AutoCAD 3D usefulness

I teach AutoCAD (among several other things) at the university level. We are working on revamping our program and I am wondering how useful it is to continue to teach AutoCAD 3D. We also teach Revit, Inventor, 3ds Max, and Maya, in addition to other packages, that give students 3D visualization and design experience. We currently spend quite a bit of time on 3D AutoCAD in one class but it seems akin to teaching someone how to use a sliderule - it's only useful if other options are not available.

I know in my 16 year career as an engineer that I never used AutoCAD 3D, but I've now been out of the field for 10 years and wonder if there are uses for it that I am not considering.

Any advice you can provide is greatly appreciated.

There are businesses that only have AutoCAD available. The basics of 3D in AutoCAD would still be worthwhile since it is easier to draw in 3D than in Isometric. Things like plumbing risers, piping isos, etc. are still viable tasks that can be done in AutoCAD. Trying to replace Inventor or Revit with AutoCAD is a fools errand but for the occasional one off 3D at a place that only uses AutoCAD it is still perfectly useful.

There are businesses that only have AutoCAD available. The basics of 3D in AutoCAD would still be worthwhile since it is easier to draw in 3D than in Isometric. Things like plumbing risers, piping isos, etc. are still viable tasks that can be done in AutoCAD. Trying to replace Inventor or Revit with AutoCAD is a fools errand but for the occasional one off 3D at a place that only uses AutoCAD it is still perfectly useful.

Welcome to CADTutor AR.

+1 to rkent, very concisely stated, as usual!

I teach AutoCAD (among several other things) at the university level. We are working on revamping our program and I am wondering how useful it is to continue to teach AutoCAD 3D. We also teach Revit, Inventor, 3ds Max, and Maya, in addition to other packages, that give students 3D visualization and design experience. We currently spend quite a bit of time on 3D AutoCAD in one class but it seems akin to teaching someone how to use a sliderule - it's only useful if other options are not available.

 

I know in my 16 year career as an engineer that I never used AutoCAD 3D, but I've now been out of the field for 10 years and wonder if there are uses for it that I am not considering.

 

Any advice you can provide is greatly appreciated.

http://www.cadtutor.net/forum/showthread.php?71752-WIP-Modeling-My-Fender-Squier-Stratocaster

As you can see, AutoCAD is more than capable for 3D modeling and rendering. I am a Revit user and have been fiddling with Revit since 2008, while going full time in Revit since 2010. I do not need AutoCAD at all to perform my job, although it does make it useful as rkent has mentioned for the little extras that specialty programs like Revit cannot do, such as isometric drafting for us MEP guys who produce schematics at times. But AutoCAD is not "needed", just helpful because it does these types of things better than any other program. Having an understanding of AutoCAD is valuable, no doubt, but since we're talking about guys in school, I think it's a must to have the basics before they become job seekers. Again as rkent has mentioned, some jobs are AutoCAD-only and I'd hate for someone to miss such a basic tool in their curriculum where it prevented them in being prepared for what could be a good entry-level drafting position.

I will also say that in certain industries.... well, certain companies in certain industries rather.... AutoCAD is being phased out. Inventor, Fusion products, SolidWorks, Revit, Tekla products, Bentley BIM Products and so forth are the only programs used. If this class is more of a general CAD class, then touching a little on all programs would be my first thought, but if it's a specific design class, for instance architectural, or manufacturing, then I'd say AutoCAD 30% of the time and the rest 70% of the time. But these programs come with added tools and processes, such as engineering analysis, material lists, flat pattern tools for sheet metal, mold and CNC outputs, custom views, data management, and so forth that are not available in AutoCAD alone.

Hope this helps.

-TZ

Long time AutoCAD user here. This will probably shock Tanner but I'm going to suggest that AutoCAD should no longer be taught at the university level. The programs you mentioned (ex. - Revit, Inventor, 3ds Max, Maya, etc.) are probably more useful to students who will graduate from college and go on to good, high paying jobs in technical fields. AutoCAD could/should be taught in the secondary school system as an introduction to CAD.

Thank you very much for the quick responses! :-D

I think there was some misunderstanding about my question.

I was not referring to not teaching AutoCAD at all, as it is still widely used in a lot of areas and especially where we are, in Arkansas, which is usually one of the last places to adopt something new, unfortunately. I was referring to the usefulness of using an entire half of a semester to teach AutoCAD 3D, which is clunky, time-consuming, and much less effective than other 3D packages. I would also assert that since we do teach the other 3D software packages that if a student got a job where there was a "one-off" situation where they needed to produce something in 3D using AutoCAD that they would know enough of the terminology and the process that they could do it without much trouble (extrude, revolve, etc.). It might be that we take a short amount of time to at least introduce them to the 3D Modeling workspace so they know it's there and give them a basic rundown but I would envision that only being about a week of class and even then only after everything else has been covered.

Does this change any of your responses? :-)

We still have two full 16-week courses that deal solely with AutoCAD. I was just thinking it would be more beneficial to our students if we spent more time in those classes on things like dynamic blocks, x-refs, attributes, etc. than using some of that time to teach 3D.

I was just thinking it would be more beneficial to our students if we spent more time in those classes on things like dynamic blocks, x-refs, attributes, etc. than using some of that time to teach 3D.

-TZ

Has anyone inquired of employers in Arkansas what CAD skills they would like to see university students graduate with?

This sounds like the classic "my mind is made up, now I need some people to agree with me" scenario. I think you have your answer, see post 6. BTW, you never mentioned in your 1st post about half a semester for 3D. There is so much in AutoCAD that no matter what you leave out a student will get a job and the employer will want them to know what they didn't learn.

Yes. AutoCAD 3D has never been mentioned, to the best of my knowledge.

rkent: Understood, and to an extent, I probably did ask it with that in mind. Although it's not entirely my decision. :-)

If anybody had seen a big push in any specific industry/ies toward using AutoCAD for 3D purposes that I didn't know about, that was what I was hoping to find out. And yes, there will always be things they don't learn in school. However, I tell them that college isn't supposed to teach them every single thing they might need to know for a job - no degree does that - but it should teach them how to think analytically and give them the skills to be able to find answers for themselves.

ReMark: In our Advisory Board meetings, AutoCAD 3D has never been mentioned, to the best of my knowledge.

Thanks again to everybody.

I should think that spending a couple weeks might be better, that one week might be too short, maybe not.

How many times does the class meet in a week, and how long are the classes?

That information would obviously be crucial to making an informed decision and assessing how much instructional time you might want to devote to it.

The class meets twice a week for 2 hours and 50 minutes per class period.