Is C3D ready for prime time

[Anonymous]

My only real experience was with the 2004 beta
My company is a multi dicipline company and we are just starting
up a civil division. I am a long time LDD user, but now working as a cad
admin.
My question is we just got C3D and LDD 2006. Should I concentrate on
training
in C3D and use it for production or stay on LDD which I know well.

--
Dave

[Anonymous]

For us, the answer is yes and no. You really should learn the software and
make that decision for yourself.

My recommendation - concentrate on training in Civil 3D and use LDD for
production until you have a clear picture of how C3D will fit in to your
projects.


"David Allen" wrote in message
news:4983827@discussion.autodesk.com...
My only real experience was with the 2004 beta
My company is a multi dicipline company and we are just starting
up a civil division. I am a long time LDD user, but now working as a cad
admin.
My question is we just got C3D and LDD 2006. Should I concentrate on
training
in C3D and use it for production or stay on LDD which I know well.

--
Dave

[Anonymous]

I would recommend in addition to what John said, if you can afford to utilize C3D on a real project or take the time to use it on a completed project for training purposes as a "Pilot", you will learn a great deal more than just getting some training.

I know it was true for me and the fact is you need to build some confidence in the technology for yourself and the only way to do this is to try it out on a real project and work through the issues as they arise, What you will find at the end of the day as you get to know the program is that it is a more efficient design and design-revision system that creates less errors and omissions because it is an integrated environment instead of 3rd party like LDT.

[Anonymous]

I use C3d exclusively for production, and am not looking back. After the
styles are setup, the number one time consuming issue is the layer controls
for the objects. They don't turn on and off like they should, and are
rarely on the layer they say they are on (and curve labels don't "current vp
freeze"). Corridor objects have so many elements, it is very difficult to
get the layer controls to show correctly. However, the positives outweigh
the negatives.

Just my 2 cents

--
Tyler Townes, P.E.
Pacific Land Technology, P.C.
Civil3d 2006 sp1
WinXP sp2


"David Allen" wrote in message
news:4983827@discussion.autodesk.com...
My only real experience was with the 2004 beta
My company is a multi dicipline company and we are just starting
up a civil division. I am a long time LDD user, but now working as a cad
admin.
My question is we just got C3D and LDD 2006. Should I concentrate on
training
in C3D and use it for production or stay on LDD which I know well.

--
Dave

[Anonymous]

David Allen wrote:

> My only real ...

You need to drop that From email address, your not an Autodesk employee!

Terry

[Anonymous]

I will when Autodesk lets me go back to Agent.
I had to setup OE to access the newsgroups
I hate OE


--
Dave


"Terry W. Dotson" wrote in message
news:4984487@discussion.autodesk.com...
David Allen wrote:

> My only real ...

You need to drop that From email address, your not an Autodesk employee!

Terry

[Anonymous]

David Allen wrote:
> I will when Autodesk lets me go back to Agent.
> I had to setup OE to access the newsgroups
> I hate OE

If Agent lacks necessary features to allow you to access our news
server, you can try Thunderbird

http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

--
Himanshu Gohel. Civil3D Team, Autodesk, Inc.
Autodesk Civil3D Product Information: http://www.autodesk.com/civil3d

[Anonymous]

There are a fair number of Agent users in here. I'm not among them, but I do
know some.

What's your beef?

--
James Wedding, P.E.
Technology Manager &
Associate
Jones & Boyd, Inc.
Dallas, TX
XP/2 on P4-3.4/1G
LDT 2006 & C3D2006/SP1

[Anonymous]

My personal experience with c3d was to jump in and start using it on
projects of the size where when c3d didn't 'work' we could just as
easily do the project in Ldd. The best thing to do is take a small
project, do it in land, and then at night, do it in c3d. In many ways
you will discover the things you love and the things you HATE about
civil 3d. That said, i think training is overrated, better off
dividiing and conquering.

