Allplan - free CAD software for architectural and construction design. Allplan or Revit. Effectiveness of using BIM software
Looking back, I realized that over the past 6-8 months I have been asked several times by completely different people about the same thing: “What is the opinion of AllPlan from someone who works with AutoCAD?” To be honest, I want to write it all down in one place and come back here as needed... So to speak, a memoir about a stormy youth
I would especially like to note the following: everything said is a purely personal opinion. Does not concern design technology, only impressions of the program.
The matter began back in 2008 (maybe a little earlier, maybe a little later: to be honest, I don’t remember), when the office where I worked received an order to “implement AllPlan.” Everyone howled, except for two of the crews. I howled later, when I figured out some of the intricacies - but it was too late.
I will try to list both the advantages of AllPlan and its disadvantages.
Pros of AllPlan:
| Nemetschek | Autodesk |
| Almost the only solution that allows you to work with precast reinforced concrete | There was no clear proprietary solution and, it seems, there still isn’t (I’m just not following this matter now - my work is different) |
| I don’t remember whether the construction sequence module was built in or not, but they showed it to us | NavisWorks, as far as I remember the presentation, will allow you to do this and a lot of other things “in one bottle” |
| A correctly working module for “transferring” a building model to SCAD (I don’t know about the reverse transfer; about the transfer to Lyra, too).. | A similar module was developed, but only for Revit. Considering that the design was done in AutoCAD, it doesn’t work. On the other hand, Autodesk has Structure Detailing, there is Robot Structure - yes, transfer the Revit model and don’t suffer! |
| The ability to directly send tasks to robots on the production line from the design site | Autodesk has not done this, and I personally think that using this feature is fraught |
This is clearly AllPlan's strengths for me ran out. Finally and irrevocably. Let's try to look at its disadvantages and what Autodesk opposed to it.
If we try to sum up some results, it turns out that AllPlan has only one advantage: a proprietary solution for precast concrete and precast concrete plants. If Autodesk can understand this, consult with its own partners and customers - how they currently design, what difficulties they face and what they want as a result; and at the same time give a clear task to its own developers - AllPlan may find itself in a very uncomfortable and sad position. Because otherwise, Autodesk is either neck and neck with him or ahead.
I emphasize once again: everything said is a purely personal opinion. I I don't work for Autodesk. I I don't work at Nemetschek. Now I am not involved in construction at all.
There are 7 comments. to “AllPlan and my impressions of it”Everything is exactly the opposite. I hate AutoCAD after I started using Allplan. Now I’m sitting on 2015 (30 years of edition). We use it for AR and QOL, we haven’t convinced others, but import-export saves us. Disadvantages (evened out by long use) - there is little Russian localization, everything accumulated since 2005 and subsequent versions is transferred directly to the std and prj folders (in 2015 there is a small problem with this - you first need to create an empty project with the same name, then abandon the project itself, then it sees him). There are still problems with hatching when converting from AutoCAD. As for the rest, the logic and speed of work are an order of magnitude (!!!) higher than AutoCAD, the speed of initial training for full-time work is 3 days (I also tested it on my 13-year-old daughter - she dreams of becoming an architect, she draws in volume). A very friendly program, now I’ve started to go back to design, I’m counting the volumes outlining other people’s drawings - super, one click and the specification is ready...
>> I hate AutoCAD after using Allplan
It is your right.
>> Now I’m sitting on 2015 (30 years of edition)
Congratulations. And how long has this “edition” been around? Let me remind you that the text was written in 2013, and it concerned AllPlan 2008.
>> in 2015 there is a small problem with this - you first need to create an empty project with the same name, then abandon the project itself, then he sees it).
This means that we haven’t figured out the projects in AA. Congratulations on that.
>> There are still problems with hatching when converting from AutoCAD
I wonder, what's the point of throwing over shading? Well, just interesting.
>> I count the volumes while outlining other people’s drawings - super, one click and the specification is ready...
If the drawings are made in the normal version, then “outlining” them in Revit is a no-brainer.
