever gezegd nieuw in de Formule 1. Pascal Wehrlein, Rio Haryanto en Jolyon Palmer allen niet echt nieuwe in een raceauto, maar nog geen Formule 1 races gereden.

Dan de banden, we hebben een nieuwe compound en deze heeft een mooie paarse zijkant gekregen. Het is de Ultra Soft, die dus nog zachter is dan de Super Soft die we al hadden. Word waarschijnlijk alleen op een aantal stratencircuits gebruikt, zoals Monaco. Verder kunnen de teams dit jaar uit 3 compounds per race kiezen, waar dat in 2015 nog 2 compounds waren die door Pirelli werden gekozen. Dit gaat voor ons kijkers wat verwarrend worden, omdat er in 2015 werd gesproken over primary en option tyres wat dus voor iedereen hetzelfde was. Nu kunnen de primary en option banden dus per team verschillen, ben benieuwd hoe dit zal gaan.

Het geluid, daar is sinds de V6 met turbo nogal wat over gezegd en het was inderdaad nogal zacht. Hier hebben ze dit jaar wat op gevonden. Er zijn namelijk extra uitlaten toegevoegd die uitlaatgassen afvoert die niet door de turbo gaan en dus voor meer geluid zorgen. Voelt voor mij allemaal wat kunstmatig, maar er wordt wel meer herrie gemaakt.

Nieuw dit jaar is matte verf op de een aantal auto’s. Red Bull heeft dit in ieder geval en ook Renault schijn dit ook te gaan doen, maar dat zien we morgen (16 maart) voor het eerst. Men zegt dat deze matte verft ongeveer een halve kilo aan gewicht scheelt ten opzichte van glimmende verf.

Dat zijn zo ‘from the top of my head’ wat zaken die ik wel interessant vond, maar er zijn natuurlijk nog honderden kleine en grotere zaken die veranderd zijn, zowel technische als in de regels.

Maar goed, wat verwacht ik van de Formule 1 in 2016?


Zal wel weer bovenaan staan


Zal ze het een stuk moeilijker kan maken dan in 2015 en waarschijnlijk wel wat overwinningen meer kan pakken. Vraag me af wat Kiki Räikkönen nog kan, had niet een best jaar.


Ging afgelopen jaar eigenlijk best goed en hoewel Massa een beetje een zuurpruim wordt is het toch een leuk ‘oud’ team dat thuishoort in de Formule 1.

Red Bull

Heeft in de basis dezelfde motor als in 2015 en die was niet zo best, maar ik mag aannemen (of hopen) dat deze over de winder heen wel wat is verbeterd.

Force India

Deden het ook prima en voor een team dat een aantal jaar geleden toch zeker niet zo goed gingen toen het nog Spyker of Midland was. Het lijkt weer op het niveau te zijn als toen het nog Jordan was in de jaren 90.

Torro Rosso

Een kleine 100 pk meer dan in 2015, maar een motor die niet meer wordt doorontwikkeld, dus die moeten aan het begin van het seizoen grote stappen maken en punten scoren, zal aan het einde van het seizoen lastiger worden als de 2016 motoren nog wel worden aangepast.


Om eerlijk te zijn valt er niet zo veel te vertellen over Sauber. Hadden niet zo’n best jaar in 2015, kijken hoe 2016 verloopt.


Ja McLaren, denk dat 2015 op zijn minst een klote jaar voor ze was. Ik had in ieder geval veel meer verwacht van Honda, laten we hopen dat ze het lek boven hebben en dat ze in ieder geval mee kunnen doen voor de punten.


Op het laatste moment hebben ze Lotus gekocht dat in de financiële problemen zat. Natuurlijk een grote naam in de Formule 1 vanwege de motoren door de jaren heen (maar zeker niet in 2015) en hun eigen F1 team. Lotus heeft het in 2015 nog niet eens zo heel slecht gedaan, maar dat zal voor een deel aan de Mercedes motor gelegen hebben, nu met hun eigen motor, die in 2015 niet best ging, ben benieuwd.


In 2015 standaard achteraan, ik verwacht voor 2016 hetzelfde.


Zoals hierboven al gezegd, veel ervaring in racen, nog niets in F1. Ik denk dat ze het weleens goed zouden kunnen gaan doen. Heeft de 2016 ‘drive train’ van Ferrari, dus daar zal het niet aan liggen.

Goed, ik zit er aanstaande zondag klaar voor met een glaasje jus, wat croissants en een kop koffie (het is namelijk nogal vroeg) en heb er zin in. Dus zoals David Croft (Crofty) op de BBC altijd zei “Lights out and away we go !”

Phases in Revit a short explanation

There was a question on about phases in revit and if I could make a small explanation with some images, so here it is.

