what are the main differences of civil 3d and infrawork?

[Anonymous]

Can anybody compare the essential difference in function of the two? I only have civil 3d in my computer. I want to learn more about the functions of infrawork and decide if I need to buy one. Thanks

[wfberry]

Perhaps you will get a better understanding through this:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/infraworks-forum/is-infraworks-worth-it-for-our-office/m-p/7233241#M1...

Bill

[BushW]

Hi @Anonymous

Here is some video links that will show the capabilities of using your Civil 3D design with Infraworks. I think this will give you a better understanding of what you can do and achieve with Infraworks for your proposal's and projects.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWksih8nd_s 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIesqrg_-WM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY2V4xjhNJ4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWA_B9gU2v4

Here is a free download trial of Infraworks for 30 days.

https://www.autodesk.com/products/infraworks/free-trial

Please select the Accept as Solution button if my post solves your issue or answers your question. This lets me know that I was effective in helping you, and thank you for doing so.

[BushW]

Hi @Anonymous

Here are some comparisons that show the actual times to complete the same tasks in InfraWorks 360 vs. in Civil 3D, here is an Autodesk-commissioned report that is interesting: https://damassets.autodesk.net/content/dam/autodesk/www/solutions/bim/images/stories/civil-3d-infraw...

Hope this helps! 

[neilyj666]

Infraworks is more for conceptual design work although it is getting pretty good at more detailed stuff and it is streets ahead of Civil when it comes to fly throughs and orbiting etc even with large datasets.

Information exchange between the two packages is getting better as well but don't abandon Civil just yet though as you will need to produce drawings etc which can't be done in Infraworks

[Neilw_05]

Infraworks is more for making pretty presentations and conceptual planning using pre-defined rendered objects that you can place or draw without the precision you would use in a design stage. It is not a substitute for Civil 3D for creating detailed plans and designs.

[TrevN]

I'm sorry, Infraworks 360 is NOT just for pretty presentations!

You can quickly and accurately produce multiple alignments to correct design standards that will give a very good preliminary design to present to many people in one go.

You can then export directly into civil 3D to give a huge head start for your detailed design.

You need to get used to using it, for as far as I can see it is the future and will link more and more with civils 3D.

[neilyj666]

---

@TrevN wrote:

I'm sorry, Infraworks 360 is NOT just for pretty presentations!

You can quickly and accurately produce multiple alignments to correct design standards that will give a very good preliminary design to present to many people in one go.

You can then export directly into civil 3D to give a huge head start for your detailed design.

You need to get used to using it, for as far as I can see it is the future and will link more and more with civils 3D.

---

I would add that much of the functionality that you are talking about is indeed available in IW360 BUT users of the Design Suites (and those on ongoing maintenance subscriptions) only have access to 360LT which has a much more limited suite of tools although it is possible to upgrade to a full IW360 subscription as I have done.

I am not sure of the situation with the Collections but my understanding is that full IW360 is included as standard.

[Neilw_05]

Why would you use Infraworks instead of C3D to create your initial designs? Is it not for the presentation value?

[TrevN]

Because you can produce multiple options far far more quickly in IW360, and change them on the fly.

There is a lot of work to set up one option in C3D.

[dgorsman]

---

@TrevN wrote:

Because you can produce multiple options far far more quickly in IW360, and change them on the fly.

There is a lot of work to set up one option in C3D.

---

Which I think was the initial intention of the program.  You can quickly knock out a bunch of options and check (at a macro level) to see how suitable they are, rather than investing the same time in only one option that ends up having to be redone.  Then you only need to do detailed engineering in Civil3D once (or 1.5 times, 'cause you know - clients...).

[ChrisRS]

This is partially copied from another one of my other posts.

I have only used InfraWorks on the 30 trial, so my understanding is not complete.

I do not think Autodesk (AD) has clearly communicated the essential differences between InfraWorks (IW) and Civil 3d (C3D). If any one at AD actually knows the essential differences, they are not telling! 🙂

This is my take so far:

AD has positioned IW as a Tool (GIS BASED) for planning and preliminary Civil engineering design. Evaluations of multiple options is a priority. The primary audience is NOT civil engineers and designers; they took the opportunity to come up with a streamlined interface and process that does not build on AutoCAD or Civil 3D and feels pretty foreign.