I won’t comment on the rest - I haven’t communicated with AllPlan for at least 5 years. And I don’t plan to do research on something that I’m unlikely to need in the foreseeable future: I don’t have enough time anyway.
Reinforcement in automatic mode it worked fine already in Allplan2012, i.e. until the time of writing this article. AP2015 generally has a built-in Cinema4d rendering module. Well, the main point is that in AllPlan everyone works simultaneously with one 3D project (over the network), this is achieved by dividing into layers and the ability to enable their display in reading mode on the current drawing. Those. designers see what architects change during their work.
The disadvantage so far seems to be that they are not screwed onto AllPlan because of this third party systems document flow.
At the very beginning it says: the story began in 2008. At that time, AllPlan 2012 was not in the project. “Simultaneous” work with a 3D project is implemented in both AutoCAD Architecture and the entire Revit family. Quite organic and very simple.
I won’t comment on everything else - I haven’t encountered it, I don’t know the current state of affairs, and everything is already outside the scope of my interests. If my old friends who now work “in both ACAD and APlan” want to, they will express their opinion regarding ease of use, adaptation, production of drawings, etc. I've been inviting them for probably two months now - but so far they don't seem to care. I don’t want to retell other people’s words without having any opportunity to verify them.
Allplan nemeckaja proga. Autocad - Amerikanskaya.
U autocada nado pokupat dohrena programm - spisok bolshe 20 shtuk.
U allplana - 4-5 packages.
Za vsjo ispolzovanie allplan mne ponadobilos 12 4asov obu4enija v Univere i potom samostojatelno intuitivno vsjo u4itsja. S Autocad mne ponadobitsja u4itel i postojannij feedback.
Tak kak Nevozmozhno dazhe samostojatelno napisat text v etoj dolbannoj program.
U Amerov ruki iz zhopi rastut. Potomu - 4to programma nelogi4no postroenna. U nemcev vsjo logi4no udobno raspolozhenno. I nemci dazhe v avtomobiljax silno zabotjatsa o komforte polzovatelja.
Tozhe samoe mogu skazat i o Cinema 4d po sravneniju s 3dsMax.
Mozhet bit v Autocade est bolee krutie reshenija dlja komplexsnogo stroenija. No bolshinstwo Strojek imejut srednjuju slozhnost. I dlja bolshinstwa architekturnix i ingenernix büro, bolshe podojdet Allplan.
Nas4et 3D project tozhe skazhu - 3D sdelali li4no dlja bab w ingenerii. Tak kak Babi ne imejut 3d Voobrazhenija. U nix brain drugoj. I professija ingenera -- muzhskaja.
Poetomu 3d 4er4enije sozdano dlja tex, kto sebe model ne mozhet v golove 3mernoj predstavit. 4tobi oshibok ne bilo.
It’s hard to read such a text... Has translit.ru really fallen asleep?
Go...
There seems to be confusion between AutoCAD and vertical solutions based on it. These are not additionally purchased modules, but completely standalone applications- sometimes with absolutely its own design logic.
We learned - ok, no question. But that was not the emphasis in the text of the article - read it again.
P.S. A mention like “women don’t have spatial imagination,” to put it mildly, is not a fountain: I personally know a lot of designers who, based on the three-dimensionality of their imagination, will give a hundred points head start to anyone.
1. Mikhail, in my opinion, the laid out rods in the all-plane (places of reinforcement) cannot be designed “according to GOST” and the accepted forms for indicating reinforcements in Russian design institutes, i.e. you will need to measure and label each rod. Or can the allplane decompose the gain components that are displayed as they should?
2. “For example, did YOU know that, unlike revit in Allplan, a full-fledged GP section can be created with automatic records of earth masses?”
Provide an example of a full-fledged GP in allplane! It is impossible to implement the GP in full in it. The video demonstrates great amount triangulations based on manually raised points, a huge amount of manual work and not a single prepared drawing. According to GOST, only AutoCAD substrates are allowed for design. In Revita, no one is trying to make a master plan. For this there is Civil3D, which is a tool for other specialists who do not need revit, so there is no additional cost. program for Revit. I never saw a cartogram of earth masses by squares.
