AutoCAD Civil 3D General

Reply
*wfb
Message 21 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-24-2005 11:23 AM in reply to: *wfb
Doug & Laurie:

I wholeheartedly agree with both of you. In my case all I have to do is
look in the mirror to find my staff. (I do have a field man that works part
time.) AND I will get the hang of this product, but as I have been harping
on for the last few weeks we need help from AutoDesk(or a "pay-to" source)
to provide some styles that we can readily use. Since I must use the
Imperial "version", I am somewhat jealous of Laurie's group that has seen
fit to set some of these up for the metric trade. I want to thank Daniel
Philbrick for submitting his profile styles, even though I have not been
able to try it out. I just came out from under the gun today, therefore I
can hopefully get back into some Civil 3D.

Bill
I have said it before, there WILL be a revolt with the smaller firms. I
know them.
Maybe AutoDesk only wants the "maxi-seats" offices.

"Doug Boys" wrote in message
news:4854305@discussion.autodesk.com...
I agree with Laurie on this one. The only way I can see that Civil 3D could
be introduced successfully would be to set up templates with standard
settings to suit the organisation BEFORE training staff in the design
procedures and expect that the design staff will never have to change the
settings.

The fact that the settings CAN be changed is necessary for Autodesk to
address the global market but it is not efficient for an organisation to
have to fiddle with these settings for itself. Regional customised
templates should be made available as part of the package.

From my point of view here in Brisbane Australia, Rad's metric templates
from Cadapps, adapted for Australian practice, look like being a godsend. I
would not attempt to introduce people here to Civil 3D without them.

Doug Boys
Cardno Brisbane Australia
Active Member
RustyBost
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎05-20-2005
Message 22 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-24-2005 01:47 PM in reply to: *wfb
Lotsa points here, lemme try and hit a few:

I have to put my support behind Laurie on this one. We're a medium sized municipality. Our CADD Admin had C3D installed on just 2 machines, and we've been able to get desc keys, styles, linetypes, templates, etc.. together. The rest of the design staff has been continuing their work on LDD, so no productivity loss there. Our only stumbling block is we had training 2 weeks ago, and still haven't completely rolled out C3D. I think aloft of the staff have forgotten much of the training.

As far as being deterred, feeling ripped off, I think if this format sticks around for a while, we'll get our moneys worth from the down time in the learning process. I like the idea of dynamic edits though, and am hoping for huge productivity improvements.

Pipes: I'm insulted as an Engineer that the folks at Autodesk act like slope and cover are the only design tools that matter. Until you can define min/max velocity, depth of flow, flow rate, the pipe routine stays at the bottom of my skill set. Its a fancy drafting tool, nothing more.

If I had to make a recommendation for a medium sized organization, I would send have 1 person trained, and get to work immediately on setting up styles.
Then have training brought to you, I think we paid $3k for 2 days for 12 people. While the training is going on, have C3D installed on the users machines.
Contributor
quiggle
Posts: 19
Registered: ‎05-05-2005
Message 23 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-24-2005 03:55 PM in reply to: *wfb
I am content to stay in the minority on the subject of training. My perspective is from the very small firm where there is little stratification of duties. Each of us, from the young PE-LS with a masters to the tech with 2 years of subdivision design experience, perform any duties necessary with the exception of storm sewer design. Often our PE is cleaning up drafting comments while the tech is in the middle of a sanitary sewer design. Who would be the Civil 3D master in this situation? Certainly not the engineers who are frequently at meetings or doing field work and apart from having zero teaching skills, I have no desire to be the one to keep all for seats running. It is enough chore keeping my own machine going and remain productive amongst the crashes. All smallness aside, I know that I would not appreciate or be content being one of those relegated to duties no more robust than entering someone else's design data. My recent training was the first formal instruction I've received since the 6 hour introductory session when I broke in with r10 in 1990. Thanks to full access to experiment and learn the program, I was able to advance rapidly in duties and responsibilities. I would have had little chance for such development had I started under the restricted access to the program as I am seeing suggested within this thread.
I like the concept of a regional collection of templates being available, but I would view these as a starting point rather than a set standard. The only real constant within the review process is its changing nature. Design manuals change on a yearly and sometimes monthly basis. If all I know how to do is load up a template when starting a project and the requirements have changed, what do I tell the client when the plans are returned with only the comment "revise to current standards and resubmit' because someone now wants to see 10 year hgl data displayed in the profile or both design and full values for velocities and flow? I HAVE to know how to set up the template in order to revise it and don't have the luxury of time to wait for someone else to do it for me.
Member
rrfarwell
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎01-18-2005
Message 24 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-24-2005 06:15 PM in reply to: *wfb
I'm a surveyor, and I'm finding Civil 3D to be a perfect site map product. The model, and its response to my what ifs, the simple parcel labeling, and even the symbol capacity, with its intelligent salability through different sized view ports is a delight to use. While I'm sensitive to the problems complex problems might provide, surveyors (base map providers) should not be afraid of this product.
*TomD
Message 25 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-25-2005 06:21 AM in reply to: *wfb
......sort of explains the reason some consultants/resellers are loving this
product.

