Role of AutoCAD in today's job market.

[Anonymous]

Also cross posted to AutoDesk Inventor, Civil 3D and Architecture.



Subject line says it all.



I would like to find out if vanilla AutoCAD still has relevance in today's
job market. I'm a semi-retired Registered Civil Engineer and Licensed Land
Surveyor. Currently I am assisting at our local high school teaching,
AutoCAD 2009, Civil 3D 2009, Revit Architecture 2009, Inventor Pro 2009 and
Studio 3D Max, Mechanical 2009



With the rich vertical applications available (last five programs above) why
are we still teaching vanilla AutoCAD? Ten years ago (back in the world of
2D), I would readily hire an architectural draftsman and convert him into a
productive Civil Engr. draftsman within a week. I've had civil and surveyor
Cad operators switch to 2D architectural drafting with no problems. Lots of
mobility available.



Today, an employee well versed in Revit Architecture 2009, would be totally
useless running Civil 3D 2009. The reverse is also true. These vertical
programs are so specialized that the skills aren't directly transferable,
except the visualization and common sense skills.



So, is vanilla AutoCAD going to go the route of the drafting boards? Are we
wasting our time teaching it? Or, is it a good entry program that still has
some commercial benefits.



PLEASE, send my your thoughts and ideas. I would like to tailor our
education programs to best fit the needs of today's (and tomorrow's)
employer.



Thanks

Ivan Vegvary

[jmcintyre]

My 2 cents-

For the moment only half the drawings I produce are off the model (using Acad Architecture). The details are done with the vanilla portion of the program.
Also, some jobs (like renos) are just to fiddly to model, so I just use 2D. Drawing lines is a good fall-back, so I believe it'll be around for a while longer.

[GRandall]

The importance of a thorough knowledge of AutoCAD IMHO can't be emphasized enough. In ACA/ADT the underlying engine is ACAD. Commands are similar or identical and if you can't draw in 2D you sure can't draw in 3D. And to go even farther back if there is not some exposure to board drafting or the concepts that are inherent in pencil on paper the new crop of drafters will be useless. The sketch is initially the easiest way to get the abstract to reality. It is also easier to learn the concept of scale on paper, but I go off in a tangent.

The fundamentals of all the ACAD based programs can (should) be learned in vanilla ACAD. I'll list several areas where I believe a thorough understanding of ACAD is the best step on the ladder: Linework, linestyles, line type scales; Setting up dim styles without the confusion and aggravation of AEC dims; 3D solids, they have more flexibility than Mass Elements but can be converted to the latter; learn the keyboard shortcuts, I believe that can cut 50% or more the time to draw basic entities; learning good practice in setting up a sheet for plotting; text and annotations; block creation fundamentals. You are talking high school level after all.

I suppose you could get any of the vertical products but... for learning the basics you need a base ACAD profile shortcut. The most important thing you can teach your students is proper CAD practice, utilize the program and its features. After being out of the field for about 10 years I went back to a community college to get as much exposure to ACAD (release 14) as I could. I saw some fellow "students" exploding all dimensions because they couldn't manipulate the dimstyle to size text correctly and overiding dimensions to the measurement they were trying to get. And my pet peeve both there and in architect generated files I work with now the seeming inability to use filet (or chamfer) to clean up intersections and gaps of up to 2" at corners. THEY SHOULD BE FIRED.

And as the previous poster said details are 2D. You can make a model granular enough to show all of the elements needed but it takeS way too long. And from what I've read a lot of the CD details in Revit in practice are generated in ACAD (vanilla) and are imported into views in the Revit CD set. And don't forget that despite the marketing, most firms don't utilize ACA to it's full ability. It is used mostly as a cool 2D drafter that auto cleans up when you insert doors and windows.

Finally, though this may sound like heresy to some of the true believers, being exposed to other graphics platforms can open up the world of possibilities in design. If you want to expose them to a little 3D visualization go Sketchup. Easy, fast, affordable for education and can import DXF.

[dermot]

Revit is the flavour of the month from what I can see here in Aust. But I have now been exposed to it in a design practice, at college & at a 3 day basics course at a Revit vendors teaching facility, my overwhelming conclusion is that to detail well one needs to use Autocad.
The instructor at The Cad Group was really good but his bottom line was always "when it gets too fiddly to model i.e. wasting time" take it to autocad & detail there.
At college all the othere students (young draftsmen & women) were using Revit, but could not work out how I was getting good CD's & rendering without using Revit.
I was using my ACA. I asked one of them (who is now teaching Revit at that college) to show me some good examples of details done in pure Revit. They were woefull, but I could not tell him that cos it may have sounded like an old guy being the high & mighty know all.
Next thing I am working in a design office where there are three young' ish draftsmen using Revit, one can fly through using the program like a jet fighter pilot, when he thinks he is finished one then has to do two or three revisions & still the detailing is junk. Another is very good, but the detailing is non existent, really. The third guy, I cannot say as I did not see any of his detailing but I never saw anything in that office that would hit the construction site sheet table & get a good to even luke warm reception from the foremen or trades men.
This is where it counts at the other end of the process after one has won the contract with the great graphics & rendering. Guys on a building site with flat sheets turning out real reality not virtual reality.
That,s enough of me ranting.
Don't get me wrong I love modelling in ACA but it has to end up on a flat sheet.
Cheers Dermot

[KevinFielding]

There are some very valid points mentioned here.

