Community
Civil 3D Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Civil 3D Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular AutoCAD Civil 3D topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

AutoCAD usage by DOTs

140 REPLIES 140
Reply
Message 1 of 141
BWYarger
9675 Views, 140 Replies

AutoCAD usage by DOTs

I am trying to figure out how many DOTs use AutoCAD, plain or C3D.  It appears that almost all state DOTs are using Microstation to the point I am worried I am getting left behind using C3D exclusively.  The problem is that Microstation with all the bells and whistles is very expensive even before talking about training costs and learning curve.  I find that my private clients use AutoCAD products, but I am wondering about just the DOTs, federal, state, and local.

 

Brad
LT, C3D 2005 - 2024
Windows XP, Vista, 7, 10, 11
140 REPLIES 140
Message 61 of 141
billneu08
in reply to: billneu08

Foolish argument..

 

Mike, I'm amused how earlier you stated that it wasn't fair that Ca didn't invite Bentley to the game! Waa boohoo.....Sounds kind of like here in MN and other nearby states with their local DOT having a closed door policy! Not much fun when you know your software is probably better but the DOT just refuses to let you play in their arena! Personally I think we are getting to the time where the big guns need to come out and we by pass the DOTs and go straight to those holding the purse! The state legislature! More to come on this one!

 

I spent three years teaching Civil Techs in the MN college system and it always amused me why the DOT wouldn’t use a software that just about every single college and Tech school in the state (and Country) teaches. But instead uses a software no one teaches, and must spend thousands of dollars per student teaching themselves!

 

During my first advisory council I had with local employees’ I directly ask both the NDDOT and MNDOT managers that were present if they would like it if we started teaching Microstations and possibly Geopak. Their answer was "don't worry about we'll teach them ourselves!" Right there I realized just how fruitless it was talking to such closed mind fools!   

 

Now again back to my original question that thing you called “Foolish”, I think you will find a few hundred and maybe a few thousand employers that would disagree with you on what training actually cost! I’ll bet if Bentley stops charging for training and just gave it away that would solve all our problems! (Few months latter they could just shut their doors too).  But I do enjoy the competition! Kinda like Ford VS. Chevy! Except I would say it’s a 2000 (V-8) Ford vs. a 2012 Chevy Druramax! But that is a whole another thread!

 

 

From my days working on the consulting side training was as rare and priceless as the Democrat in Western ND drilling for oil, most mom and pop shops can barely afford to pay the subscription to the software let along send their people away for a few weeks just to learn how to import pts and create a surface. Even the larger companies see training as almost an award to be given to their best employees.

 

Way back in the early days (90s maybe 2000, don't remember exactly the year) I remember seeing on the MNDOT website a listing of all the Microstation and Geopak classes they listed as mandatory for their employees. What really floored me was the fact that after each 3 to 5 day class as a prerequisite required the student to work in the office for another 3 to 6 months before they could take the next class in the series. Bottom line what was taking us at the time in LDT to learn in 4 days the DOT was taking a year to learn! As for today with C3D I could get a student fresh out of college with only their college knowledge of Autocad up and running C3D and designing roads with intersections and storm sewer layout in 5 days at most! 5 days! (Doing that this week infact) I had an ex student of mine that last year spend a full 5 days just learning Geopak roads and it had zero to do with pts or surfaces and nothing to do with Storm sewer! I’ll bet our local DOT doesn’t even know how to do Storm sewers in Geopack!

 

So when you look at the complete picture your software really can’t be that easy and C3D I know for a fact is not that hard to learn! 5 days just for ROADS! Again 5 days just for roads! Heck in 5 days I’ll also teach them how to build their own custom subassemblies using the Subassembly Composer Tool! I’ll also spend the 20 minutes to teach them Datashortcuts so they can learn how to do the BIG projects you talk about!

 

I’ll be generous and only say it would take a Geopak trainer 20 days to train your easy software to do what I just claimed above! Now throw in 4 round trip airfares to Florida, 20 days of hotel at $100 plus per night in sunny south Florida and then multiply that by the amount of employees you wanted train and we are talking some serious “Foolish” money! We are talking in the neighborhood of 20 thousand plus dollars per student! OUCH that is some serious Foolish money! As they say a Fool and his money will soon part ways!  Don’t forget the 20days they are out of the office not being billable too! 8hrs x $50/hr (real generous on that figure, don’t want to make you look too bad) x 20 days! That is $8k of lost income!  Starting to look like a real bargain isn’t it! What do you guys charge per day of training? Again just to design Roads! If it so darn easy why does it take so darn long to learn?

