AutoCAD Civil 3D

[#1]

Hi Everyone

I know we've had this discussion in bits and pieces over the years.

I am collecting information about what finally made you/your company make the switch from Land Desktop to Civil 3D.

What finally convince you (or helped you convince the boss) to make the change?

If you aren't fully switched to Civil 3D, what holds you back?

Is it about specific features? Is it about value? What tools make your life easier? What about the big picture- billable hours, client requests, critical mass on knowledge and learning?

Thanks!

Dana

[#2]

Autodesk stopped supporting LDD. 

[#3]

Surfaces and profiles that automatically rebuild had to be the biggest benefit I saw.  Cuts drafting time by big chunks when you don't have to re-create profiles and contours with every revision.  Then I discovered pipes and the labeling features, which cut drafting time in half again (after the learning curve).  With C3D, I could create a site plan or development plans in about half the time, and much more of that time was spent on design work rather than drafting, which created a better finished product. Granted, it took about 12 months to get comfortable with the software, and to create a solid template, but in hindsight it was well worth it.

[#4]

Autodesk stopped supporting LDD.   I use so little of what Civil3D does that it was/is not worth it to me.  Don't know why they worried so much about it because they don't worry about updates and such.

David

[#5]

When I first worked in the office I asked questions about how to use LDD. Based on the responses it became clear the office did not know how to fully use LDD, despite the request to know how to use LDD in their employment ad. Rather then spend time on a program that was going a way I lobbied to get Civil 3D installed to learn on. Luckily I was able to get Civil 3D installed and was able to use it on projects in conjunction with LDD. This didn't seem to be a problem since they were mostly using LDD as AutoCAD anyways and an XREF shows up the same in both programs. Once others started using the program, Civil 3D starts to make the person learn Civil 3D. LDD I think one could use the product as an expensive version of AutoCAD without fully understanding how to use the features of the product.

Christopher

[#6]

We were on subscription. 2007 got dropped on my desk for analysis and review.

What did I report back? 

• Surfaces that dynamically build, and are so easy to edit and mod
• Profile sheets that are plot ready as soon as the improvements are added
• dynamic alignments and profiles
• drag and drop sub-assemblies
• corridor modeling without a degree in computer science
• point management off the chart
• transparent commands
• gradings that were super-responsive and customizable

I could probably go on and on, but I'll let someone else talk....

[#7]

What finally convince you (or helped you convince the boss) to make the change?

I could get the job done faster with fewer errors than with Land Desktop.

It's more fun than LDT.

The fact that LDT became unsupported had no effect on our decision to move.

You didn't ask, but I thought I'd throw this in there.  What were the chalenges?

The learning curve.

Having to create multiple DWT files for each drafting standard we needed to work with.

Early bugs and missing functionality (we started with the 2005 version).

Is it about specific features? Is it about value? What tools make your life easier? What about the big picture- billable hours, client requests, critical mass on knowledge and learning?

The tools we got the most benefit from were:

Assembly creation (far easier than templates in LDT)

Corridor modeling - easy surface creation, targetting is very straightforward, way easier than LDT

Pipes

Dynamic cross sections. (one standard we needed to follow made us move section views around all over the place.  With LDT this was very time consuming when there was a change.

[#8]

We switched, basically because we had to.

C3D's 2 best features, I think, are:

1. It's dynamic nature.  The automatic updating of profiles is great, with plan and profile surfaces, piping & structures, etc. linked together.

2. It's compatibilty with Paperspace.  No matter how your profile is run, or even if you have to "pull off" a few stations due to graphic interferences, and you get a callout arrow, Paperspace makes everything readable.  LDD behaved as if there was no such thing as Paperspace.

Having said that, I miss the whole PROJECT concept of LDD.  I can't understand why it was abandoned.  I would have multiple surfaces in my Project, and be able to take a volume from any of them with opening up (ie: Existing Grading), or even viewing it.  All surfaces were simply there.   How Data Links is better escapes me.

Mick

[#9]

I used a book (you may know it) "Introduction to C3D 2009" when partisipating in the beta release of C3D 2010.
I picked it up really quick, so quick I was able to present a class at AU09 with less than 12mth in the software..
cheers.

[#10]

Given that we switched to C3D 2007 almost five years ago now, it must've been masochism... 

These days, when I ask most people why they're still using LDD, I get a lot of responses that were true back then, but are no longer true as of C3D 2009 or 2010.  So much of the resistance I see now is from people who tried those early versions of C3D (or knew someone who did), and those early bad impressions are still sticking.  The product was rushed to market, and that created a bad stigma that is still difficult to overcome.

Then there's all the talk about how you need to hire training to move to C3D, and for a lot of people, that simply confirms the bad impressions and lingering doubts I just mentioned.  Those doubts get confirmed when people hit that initial learning curve.  Doubts get doubly-confirmed when people learn what a pain it is to setup and maintain Styles, mostly due to the poor design and UI.  They get triply-confirmed amongst anyone who needs to maintain multiple templates, because they must do work to different standards for different clients.  They get quadrupelly-confirmed the first time someone needs to edit the base Alignment of an 80% complete corridor design, or for LDD+Map experts who discover half their toolset is now either crippled or useless due to C3D-Map incompatibility, or for any of a number of similar issues.

However, I've also noticed that for most people who manage to make it through the initial trials and tribulations of learning and configuring C3D, it gets difficult to use other software.  And it becomes inconceivable to use LDD.  C3D is vastly superior in too many ways.