Everyone is focusing on how Revit is the future, but the bottom line is (like you rightly point out), most buildings are built based on the CD or details. It doesn't matter how good the program is with regards to BIM. The details will certainly for the foreseeable future, be in 2D as 3D detailing takes so much longer.

The question from me is, seeing as you will have to be versed on AutoCAD for detailing, would it make more sense for ACA to be developed into a more BIM software (thereby only having to learn 1 1/2 packages) as opposed to new users having to learn 2 software's with Revit and Vanilla? I'm sure development costs would be too prohibitive.

I would also like to add that ACA has taken massive steps in recent years in actual 'in the trenches' usability. The recent 'edit in-place' wall clean ups for me are a revelation and save me so much time.

[JayMoore]

Ivan,



Great question and much of what is occurring in our national and international economies (not to mention marketing hype) can create large amounts of confusion for people. So it is wise of you to ask such questions.



You have already received some great input so I will not camp on their existing input but try to make it brief by pointing to very legitimate sample that prove the current and future importance of AutoCAD in the market.



There is no question that BIM will ultimately be the evolution of CAD. But the fact will always remain (at least I predict this to be so in my lifetime) that the man in the field will still build their structure from 2D documents. BIM technology will greatly enhance the quality, green/sustainability, and resource management of the structure (commercial or residential) but the 2D derivative of the model data will still be the base for the actual building cycle.



In my opinion, base AutoCAD knowledge will continue to be the "tail that wags the dog" yet you need to expand those "base" skills with BIM knowledge to ensure you are positioned for movement in either direct (esp. when looking for a job). In short, I believe AutoCAD is still the best base to have in your portfolio then BIM education above and beyond that is "icing on the cake".



Now all that is my opinion, "where is the beef", Jay? For the "beef" to validate AutoCAD's continued importance in our market I point to two compelling AutoCAD focused sites produced by Autodesk themselves:



AutoCAD Exchange:

http://autocad.autodesk.com/



Autodesk Student Community:

http://students6.autodesk.com/?nd=home



While the Student Community expands beyond "just" AutoCAD it is still a key focus of attention for the students and a recent Autodesk press release stated that students can now get FREE copies of AutoCAD (and some other select platforms).



If Autodesk themselves questioned the viability of their AutoCAD "flagship product" in the market why would they have spent the time and money to develop these two sites? They wouldn't. Hence, this along with the others input should give you plenty of reassurance that an AutoCAD based education is still the safest bet in the market.



Thanks,

Jay Moore

Ameri-CAD, Inc. - An ITW Company

Developers of VisionREZ

Authorized Autodesk Developer and ISV Reseller

[Anonymous]

I saw Eric Stover of Autodesk speak earlier this year, and he made a
comment that a lot of people just don't see AutoCAD as being as 'cool'
as they should, so they want to bring back that perception.

He also talked about how their product line may have been come 'too'
diversified in recent years (something I believe Carl Bass may have also
said at AU last year), and they want to step back, and put more of those
'vertical' features into AutoCAD (or, *purely my impression* have
AutoCAD as a base for most products and tack on the other special
features as additional modules, in which, if I am guessing correctly,
would mean that continued knowledge of AutoCAD will be vital for many
more years), as evidenced by the modeling capabilities of recent years
and the constraints of this year, etc.


It will be really interesting to see how things pan out.


Melanie Perry
***not all who wander are lost***
http://tech-tea.com
http://augi.com/autocad
http://mistressofthedorkness.blogspot.com

