AutoCAD Architecture Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s AutoCAD Architecture Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular AutoCAD Architecture topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

ADA's future!!!

29 REPLIES 29
Reply
Message 1 of 30
wenyanwei
1230 Views, 29 Replies

ADA's future!!!

Hei

I'm an ADA user, I have worked with ADA for some years. Lately we got a project and the client requires BIM solution. We are a small company normly work with project no more than 20 000m2 and the construction engineers arround the area are using Autocad.

My question is if Autodesk going to replace ADA to Revit in the future? Why ADA havn't got BIM platform?
I belive that most of us in the Discussion Groups are professional cad user which meas we have to work and produce driwings. We are not learning a programme for fun. We spend many years to build up our experience but soon we can not be sure the coming future.

Is there any one has the same thought?
29 REPLIES 29
Message 21 of 30
dtdesign
in reply to: wenyanwei

I agree with 'jmcintyre' - I find the detail component manager in ACA better than the method of bringing detail component families into Revit. It is much easier to click a ribbon button and have the component manager open within the software verses having to plow through several outside drawings to find one drawing for cut objects, another for plan objects, etc.

I also like the control of the text and multileaders better in ACA.

The one major gripe I have with Revit's detailing is that when I bring in plywood and insert it on an angle (for a roof detail on a residential project), the hatch does not follow the angle of the sheathing component - it stays orthogonal - and that is a dangerous thing for a detail because it is confusing for the contractor and makes the drawings appear amateurish. if anyone knows a solution to that issue - please let me know.
Message 22 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

On Sat, 1 May 2010 18:12:45 -0700, jmcintyre <> wrote:

>Matt,
>Did you actually read my post? I didn't say acad/ACA was better, I said I personally have 20 years experience with it which is why I'm staying with ACA for the moment. I also said other programs can do this, but why would I want to change.

Of course I read your post. My comment was purely to say that, while I agree
that you can be immensely efficient at detailing in ACA, you have at least the
same level of efficiency with Revit. And partly to dispel the notion that Revit
cannot detail, which seems to be a recurring theme.

>It's interesting to note you train people to 'bring in acad details and copy the linework into revit', rather than drawing them in revit in the first place. This is not a very good arguement for saying revit can detail better than acad.

Of course, drawing details from scratch is easy. And by leveraging the model
graphics (as you would in ACA) you often have a huge running start. But that's
not the point. Most people I train are coming into Revit from AutoCAD or ACA.
They have bazillions of standard details they want to reuse in Revit, but
redrawing them from scratch would be stupid.

Matt
matt@stachoni.com
Message 23 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

On Sun, 2 May 2010 03:28:22 -0700, dtdesign@verizon.net <> wrote:

>I agree with 'jmcintyre' - I find the detail component manager in ACA better than the method of bringing detail component families into Revit. It is much easier to click a ribbon button and have the component manager open within the software verses having to plow through several outside drawings to find one drawing for cut objects, another for plan objects, etc.

I will concede the point - using the Properties palette to change it from
section to elevation is convenient. However, I do prefer the concept that OOTB
detail components are easily copied/modified for company standards instead of
being locked up into "recipes" which are difficult to edit.

>I also like the control of the text and multileaders better in ACA.

Multileaders in Revit are drop-dead simple. Select the text, and hit the add
leader (left or right) button. Leader alignment was by far my biggest beef with
Revit 2010 was . However, this was one of the improvements in 2011. You can
align leaders with 3 points on each side (top/middle/bottom). Overall, leaders
and notes are essentially on par with AutoCAD.

One irritant I have is that you cannot pre-determine the paragraph text box in
the command as you do in AutoCAD. You have to type out the note, hit ESC to
cancel the text command, select the text and edit the box grip. Also, the
paragraph box isn't an instance parameter, so you can't copy/paste it to other
text elements to make all text wraps the same length in one shot.

With text itself, one of the big gripes I still have is that you do not have
grips as you do in AutoCAD. Also, you cannot align text using the Align command.
Properly centering text in a box is always a fudge, whereas it's drop dead easy
in AutoCAD.

But when you move text it will want to align its alignment point with other
text, so that's not a huge problem with notes.

>The one major gripe I have with Revit's detailing is that when I bring in plywood and insert it on an angle (for a roof detail on a residential project), the hatch does not follow the angle of the sheathing component - it stays orthogonal - and that is a dangerous thing for a detail because it is confusing for the contractor and makes the drawings appear amateurish. if anyone knows a solution to that issue - please let me know.

