The Global Archicad Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Discussions closely related to Archicad. (Example: Do we need a Linux version of Archicad?)

Moderators: Karl Ottenstein, LaszloNagy, ejrolon, Barry Kelly, Gordana Radonic, nbalogh, mnguyen, gkmethy, mtron, Csaba Kézér

User avatar
By Mjules
#315109
I naturally like ArchiCAD as I love my friends! However, I've found Revit Families are closer to the AEC reality than the ArchiCAD's objects, windows, doors, and curtain walls. It's not enough to have access to 3D components in BIM software, but their connection systems are very crucial to consider. For example, doors, windows, and curtain wall's framings in ArchiCAD have some 2D graphical representation issues compared to those in Revit. I have had to adjust doors, and windows rails' connections with their corresponding glazing anytime in ArchiCAD, as well as their stiles, muntin bars, channels, jambs, etc. What makes Revit much faster in construction details than ArchiCAD.

About the ArhiCAD's curtain walls, I have always wondered how is it possible to draw different curtain wall systems typically available on the North America market like a Kawneer's 1600 Wall System, a stick wall system that utilizes a series of tube extrusions, a unitized wall system that uses a split mullion while having their connection system available in ArchiCAD without needing any morph conversion to adjust them correctly?

These issues need to be addressed by Graphisoft since such adjustments take us a long time.

Other interesting features I've found in Revit are their dimensioning and massing tools, as well as the exploded capability allowing users to realize great graphical representations to convince different AEC stakeholders.

In my opinion, Revit is more practical than ArchiCAD. Revit better adapts to local standards than ArchiCAD.
Last edited by Mjules on Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Moonlight
#315110
First, you have personal preferences, and as they say in Spain, "There is no written rules over taste"

Second, what can you achieve, just put in your mind that the two of them are part of the tools in our trade, and if you're an architect, the most important thing to know is how to architect !!!

Third, as a program, ArchiCAD have adopted the highly specialised tool for the profession, where it excels in the architectural field, leaving other specialities for their highly specialised programs dedicated to BIM for MEP, or for structure.
Autodesk on the other hand is trying to recreate its previous success of AutoCAD with Revit, putting Architectural, Structural and MEP design in the same platform.

Fourth, depending on offices and firms internal structure, one platform could suit best broad needs than the other, for example, lets imagine that the firms workers are divided in 4 categories, 1 for architecture, 1 for MEP and 1 for structural design, and finally 1 for modelors, in case of ArchiCAD, you can not float any workers to support the others, unless they share knowledge with the available platform .... but in case of Revit, all teams can float if needed, since all know the same platform (float here is used of the context that you can rush one speciality to help another even when s/he have no idea outside their area of profession or expertise).

As an advise, continue with your university curriculum with ArchiCAD for the time being, since that:
1. It's free or already paid for, so use it.
2. If the day comes where you have to learn Revit, then many of the concepts that you have already learn will serve you to learn Revit much quicker.
User avatar
By Mjules
#315111
Hi,

As I said previously, having access to 3D elements in a software program is not enough to talk about BIM. The connection systems between different structural elements should be a must.
Moonlight wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 5:04 pm First, you have personal preferences, and as they say in Spain, "There is no written rules over taste"

Second, what can you achieve, just put in your mind that the two of them are part of the tools in our trade, and if you're an architect, the most important thing to know is how to architect !!!

Third, as a program, ArchiCAD have adopted the highly specialised tool for the profession, where it excels in the architectural field, leaving other specialities for their highly specialised programs dedicated to BIM for MEP, or for structure.
Autodesk on the other hand is trying to recreate its previous success of AutoCAD with Revit, putting Architectural, Structural and MEP design in the same platform.

Fourth, depending on offices and firms internal structure, one platform could suit best broad needs than the other, for example, lets imagine that the firms workers are divided in 4 categories, 1 for architecture, 1 for MEP and 1 for structural design, and finally 1 for modelors, in case of ArchiCAD, you can not float any workers to support the others, unless they share knowledge with the available platform .... but in case of Revit, all teams can float if needed, since all know the same platform (float here is used of the context that you can rush one speciality to help another even when s/he have no idea outside their area of profession or expertise).