Civil 3D is a design and plan production tool. AD markets C3D as a BIM tool, but BIM is pretty much limited to corridors.

AD is emphasizing IW development. AD is adding design capabilities to IW that are better than the C3D equivalent. (Examples below)

IW is evolving quickly; its essential purpose is in flux. Having observed past and current development of InfraWorks and Civil 3d, I conclude that ignoring InwraWorks is a bad idea.

I have been told, and believe, that it is not "InfraWorks or Civil 3D"; it is "Infraworks and Civil 3D."
Infraworks and Civic 3D are indispensable to each other.  I think that it is significant that Autodesk is very consistently refers to "InfraWorks and Civil 3D". I seldom, if ever see the term "Civil 3D and Infraworks."

If you are considering getting IW as a tool, it is available only as a subscription. If will be using both IW and C3D, the AEC Collection is the least expensive way to go. If your C3D is on a maintenance plan you can sue the switch program at renewal time and get a legacy discount on the new subscription. (There is little that pleases me in the Civil 3D, Infraworks, AEC Collection maintenance/subscription kerfuffle, but AEC Collection is in my financial best interest.)

Here is my comparison and some examples of new IW design capabilities.

• Civil 3D and AutoCAD Map are GIS products.  --  Infraworks model builder is automated GIS, that is not available in Civil 3d. (Is see an existing conditions model is a first step, a preliminary sort of thing)
• Civil 3d corridor creation is totally manual. Civil 3D profiles need to be manually fit to the existing surfaces.  --  Infraworks Roadway design automates the alignment, profile, and corridor creation process while taking the surface model into consideration. I automates intersections. (The roadway design is preliminary)
• Drainage design in Civil 3d uses catchments (rudimentary) and uses SSA.  --  Infraworks Drainage design is more automated and can size and place culverts, roadway inlets, etc. (I see much of this as full on design since it exceeds the capabilities of Civil 3D.)

I would have preferred that all of the automation mentioned in the above bullet points be implemented in Civil 3D. Autodesk chose to implement them in InfraWorks. It is what it is; time to accept and move on.
 
Currently Civil 3d is needed for survey data and finalizing design. Civil 3D is necessary for drafting and plan production. I am told that plan and profile sheets are coming to Infraworks. Civil 3d will be needed for a number of years, but Autodesk vision for civil/infrastructure design is unknown.

[MikeEvansUK]

Sorry if I'm out of date but I used Infraworks a few year ago and didn't really see any use (from my point of view).

I am a designer, we don't really have to check multiple options. The planners have already done that when I get my hands on it, I inevitably have to tweak the design to the "real world" information based on Topographical Survey information in 2d & 3d not aerial photos or inaccurate OS mapping.

Is Infraworks capable of using tinn surfaces with breaklines, last I saw it was just GIS grid surfaces which do not contain breaklines. We need accurate volumes & design so we can build it.

There seems to be a lot of tools on the 360 version but isn't this primarily an online cloud based tool? I can use Civil3d without the internet or in a power cut (with a charged battery). How does using up bandwidth (which not being in a town is limited) help me. That's like having a scale rule you have to share with 5 others.

You needed to do a lot of messing around to port surveys & plans into IW, a lot of our surveys do not relate to a GIS coordinate system but use site grids so we would have to manually align then before exporting to IW (risky coordination with others).

Compatibility with Revit / drawings etc.

I believe Autodesk are clear on this, IW is for planning / conceptual design / creating games surfaces. Civil3d is for designing the real world. this may change in a few years but I'll hope I'm retired when it does.

M

[neilyj666]

It's fair to say IW has moved on quite a lot since you last used it...:)

We use it mainly for fly throughs to demonstrate our understanding of the Client's requirements and our methodology. It can directly use a Civil drawing as a data source as well as the reading the objects e.g. surfaces and corridors and applying materials to the various corridor features

It is also possible to fbx the model out and use it in Navisworks as well but I am not convinced at how robust IW is as a detailed design tool.

I use Infraworks on my local machine and avoid the cloud functions as much as possible and it is very very quick at viewing 3D objects (such as the windfarm in the screenshot) that would have Civil choking straight away.

