A Conversion Saga

[Anonymous]

I’ve been lurking here for the past year or so and have found it both quite helpful and discouraging (more on this later). So I thought I’d tell my conversion tale. Since 1994 I have run a single person architectural practice primarily doing industrial & commercial design/build projects. Eighteen months ago my best customer, a large general contractor, offered me a two year consulting contract to evaluate their design/build program, suggest improvements, and help implement them.

We have identified a number of problems with the “build” side of their program, but the “design” side issues might be of interest here. Early in the process the contractor was eager to investigate the potential of 3D CAD/BIM. For past few years at the various trade shows, conferences, and in all the magazines they had been hearing about this “new” software that was (or was going to) revolutionizing the design and construction industry. Within a few weeks of my start they had lined up a Web cast on Revit. The lure was three-fold.

• The marketing folks wanted the whippy 3D models and fly-throughs, hopefully overnight, to wow the clients into signing up.
• The estimators were intrigued by the potential of an automatic takeoff. If it was accurate, in their current estimating format, and instantly updatable at any stages of the project.
• And management, of course, wanted assured profits and more of them.

Even thought Revit was poorly presented it was clear by the end of the Web cast few of these expectations would be easily achieved. (while all of these claims were hinted at). Though it did seem the pretty pictures were doable. At least marketing would be happy. So after the Webcast I seriously investigated Microstation Triforma, Revit, & ArchiCad. Since I’m posting here my choice is obvious. Why I chose ArchiCad boils down to one issue. It runs on both PCs and Macs. As a longtime Mac and 2D Microstation user the move to any of the other programs would have required a complete software and hardware conversion for all of the design process. The conversion had to occur as quickly, because “implementation” meant actually doing the design on some design/build projects already in the works. The contractor is all PC based so if in the long run the design operation needed to be PC based that could happen with a little retraining. So 18 months ago I bought my first copy of ArchiCad 8.1, had three days of “training”, and dove into the first two small projects.

After a few days of title blocks and MaxATS template modifications I started the first preliminary. Two days later it became obvious that the three days of “training” were a waste. With absolutely no experience using the program before the training, three days was enough to skim almost everything but to learn how to do almost nothing. Was I asleep or what! After a half day trying to figure out how to enter the metes and bounds of a rectilinear site I bailed to Microstation and called my vendor. As luck would have it I needed some help last summer and he knew of a 4th year architecture student who was looking for work and was “trained” in ArchiCad. I hired him and voila less than a week later a full blown model with cars, trees, people and everything. Both the contractor and the client were wowed! With a little time and a few tips from him I slogged through a second preliminary with similar results. A few weeks latter we were released to do CD’s on both projects. Then the feces hit the fan! The “training” the student had was an orientation by the university followed by learning by doing in design studios where “model” primarily means “pretty pictures”. Even thought I had warned him, and he started from an accurate imported 2D plan, he had never learned that precision input is mandatory if the model is to be used to generate CD’s. Two weeks later the “pretty model” back to a state that was usable. Then we found out that neither of us had a clue how to use Plotmaker & ArchiCad together. And then, and then, and then when the contractor and owner were ready to fire us because we were over a month behind schedule we issued the nastiest sets of construction drawings I had ever been involved in. But they both had a pretty picture on the cover……….(to be continued)

[Karl Ottenstein]

Hi Dave,

I look forward to reading more ... and imagine others have similar stories to tell.

My experience as an expert user and trainer is this. Given the desire, the manual dexterity (motor skills ARE important), and the ability to absorb new concepts fast and furiously: the quality (and timing) of training is the number one factor leading to success.

Some trainers teach in a way that is an extended sales presentation - you get this 'wow' feeling of all that can be done, but walk away with no idea how to do it efficiently yourself.

Learning to use ArchiCAD is much more than learning to use each tool and how to model precisely (and precision is essential - woe on that student). It is a holistic process of learning how to use the software in the entire workflow, tricks for speed, workarounds for limitations, and much more.

Seminars such as http://www.hightechhighnature.com provide an excellent kind of group training IMHO. Next best thing to individual or customized small group training.

An investment in training is a time (and money) saving alternative to months (years?) of 'hard knocks' (trial by fire?) learning.

I feel your pain from the model that could not be used for documents. 😞

Regards,
Karl

[Anonymous]

Thanks Karl

How are things up in God's country. I spent my first 25 years in Montana. Eastern thru high school, Western later. Loved it, still do.