3. Regarding collaboration. Tell us how it is proposed to issue tasks between specialists in the MagiCAD+Allplan+ArchiCAD+Tekla combination? Really AutoCAD and IFC? For example, issue equipment from the technologists from the archcad to the allplan in IFC format, and then changes in its location? in AutoCAD with a note: what has changed? Convert equipment into loads and transfer them to the calculation complex? In general, can loads be specified in an allplane? Well, it’s interesting to look at the transfer of the task for holes between these programs
4. If the robot doesn’t suit you, then let’s compare it with the sophist.
5. About the fact that reinforcement cannot be transferred from a robot - this is a blatant lie.
https://youtu.be/ksLjZd62DoY?t=19m58s
https://youtu.be/16IeZfhi6io
6. About the possibility of performing reinforcement. Experts believe it is possible.
https://www.architect-design.ru/doc/Autodesk/Sertififot_Robot_2017-_Prilozhenija.pdf
Alexander, you have attached a certificate for the Robot and are referring to experts - do you even know how it is made? I'll explain - the volume is estimated installed program(direct physical in MB) and the volume of the certificate, as well as a list of norms that need to be included in this piece of paper. Based on this data, the price is set and upon payment, such a piece of paper is generated. There is quite a lot of certified software in the list that actually does not even come close to the stated standards. So this piece of paper is just a formality and doesn’t say anything. Sophistry also has enough of its own plugs, the same seisiika there is so-so...
This is by the way.
I understand that those who prepared such a “paper” take responsibility for what is written in it. Please provide facts regarding such allegations of negligence. I personally know people who calculate the reinforcement in a robot and justify the results. And I know a lot of people who don’t know the differences between Eurocodes and our reinforcement calculations, but they claim that “a robot can’t”
DeleteAlexander
1. you can
2. in the video there is a small piece of possibilities
3. the architect or engineer drew, the designer saw in one model
4. What does sophistry compare? when the sins of Revit are discussed!
5. and comment on the video, what is being conveyed there?
6. and what do they think? comment on the video? although you have already been answered about certification
Alexander, what facts if I (like many interested users) myself participated in compiling lists of standards that I would like to see in the certificate for specific programs, knowing in advance that they are not there. If you come across this procedure, see for yourself. It is not in my interests to discuss this in more detail, since I am interested in using foreign software. And if certification performed its function properly, there would be 5 programs left to choose from - SCAD, Lira 10, Lira-SAPR, Ing+ and Stark ES. Which absolutely doesn't suit me.
The Robot has some problems when calculating according to joint venture, this has been verified by a large number of engineers - to avoid this, you can use a combination with OM SNiP, but it has its own problems and extra hemorrhoids. You can use older norms and justify it... It depends on who you justify it to.
About the differences between Eurocodes and our joint ventures is too broad a topic, it cannot be covered in 2 words, this is not a CAD system to set up.
Sometimes it seems that it’s better not to remember about certification once again, otherwise everyone at Stark ES will work within the framework of import substitution))
Maybe it’s better to rub these posts over to Mikhail and let the officials eat their bread =)
Michael. I will comment on what I consider constructive:
"3. the architect or engineer drew it, the designer saw it in one model"
Do you suppose that it is possible to work in one model in the Allplan-MagiCAD for AutoCAD-ArchiCAD-Tekla programs?
I think you meant inside one Allplan program, but then, you contradict yourself in the post above about how you see the most efficient work in BIM. Those. when you are asked about functionality, you talk about specialized solutions, when about the exchange of tasks and joint interdisciplinary work, then “everything is in Allplan,” but it won’t work that way. And “everything in allplan” is similar to “everything in revit”, it has its pros and cons. There are a lot of disadvantages in the allplan for architects and engineers; the work is done directly for the sake of the designers and in terms of output (sq.m per person) it is no more effective than in “everything in AutoCAD” and even more so not more effective than “everything in Revit”.