What we did:
Took one designer draftsman and put him on style duty

Take one engineer and put him on corridor production (tell him to ignore
styles)

Take out a contract for someone to fix holes in the wall punched there
by the engineer

1 pair of cheap tires should be bought for 'steam blowoff'

get an office dog to make you forget about why things in c3d suck

Now, this combination worked for our office, and now we do things in a
combination c3d, ldd design effort. c3d standard styles are HORRENDOUS,
in fact, they are so bad, so cumbersome, you will be begging for mercy.

c3d has the ability to make the styles not suck, but the one thing you
give up in going to c3d is QUICK EDITING (unless you just explode
everything,loss the much touted 'dynamic updating' and let your
designer/draftsman kick the dog, since he just spent 2 weeks getting the
drawing looking useful)

The changes that we have to make to a project are always done at the
behest of the cities we work in. Best off just exploding your data to
do quick edits.


Autodesk has made a severe design mistake with c3d. It's life. They
could have extended the .dwg format to make objects more intelligent and
have them editable with the already built library of autocad tools
(move, extend, rotate, trim, etc). Instead they made a huge pile of
semi-intelligent NEW objects that standard autocad commands (list, dist)
have NO idea how to deal with. But, because you/we are in Autodesk's
happy little pocket, you get to change your entire design proecess to be
productive. Oh hey how about those great 'object enablers', pffft, so
that everyone else in the world just explodes your .dwg anyways.


Do I think c3d is worth the payoff? Probably not, at least not for very
small companies. We are seeking other solutions, and will continue
seeking other solutions. Till then, LDD/c3d get us by, but I can't WAIT
to ditch 'em both.

Sorry this turned into a rant, but this is the cold hard truth, c3d is
BEYOND frustrating, in many ways we have given up everything GOOD about
CAD in the first place, (quick editing, erase a line, make new line),
for a cumbersome, dynamic editor, with less flexibility than Eagle Point
R13.

The best thing c3d is for is the corridor modeling, the worst thing it's
for is EVERYTHING else. GOD I WISH I COULD LIST A CONTOUR. Hovering
will feel to your engineer like he is designing a subdivision in Adobe
Illustrator.

I like using LDD for my road profiles, then when I like them, I dump
them to c3d, to make a cute corridor, which is great for quantities...
and great grading plans. Course once you are doing that, there are a LOT
of much CHEAPER dirt quantity solutions out there....

Autodesk has picked a direction, I hate it, and my company will make
more money with other peoples products. We have already dumped the
hydrology stuff to a REAL program. But autodesk lets you free trial for
30 days, HIGHLY RECOMMEND YOU DO THIS.

BTW, when you do a 30day trial, focus on the corridors, and making
profiles, don't bother making the profiles look good, just copy the
profile, explode it, label it by hand, as grading plans and profiles are
the one thing that a computers superior triangle crunching ability will
get the job done faster, and more accurate.

Don't bother with parcels, or pipes as both of those can be drawn quick
in base autocad (or autocad LT) by a fast draftsman probably quicker
than doing it in c3d.

NUMA

[Anonymous]

Hi Numa,

Fascinating. I've never seen a better advertisement for training. Did you
actually do any to justify your ridiculous statement that "training is
overrated"

--

Laurie Comerford
CADApps
www.cadapps.com.au
"numa" wrote in message
news:4990397@discussion.autodesk.com...
My personal experience with c3d was to jump in and start using it on
projects of the size where when c3d didn't 'work' we could just as
easily do the project in Ldd. The best thing to do is take a small
project, do it in land, and then at night, do it in c3d. In many ways
you will discover the things you love and the things you HATE about
civil 3d. That said, i think training is overrated, better off
dividiing and conquering.

What we did:
Took one designer draftsman and put him on style duty

Take one engineer and put him on corridor production (tell him to ignore
styles)

Take out a contract for someone to fix holes in the wall punched there
by the engineer

1 pair of cheap tires should be bought for 'steam blowoff'

get an office dog to make you forget about why things in c3d suck

Now, this combination worked for our office, and now we do things in a
combination c3d, ldd design effort. c3d standard styles are HORRENDOUS,
in fact, they are so bad, so cumbersome, you will be begging for mercy.

c3d has the ability to make the styles not suck, but the one thing you
give up in going to c3d is QUICK EDITING (unless you just explode
everything,loss the much touted 'dynamic updating' and let your
designer/draftsman kick the dog, since he just spent 2 weeks getting the
drawing looking useful)

The changes that we have to make to a project are always done at the
behest of the cities we work in. Best off just exploding your data to
do quick edits.


