Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Whilst Autodesk provide building product manufactures’ content out-of-the-box, we know you need more? Let us know which manufacturers and which product lines you require?
Some metric inch data would be very much appreciated. Canada uses metric information but uses the same pipe as the US. For all I know this could be the same as the rest of the world as well.
The current item vendor does not provide metric inch even though the salesman said that it was definitely in the pipe line in 2010. Funny that eh? Anyway, the upshot is that anyone needing to do a job in metic in North America has no data.
What really needs to happen is to decouple Content from the Database. It's too tightly tied together.
I can't just import content from others into my DB without bringing in a mess of other stuff, often duplicate things I already have just because the name is different.
Build all you want but I can't easily consume it without horking up my DB with extra information creating needless infobesity. If I throw mine away and use Autodesk's, unless they have EVERYTHING I need, I still need to build more, then later, I'm in the same boat, can't use Autodesk's new stuff without potential duplication of materials, connectivity, etc for things I've built but didn't know what Autodesk's future naming strategy was.
Perhaps something like a "Standards Checker Wizard" for Content that would allow me to import content into my DC but map someone else's content properties to the proper definitions in my DB.
Not an easy issue.
Also, connectivity may or may not coincide w/connectivity used in my DB. Connectivty should be overhauled as well. Connectivity should be automatic (other non-adsk products do this and do it well) for any material connecting to like materials. e.g. Soldered Copper should know how to connect to Soldered Copper, Vic Grooved should know how to connect to Vic Grooved, etc.
The ONLY thing you should have to define with regard to connectivity is user preferences about how to bridge between material types....how you want to go from Copper to carbon steel, etc.
