ArchiCAD is such a pain after AutoCAD!

[Anonymous]

I have only been using ArchiCAD for a few months after using AUtoCAd for ten years and so far I am finding it far worse than AutoCAD, I have to say.

Why anyone would actually choose to use this program over AutoCAD is beyond me especially as drawing 3d architecture is just plain ridiculous IMO!!

I mean does anyone here actually draw architecture in 3d? Because I find the 3d library so limiting in terms of my design wishes. What do I do if I want a certain glass staircase or somethign else that isnt in the library? Surely not design a new 3d model of it!?

And how can you draw a site using different levels, manholes, car spaces, drives etc all at different levels in 3d?

This whole fascination with 3d in architectrure really loses me - I just dont see the point in it and it definitely limits your design ability to waht is in the software.

Give me AutoCAD anytime!!

Anyone with any argument for using it? Please only respond if you are someone who isnt just doing houses or venacular buildings but 'proper' architecture!

Nats

[Anonymous]

Dwight wrote:
Observation: Good architects don't get stuck drafting for their careers.

Don't tell me.....(place tongue firmly in cheek)..... they write books about CAD programmes and how to get around their shortfalls

[Rod Jurich]

Nats,
This gem was sent to me by my son.

http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/heinz/

Please take time to read/absorb the possibilites.

Enjoy! ':)' ':roll:'

[Anonymous]

hmm..I really can`t understand what U boys are talking about.

I`ve been using PC for over ten years, and now I´ve switch to Mac.

I feel like I`m learning to walk again. But U have to go trough that before U are able to run!

I`m just a student starting on my 4`th year.

And all ready, this summer, I´ve been taking over to projects (from some old architects that don`t use 3D program),
just because I draw a 3D of the building, so the owner could see what it would look like when it´s finish.

Here in Norway, if you look at the adds for new architects, most of them are looking for ArchiCAD users.

At my school there are only 2-3 AutoCAD users, and about 55 ArchiCAD users.

Me myself have been using AC for about 6 month, and I´ve been taking the 1 course (3 days), so now I can do whatever I want, making all things.

But, as all things here in life, U just can`t say thing is bad because U don´t get the hang of it..

Thing takes time. And U have to make time, or else U will never go further on.

[Anonymous]

I’ve only just come across this thread and have to offer Nats some support. Like you, I came to Archicad 4 1/2 years ago after over 10 years experience with Autocad, and of course the changeover was very painful process. Our office is equipped with Macs (another painful learning curve), and so uses Archicad exclusively.

But I still am firmly of the opinion that Autocad is a more efficient base for producing working drawings, if only because that’s what the rest of the industry in the UK is using. We routinely produce schematic layouts in 3D, and Archicad is superb at doing this. Archicad is also faster for drawing walls, windows and doors at the schematic stage, even if you don’t need a 3D image.

But when the project goes to construction, 3D is abandoned. Elevations, even if generated from the model, are developed in 2D. Sections, details etc, are all produced as line drawings in 2D. Whilst there may be clear benefit to be obtained from maintaining the link between plans and elevations, e.g. if altering a window – the alteration is automatically reflected in both views - we have never achieved this in practice. We may yet. Incidentally, the office I worked in previously always converted projects to Autocad at the construction stage.

For 2D drawing, Archicad (in my opinion!) is still nowhere near so quick and easy as Autocad although there are significant improvements in Release 10, such as improved element selection. Lines and arcs are treated as different elements so you have to change their attributes separately, polylines are intractable, and I can never get used to Archicad’s equivalent of the offset command. But the real pain is when wall junctions don’t behave the way you need them to, and you end up exploding the wall so that you ‘fix’ it with lines, and then the wall next to it, and so on. In Archicad, we always draw the outer leaf of the construction separately from the inner leaf, because this is the only way we’ve ever been able to get the various junctions to work, but this in turn gives problems with door and window openings, because the ‘empty’ opening on the inner leaf doesn’t allow automatic jamb details - cavity closers have to be drawn in separately. Editing opening widths can also be a nuisance (as you can’t stretch the window/door component with a marquee), and stretching is always less easy than in Autocad because you can’t deselect the items you don’t want to stretch. Using Macs you can only have one session open at a time, so it’s a nightmare if you want to copy and paste part of another drawing, and modules (blocks) can’t be edited without exiting the drawing you’re working in and loading up the module separately. When a consultant asks you to email a drawing, I usually find I didn’t remember to ‘publish’ a .DWG version last time I plotted the drawing; so I know it’s going to take me half an hour to go back and do this, rather than just attach the drawing files. And you’re so right about the lack of ‘by layer’ functions for colours and linetypes: you have to be really disciplined if you’re going to maintain layers correctly. Also beware of the disappearing dimensions problem – Archicad doesn’t insert a marker (a colleague places hotspots at every dimension point first)