wrote in message news:4855345@discussion.autodesk.com...
I am content to stay in the minority on the subject of training. My
perspective is from the very small firm where there is little stratification
of duties. Each of us, from the young PE-LS with a masters to the tech with
2 years of subdivision design experience, perform any duties necessary with
the exception of storm sewer design. Often our PE is cleaning up drafting
comments while the tech is in the middle of a sanitary sewer design. Who
would be the Civil 3D master in this situation? Certainly not the engineers
who are frequently at meetings or doing field work and apart from having
zero teaching skills, I have no desire to be the one to keep all for seats
running. It is enough chore keeping my own machine going and remain
productive amongst the crashes. All smallness aside, I know that I would
not appreciate or be content being one of those relegated to duties no more
robust than entering someone else's design data. My recent training was the
first formal instruction I've received since the 6 hour introductory session
when I broke in with r10 in 1990. Thanks to full access to experiment and
learn the program, I was able to advance rapidly in duties and
responsibilities. I would have had little chance for such development had I
started under the restricted access to the program as I am seeing suggested
within this thread.
I like the concept of a regional collection of templates being available,
but I would view these as a starting point rather than a set standard. The
only real constant within the review process is its changing nature. Design
manuals change on a yearly and sometimes monthly basis. If all I know how
to do is load up a template when starting a project and the requirements
have changed, what do I tell the client when the plans are returned with
only the comment "revise to current standards and resubmit' because someone
now wants to see 10 year hgl data displayed in the profile or both design
and full values for velocities and flow? I HAVE to know how to set up the
template in order to revise it and don't have the luxury of time to wait for
someone else to do it for me.
Distinguished Contributor
billneu
Posts: 280
Registered: ‎06-04-2003
Message 26 of 26 (49 Views)

Re: Where are we now?

05-25-2005 08:42 AM in reply to: *wfb
Going from LDD to Civil 3D is like going from DOS to Windows........

There's going to be some growing pains but at least we are now getting closer to what we have been asking for over the last 6 or 7 years. Glad to see Autodesk finally helping out the Civil Engineers with some modern tools. Remember Civil 3D is only a tool that just happens to run in AutoCAD!

Ask yourself how many typewriters are there still being used in the world today?


Bill Neuhauser P.E.

"The only thing constant in the world is change"

You are not logged in.

Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register

Announcements
Are you familiar with the Autodesk Expert Elites? The Expert Elite program is made up of customers that help other customers by sharing knowledge and exemplifying an engaging style of collaboration. To learn more, please visit our Expert Elite website.

Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions to get help installing your software.

Ask the Community


Civil 3D Exchange Apps

Created by the community for the community, Autodesk Exchange Apps for AutoCAD Civil 3D helps you achieve greater speed, accuracy, and automation from concept to manufacturing.

Connect with Civil 3D

Twitter

Facebook

Blogs