 

Have a nice day in sunny Florida! Just had a record setting 70 plus day here in Bismarck, ND! Shhh don’t tell anyone! Hate to see a bunch of out of work Floridians wanting to move up here!  😉

 

Bill Neuhauser P.E.

 

Edited by
Discussion_Admin

 

 

 

Message 62 of 141

I don't use Microstation because of the poor customer and partner support. I've attempted to get trial versions of the software without luck and my application to become a Technology Partner was not even replied to. From my point of view Bentley doesn't want me as a customer or a Partner. While this discussion is mainly about DOT, I can see why Bentley products are not well used by companies if other companies are experiencing the same thing. 

 

Christopher

http://blog.civil3dreminders.com/

Message 63 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: billneu08


billneu08 wrote As for today with C3D I could get a student fresh out of college with only their college knowledge of Autocad up and running C3D and designing roads with intersections and storm sewer layout in 5 days at most! 5 days!

 

So when you look at the complete picture your software really can’t be that easy and C3D I know for a fact is not that hard to learn! 5 days just for ROADS! Again 5 days just for roads!


 Umm...  Let's not get carried away here...  C3D is full of bugs.  And for people not used to "model driven design", there is a significant learning curve.  I tend to feel it takes AT LEAST 3 months for someone to get proficient with C3D, and that's with good training.  But once that curve is overcome, it's easy to do incredibly powerful things in very short time frames.

 

I can't imagine that you can spend 5 days with a college student and turn them into a good C3D engineer.  Part of that is that being a good C3D engineer is knowing your work, and frankly, college students don't know enough.  So much of being a good engineer is built on experience.  The software is only a tool, and if you don't know what you're doing, you can't operate the tool properly.  You may be able to pass some "test" that you are trained to pass, but that's a completely different thing than knowing your craft.

Sinc
Message 64 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: mike.barkasi


@mike.barkasi wrote:

Sync you are wrong. NOT ONE of those mentioned has switched from using a Bentley software.

 

(WisDOT Alaska and Caltrans all were standardized on Caice...) Florida- still cannot pass standards checker (as of early this yr)


Please spell my name correctly.

 

And no, YOU are wrong.  EVERY DOT I mentioned was standardized on Bentley software, and has either switched completely, or is in the process of switching, because no one uses Bentley in the private sector.  So for the DOTs to work with anyone, they HAVE to get off the Bentley stuff.  It just creates too many problems otherwise.  The only major holdout is the Army Corps, and even there I've seen a break (I've heard Army Corps personnel call Microstation a "dirty word"...).

Sinc
Message 65 of 141
Neilw_05
in reply to: billneu08

I'm not taking sides in this debate but I think there is a lack of perspective on the past. Keep in mind that prior to Civil 3D the competing products were Autodesk's Land Desktop and Bentley's Geopak and InRoads. I have no experience with InRoads but I do have some feel for Geopak since many of the Geopak tools are in Power Civil though it lacks the more robust road design tools in Geopak. So based on my knowlege of Power Civil and what I have been able to glean about InRoads and Geopak, I would have to say that prior to Civil 3D the Bentley civil products have been far superior to Land Desktop for large scale road design projects, not only for it's more robust road design and modeling capabilities but also for it's support for large scale multiuser project management. Thus for me I think the DOT's had more than political or financial considerations when chosing Bentley products. They were just superior to Land Desktop in every way. In fact InRoads corridor modeler was a predecessor to Civil 3D's corridor modeling and apparently it's capabilities are somewhat mimiced in C3D.

 

With the advent of Civil 3D the game has changed somewhat as Civil 3D now has certain technical advantages over the older Bentley products, but it still falls short in regards to it's support for large scale project management and interoperability. There was an AU presentation last year which considered the challenges the Florida DOT has had to overcome to get C3D to work within their system, largely due to Autocad's limitations vs. Microstation. Apparently they are still struggling to get it working as Mike Barkasi mentioned.