As an advise, continue with your university curriculum with ArchiCAD for the time being, since that:
1. It's free or already paid for, so use it.
2. If the day comes where you have to learn Revit, then many of the concepts that you have already learn will serve you to learn Revit much quicker.
By jl_lt
#315180
I think what Mr. Moonlight is trying to say is, dont miss the forest (the architecture you can do with Archicad) for looking at just one tree (the detailing of a single door), both of which can be done with Archicad. If the parametric objetcs offered in Archicad are not enough you can always do your own. Also, Bim as a process has nothing to do with the modeling software, or even the detail or modeling of an object. A simple rectangle that represents a door can be more useful than a super detailed model if the simple rectangle has embedded information (specifications, information about manufacturers, links to more manufacturer, dimensions, etc) and that information is consistent through all the project.
User avatar
By Moonlight
#315182
@jl_lt

I meant is, that if the university is already offering the ArchiCAD course, then our friend must take advantage of it ... cause I don't know if that university is public or private, but you can consider that this specific course have been already paid for.
ie: not taking the course, is like wasting your money and easy credits (if applied).

Besides, I don't know if our friend's grade depends on it or not, so:
1. If grades do matter, then whether he likes it or not, he must learn ArchiCAD and pass the test/exam.

2. If grades do not matter, then talking from my own experience, starting to depend on a tool that you don't domain while you're studying can be quiet dangerous and can affect his/her grades in a negative way, specially when you don't have someone who you can run to and ask how to face your problems with the program, but since he already have a professor, an assitant, or who ever is giving him/her the course at hands then take the advantage (lets say, that in this particular case, I say let our friend play it safe)

Besides, everybody here, if we have learnt to use Revit, it was by tutorials and videos, so I don't think you may do it differently.
User avatar
By Mjules
#315183
Moonlight and friend,

My concerns about ArchiCAD are very serious. Please don't play with that. I've been working in the field for more than 9 years as an architect outside the United-States and Canada. I have only 6 months as an intern architect in Quebec and I hope to be eligible to practice in California as well.

Let me be clear with you. First, you may not love ArchiCAD more than me. I've started working with ArchiCAD since the tenth full version. I used to work with the ArchiCAD's Geometric Description Language (GDL), but I've given up for 7 years since I've been living in Canada cause that's not what matters most here.

What would be the purpose of a BIM software? In North America, BIM is about three-dimensional and intelligent software. Components are not only represented geometrically and spatially but are linked to data describing their intrinsic properties and relationships to other components.

Is ArchiCAD intelligent enough to state that it's about a perfect BIM software? Based on my experience, the correct answer is no, but I hope so one day since I like it a lot! Meanwhile, I agree with jl_lt when talking about "consistent" drawings.

Let me give you some examples. The ArchiCAD's 3D components (library) including doors and windows have some 3D and 2D graphical issues. I have to adjust their corresponding rails, stiles, jambs, heads, and so forth to comply with any standard related to both Quebec and California's Building Codes. Please take a look at the enclosed screenshots.

The connections between frames and monolithic, laminated or insulated glazed doors or windows must graphically be well-drawn pursuant to those standards. Load resistance of glass in buildings should be taken into account, as required by the ASTM E1300 Standard practice in the U.S. Sometimes, I've determined them using the Mass Properties command in AutoCAD. Glass deflection is another aspect to consider when designing curtain walls, storefronts, and window wall systems.

I am not an expert in ArchiCAD. I am also here to learn from your best practices, and I wonder why couldn't simply use the GDL scripting window of ArchiCAD to adjust the windows or doors' frames as required by those standards? Why do I need to convert them into the Morph first to make those adjustments?

Furthermore, how could I integrate an ArhiCAD existing or a custom storefront door or window into a curtain wall system drawing with the ArchiCAD's curtain wall tool? How those tools can work together in ArchiCAD? Why are there so many of them (tools) in ArchiCAD? Are they really effective to help deliver the clients' work on time while respecting the local standards?

I firmly believe that all of those questions need appropriate answers! Remember that I am here to learn from the best practices!