Autodesk has made a severe design mistake with c3d. It's life. They
could have extended the .dwg format to make objects more intelligent and
have them editable with the already built library of autocad tools
(move, extend, rotate, trim, etc). Instead they made a huge pile of
semi-intelligent NEW objects that standard autocad commands (list, dist)
have NO idea how to deal with. But, because you/we are in Autodesk's
happy little pocket, you get to change your entire design proecess to be
productive. Oh hey how about those great 'object enablers', pffft, so
that everyone else in the world just explodes your .dwg anyways.


Do I think c3d is worth the payoff? Probably not, at least not for very
small companies. We are seeking other solutions, and will continue
seeking other solutions. Till then, LDD/c3d get us by, but I can't WAIT
to ditch 'em both.

Sorry this turned into a rant, but this is the cold hard truth, c3d is
BEYOND frustrating, in many ways we have given up everything GOOD about
CAD in the first place, (quick editing, erase a line, make new line),
for a cumbersome, dynamic editor, with less flexibility than Eagle Point
R13.

The best thing c3d is for is the corridor modeling, the worst thing it's
for is EVERYTHING else. GOD I WISH I COULD LIST A CONTOUR. Hovering
will feel to your engineer like he is designing a subdivision in Adobe
Illustrator.

I like using LDD for my road profiles, then when I like them, I dump
them to c3d, to make a cute corridor, which is great for quantities...
and great grading plans. Course once you are doing that, there are a LOT
of much CHEAPER dirt quantity solutions out there....

Autodesk has picked a direction, I hate it, and my company will make
more money with other peoples products. We have already dumped the
hydrology stuff to a REAL program. But autodesk lets you free trial for
30 days, HIGHLY RECOMMEND YOU DO THIS.

BTW, when you do a 30day trial, focus on the corridors, and making
profiles, don't bother making the profiles look good, just copy the
profile, explode it, label it by hand, as grading plans and profiles are
the one thing that a computers superior triangle crunching ability will
get the job done faster, and more accurate.

Don't bother with parcels, or pipes as both of those can be drawn quick
in base autocad (or autocad LT) by a fast draftsman probably quicker
than doing it in c3d.

NUMA

[Anonymous]

And for you poor bastards working with Numa, please feel free to give me a
call, we're always looking for good people that love technology. Numa shoots
himself in the foot in the dark, then blames the power company for not
turning on the lights.

I spent about 10 hours yesterday with Bob Breedlove, P.E. of Brannon
Engineering out in Tyler, Texas at an ENR conference. Brannon is proof that
training and a good attitude about technology can deliver good ROI and happy
employees. Their story is worth reading if you're at all serious about
trying to implement C3D in a realistic environment. Brannon is NOT part of
the gunslinger/beta-testing circle that to some extent has dominated the C3D
pilot project group to this point. This is a company that got good training
and good help, and is making it work. http://tinyurl.com/bxb2e

--
James Wedding, P.E.
Technology Manager &
Associate
Jones & Boyd, Inc.
Dallas, TX
XP/2 on P4-3.4/1G
LDT 2006 & C3D2006/SP1

[Anonymous]

I also think that training is imperative. There is far too much in the program and it will make your head spin without assistance. Even if you just get training to work with the many styles, you will save yourself many long hours and many headaches. Once you have a good prototype that works well, the tasks get easier.

I think that C3D is a good start and, used properly, can save time in many tasks. I have great concerns with portions of the software, but it is a new, very different approach and I am willing to wait and see what Autodesk does with it. Instead of dumping the software and writing it off as a failure I think it is far more productive to at least experiment with it and give your feedback to Autodesk. I have already, in my short time using it, seen good results from the feedback that is given to Autodesk through this newsgroup and other routes.

Civil 3D is far from perfect and still has growing to do, IMHO, but in general I like the direction it is heading. Again, TRAINING, TRAINING, TRAINING. I think it is unreasonable to think that the program can be learned well for most people simply by playing with it for a week or two.

[Anonymous]

Well said James.