 

I do know that Bentley is making significant enhancements to their products which should in time overcome the current deficits vs. Civil 3D, so I am not ready to conclude that the DOT's are going to abandon their products any time soon. If anything the DOT's might be more open to considering Autodesk's solution as an alternative technology now that it's capabilities are more comparable to Bentley's road design tools.

 

I should say that Autocad/Civil 3D's strength is it's annotation capabilities. Microstaton has been rather poor in that regard. Also I agree with C3D Reminders that Bentley's support for us small fish has been disappointing, to put it mildly.

Neil Wilson (a.k.a. neilw)
AEC Collection/C3D 2024, LDT 2004, Power Civil v8i SS1
WIN 10 64 PRO

http://www.sec-landmgt.com
Message 66 of 141
ballen
in reply to: Sinc

Sinc: The Army Corp isn't holding out. They're currently, as we speak, are in the process of switching.

 

Just saying.

 

Another one down, another one down, another one bites the dust yeah. dot dot dot dadotta dot dot dadat.

 

 

 

 

 

Message 67 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: Neilw_05


@Neilw wrote:

I'm not taking sides in this debate...


Sorry, you just did.

@Neilw wrote:
So based on my knowlege of Power Civil and what I have been able to glean about InRoads and Geopak, I would have to say that prior to Civil 3D the Bentley civil products have been far superior to Land Desktop for large scale road design projects, not only for it's more robust road design and modeling capabilities but also for it's support for large scale multiuser project management.
Well, yes... Land Desktop was pathetic in comparison to C3D. That's not news. However, I agree that C3D is very weak when it comes to large-scale Project Management. I've repeatedly stated my position that Autodeak has completely missed the ball when it comes to Project Management, since they seem to think that Model-Data Management and Document Management are synonymous with "Project Management" (and they are not, these are three completely separate things). So I'm kind of with you on that point.

 

Sinc
Message 68 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: ballen


@ballen wrote:

Sinc: The Army Corp isn't holding out. They're currently, as we speak, are in the process of switching.

 

 

 



Well, I DID say that even with the Corps, I've seen signs of them switching (and have heard people privately call Bentley stuff a "dirty word")...

Sinc
Message 69 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: Neilw_05

Oh, and I also agree with your point about "multi-user support".  The DWG format is incredibly flawed, basically an archaic single-user DB format that doesn't even work properly (thus the need for an AUDIT command).....  Yeah, TrueDWG is a joke.  Point taken there.

Sinc
Message 70 of 141
Neilw_05
in reply to: Sinc

Richard (sinc),

 

While it may appear I am taking sides, for the record I am not sold on Bentley's products and I have been quite vocal on their forums about deficiencies I've found in their products as well. I just feel the debate tends to ignore the fact that the products being compared have evolved at different rates and thus cannot be objectively evaluated in their current state, so it seems premature to be making predictions about where things are headed.

 

And yes Land Desktop is pathetic comapred to Civil 3D. It is also pathetic compared to InRoads and Geopak. I can't imagine trying to do large scale road projects with Land Desktop. It's no wonder DOT's didn't want to consider it.

Neil Wilson (a.k.a. neilw)
AEC Collection/C3D 2024, LDT 2004, Power Civil v8i SS1
WIN 10 64 PRO

http://www.sec-landmgt.com
Message 71 of 141
Sinc
in reply to: Neilw_05

I peronally feel that, as long as Autodesk needs to keep up with and try to top competiors (such as Bentley and Carlson+Infellicad), it is good for the end-user.

 

Personally, I have a vested view, in that I provide the Sincpac-C3D add-on to C3D...  Bentley doesn't give me that opportuninty.  Neither does Carlson (and I talk to Dave Carlson regulrarly about this point).  Autodesk has started to provide a base platfrom with extensibility, so we can do what we do at QuuxSoftware, and I think that adds IMMSENSE value over other options...  Jeftt, Christopher, and I provide what we feel are the best solutions, based on what we see...