Anonymous, about certification we are now discussing with ETABS their decision, they have some difficulties with obtaining all the points for reinforcement in the certificate (and they really don’t count everything according to the joint venture), it’s not as simple as you write. I’m a robot, I’m not very eager to protect , I haven’t worked with it for 5 years. And I don’t consider myself an expert on it. I’m sure that any calculations can be completed on the robot, the API is enough, if I need it, I’ll calculate it as required.
About data transfer points - they exist; data in the form of reinforcement diagrams is transferred to Revit elements. Then the reinforcement and reinforcements are laid out according to the diagrams. The sophist, using the standard API Revita, even created a diagram showing how many of the expanded system fittings are missing (the video is on their channel). You can automatically lay out the reinforcement along the diagram with Dynamo, as soon as there is a vacation, I can implement it.
Deleteto Aleksnadr:
Regarding ETABS - this most likely has to do with the desire to get money from NIP Informatics or something like that, especially since they certified Plaxis (which, by the way, does not contain any standards at all) for an impressive list in a completely different office - perhaps this is revenge on them ? =) I won’t develop this topic too much, it’s already covered far and wide.
As a recent example, my colleague working for an Australian company just recently discussed the issue of certification of their program, which, again, does not contain any standards at all. Who will agree?
p.s. I counted in ETABS even before they started selling it in the Russian Federation. I underwent examination with him both in the Russian Federation and abroad. Not everything depends on the certificate. In essence, my message is only that the certificate does not indicate anything other than its presence. And even more so, you should not have any illusions that when issuing it, calculations according to the standards are at least somehow checked (except perhaps quite occasionally).
By the way, in controversial situations (when bugs in the software were identified) there are precedents for contacting the certification body with the question “how is this possible??” and an answer in the spirit: “Are you fucking crazy? What does the certificate have to do with it?”
By the way, the robot great program. You can add to the calculations, but you are unlikely to make them productive - I believe that the calculation of all reinforced concrete elements of a building for 15-20 combinations using the iterative method according to BAT will take you many hours. And this will be a good result - this is exactly what professional programmers achieve without a narrower specialization.
I’ll add examples of certification (for those programs that are no longer scary to remember, since they are no longer on the list). At one time, for individual calculations on the territory of the Russian Federation, certificates were obtained for LS-DYNA (! multiphysics package fundamentally without standards) and GSA (Arup development program, does not contain Russian standards). The calculations were completed, the certificate was not renewed and these programs are no longer on the list...
DeleteOops, I opened the list, but GSA is still on it)) Fuck, I guess I leaked someone... Mikhail, we need to erase the certification posts - we could harm innocent people =))
Delete2. yes, but you took the functions that are in Revit LT and compared Allplan with them, while comparing the price with full version Revit, which I think is weird.
The designers we work with use at least Revit, Navisworks (to coordinate work with related companies) and Autocad, that is, it makes sense to buy a collection, even without Robot, there is, and, for example, a combination of Allplan + Solibri, if we are talking about an alternative Autodesk will already give a different price than in your comparison.
3. what does it mean to believe, we create models that contain Architecture + Constructive + Engineering (OV, VK, TS, HS, APT... for electrical purposes, trays, busbars and equipment are included in the model), and I know two options for how this can be assembled either in Revit or based on IFC, the second option is inconvenient, since: it is very difficult to organize truly joint work, there are problems with completing tasks, with working with collisions, with prices for a large zoo of products (for purchase, training and user support), plus there is a lot of additional work at the intersection of disciplines (for example, an engineer cannot simply take a model from an architect and use it as a substrate; he will have to suffer with graphics. in Revit directly in architectural pattern a view template is created for the engineers’ background and the views themselves are generated, then the engineer sees them from related model architect. and so on in everything as soon as it comes to interaction). General planners, yes, work in a separate product, but the results of their work, firstly, can be easily loaded into Revit as a connection, that is, see all updates in real time, and secondly, even this is not often required, since the interaction between general planners and subcontractors is not as intense as, for example, between an architect and a designer or HVAC engineer.
