Microstation to Archicad or Revit

[KeesW]

I've got a colleague running a very successful architectural practice, who uses Microstation (MS). He wants to change to a BIM type product and is considering Microstation Triforma, Revit(R) or Archicad (AC). His reason for not immediately moving to R or AC is that he knows Microstation quite well and hasn't the time to learn another CAD package. If he goes R or AC, he won't himself be able to drive either of them and will be beholden to his staff who can use these products.

Cost is not the major issue but being in charge of his business is.

He's got people using R and AC in his office and has seen how productive these products are. He tried MS Triforma some years ago but found AC infilnitely more productive. He then employed a Microstation whizz who was able to create amazingly complex 3D graphics (in raw MS!) - probably of higher quality than AC could then manage. Because of his understanding of Microstation, my friend is wondering why he shouldn't persist with its 3D version but just try harder to make it work.

What advice can we give him?

[Anonymous]

Hi,
I was on MS & Triforma and went to AC and very happy about the move.
Ease of use is on top of the list.
Multi platform another one.
With gdl (from venders), result is more capability.
Oh I forgot ArchiTalk!
Joseph

[Anonymous]

I feel for ya....going thru same thing....I was hired on as a cad manager...and have experience both in Triforma and AC....but none in Revit...but where I am at now, it is a true autocad house/ADT....only problem ADT3.3...so we are behind the times....so I have to convince these guys to move over to one of them....personally I prefer AC10....but recently finding out that the Sketch Plugin does not exist might affect this...Trifroma is great product no doubt....if your doing pharma work...it's the only way to go....anything else you can use AC

[Rakela Raul]

Trifroma is great product no doubt....if your doing pharma work...it's the only way to go....anything else you can use AC

pharma ??? excuse my ignorance, what is this ?

[Anonymous]

pharmaceutical work....

[Anonymous]

What is so special about Triforma and pharma?

[owen]

Archicad wins hands down on user-friendliness and document production IMO. If you're doing fairly simple building geometries then AC (or Revit .. haven't tried it but it has some ideas i think AC could learn from) probably makes sense.

On the other hand if you are doing more complex building forms then i have to say from what i've seen of Microstation (haven't used it myself since Uni) it leaves Archicad's modeling capabilities for dead. GDL will let create more complex forms and give them parametrics but it requires some programming. AC's modelling tools are not adequate for complex geometries and its base modeling engine is well overdue for a replacement IMO. The two big ones which will increasingly become a problem are its a surface modeller and it doesn't do NURBS. Pretty sure the first can't be fixed without a major re-write, not so sure about the second. No idea why they picked a surface engine over a solids engine .. so if anyone knows or is willing to speculate i'm very interested.

Anyway this may not been an issue for most people. I've been using AC since 96 and it has been great for what ever i've needed to do. Lately however i've been working on projects that have started to reach the limitations of AC form modelling abilities. This has partially been solved with the development of C4D<>AC exchange plugins. The two problems with this are:

1. Its not AC. This might be an issue for some.I didn't have a problem as we use it for rendering/animation anyway. My real issue is that all the tools we need to model forms should be part of AC. I'm hoping this is a stop-gap measure, my main fear is for how long.

2. Its dumb. Parametrics are fast gaining in popularity yet lately GS seems to have lost its lead in this area (within Architectural applications at least). None of the recent additions to AC's features incorporates them (like 'complex' profiles). Whilst you can model complex forms in C4D and give them a form of parametrics, they are reimported into AC as a non-parametric object. Good luck editing the script as they are the GDL equivalent of mapping the individual coordinates of a crumpled peice of paper.

Anyway getting to my point ... for me AC has the lead in interface and its documentation tools are generally outstanding whereas Microstation has a far superior engine. Both need to improve on their weaknesses but i feel that one of those weaknesses is a much more difficult issue to solve than the other and i'm not sure they have shown any intention of resolving it soon enough for some.

I recently went to a talk by one of Arups principles (Tristram Carfrae) on developing technologies being used for design on projects such as the Beijing Aquatic Center. Form generation, structural analysis, 3D documentation straight to the fabricator ... nearly all of it using Microstation or software developed in-house to augment it. Design is heading this way (at least on a commercial/public scale) and Archicad is not keeping up with it.

When will Archicad be able to do this sort of thing?

www.smartgeometry.com

There were some Quicktime movies of parametric generative geometry modeling in use on City Hall and 30 St Mary Axe on Fosters page, but they don't seem to be working for me at the moment.

www.fosterandpartners.com

[Anonymous]

Microstation is great for high end work in the pharmaceutical/power industry/transit/ DOD industry...it has better interface with PDS/PDMS and other engineering packages....if you can afford Microstation...by all means try it...it's real easy to use, fast, hard to corrupt, stable....so if your going to do work in that industry, great product...anything else, Archicad is your next best bet.....but that just me