Archicad 10 and Calculation

[Anonymous]

As time appoaches for AC10 (isnt it?) i really wonder if we are going to see improvements in the calculation side of AC.

My worries come from the fact that if AC10 has the calculation features it should, then why should Graphisoft Constructor exist?

I use the database a lot, but i find that it has been left behind in development.

[Djordje]

oreopoulos wrote:
My worries come from the fact that if AC10 has the calculation features it should, then why should Graphisoft Constructor exist?

It is a completely different software solution for completely different purpose. Maybe the same ArchiCAD engine is used, but the similarity ends there ...

[Anonymous]

oreopoulos wrote:
As time appoaches for AC10 (isnt it?) i really wonder if we are going to see improvements in the calculation side of AC.

My worries come from the fact that if AC10 has the calculation features it should, then why should Graphisoft Constructor exist?

I use the database a lot, but i find that it has been left behind in development.

I think the better question is: How is ArchiCAD 10 addressing improvements in calculation funcationlity???

Hopefully we'll see some improvements in useabilty and functionality of the Listing, Interactive Schedules and SQL features. Calculation has long been a selling point of this software but the most difficult feature(s) of the software to understand and "actually" use.

In addition to needed functional improvements, we are long overdue for some good working examples and comprehensive documentation

Now that we are nearing the end of the year and getting closer to seeing a release of ArchiCAD 10, it would be nice if someone at Graphisoft could share more info about what's coming.

I think Oreopoulos shares the same questions that I do...It seems the real focus/features of Calculation are being more addressed in Constructor/Estimator than the original ArchiCAD software. If the features of ArchiCAD's internal Calcultion tools are not substantially enhanced, will we need to purchase Constructor/Estimator in order to really use these features??? I Hope this is not the case.

Dan K

[Anonymous]

Sorry Djordje but reading all the turorial of Constructor, i am sure that its the same excacly product + a few addons + notion of recipe

which is actually an enchanced notion of property scripts (this is how scripts should be). I dont see any differecnce.
Maybe i am wrong, but from the data i have, that is the only conclusion i can get too.
Constuctor- Archicad = 10% difference all in the calculation part.

What i want is to have a database of materials from multiple suppliers that i can choose from. Have a cost field.
Yes i know, making these changes will result in Constuctor product.
This is why i say that the Constructor will prohibit the archicad calculation enchanment.

[Djordje]

oreopoulos wrote:
Sorry Djordje but reading all the turorial of Constructor, i am sure that its the same excacly product + a few addons + notion of recipe

The problem is: how many architects model the reinforcement in their reinforced concrete? What is the level of the detail in your model? I don't mean 2D detail, fully modeled details?

The architectural practice in Europe does go for far more detailed approach than elsewhere, IMHE. I understand what are you saying - and it would be good to enrich the ArchiCAD package ("for architects") with the Constructor functionality you talk about ("for builders"). Frankly, most of my professional career I was in the design and build orianted companies - because, you can't charge enough for the design, and you can control the build properly only if you designed it yourself.

If the user feedback to Graphisoft is strong enough, and documented enough, there might be results. Whining never helps.

Then again - think about your colleagues. How many of them understand that the intelligent 3D model is the right way to go? How many contractors/builders treat your approved construction documents as something more than to spread on the site table to have the lunch on? How many of them will even consider investing into a software?

Quite a mountain to climb ...

[Anonymous]

Hmmmm.
I understand what you say.
For me, designing and building are not seperate things.
You talked about reinforcement. You dont need to model it to calculate it.
Even now i can add it as a property script (although its not versatile enough)

Doesnt archicad need some tools for civil engineers to work in the same model as architects? Revit has it now (although with a stupid appoach of a seperate product.

I agree whining does not help, but if you see that in V9 there was not a single feature added to calculation, and next you see the contractor product, doesnt that upset you? Wont you feel disappointed if in V10 there would not be any development in the calculation part? (and i dont mean adding a simple function but adding functionality).

So after wishing, doesnt whining come?

Anyway i wish AC10 solve some of the problems (although i am very pessimistic about the calculation part of AC)

[Anonymous]

In NJ USA IBC 2000 is a building code that requires extensive structural documentation. Every non-structural component needs to be analyzed as to its impact on lateral stability and attachment to the structure. I have read the structural changes to the 2003 code. All the prescriptive rules of the IBC 2000 are gone and replaced with mostly finite element analysis. In simple terms if you do not have a structural software equal or better to Risa 3D you will be rendered soon to nothing.

Then, there is the energy compliance, a noose that is tightening.


In other words we are at a crossroads: you want to design you must at all times have at your right a structural engineer and to the left a mechanical one. But this way you will go extremely slowly and nowhere fast.


Thus, to design one needs software that integrates Architecture, Structure and Energy analysis in an instant feedback environment.

If GS is incapable delivering this environment within the next 24 months I am afraid it is finished. I believe that GS must concentrate on this before any other aspect: rendering, or modeling. I am also convinced that for this to happen they must rewrite Archicad.

[Anonymous]

Djordje wrote:

oreopoulos wrote:
Sorry Djordje but reading all the turorial of Constructor, i am sure that its the same excacly product + a few addons + notion of recipe

The problem is: how many architects model the reinforcement in their reinforced concrete? What is the level of the detail in your model? I don't mean 2D detail, fully modeled details?

The architectural practice in Europe does go for far more detailed approach than elsewhere, IMHE. I understand what are you saying - and it would be good to enrich the ArchiCAD package ("for architects") with the Constructor functionality you talk about ("for builders"). Frankly, most of my professional career I was in the design and build orianted companies - because, you can't charge enough for the design, and you can control the build properly only if you designed it yourself.

If the user feedback to Graphisoft is strong enough, and documented enough, there might be results. Whining never helps.

Then again - think about your colleagues. How many of them understand that the intelligent 3D model is the right way to go? How many contractors/builders treat your approved construction documents as something more than to spread on the site table to have the lunch on? How many of them will even consider investing into a software?

Quite a mountain to climb ...

I am a home builder and I am a fanatic when it comes to accurate plans and the ability to take advantage of creating an accurate model that results in automatically accurate schedules.

Archicad can do it and if I can get my template perfected in concert with good layer control and drawing rules, the amount of detail that can automatically be produced will be so amazing that any builder with half a brain would pay extra for this information. Also, this info could be provided by an architect very easily (& affordably to the builder) if a template was established like the one I am doing.

40 page detailed and accurate plans with elaborate scheduling are a piece of cake with this program (and a good template,etc).

My biggest wish is that the interactive schedules could be placed in Plotmaker and updated like any other drawing instead of having to replace or update every schedule individually. I have 40 plus schedules so you can imagine how tedious this can become if a change is made. Plus the fact that this is not an automatic process is contrary to the logic of Archicad as a whole. Avoiding reconciliations are one of my highest priorities and why I love this program.

I’m currently working with a developer to see if I can create all my schedules in a spreadsheet program automatically by merely referring to a specific drawing. If I am able to accomplish this, I'll drastically reduce the number of schedules I place within Archicad, save a ton of time and have my estimate automatically produced by merely referring to the Archicad pln file....time will tell, I do think it is possible.