4. the designers are different, yes, you made a reservation that you are writing about quality of life, but again returning to the people who make purchasing decisions, simply because Allplan has better reinforcement, no one will buy it, that’s why comparisons, in my opinion view should be a little broader, at least covering all aspects of the work of the average designer, including working with metal and working with related products, and then the modeling will not have less weight than reinforcement. Your comparison creates the wrong impression about the capabilities of the program, although in fact only a small part of the toolkit is compared.
5. individually, in many ways, these programs are better than Revit (although Revit also has cool tools that competitors do not have), but setting up a real process of interaction between departments or companies is different from what is available when working with flat drawings It’s extremely difficult with such a zoo, and this is the most important thing.
6. it is not logical when the comparison results consist of a comparison of essentially one thing strengths(reinforcement) program, and weak points are given minimal attention or are not addressed at all.
Delete2. We have Revit 2018 in the contract, there is no LT, please drop the CP for LT.
3. Not you, but the engineers and architects of GORPROEKT, and they design (no offense) one house for years, where the most important thing is still the calculations for the most part, the structural diagram and engineering systems. And it’s a myth about one model in Revit; in order to connect all the sections you have to buy Naviswork and save the model in its own format. And if the general plan is then the third product with its own “container” of models, but in Allplan there is one model everywhere, general plan, engineer, AR, KZh, etc..... and you don’t need 3 programs. Even estimates in Allplan are built-in, but in Revit, again, it’s an external application and even the developers don’t praise http://isicad.ru/ru/articles.php?article_num=19263. Well, let's compare the price of Allplan with REvit and three appendages?
4. Do you know what the problem is with people who work in BIM? they meddle in other people's questions without understanding the problem. Write more specifically what is a great toolkit for the “average” designer.
5. Call it cool
6. Call out the weak
2. I am not involved in sales, how can I send you a commercial proposal? contact Autodesk, or at least the company’s website, where the price is $328
https://www.autodesk.com/products/revit-lt/subscribe?plc=RVTLT&term=1-YEAR&support=ADVANCED&quantity=1
3. and we are also involved in modeling in Revit for this project, since we are also part of Gorproekt, and we are also professional engineers and architects, and, in some cases, we do more than just consultations, here I’ll tell you a little about a small part of that work , what I did, if we talk specifically about modeling, starting from 32 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhN6C_utOzc
We also participate in the project in other sections.
so about us and them, you don’t quite understand how it really works. And I didn’t mean this particular project, but, in general, my experience in design and modeling. As for the timing, everything is fine with them, and about one house is also wrong, Gorproekt is developing many parallel objects comparable in complexity to Lakhta.
Now about appendages, the estimator does not need Revit, just like Allplan, he needs information obtained from the BIM model. The general planner doesn’t need everything together either. If we talk about the workplace of a specific specialist, then let’s compare, a designer needs a BIM program + Autocad (or an analogue) + a program for project coordination (not always, but this is more convenient in many cases) + a calculation program (also not always). Autodesk has all this in the AEC collection for 85,103 rubles. per year, you will have to separately purchase a calculation program, but there are also several nice bonuses like 25GB of space in the cloud and a calculation module for Revit in the cloud, where some quick assessment of a project in the early stages can be produced. What can competitors offer here, only individual products, each of which will cost quite a bit of money.
About the myth of one model in Revit and the purchase of Navisworks - this was something incomprehensible to me. There is no need to buy Navisworks, since it is already in the AEC Collection, and this program has nothing to do with the fact that the model exists in Revit, all work is carried out in Revit anyway, Navisworks is needed to check the model and for quick view, if the objects are really large. but for Allplan, for these purposes you will have to purchase Solibri or the same Navisworks.
4. I wrote quite specifically: working with subcontractors and working with metal structures, you can add to this joint work within the department - this important aspects the work of the designer, this is not in your comparison. If we consider not only the narrow task of reinforcement, then the picture may be different.