If used properly (yes it does take time to setup) this program can produce
things much fatser and easier than LDT ever could. Yes there are some holes
in the program, but show me any software that is perfect. You do get what
you pay for. The software is often as smart as the operator. Training is
key. It is a shame that we are in a world where we can not admit that we do
not know or understand the subject matter.

Numa, Give up your 8-track and experience a CD. Amazing how technology
works.


"James Wedding" wrote in message
news:4990708@discussion.autodesk.com...
And for you poor bastards working with Numa, please feel free to give me a
call, we're always looking for good people that love technology. Numa shoots
himself in the foot in the dark, then blames the power company for not
turning on the lights.

I spent about 10 hours yesterday with Bob Breedlove, P.E. of Brannon
Engineering out in Tyler, Texas at an ENR conference. Brannon is proof that
training and a good attitude about technology can deliver good ROI and happy
employees. Their story is worth reading if you're at all serious about
trying to implement C3D in a realistic environment. Brannon is NOT part of
the gunslinger/beta-testing circle that to some extent has dominated the C3D
pilot project group to this point. This is a company that got good training
and good help, and is making it work. http://tinyurl.com/bxb2e

--
James Wedding, P.E.
Technology Manager &
Associate
Jones & Boyd, Inc.
Dallas, TX
XP/2 on P4-3.4/1G
LDT 2006 & C3D2006/SP1

[Anonymous]

Good training providers can offer very flexible and customizable options that can make training relevant to anyone and very beneficial. For instance, for civil firms introducing C3D for a pilot project, it is OK to limit the training scope to the project scope. This is just the first project and one of the most important things, if C3D is truly viable, is to build confidence in the technology so you can take the next step.

When you take the next step, you will be amazed how much easier the next project goes. If you don't seek help the first time through, you will inevitably think it is poor solution with the risk of continued use of outdated and inefficient technologies that leave you on the depleting edge instead of the leading edge of technology..

[Anonymous]

What's with all this training ? Training is for when you want a certain
number of staff to get up to speed properly in a given time. The software
shouldn't NEED training to be able to get familiar with it and use it
provided you have time to fiddle with it and teach yourself. Most of us
learnt AutoCAD and Word and Excel by ourselves and the "knuckle" approach
(knuckle the keyboard and see what happens). Good software should be able
to stand this sort of treatment. Civil 3D seems to be more difficult to
follow than that and brittle. Pity. Even Bill Gates' products are ready to
come out fighting in MUCH shorter development time than Civil 3D and get up
again when knocked over.

Doug Boys

[Anonymous]

Wow, didn't mean to stir up the autodesk fan club.

Hmm, lighten up folks. It's just Autocad.


Let me think though, gosh sure didn't 'need' any training with the other
software we have had and made money with it, and now the solution to
people being unable to make money with Autodesks current frankenstein is
training????? Wow.

Course I figured out civil3d just fine, I know what it can do faster,
and what it can't, this is how you make money.

Identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the civil3d product is
paramount. But hey, I'm sure in 'training' other people can tell him
just what to do.

Sorry chums, civil3d ain't that hard, and I don't support training. I'd
pretty much go to to toe with the best of ya at corridors, learned by
doing.

See ya'll round.

[apweng]

As a trainer I can tell you that the investment in training will pay for itself. The technology is very powerful. Powerful technology in the engineering environment is not going to be easy to use - or easy for the average user to get up to speed with.

It's all about getting a return on your investment.

[Dommy2Hotty]

[quote="Numa"]Wow, didn't mean to stir up the autodesk fan club.

Hmm, lighten up folks. It's just Autocad.[/quote]

:lol: James Wedding said it best about the poor bastards that are forced to be in the same vicinity, let alone the same office as you.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, must be miserable here.

Dommy2Hotty wrote:
> [quote="Numa"]Wow, didn't mean to stir up the autodesk fan club.
>
> Hmm, lighten up folks. It's just Autocad.[/quote]
>
> :lol: James Wedding said it best about the poor bastards that are forced to be in the same vicinity, let alone the same office as you.

[apweng]

The other issue - with just being AutoCAD...

AutoCAD - C3D - is the tool you use to make money in private sector and save money in the public sector. If you're not optimizing the use of the tool then you're not realizing a return on the investment.

Make that analogy to a D8 Dozer - no point using this to push wheelbarrows of dirt.

Andrew