Switch from AutoCad 14 to Archicad

[Anonymous]

Our Atlanta office is in serious need of software upgrade from AutoCad 14. We have looked at several: AutoCad 2006, Revit, Archicad. We are impressed with Archicad so far. Have a few questions for experienced users:

1.) We have many project types in our office. Some are so small (ie, single family porch renovation) they don't need full 3d modelling capabilities.
a.) Can you draft in 2d in Archicad for a small job like this?
b.) That said, not every drawing in a set needs full 3d. For example, can you do a general model of the building, cut a section, and draw 2d detail over the section?
c.) Is that the wrong approach for Archicad? Would we have to think of detail drawings in a different way? Is it really meant to model every little detail in full?

2.) Full 3d modelling capability is a nice plus. But, what we are really after is software that is reasonably easy to learn, use, and can produce quality construction documents. How satisfied are users with Archicad's ability to produce quality cd's ranging from a single family renovation to a multi-story office building? Architectural Desktop promised a lot, but delivered practically nothing. We barely use its features at all, and we're drafting in 2d anyway.

3.) How long should we expect to be on the learnign curve? Could we draft in 2d if we get in a crunch?

[TomWaltz]

Advanced ArchiCAD Techniques: Enhancing Productivity : $345

I've always taken exception to Archicad training divisions like "beginner" "intermediate" and "advanced." It's just not that kind of program. You pretty much have all the tools staring you in the face, you just have to know enough not to use your nice new nail gun as a hammer.

I think you could break it down into "design" "production" and "administration/programming" topics. Even that might be iffy, but at least divides up the tasks by who might be using the software, and how they might be using it.

It's true, you can figure out most features if you try, but most productivity studies show that it will take between 4 and 6 times as long for a person to figure a software feature out on your own as it would to be trained on it.

From a billable rate standpoint, what's cheaper:

• $375 for 1 day of training + 1 day of billable time lost while in training

OR

• 4 to 6 days of time lost to learn the same material independently

At a low-end cost of $70 an hour, that's $375+560 = $935 versus $70*3*8=$1680 for a single person.

Also consider that group training is sometimes available, and you may pay that $375 a day for up to 5 people to attend, which makes it even more economical.

Obviously, if billable rates are higher, that difference becomes even more pronounced.

I do believe most people need some combination of formal training and "sit-and-stew" time, where the learning really happens. More often than not, the training shows them what can be done, and how it should look when it's all finished. Once they start working on their own with minimal supervision, they start to internalize their training, stumble a little, and far outperform the people who just learned on their own.

The main reason I see is that they may not know the details of every tool available, but they do know what tools are available to them, and have seen them in action. That's enough to spur them to ask the question of "how can I do this quickly" instead of "how do I do this at all?"

[James Murray]

I've noticed that the people who most strongly advocate training aren't talking about their personal skills, but about the productivity of the people they are responsible for.

Steve J is admirably outgoing about his questions, and if that's your inclination it can work. If it's not, and you're on your own, then you-don't-know-what-you-don't-know.

Tom has an excellent point about 'levels', and it's actually related to what Steve is saying about finding your own way. There's different ways to be proficient, and not everyone needs all of them.

I tell trainees that AC isn't hard, but it's complex. Each little piece is easy, but there's a bazillion pieces. Then there's the random inconsistencies among the pieces. To get the big picture you need to sit with someone who has it.

TomWaltz wrote:
[Don't] use your nice new nail gun as a hammer.

I'm pinning that up.

[Steve Jepson]

Now thats what i would call hitting the nail on the head. Tom and James have said it exactly right.

[__archiben]

TomWaltz wrote:
I've always taken exception to Archicad training divisions like "beginner" "intermediate" and "advanced." It's just not that kind of program. You pretty much have all the tools staring you in the face, you just have to know enough not to use your nice new nail gun as a hammer.

sure - me too. but i think you would possibly find that when approached, most training consultants can tailor their training to suit the needs of the office . . . cost always depends on numbers of course, and having to know 'what you don't know' helps brief them. but . . .

my 2p/¢
~/archiben

[Anonymous]

Similar comment here. My office is kind of getting sick of Architectural Desktop 2005 (and since I'm the only CAD guy, that means I'm getting sick of it) and my boss has heard nothing but positive stuff about ArchiCad. He was sitting next to an architect from California on a plane a few weeks back, and this architect had just switched over from ADT to AC, and spent four hours raving to my boss. My boss then spent four hours raving to me, and I spent four hours on the AC website learning everything I could, and... if it's all true, it's a complete dream come true for me.

I ordered a free demo CD, and I was just wondering if anyone here has any particular advice that might not be covered in the documentation for someone who has spent a lifetime working with AutoCAD, all the way from version 12 up through ADT 2005, as well as VizRender and 3dsMAX.

Thanks!

[TomWaltz]

Topper wrote:
Similar comment here. My office is kind of getting sick of Architectural Desktop 2005 (and since I'm the only CAD guy, that means I'm getting sick of it) and my boss has heard nothing but positive stuff about ArchiCad. He was sitting next to an architect from California on a plane a few weeks back, and this architect had just switched over from ADT to AC, and spent four hours raving to my boss. My boss then spent four hours raving to me, and I spent four hours on the AC website learning everything I could, and... if it's all true, it's a complete dream come true for me.

I ordered a free demo CD, and I was just wondering if anyone here has any particular advice that might not be covered in the documentation for someone who has spent a lifetime working with AutoCAD, all the way from version 12 up through ADT 2005, as well as VizRender and 3dsMAX.

Thanks!

Be open to change. Almost every task in Archicad is at least a little different from AutoCAD. There is a less linear progression of work, that takes a little getting used to.

Yes, Archicad is nice. No, it's not a dream come true.

I just had a new employee start here about 6 months ago, coming from an ADT background, and he loved Archicad. But he was not the poor sod who had to set up the office production standards, like you will be!

[Achille Pavlidis]

TomWaltz wrote:
I just had a new employee start here about 6 months ago, coming from an ADT background, and he loved Archicad. But he was not the poor sod who had to set up the office production standards, like you will be!

just a question for those with experience in archicad organization... aproximately how much time is needed to set the office production standards starting practically from scrath???

[TomWaltz]

Achille wrote:

TomWaltz wrote:
I just had a new employee start here about 6 months ago, coming from an ADT background, and he loved Archicad. But he was not the poor sod who had to set up the office production standards, like you will be!

just a question for those with experience in archicad organization... aproximately how much time is needed to set the office production standards starting practically from scrath???

It depends on how you do it. You could purchase a template system online for about $100. These give you a soilid starting point that you can then customize to your own tastes.

You could also hire a consultant to do so, where the cost would depend on exactly what you needed.

In my case, the company had very specific desires for how the templates would look and act. Our current templates have evolved over the two and a half years since we switched to Archicad. Right now, I think they work extremely well. But that was not always the case.

It took me about two weeks to make my first ones from scratch, armed with the Archicad Step-by-Step manual learning the basics of the program and the Archicad Project Framework to explain how it all ties together. I made tons of mistakes, mostly due to management wanting to start the project much earlier than originally proposed, and my inability to learn and strategize a new software in two weeks.

In hindsight, I wish I had bought a pre-made template, and spent a little more time digging through the AC Library to make sure our standards complied with the pens and linetypes used. I REALLY wish I had understood project attributes and index numbers. It would have saved me a good bit of grief later on!