5. collaboration, dynamo, adaptive components, temporary dimensions, cloud services for model viewing, comments and quick calculations in the early stages...
6. about weak sides The comment concerned your scoring system, and specifically the fact that where Allplan has a lead, you divided such points into several, and where there are problems, everything either fit into one column, or, perhaps, was not included in the rating at all ( what exactly is not included can be partially gleaned from points 4 and 5).
7. speaking in general, I know a lot of different software at a high level and your complaints about Autodesk, that’s why they seem strange to me, since all this can be attributed to any company, take Adobe or Graphisoft, which have some kind of Archicad At the time, it developed very poorly, now it’s better, but there’s no breakthrough either. McNeel, which I really love for their Rhino, adds virtually no features at all, and that's actually fine. I’m almost sure that Allplan is not developing particularly rapidly, although I know little about this program, what I saw, I liked it in some places (reinforcement), in others I didn’t (joint work on a project). It’s just that almost any program is designed in such a way that all the cool ideas were added to it in the first years of its life, and then, in order to do something breakthrough, it’s easier to create a new one.
Delete2. I thought you were writing as an employee of the academy, because you write both “I” and “we”.
3. I have already seen this, and it is mostly fantasy, there is no working design there. Are you part of the design team and provide supervision during the construction of the Akhmat Tower?
One model in Revit is not possible, face it.....but it’s better for you to keep quiet about the estimates, you don’t even have a specialized education to approve anything.
I have already explained about collections; they are not needed by the designer or the organization. Moreover, Revit is not 100% BIM, somewhere around 15-20%, it is impossible to upload data to the CNC, it is impossible to create a sending element, only 3D design.
Comparing the LT version of Revit is also incorrect, in the comparison not all functions are indicated, but only the key ones, if you compare everything 100% there will be about 300 comparison positions and most of them are of no interest to anyone, I still write a blog about interesting topics I don’t pretend to give people a scientific basis, because lies are already visible to the naked eye, but judging by the way yours burns, the truth is a very bitter thing.
4. It turns out that if an engineer needs temporary dimensions for linking elements to axes, then the designer must work in Revit because of this? how “logical”!
Collaboration between an architect and a designer is possible and, according to the assurances of other specialists, it is better established than in REvit, the connection even with Archicad is perfect (even stairs are recognized by native ones), with Revit it is bad, since Autodesk does not pay attention to OpenBIM, and indeed.....
5.-there is joint work
-dynamo is pampering, there is direct programming for this, which is also available in Allplan via SmartPart or PythonPart
- there are no adaptive elements in Allplan engineering, the designer doesn’t need this at all, I built a foundation pit a couple of times in Revit to find out the volume, but in Allplan there is a corresponding tool for this in the “general plan” tab
-there are no temporary dimensions. But I’ve already talked about this, if necessary I’ll repeat it again, the two most obvious shortcomings in Allplan are the lack of flexibility in the axes and the lack of temporary dimensions for arranging objects, but this is more of a habit, since Allplan has temporary dimensions that relate specifically to the object, but this was not in Revit. But I don’t use this tool, most likely crfpsdftncz a long-term habit of working in Revit
-cloud services:
http://prosapr.blogspot.ru/search?q=360
http://prosapr.blogspot.ru/2015/08/autodesk-infraworks.html
-calculations are 10 times slower in combination with Revit - Robot, Allplan -Scad fast decision for now:
https://revitconsalting.blogspot.ru/2017/07/allplan-revit_24.html
6. I indicated the most important aspects of the designer’s work in the Revit and Allplan programs, that is, according to your logic, it turns out that adaptive element does everything depend on the design documentation in Revit? can you give me some examples?
Dynamo decides everything in designs (may the programming community forgive me and “blasphemy”)? can I have some examples? Is it all about cloud services? can I have some examples?
7. The topic is not about you or your work, but about a comparison of the tools necessary for a designer to perform sections of KZH, KZH0 and KZHI.