JayMoore wrote:
>
> Ivan,
>
>
>
> Great question and much of what is occurring in our national and
> international economies (not to mention marketing hype) can create large
> amounts of confusion for people. So it is wise of you to ask such questions.
>
>
>
> You have already received some great input so I will not camp on their
> existing input but try to make it brief by pointing to very legitimate
> sample that prove the current and future importance of AutoCAD in the
> market.
>
>
>
> There is no question that BIM will ultimately be the evolution of CAD.
> But the fact will always remain (at least I predict this to be so in my
> lifetime) that the man in the field will still build their structure
> from 2D documents. BIM technology will greatly enhance the quality,
> green/sustainability, and resource management of the structure
> (commercial or residential) but the 2D derivative of the model data will
> still be the base for the actual building cycle.
>
>
>
> In my opinion, base AutoCAD knowledge will continue to be the "tail that
> wags the dog" yet you need to expand those "base" skills with BIM
> knowledge to ensure you are positioned for movement in either direct
> (esp. when looking for a job). In short, I believe AutoCAD is still the
> best base to have in your portfolio then BIM education above and beyond
> that is "icing on the cake".
>
>
>
> Now all that is my opinion, "where is the beef", Jay? For the "beef" to
> validate AutoCAD's continued importance in our market I point to two
> compelling AutoCAD focused sites produced by Autodesk themselves:
>
>
>
> * AutoCAD Exchange:
>
> *http://autocad.autodesk.com/
>
>
>
> * Autodesk Student Community: *
>
> http://students6.autodesk.com/?nd=home
>
>
>
> While the Student Community expands beyond "just" AutoCAD it is still a
> key focus of attention for the students and a recent Autodesk press
> release stated that students can now get FREE copies of AutoCAD (and
> some other select platforms).
>
>
>
> If Autodesk themselves questioned the viability of their AutoCAD
> "flagship product" in the market why would they have spent the time and
> money to develop these two sites? They wouldn't. Hence, this along with
> the others input should give you plenty of reassurance that an AutoCAD
> based education is still the safest bet in the market.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jay Moore
>
> Ameri-CAD, Inc. - An ITW Company
>
>
>
> Developers of VisionREZ
>
>
>
> Authorized Autodesk Developer and ISV Reseller
>

[patrickg]

This is a very good question. My opinion on it, however, is that the program does not matter. It will never matter. I have used half a dozen programs over the last 10 years and it is pure fundamentals that is needed. The people I have seen fail always seem to be the people who don't have solid fundamentals.

You're teaching kids that have grown up constantly learning new programs and changing technology and those programs and technology will continue to change. Teach them to put together a set of drawings. That is what is important.

And if you are going to teach them the programs you have listed, then it is absolutely necessary to teach them the base programs so that they can have the knowledge needed to grow from. Edited by: patrickg@perlmanarchitects-az.com on Apr 23, 2009 11:54 AM

[mikeleinback]

Ivan:

That's a tough one.............I think the fact that the design & construction industries are in a transitional period, means that you have to keep a foot in both camps. I am 53-years old and own a very small architectural firm. Having moved to 3D design about 8 years ago (Arch. Desktop) and then to Revit for the past 2 years, I wouldn't even consider going back to Autocad and I certainly don't need to hire people with Autocad training/experience......it's too hard to UN-train them!! On the other hand, there are architectural firms all around me....firm 10 times my size....that swear by Autocad and wouldn't even consider "that BIM nonsense." I'm convinced that the tide will slowly (oh, so slowly) move to 3D or object-oriented design, but I suspect that that's still a ways off. In the meantime, you're trying to equip the next generation to succeed in the future...........but, first, they have to deal with the present.

So, that said..................at least for a while, I'm afraid that you must continue to teach both 2D drafting and 3D modeling. I don't see Acad as an "entry program" but maybe as foil to something like Revit. Remember when your high school math teacher spent 2 days showing you the "hard way" to do a problem, and then sprung the "easy way" on you in 15 minutes? I could see Autocad being used to train students in very basic drafting skills....line weights, readibility of drawings, basic drafting conventions, etc. that everyone who produces drawings should understand. Even though Revit generally gives us the "look" that we want for our drawings, occassionally we decide to alter something a bit so that it "reads better". An Acad class might also be a place where students are trained (okay, forced) to THINK in 3D since it's not incorporated into the drawings. I often find that that abilility is dying off as young designers become more and more dependent on 3D software. So, maybe it is that Acad becomes the tool for the "Intro to Drafting" class just as a leadholder was for the pre-Acad classes of yesteryear.

Best of luck.............

Mike L.

[JayMoore]

Ivan,

As a quick answer to your question, you can better understand the continued strength and importance of AutoCAD in the market by reviewing the following article:

http://aec.cadalyst.com/aec/Column:+1-2-3+Revit/BIM-and-AutoCAD-1-2-3-Revit-Tutorial/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/582219?contextCategoryId=6573

Following text taken from the article:
"The software program -- currently in its 23rd release -- is one of the most commonly used applications within the building industry, translating into an abundance of both AutoCAD-trained designers and AutoCAD-based designs. The native file format of AutoCAD (DWG) has become a popular means of sharing CAD data and there are said to be at least two billion drawings that exist in DWG format. With numbers like that, it’s not a surprise that even the most sophisticated BIM teams also use AutoCAD -- especially during the documentation process.

Summary
The combination of the Revit platform and AutoCAD represents a pragmatic, production-proven solution for design and documentation. The interoperability between the Revit platform and AutoCAD enables firms to take advantage of the abundance of AutoCAD-based data and AutoCAD-trained staff -- and still realize the benefits of BIM."

This should quickly point out that even Revit has Autodesk endorsement to need AutoCAD for select needs. And conversly, the power of AuotCAD Architecture is its AutoCAD foundation. Which means you don't have to export out to a different file format to complete your CD's, etc.

So yes AutoCAD does and will continue to play a HUGE role in the market for the foreseeable future.

Thanks
Jay