Sinc
Message 72 of 141
billneu08
in reply to: Sinc

Full of bugs? What release are you referring too? 2012 we didn't get our first service pack until right before Thanksgiving! I personally didn't have any customers that were using 2012 complain about any major bugs! Heck I'm training THE largest consulting firm in the state of ND (600plus employees) and we get hardly any support calls for bug issues! Almost zero! Again it took Autodesk from April till late Nov to even come up with enough bugs to make it worth a service pack!

 

I've been training C3D now since 2005 (right after it came out) and in the early days oh ya it was buggy, but today! I''vie been having more hardware issues than bug issues! As for the 5 days of training right out of college sure, I'm training them how to run software not to design the road!  I tell my students the worst thing they can do the following Monday is not start a project!  Practice makes perfect! If my students couldn't do this after the 4 days of Fundamental, believe me we would hear about it...... 

 

I have no idea how many students I've had over the past 7 years nor how many companies? But I can tell you most of them when they leave the fundamentals class can import points, create and edit surfaces, create assemblies, create alignments, profiles, corridors, sample lines and cross sections and then earthwork! Not too mention ponds, and pipes! I know because I do this just about every other week all around the country and I get very few if any calls from the students asking how did you do that again! If you are a customer of ours and on subscription we don't charge for support, even with the free support we don't many calls on "how to" and lately few bug calls. PERIOD!

 

If necessary we even do house(office) calls! Call up Bentley and ask them how much it costs to send an AE from Florida to Ca? And have him on-site tomorrow! 😉  How many local VARs do they have Mike? ZERO!

 

I stand by the 5 days! (I added a days worth of styles training to get it to 4 days)

 

Bill Neuhauser P.E.

 

 

p.s. I'm training this week using a Win 7 64 bit Compaq 6720 duo core Centrino with a whopping 2 gig of ram and have yet to FE! My sample project I train with is a 2.5 mile of rural road. And we are training in C3D 2011..... 😉

 

My Dell M6600 died on me during class and now waiting for parts to show up! Not a happy camper with Dell right now!

 

Edited by
Discussion_Admin

 

 

Message 73 of 141
rick.hberg
in reply to: BWYarger

I do structural work for a civil engineering firm, with a lot of TxDOT work, and it's all Microstation. I believe they were looking at C3D for awhile, and maybe they still are??.  That being said, our whole company was on Microstation V8 up until 2009 when the Land Dev groups bought into Civil 3D.  I was Land Dev at the time...and still support their structural needs now, so I use Civil 3D and Microstation both all day.

 

My honest opinion - they both have their strong sides and their weak sides. It's up to the people with money to determine which is most efficient for their needs....a lot of the arguments here are "this is waaayyy better" or "that is waaayyy better".

 

I know Civil 3D is more efficient for those Land Dev groups here (at least for the people willing to learn) because they can push out the little subdivisions real quick and then move on.  But like others have said, for large, multi-user, multi-company, multi-year projects, Microstation has better management abilities.  The Transportation folks here can do very robust designs with Geopak and they still have XP with 2G ram. Plotting is MUCH faster for projects with 100s or 1000s of sheets (I don't want to imagine trying that with SheetSetManager).  Now it sounds like I'm bashing on C3D, so I'll flip sides now....Annotative scales and Viewports are far superior to any method I've seen in Microstation for cutting sheets.  Customization is also much easier in Autocad (notice I didn't say "in C3D" there). Blocks are superior to Cells, etc....see, Acad has many advantages as well.

 

For the record, I like using Civil 3D / Autocad more for what I do, but you do have to recognize and avoid the bugs that are always crawling around in there....featureline linetypes, survey figures, incorrect parcel reports, etc. and pretty much incompatible with everything else. Microstation is pretty rock solid worry free software, whereas you have to actively be mindful of what you're doing in a C3D file to avoid the problems all over these forums. I recognize these issues, but still like the advanced features C3D is coming up with.  when it all works, and normally it does, it is a fast process to make updates to a design.  I definitely agree that the root design data would be preferrable external to the drawings. I'd also be fine if C3D had new releases only with new format releases, and just worked on all the bugs in the meantime.

 

Anyways, that's my $0.02. 

p.s. you probably won't here much from the DOT's or companies that are solely using Microstation/Geopak products because they can't stand Autocad (at least that's the vibe I get where I work).

