Revit and Archicad pros and cons

[Hmm..]

Hello cad friends!

 

Everyone is familiar with both of these programs. Its been a while since first version of Revit was released, first discussions and comparisons done, lots of program mistakes are prevented and lots of improvements are made, the same goes with Archicad. I think every one has discovered things that are not so handy in one of these programs but handier in another. I am appealing to everyone join this thread to count down the pros and cons of these programs. Please be guided by your opinion. If some user has opinion which is a bit obsolete, and if you know that there is improvement made, please be understanding and comment it instead of dispute. I also hope this will help to new users.. So I go the first..

 

1. Archicad better than Revit

Archicad's Roof wizard does all the work for timber roof structure design. The roofs itslef design in Archicad I think is handier and faster than in revit, also editting is easier.

 

2. Revit better than Archicad

In Revit there's no need to remodel wall heights if levels are changed, in case walls are attached right to these levels including offsets.

 

3. Archicad better than Revit

Its very handy to use FLY option to go through the 3D model. Without wasting time for walkthrough's or animation makings, at any stage of the design. The possibility to fly through the model like in video games leaves a good effect to the client.

 

WRONG INFORMATION!!! 2009 version of Revit also has this option! =)

 

4. Revit better than Archicad

Its very handy to use dimension line constraint, so you can define which dimensions must be like designed, and which can be changed during remodeling.

 

5. Revit better than Archicad

I just love that there is possible to create command shortcuts like in Autocad using as many letters as user wishes. In Archicad you must assign CTRL+M for move and SHIFT+M for mirror and so on, because only one letter can be used.

[ammobake]

Both are good but it looks like, to me, that Revit and Bentley will be the BIM programs that end up really standardizing things (Probably Revit mostly) as far as the government is concerned.

 

I just attended a seminar in Anchorage, Alaska a few weeks ago on BIM. The Army Corps of Engineers up here is requiring that all companies doing business with them to use BIM by 2009 and by 2010 they want everything to be completed in BIM either with Revit or Bentley software.

 

That is problematic for a few reasons..

People have to shell out high dollar amounts to purchase the new software, spend the money/time to train their people in CAD all over again, And also train them on how BIM works in general..

 

I do CAD for a contractor on an Army fort up here and I can tell you right now that it is going to be A LONG TIME until BIM really takes over the field of CAD. They are still in the process of changing everything over from the old Mylar system to digital 2D autocad up here. It could be decades until they end up having a BIM for every facility on this post..

 

Most of our projects are renovations and it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to do an entire as-built BIM just to do a minor renovation project... How it SHOULD work is the government gives us their current BIM, we add-to and edit the BIM as necessary to complete a project and the drawings needed for that project, and we submit the as-built BIM back to the government with all the changes after the project closes out.. Then, in the future, if any other projects take place involving that same facility the government always has a current, up to date BIM of that facility. Even though a contractor is required to submit as-builts to the department of public works (DPW) after a project closes out, The department of Public Works is ultimately responsible for maintaining all of this information and keeping it as up to date as possible for the government (They are ultimately the gov-paid civilian contractors responsible for this task).. Not the contractor.

 

Everything i have done in the past 6 years has been 2D or 3D autocad. I can see ALOT of problems up the road and I'm not exactly sure how the government plans on solving them. The Army Corps of Engineers is migrating to BIM and so are other government agencies it seems.. It saves the government money in the end and in these harsh economic conditions it makes sense to them. The problem is making the transition...... Just because they can officially say they've made the transition to the BIM format, they themselves will take decades after that until everything is transferred over to BIM format. Kind of a nightmare. Everything seems so cut and dry as far as BIM is concerned, that much is clear from the seminar I was at.. But that over-confidence could cause alot of problems later on too. Probably 9 of the 12 questions I heard at the end of the seminar were BIM questions directed at the Army Corps of Engineers representative and even he could not answer the questions being asked. I'm not sure these guys know what they're getting in to actually.

 

-ChriS