When things settle down to a dull roar, you're on my list. I've found your posts most informative. Mastering the calculate menu in a long term goal related to our design/build work.

Read the second half of the saga/rant below: (I wrote it prior to your response)

Dave

........Lest you think this is going to be just a negative rant it is not. Now after a year of using the program regularly I can say that I have never worked with a program that can get from talk to understandable preliminaries quicker or better. I use a 17” Powerbook and a projector for most presentations and early reviews. The clients have been universally blown away and truly understand the solutions much better when you rotate, slice, and dice it on screen in front of them. In fact it is almost too good, because by the end of schematic design it appears to them that for all practical purposes you’re DONE ! When we all know and the old song croons, “We’ve only just begun.”

I hired a young registered Architect (AutoCAD in retraining) this March, then the student when he graduated in June. During the last year we have designed and built two small commercial projects, just finish the CD’s on moderate sized ($6 mil-50,000 sf) project, and have done preliminaries on 12 other projects. While we are improving daily, IMHO of the completed projects: the two small projects took nearly twice as long and the larger project about 125% longer than if I had done them in Microstation 2D. But I think I can see some light at the end of the tunnel.

Now I’m sure I hear all the ArchiCad vendors, trainers, and gurus here muttering, “Well you should have read the manuals, checked the documentation, set up your templates, got your favorites done, got some training, called ME!” With the exception of the last I have done and am doing a little of all of them pretty much everyday.

Lest you think I have not done this before, I started on a Mac in 86 using MacDraw, then MacDraft for details on sticky-back for mylar overlay drafting, converted to VersaCAD when it came out, then traded it in (+$300) for Microstation, and later trained and converted a 20 person paper office to CAD on Macs and that software. IMHO none of those conversions were one tenth as difficult as this one is.

So all you out there reading the ArchCad PR that “architects say’ you’ll produce projects 30 to 40% faster, BEWARE!

1. How do they know? Did they do the same projects side by side on different software?
2. Was their production speed prior to conversion abysmal?
3. Did they get this kind of increase on their initial projects?
4. Was the setup and training time factored into both the duration and the time spent on those initial projects?

Do I believe after you have a couple of years on the program, all templates tuned to perfection, file and library management flawless, all standard details drawn or converted, and countless other minutia mastered, this kind of improvement might be possible? Absolutely!

Earlier I said Architalk is both “quite helpful and discouraging.” Helpful because it’s easily accessible and most of the problems that the new user encounters have already been covered here and with a little searching answered. It’s “discouraging” because you find that some of problems, like PM/ArchiCad relationship, frustrates even the veterans. And some of the potentials such as “real” building information modeling seems to be only one step above vaporware.

Ok I've vented, hopefully my future posts will be much briefer and problem oriented.

[TomWaltz]

Dave wrote:
So all you out there reading the ArchCad PR that “architects say’ you’ll produce projects 30 to 40% faster, BEWARE!

I have to say, that number is POSSIBLE, but not TYPICAL.

In our office, there is a huge split. Managers and architects who have really latched on an are willing to adapt are DUSTING other teams with twice as many people on them. Some of them have even gotten a handle on what I can do in GDL, and asking me at project startup to have certain parameteric objects for them (which are then reused on other jobs).

Staff who insist on "whiting out" model information, typing their schedules, working in plan only, drawing 3/4 of their section content in 2D, typing notes in Plotmaker, not using Find & Select (manually hunting), or just insist on doing drawings in the same order they did them in 10 years ago are taking forever both to get initial drawings and to make changes, then blow their budgets and blame the software. (despite extensive written standards and a training program most people would kill for).

Technically, you SHOULD be able to produce your project in any way you want. Unforunately, to really fly in Archicad, you have to figure out how Graphisoft wanted you to do it, and how far you can stray without slowing down.

It really took me a long time to even figure out the "fastest realistic" way to do a lot of tasks, and pass it all on to the group. After being on Archicad almost 3 years, we have made some serious progress, with a breed of power users emerging.... 2 of whom are younger (under 35) licensed architects that can outperform a "manager with 2 draftspeople" team.

While I felt it took a little longer than I would like to get the average user up to speed, our "errors and omissions" on drawings dropped like a rock. Suddenly the only people with incorrectly coordinated drawings were the ones faking them!

[gpowless]

Interesting learning curve.

I am a carpenter by trade and studied architecture as a secondary to my trade. I build in 3d so going to 3d architecture wasn't so painful for me. Back in the early 80's I took a couple of CAD courses using 3d Colour Vision system on a mainframe and it gave me an appreciation for the capability of 3D modeling.