In the brave new world of BIM, all surveys and designs should be related to real world coordinates (which is how we work) so there is no issue with aligning models.

All that said, I use Civil for 95% of my work and with the ability of IW to directly read Civil drawings the IW model can be updated by refreshing/reloading the Civil data to maintain a "dynamic" link.

[ChrisRS]

@MikeEvansUK, I agree that what Autodesk says is pretty clear: 

IW is for planning / conceptual design / creating games surfaces. Civil3d is for designing the real world.

this may change in a few years but I'll hope I'm retired when it does.

What Autodesk does is much less clear that what Autodesk says:

Civil 3D (including Map 3D) has GIS capabilities; Model builder could have been built in Civil 3D; Autodesk chose otherwise.

Drainage Design with automatic catchment determination, culvert placing and culvert sizing, should be in Civil 3D; Autodesk chose otherwise.

Pavement Drainage, with automatic inlet placement and sizing should be in  Civil 3D; Autodesk chose otherwise.

I am not thrilled with the Infraworks/Civil 3D interdependence/completion/prioritization. The situation is totally under the control of Autodesk. I have determined that it is in my financial best interest to continue using Autodesk products, so I accept the situation. As usual I find myself taking a defensive position while dealing with Autodesk. 

[neilyj666]

I wonder how much the development  (or not) of Civil is constrained by the fact that it is built on legacy platforms i.e. AutoCAD and Map and any limitations that the dwg format has inherently.

Annoyingly every quarterly update of IW is a totally new install (and the previous version has to be uninstalled first) and any models you wish to use have to be upgraded (or copied and upgraded)

[ChrisRS]

Civil 3d and AutoCAD are mature products. Big improvements and new features are not happening in AutoCAD or Civil 3D. Bug fixes and performance improvements that are not very visible seem to continue. There is a ton of legacy code. Legacy code is old, but stable. It is not necessarily bad or inefficient code. Continued development of Civil 3D and AutoCAD are also saddled with the need to maintain the UI and feel of previous versions and to not break anything that works in previous versions.

InfraWorks took a fresh start and allowed Autodesk to try new things. This fresh start allowed Autodesk freedom to develop a new tool without the legacy constraints. Admittedly, interoperability has been considered. My take is that it currently is not elegant, straight forward or dynamic. Autodesk intends to improve this situation.

Because of its immaturity, development dollars invested in InfraWorks yield flashy looking, substantial improvements, some of which replicate existing Civil 3D functionality. Development dollars invested in Civil 3d yield less impressive, incremental improvements. The perceived return on investment of development dollars is higher for Infraworks than Civil 3D. (I admit that Autodesk is making Civil 3D improvements that enhance large roadway design which are beneficial to Autodesk efforts to be used/accepted by state DOTs.)

Autodesk decided to move to subscription again, at the same time Infraworks was being developed; InfraWorks is a subscription only product. The decision to concentrate on Infraworks development over Civil 3D occurred simultaneously with the new InfraWorks subscription revenue stream. Perhaps it is a coincidence.   

[MikeEvansUK]

That's true(ish).

A lot of products we use were built by other firms who were brought out by Autodesk so the development was based on the existing program constraints.  Revit (softdesk?) for instance was and still is a bit clunky according to the guys here, it would seem fair that if given the opportunity to start a fresh program (IW). However I do not believe the problem lies with the product but more using and adding information to old code, I believe Civil3d has had a bit re-written to enable new features through times rather than bolting on.

Civil3d development has generally been slower because every 3 years the DWG databases need to be updated to enable new features to be added & developed over the 3 year life. Some things are probably in there but have not been made public because they are still working on them or have not gotten around to them yet.

I think the next few years could be quite exciting for Civil3d with the inclusion of a few new features, I first heard autodesk were working on new drainage parts creation tools about 6 years ago but didn't hear anything further until Project Kameleon was launched.

I do love this feature (apart from the need from yet another software product & subscription) but the prospects it opens up in Civil3d particularly on BIM. Some things like pipe connection points could really help but these have yet top be included in the Civil3d code.

I think we may be on the right tracks again after a slow few years seemingly sitting in an armchair while IW was developed.

M