If you’re using Release 10, you should be thankful that you don’t have to wrestle with Plotmaker into the bargain, but even now you have to wait while views ‘update’? Why can’t it be instant as with Paperspace?

I can’t tell you what a relief it is to find someone on this site who shares my view.

- Keith

[andrewzarb]

Keith wrote:
I can’t tell you what a relief it is to find someone on this site who shares my view.

It's good to know we are not alone but I'm not sure you're getting the most out of ArchiCAD and if so then the Autocad comparisons may be a liitle biased.

Keith wrote:
I still am firmly of the opinion that Autocad is a more efficient base for producing working drawings, if only because that’s what the rest of the industry in the UK is using.

Autocad more efficient because that’s what the industry is using?
It might be more efficient, but perhaps not for that reason.

Keith wrote:
But when the project goes to construction, 3D is abandoned. Elevations, even if generated from the model, are developed in 2D. Sections, details etc, are all produced as line drawings in 2D.

Why? I do use lines on my elevations and I do have to sometimes hide some blemishes with an empty fill. At the moment I'm in the process of completing some tender drawings for 25 appartments on a steep site, not a simple project, and all my Sections and Elevations are still linked and will be even when the project's files are archived.

Keith wrote:
For 2D drawing, Archicad (in my opinion!) is still nowhere near so quick and easy as Autocad

I can't comment, I've only ever used Autocad to view other contractor's drawings. I tried drawing an arc with it today and I couldn't even do that, I found it very user unfrendly and couner intuitive. I think I'll go find an Autocad forum and tell them that.

Keith wrote:
you end up exploding the wall so that you ‘fix’ it with lines

Well if it comes to that then I'm afraid you really aren't getting the most out af ArchiCAD. There's usually a work-around, what about using a polygonal wall at the junction. For example you have three walls joining at one point and that point doesn't look right, stretch the walls back a little and draw the junction with a polygonal wall. It should look right in 2D and 3D.

Keith wrote:
Also beware of the disappearing dimensions problem – Archicad doesn’t insert a marker (a colleague places hotspots at every dimension point first)

Huh? Let me think... Ah, no, I don't get it...Huh? Are you trying to use ArchiCAD like Autocad, because I was trying to use Photoshop like Koalapaint (a Commodore64 program) and it just didn't behave the way I expected it to.

Keith wrote:
I can’t tell you what a relief it is to find someone on this site who shares my view.

I'd be more relieved if I knew I was getting the most out of the software I have to use.

[Anonymous]

I cant believe this topic is still going.

Anyway I can see the points from both perspectives.

I dont have half the experience of using Archicad that everyone here has and yet can tell that you need to employ some quite nifty 'workarounds' to translate outline plans into a set of construction drawings. And past tender stage I cannot really see the point in keeping a 3d model going. Also the lack of some of AutoCADs even basic tools like offset (which I used for absolutely everything!) is a major pain when drawing in ArchCAD in 2d.

But yes I can plainly see that ArchiCAD is capable of producing some lovely perspectives, could be very useful for producing automatic scheduling etc, and is very good for all design matters in terms of really being able to see the 'space'. And just using ArchiCAD is far more pleasant than using AutoCAD (although I may well alter this view once I get onto proper 3d models and trying to produce accurate construction info from them)

I would be really interested to hear, as was mentioned below about using polygon tools to get around dodgy wall junctions, how the experienced architects here actually produce their constructional info from their 3d ArchiCAD models - is it easy or is it an absolute nightmare that requires major workarounds to get it looking correct?