The problem is that the Help file states that drafting patterns can be set to
align with the host element, but this only works with system families (e.g., the
hatching you see when when you cut a section).

Worse, the pattern for the plywood is called "Plywood - Align" inferring that it
will align with the filled region, but it does not. It will do so only when part
of a system family such as a roof sheathing layer.

With detail components and filled regions, you have to use a model pattern, not
a drafting pattern to have it properly rotate. What I did was create my own
plywood hatch pattern by importing a .PAT file (I just reused the one I had in
AutoCAD and modified it for Revit).

If you do a search for "plywood drafting pattern" on the AUGI Revit forum you
will come across some user-submitted plywood RFA files which are very good and
will do what you wish.

Matt
matt@stachoni.com
Message 24 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

wrote
> unless the client pay me to learn it.

Assuming you weren't born knowing AutoCAD Architecture, who paid you to
learn that?
Message 25 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

I think the point is, as is mine, that I already have an efficient tool with
which I am well profficient to get the job done in and to pay more (each
year) for another program that I will have to invest a considerable amount
of my life learning will require a quite reasonable return in investment to
make it worth my while. If it costs more to just does what I do now with
only a bit better efficiency then maybe I don't want to invest another large
slice of my life in learning how.


"Joe Blizzard" wrote in message
news:6384587@discussion.autodesk.com...
wrote
> unless the client pay me to learn it.

Assuming you weren't born knowing AutoCAD Architecture, who paid you to
learn that?
Message 26 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

Nathan,

I subscribe your post 100%.
I am 56 years old. I work with ADT since version 1 and I did invest a lot in
this program. I don't want to start it all over again. Autodesk did invest a
large amount of money buying Revit, but I´m not going to pay for it. It is
not fair that the money from ACA subscriptions is being spent in Revit
development and propaganda. Enough is enough.


"Nathan" escreveu na mensagem
news:6384704@discussion.autodesk.com...
> I think the point is, as is mine, that I already have an efficient tool
> with which I am well profficient to get the job done in and to pay more
> (each year) for another program that I will have to invest a considerable
> amount of my life learning will require a quite reasonable return in
> investment to make it worth my while. If it costs more to just does what
> I do now with only a bit better efficiency then maybe I don't want to
> invest another large slice of my life in learning how.
>
>
> "Joe Blizzard" wrote in message
> news:6384587@discussion.autodesk.com...
> wrote
>> unless the client pay me to learn it.
>
> Assuming you weren't born knowing AutoCAD Architecture, who paid you to
> learn that?
Message 27 of 30
dtdesign
in reply to: wenyanwei

Pedro - I agree with you as well - I am 39 and have been using ACA since v-2007. I used LT prior to that. But, I also used to hand draft. When the industry went to CAD, I had to learn and invest in the software (LT and ACA). Although this is not an argument to support this, but - we will have to learn new software at some point I guess - and if the industry heads that way, we either get on board or quit this profession and becone a hot dog vendor...

Remember - we had to invest time learning the industry standards at the time we entered the profession whether it was a Mayline or CAD - things will change and we will need to change with them.

But, getting back to the initial thread - ACA can BIM. Revit is not the only BIM solution - although AutoDesk will say Revit is their primary BIM software, ACA can handle BIM as well...

- Dave T.
Message 28 of 30
Anonymous
in reply to: wenyanwei

The world of Autodesk and Architecture is two fold now:
- True BIM
- CAD as always.

So far, to date, clients who pay us (you and me) to exist are the ones that
decide if their projects are going to make the leap or remain 2D. Some have
made the leap and you cannot use AutoCAD to meet the client's requirements,
Most have not (and don't really care if we etch on stone tablets, as long as
the contractor can read it and build it cheap).

Until our clients (not Autodesk) kill off 2D Cad, I seriously doubt you are
going to have to take on BIM as the only solution for CAD.

Just a reminder: AutoCAD and it's variants are Autodesk's golden-egg laying
goose (geese?).

--
Dean Saadallah
http://LTisACAD.blogspot.com
--
Message 29 of 30
Mike.Lamka
in reply to: wenyanwei

Isn't BIM pretty much the same as Navis Works?

Message 30 of 30
ToanDN
in reply to: Mike.Lamka

 


@mlamka wrote:

Isn't BIM pretty much the same as Navis Works?


Is Fast-Food Industry McDonald?

 

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report

”Boost