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

Hi there,
I think Archicad should aim towards implementing features needed during the whole construction planning.
The thing that I think we need the most are improvemets on quantity take-offs with interactive schedules (more listing parameters for all types of elements and the possibility to do calculations and edits once the schedule is created) and reinforcement drawings. We are currently using Allplan Engineering for our reinforcements drawing, but it is not as userr friendly as Archicad, so we are looking forward for a reinforcements tool embedded (just like MEP have been with AC24) in the program we love. Especially it would be useful if it would have the possibility to list (graphically) the rebars used, label them, quantify and so on, and have the possibility to implement standard rules used in our own country. We tried Eptar but we're not happy with it.
Another thing I think would be needed are MEP labels, as currently I have not found one from GRAPHISOFT.
We tried Eptar but we're not happy with it.
On the quantity take-offs there is much scope for improvement, BUT I think AC struggles due to the diverse way we abuse the tools and from a design perspective visuals will always take preference over quantities. I would imagine it is possible to use AC for quantities but you need to be disciplined in your model development.

Reinforcement - As an add-on OK but please don't dilute the architectural focus of AC with tools that 99% will never use. I'm not even sure the recently introduced Structural Analysis additions have achieved anything yet. From the lack of discussion on here it suggests they weren't a must have upgrade and they aren't being used that much.
Yes, no reinforcment please.
Archicad suffers enough from feature creep.

GS should make a new version, with nothing new at all. Just fix all the problems and achieve some consistency. This would make us all happy.
I think no need for reabr tool so far, even engeneers don't trust revit rebar, there is much better solutions for this task,
an easy coordination workflow will bring archicad to another level, smarter coordination ,
i think, more work should be done on " HOW TO EXTRACT QUANTITIES "
the " material based workflow" is genial, and gives us a good takeoff workflow
John, from CONTRABIM, did a great work on quantity takeoffs and cost estimation with ArchiCAD,
schedules, combined with proreties can do a lot of smart calculations.

for some components, takeoffs are limited, for technical reasons of course, or a bit complicated, like stairs, railings, curtain walls, shells, objects, etc

ArchiCAD should release a version where it refurbish it's existant tools, before thinking about adding new ones
Walls, slabs, roofs, doors and windows, zones, should be renewed,
I do completely agree on that matter. Contrabim did a really good job. I have just finished my studies, it is my first job and it has been just a year since I started working with archicad and I loved it because it is user friendly. I see a lot of potential in this software, it just lacks some tweaks here and there. The architectural part is pretty much well established, there are some flaws with the tools, minor ones, that I hope will get improved in the next updates. I have seen mosty that they have been working on fixing bugs, intead of consolidating the tools and their workflows and capabilities.

As for the quantity take offs, the problem that I see at least in Croatia where I work, is a lack of standardization of the costs and listings of works(is that the right word?) so we have to make one inside our firm. But a lot would help if we got improvements on the listing parameters, editing of schedules, calculations inside a schedule (ex sum this listing parameter and this one and put the result in the schedule).

Even just having the possibility to translate the parameters of all the tools (have an outside file containing all translations where you can make ine for your own language) could help make documentation for take offs faster (we often have to make a proof of quantities to explain each cost listing).

The main point is, yes, a lot could be improved if they revamped the existing tools and features we already have and have a better learning platform that touches all the possible topics.
Hi guys, hope you are all fine. I would like to know what kind of schedules you are talking about, because, as far as i know, with a sensible use of layers and Id´s and good care at modeling, all the finishes, all and any structural element including foundations, doors, windows, ballaustrades, curtainwalls, can be accurately measured and scheduled. What is it that you need? Also, as ive said elsewhere, if you are an architect, anyone who asks you to model rebars should be kicked in the rear.
Yeah a lot can be done with IDs, but there are still flaws. An example are window shadings not showing on schedules. There are things that still need improvement is what I am saying, but most of the things are ok.

Don't you think it could be useful using listing parameters in various mathematical operations just like we can do with fumction defined properties?

I am not an architect, I am a structural engineer, that is why I am concerned about reinforcement drawings. I don't think reinforcement drawing (execution drawings as we call them) shoud be part of the architects job.
  • 1
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25