Do you tend to try to keep everything 3d after tender or drop that and move to 2d only? Is it even possible to create a fully detailed 3d model with all of the construction info on the model in 3d? I cant imagine that someone would actually create things like rainscreen cladding details in 3d but as I am new here I could be completely wrong. I know that steel studwork, insulation and boarding could probably be created using the wall, roof and slab tools but does anyone actually do this in a commerical environment (ie not meaning students - who have loads of time to waste on such things!) ?

[Anonymous]

When drawing 2D details, I use the wall tool a lot as quick way of getting a filled element like plasterboard, or a leaf of blockwork. If you do this with a solid fill, it's is a very useful way of getting a thick line, e.g. for thin cladding, metal angles etc.. The height is irrelevant, of course.

There's a library part which gives you quilt insulation at any length or thickness. (It's called 'Insulfib' , and it's to be found under 'Signs' (don't know why?) under 2D elements)

Strange thing is, if you try to use the 'Detail' window, 3D elements like walls disappear - which makes it less than useful!

Thanks for tip on Polygonal walls, Andrewzarb, but I think the problem's bigger than that. I'll try and send you a screen shot at some point.

KEITH

[Laura Yanoviak]

Keith wrote:
Lines and arcs are treated as different elements so you have to change their attributes separately

No you don't -- try the "Edit Selection Set Dialog", where you can change the layer and/or pen of a number of different elements in a single instance. There's also "Uniform Settings for Line Tools" for mimicking AutoCAD behavior when drawing in 2D.

Keith wrote:
I usually find I didn’t remember to ‘publish’ a .DWG version last time I plotted the drawing; so I know it’s going to take me half an hour to go back and do this

That's why you should have an "Export to ACAD" publishing set as part of your template -- takes me, literally, 5 seconds.

I used AutoCAD for 16 years, and although learning something new is always a challenge, I believe ArchiCAD to be a far superior tool -- in both 3D and 2D. It sounds like you are trying to use ArchiCAD with an AutoCAD mindset (exploding walls?!?!?!), which is non-productive -- they are different programs, and you must adapt to be successful. I cringe everytime I have to go back and do something in AutoCAD -- now that's PAINFUL.

[Scott Bulmer]

Keith Jaw wrote:

When drawing 2D details, I use the wall tool a lot .....Strange thing is, if you try to use the 'Detail' window, 3D elements like walls disappear - which makes it less than useful!

A reasonable way to layout some details is to use the wall tool in plan view (on a story). Then explode, cut/paste into the detail window where it can be annotated, dimensioned & linked to reference marks. IMO, detail organization within AC is handled pretty well.

[Anonymous]

It might be time to give this thread a rest. Keith...If you have been using ArchiCAD for 4-1/2 years and you still don't get it, I suggest it is because you expect it to work like AutoCAD. If Autodesk believed that they could simply wait out this "3-d fad", they wouldn't have introduced Revit!

Even the maker of AutoCAD sees that 2-d flat-cad is on life-support.

Nats, you have shown some evolution since this thread began. I would encourage you to put aside whatever frustration you have in being forced to give up your AutoCAD guru status and learn BIM no matter what flavor (ArchiCAD or Revit) or else you will surely become irrelevant and obsolete.

Now as far as I'm concerned I could care less if you choose to hang on to your flat-cad world. One less architect for me to compete with in the global economy. This transition is owner-client driven not profession driven.

All this discussion about "producing construction drawings" tells me that you are still looking at drafting as a separate discreet function. It isn't. It is a by-product of the modeling process. Once you grasp this concept and think about enhancing the drawing the model is producing, you will have made a big jump in understanding.

By the way, I am a 15 year veteran of AutoCAD. I will never go back to drafting when I can build instead. The 2-d tools that ArchiCAD has a very superior to AutoCAD tools.

It comes down to Darwin-Adapt or die....or Intelligent design-Don't confuse me with facts...I'm staying with 2-d.

Gary Bley