Civil 3D 2014
Windows 7 x64
Message 74 of 141
tshulbert
in reply to: BWYarger

1)  All software has bugs! 

2)  Neither Bentley or Autodesk can create Engineers!  Good or Bad!

3)  Both software companies create TOOLS for Engineers, not Push Button Design!

4)  In the past AutoCAD and the verticals were cheaper than Bentley products, and had better reseller presence and support.

5)  Closed door policies for design tools are bad for everyone.

6)  Competition in the community is why we have the success with the tools we have.

 

Sean Hulbert
Message 75 of 141
pdx271
in reply to: DarrenP

How long ago was the benckmark test?

Civil 3D has come a long way in the last couple of years. Anything older than 3+ years is a differnt animal.

 

Message 76 of 141
t_mckenzie
in reply to: billneu08

Bill,

 

You say you don't get crashes, but have you tried using the grading tools? And I mean like, to create grading for a 50 lot - slab on grade - subdivision. Where mass grading is required. For your main training tool (single road corridor), C3D is awesome. But for lot grading and site grading, I find it lacks substantially behind my expectations.

 

I have found some work arounds for the crashing (like create the grading, copy the resulting feature line, and remove the grading), but it is still crashing at some points.

 

I am also using an older version of the software (09). But I just put a post asking about stability, and did not get one reassuring post.

 

I LOVE C3D for the dynamic capabilities. I LOVE using the road tools (alignments, profiles, corridors, etc). I really like the utilities tools (pipe networks), but pressure pipes needs addressing (force mains, water mains, etc). I like the concept of the grading tools, but I HATE the actually ussage of them. If I can't get a stable drawing, how am I to finish a project?

 

-Tucker

Message 77 of 141
Bill.Neuhauser
in reply to: Sinc

If you are still using 09 I hate to say this but you really have no argument one way or the other on the software! In a couple of weeks they will be releasing 2013 which when compared to 2009! Ughh! I wonder if you are even running the latest service pack for 2009 that came out well over three years ago! Grading toosl 2009 vs. 2012! OMG get on subscription and have a little faith and jump!  I can't even remember the last time I FE while running C3D, let alone has a grading object fail!

 

Run Forest, run!

 

I wonder if Mike didn't get his wings clipped?  😉

 

 

p.s. Since 2009 was released there has been 12 updates/new version to the software since your 2009!

 

 

Message 78 of 141
t_mckenzie
in reply to: Bill.Neuhauser

Bill,

 

Two things:

 

1st - pay for my companies subscription and I will upgrade immediately. I don't have any say as to where my company spends its resources. I would love to have the updated software. I agree I can't speak to the newer versions, but I have yet to have anyone that I have spoken to tell me the grading features are more stabile in newer releases. Which leads me to my second question ...

 

2nd - Have you actually used a grading object for more than a BMP? Have you used multiple grading objects interacting with each other? If you have, and haven't had either fatal errors or a corrupt drawing, great. That was my original question.

 

Please don't patronize me. I asked a simple question, and admitted that I may not be able to speak to the newer versions (hence my question). I only pointed out the issues I am having as a reasoning to my question. Also, I am not trying to demean your experience, as I don't know it. I am trying to point out that C3D is awesome in linear design, and has some great tools, but also has issues in my opinion. If these issues have been fixed, and grading objects no longer cause crashes then great.

 

To be clear, I prefer C3D compared to the other softwares I have used (MS and Carlson). And in response to the original purpose of this thread, learning both would be great. But as with any career, I feel you should educate yourself in the way in which you want your career to proceed. If you are looking to do mainly DOT work, it would be beneficial to learn MS. It is dependant on you and your companies needs. As said earlier, we will work in what we are paid to work in.

 

-Tucker

 

-Tucker

Message 79 of 141
ballen
in reply to: Sinc

Tucker:

 

The latest version 2012 is much more stable than 2009, including grading objects.

Message 80 of 141
sboon
in reply to: ballen

Agreed.  When they rewrote the code for 64 bit the grading stuff was significantly improved.  It's still possible to FE, but you have to be doing something stupid for that to happen. 

Steve
Expert Elite Alumnus

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

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report