When I started my practice, I too looked at Microstation, Archicad, Archectural Desktop, Softplan and even...yes....Chief Architect. I had resolved to buy the most technologically advanced CAD that I could afford. The lower end Ch.Arch. & Softplan had operations that I had to undo and defeat to get the software to do what I want. So they were out very early. Microstation on a Sun system was so expensive that I couldn't even afford the demonstrations. I started on AC6.0 and I haven't looked back.

When specialists build custom homes, it often isn't done any faster or any cheaper than building tract housing. That is because most the time any savings that might be realized anywhere in the project are reinvested in better quality items and in the end the custom home is often far superior to anything that a tract builder can produce.

Design is much the same thing. If we choose vanilla Autocad to work with we may get fast at the repetitious stuff but we bog way down in the complicated. We can fudge dimensions and details in the flat world but it is awful hard to cover up in the real world. Accuracy in design is becoming more and more important to building officials and clients and we become more and more liable for those tiny errors and ommisions that we should have caught in preparing the CDs.

With ArchiCad I can model, present, detail and prepare CDs all from one point and I can CHANGE them all quickly without endlessly having to return to page after page of details, reports and schedules to reflect even the most modest revision. It makes sense to focus on the 3d world in entirety (although how far to take the model is still open for debate). To be successful one must fully realize the potential of the 3d BIM and follow through - even though getting there initially takes more time.

In the end, boasting about producing faster documents is a possibility, but more importantly I find that my drawings are becoming so accurate that very few comments are returned by planning boards and building officials in reviewing them. Not having to make corrections and revisions IS a time savings....and the "wow" factor of the software rendering capability is an added bonus.

Buying Archicad can be compared to buying a cabinetmaker's saw with a sliding table. Although hand-saws and circular saws can cut the same material, the finishes never seem to come out with the same quality.

[Karl Ottenstein]

Dave wrote:
Thanks Karl

How are things up in God's country. I spent my first 25 years in Montana. Eastern thru high school, Western later. Loved it, still do.

Beautiful as always here. My wife spent most of her life in Montana, too - also from eastern (Billings - not true eastern 'the zone') thru HS and then Western (Bozo).

Now I’m sure I hear all the ArchiCad vendors, trainers, and gurus here muttering, “Well you should have read the manuals, checked the documentation, set up your templates, got your favorites done, got some training, called ME!”

Didn't want my post to sound like a "ME" ... but, rather 'someone'. 😉

The ever-talented Tom Waltz posts a major problem - as good as he may be at training and setting up standards in his large office... you can lead a horse to water, but can't make him drink!

Cheers,
Karl

[Rakela Raul]

very interesting reading!!

i have used archicad in a couple recent project and i have experienced the following and please expert advise if you wish:

i found ac to speed up the process of selling the project, preparing cd's without a shadow of the dought...but, only until the cd's are approved by the city.
i found that i wasted a lot time doing correction during the construction phase
(after a few months normally) , because of diff people in the team, or change of ac version or forgot workarounds or i dont know why.

so the next project, after the cd's are approved by city make a copy of the project and make it flat and possibly dwg; so anybody either in ac or autocad can tackle the project and make changes quickly, and going sheet by sheet if necessary...but without worrying about links, attachments, pictures, moved folders, ac versions, etc.

sorry if i went side ways but i had in for days

[Ignacio Azpiazu]

I think it is all about system setup. The learning period is long, painful, frustrating, very especially if you are on your own and must be self-sufficient so that you have to dominate every single step that will take you to the deliverable-- in a larger office you can start by learning say annotations and dimensioning and the syringe tool and start producing immediately, then go into modelling, then layers combinations and views, then page layout, etc.

But also I don't know of *a single person* that, having become a decent user of ArchiCAD, will want to go back to 2D CAD regardless of how amazingly proficient he is at Autocad or Microstation or hybrid VectorWorks or whatever. That must mean something.

[TomWaltz]

Ignacio wrote:
But also I don't know of *a single person* that, having become a decent user of ArchiCAD, will want to go back to 2D CAD regardless of how amazingly proficient he is at Autocad or Microstation or hybrid VectorWorks or whatever. That must mean something.

you know, that's kind of a funny point... even my most resistant staff members who really try not to be efficient like Archicad (except for one, who just refuses to learn any new job skill, and I think is in line for the guillotine.) Most common statement: They really love its 2D tools 😄

[Rakela Raul]

thx...i can see that it is not a common practice.