Regards,
Martin









Moonlight wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 8:10 pm @jl_lt

I meant is, that if the university is already offering the ArchiCAD course, then our friend must take advantage of it ... cause I don't know if that university is public or private, but you can consider that this specific course have been already paid for.
ie: not taking the course, is like wasting your money and easy credits (if applied).

Besides, I don't know if our friend's grade depends on it or not, so:
1. If grades do matter, then whether he likes it or not, he must learn ArchiCAD and pass the test/exam.

2. If grades do not matter, then talking from my own experience, starting to depend on a tool that you don't domain while you're studying can be quiet dangerous and can affect his/her grades in a negative way, specially when you don't have someone who you can run to and ask how to face your problems with the program, but since he already have a professor, an assitant, or who ever is giving him/her the course at hands then take the advantage (lets say, that in this particular case, I say let our friend play it safe)

Besides, everybody here, if we have learnt to use Revit, it was by tutorials and videos, so I don't think you may do it differently.
Attachments
M13_JULES redmarks  (1)-9.jpg
M13_JULES redmarks (1)-9.jpg (87.67 KiB) Viewed 563 times
Curtain Wall Details.jpg
Curtain Wall Details.jpg (226 KiB) Viewed 563 times
Curtain Wall Details_Kawneer.jpg
Curtain Wall Details_Kawneer.jpg (80.31 KiB) Viewed 563 times
User avatar
By Moonlight
#315184
@Mjules

Let get this straight ...

1. If you have observed everybody's response, you will see that most of us have responded based on, whether we like ArchiCAD as our choice of preference, or our not so convenient experience with other BIM platform ...

I on the other hand, knowing do little about our friends situation, have based my response on:
a. ArchiCAD being an integral part of our's friend curriculum.
b. Direct help from an expert availability.

Just make this exercise, take my response and instead of ArchiCAD, called program X ... you will see that the advice will still be valid.

2. Graphisoft have created a template and a library that is convenient for almost everybody ... or in layman's term, the most general of most general of cases, that is why the library will not suit anybody's needs perfectly.

3. Although this is not the thread that we should discuss this, but I will give you a glimps, if I understand correctly the type of inter-connectivity that you which to achieve in the context you try to apply, then Rhino+Grasshopper is your destination.
#315185
Speaking as a California architect who has been licensed for close to 40 years, and used Archicad for more than 20 of those, even if Archicad could produce realistic storefront windows at every scale, I'm not sure I would want it to. I'm happy to let drawings of, say, 1/4" = 1' and smaller use very generic representations, and let the large-scale 2D drawings supplement those. I do NOT want highly detailed representations of aluminum extrusions for a couple of reasons:

1) In many, if not most, cases, they will be wrong. Manufacturers like Kawneer change details all the time. Further, contractors and clients change manufacturers all the time. If you count on your software to represent these details at any scale so they are totally realistic, who is going to change the profiles each time someone changes their mind?

2) Even if you COULD get the software to do this, all of those extrusions are going to create a model with so many (useless) faces that the model would be dreadfully slow to work with. All of those faces do not add any information that is important to the contractor.

I think the current data management scheme (Classifications and Properties) does a pretty good job of keeping track of what's important in schedules. Connections are usually detailed by the fabricator in shop drawings, so not sure why you are so anxious to do someone else's work.
By Braza
#315220
Richard Morrison wrote:2) Even if you COULD get the software to do this, all of those extrusions are going to create a model with so many (useless) faces that the model would be dreadfully slow to work with. All of those faces do not add any information that is important to the contractor.
Agreed. And in case you haven't noticed, you can already vote for a Complex Profile with LOD. :)
By DGSketcher
#315234
Is it just me that thinks the younger designers are missing a reality check? Technology is moving so quickly they have already lost sight that it wasn't that long ago commercial 2D CAD was just hitting the market, now they seem to think we are all driving quantum processor computers and the 3D model should contain every nut, bolt & screw with one click. The software we use is intended to assist in communicating our designs, it isn't meant to replicate the finished building in its entirety. It only takes a moment to sit back and ask what do I need to show the contractor and component fabricators to do the job correctly. Keep it simple. And be assured the more detailed the information gets, the less it will actually be read or considered.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8