Making the phases

On the Manage Panel you will find the Phases button, once clicked you get a screen where you can make the phases you need. In the case from the question that will be 2 phases, one Existing and one New.

revit phases


Setting up Filters

This is basically where you tell revit what to do with which phase. You have 3 options, By Category, where it will show the object as it is setup in the family, so the standard way you made the family. Overridden, this is what you use when you want things in that phase to look different then the same item in another phase. Not Displayed, well that kinda explains itself. I named my Filter Example in this case.

revit phases filters


Setup the Overrides

This is where you tell an object on a specific phase what it should look like and you get about the same options as you get in the Visibility/Graphics settings. In my example I set the New items to be a wide green line and the demolished items to be a thin red dashed line.

revit phases overrides


Setting items on the right Phase

In an ideal world you would activate a phase before you start modeling you building and families you place will be placed in that phase right away. You can also do that after you placed the families, but that will be a bit more work. Seeing that the one asking the question has everything placed already I’ll explain how to change phases for families. If you select a family you will see 2 options in the Properties panel called Phase Created and Phase Demolished, which pretty much is what they do. Select a family (or multiple ones) and set them to the existing phase. Select the families that are new and set them to the New phase. If you have families that are placed in the existing phase, but will be removed in the New phase you can set that too, or use the Demolish tool (looks like a sledge hammer) in the Modify panel.

revit phases existing new

Setting the right phase and filter

Once that is all done you choose the right phase and filter in the properties panel and voila you get this (the text I added to make thins clear, that will not be added)


New York City – Downtown

Not long ago me and all of my colleagues went on a trip to New York City. We were asked to pick a part of the city and find out nice locations to visit. When traveling by myself I usually dont make a big day to day plan, but I do try and find things I want to see before I go and see if I can see those when I’m there.  As I have been in New York City 2 times already I have been to all the touristy things so I went for the stuff that is a bit ‘off the beaten path’ so to speak.

First of all, what is Downtown New York actually. It is everything on Manhattan below 14th street and has some of the up and coming areas in New York like SoHo (South of Houston), NoHo (North of Houston), Greenwich Village, Little Italy, Chinatown, TriBeCa (Triangle Below Canal Street).

Brooklyn Battery Tunnel Air Shaft

The first one is one we have all seen, but probably don’t realize that. It is the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel Air Shaft, which is a not so nice looking hollow building that provides the tunnel below it from fresh air. This is of course not why we know it. We know it because it is not just an air shaft, it is also the Head Quarters of the Men in Black.

New York City Hall Subway Station

One I will go too next time I’m in New York by myself, or with people willing to visit it, because this time there was just no time to do so. The subway station below city hall has been there for over 100 years (construction finished in 1904) but closed down in 1945. They started doing guided tours to it in 1995, but stopped that in 1998 because it was considered a security risk being underneath city hall. But you can still go there with the subway, you just have to stay inside the 6 train after its last stop and the train will drive trough the city hall station to make the turn to go back. It is probably not as nice looking as the images in the presentation, but at least I’ll see it.

W Hotel & Residences

From the outside not that special, just another high-rise building in New York City, but once you enter the bar there is that pretty cool ceiling. This also is one that is on my list for the next time I am in New York, no idea if you can just walk in and have a look around though.

Fulton Center

Just a subway hub Designed by Grimshaw Architects in collaboration with Arup and world renowned designer James Carpenter with shops around it, so it does not sound that interesting, but the glass Sky Reflector , as it is called is pretty cool.

Hook and Ladder 8

A fire station in down town New York, like many others, but this one is special. It is the headquarters of the Ghostbusters, so expect some ectoplasm and other creepy stuff when you are there. Well no, it actually is just a fire station, they just filmed there for the movie.

Charging Bull

Probably the only well known item on my list here, but it is a nice one. Right in the middle of the area in New York that caused the economic crisis and lost the world a lot of money. You can probably not get a nice picture of it when you are in New York because there are bus loads of tourists around it all the time.

8 Spruce Street

A tower bt architect Frank Gehry which looks much better on pictures then it does in real life, at least when I was there. The wrinkly building just looks weird and for some reason not extreme enough, but at least it is a bit different that the usual buildings.

Cooper Square

Cooper square has 2 strange buildings on it. The Cooper Union, which is a school for science and art and The Standard which is a 21 story luxury hotel. The Standard is a building I kinda like, especially the way they build it next to the old building that houses the Asian Pub. Not sure about The Cooper Union, looks to me it is just weird for the sake of being weird. The interior is better then the exterior if you ask me, even though I just saw that on pictures as we were not allowed to go inside.

So, there are a few things I will try to see next time I am in New York, and I’m sure there will be more visits as I love that place.

When are skills actually skills?

I realize that this is a weird question but let me explain. The skills I’m talking about are the skills people say they have on LinkedIn. I have a couple of skills listed on there and got endorsed by some people for those skills. Stuff like English (judging by this article that is a skill I really have) and AutoCAD, which I have been using for the past 15 years or so and Revit which I have been using the past 4 years. I also have PhotoShop and Illustrator on there, which I hesitated to do as I do know the basics, but in no way am I an expert in either of those programs, but I know enough to do the stuff I need to do with them. Because LinkedIn does not let you put a ‘grade’ on your skills I figured it was good enough to list it.

skills cloud

Then there are skills I have a little bit of, for example SketchUp. Sure I know how to run it and I can make a simple model with it, but as I have never done any more work with it then maybe 30 minutes I do not consider that a skill.

That brings me to the one that bugs me to see as skill listed on some people, which is BIM (Building Information Modeling). This is a bit of a fashion word the last couple of years and you see it pop-up as skill on a lot of peoples profile, some of which I am pretty sure of have never done any BIM project. They might have done a project in Revit of ArchiCAD, but that does not qualify you to say you know BIM if you ask me. This is the reason I do not have BIM listed as a skill I have. I did projects in Revit over the years and I did a project that was BIM-ish, but it was nowhere near a full blown BIM project and when I was put on a BIM project right now there is a pretty big change I would make a fool out of myself if there was nobody around to help me out.

So that brings me back to the question I started with, When are skills actually skills?  When do you list a skill you have (of think you have) as a skill on LinkedIn?