P.S. All the same, it’s time to end the idle chatter that is not relevant to the topic, especially with managers.
Mikhail, you are a funny person, as soon as you run out of normal arguments (and judging by some phrases they have ended, I draw the conclusion from this: “dynamo is pampering” - there’s even no point in explaining anything here, “if you compare everything 100% then there will be about 300 positions of comparison and most of them are of no interest to anyone" - is joint work not interesting? "I have already seen this, and it’s mostly fantasies" - these fantasies are now being realized, and in a year everything will be finished, about Akhmat there was no talk at all, there was another project in the video; “even stairs are recognized by relatives” - it seems you don’t understand how normal collaboration works and what tasks and problems arise there, hint: whether stairs are recognized from subcontractors’ files is not important at all), then the interlocutor either starts to burn something, or he starts drinking, and in a very extreme case, he becomes a manager. If anyone who knows me personally reads your comments, then in their eyes, I think you don’t look at all in the best light, and it’s really time to end the chatter.
Here's a final video about cloud services:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVjY8T4ud6Y&list=PLO7KUCpJ1y1d6PPItjMPwQI46QDRkhJxf&index=22
You yourself would have seen many use cases about dynamo if you knew how to communicate normally with people and did not suddenly leave the chat on Skype.
DeleteIn detail with all the arguments about Dynamo http://python.su/forum/topic/29106/?page=1, Alik learn the mathematical part and read the yellow press less.
And about the topic on Skype - “BIM chat”, Dima called me there, I saw that they had been discussing me like crazy for several days, something about visual programming, that, roughly speaking, I’m wrong and everything can be done, you can create a red “reinforce everything” button in a year, and ideas to move forward are worse than here:
https://revitconsalting.blogspot.ru/2017/08/bim-1987.html
Therefore, I did not study the ideas of “impressionable” people; there is a lot of work there for psychologists.
This happened two years ago, for two years the red buttons never appeared. But I already talked about this a long time ago:
https://revitconsalting.blogspot.ru/2016/01/autodesk-bim.html
It is well said about certification: B Lately engineers are increasingly using computer programs for complex calculations. Smart people They understand: what you put into the program is what you get. That a program is just a tool, and, as you know, you can hammer nails with a microscope. Unfortunately, with the spread of programs, there are more and more would-be specialists who, having learned to press buttons in a program, think that they have learned the art of calculations. Often they are with important look They say: “I have a complex calculation, a certified program, what are you proving to me here with your calculator?”
This “computer” disease abroad struck, perhaps, an even larger part of the population, since they began to use programs earlier there. Once we had to prove to our English colleagues that, by no miracle, a four-story parking lot could transfer to the base a load comparable to the weight of a sixteen-story building. The answer was: “We don’t want to know anything, we calculated it on the computer.” You can count even on an abacus or on a computer - this will not change the law of universal gravitation.
No triple-certified program guarantees the correctness of the calculations. Program developers do not bear any responsibility for the results of calculations. If an engineer makes a mistake, it is his mistake and his responsibility. The subject of certification of programs is their compliance with certain provisions of the standards. At the same time, certification and verification are different concepts. Certification does not imply verification i.e. more or less detailed verification of the results of calculations according to the program. The rules of structural mechanics are not set forth in the standards. Therefore, the certificate does not concern the correct calculation of forces in structural elements. It concerns only the program’s selection of reinforcement, selection of sections, etc. Therefore, a program that, say, only calculates forces in a beam (and does not select reinforcement) cannot be certified. This leads to the sad conclusion that a certificate is, in general, a piece of paper that helps sell commercial programs. Sometimes a non-certified calculation on a piece of paper in a column may be more correct.
This does not mean at all that you need to count everything “in a table” and abandon programs. It’s just that we, as the developers of one of the well-known calculation programs for calculating buildings and foundations (FEM models), know well that reckless trust in the results of computer calculations is extremely dangerous. A normal reaction to the results of calculations is a healthy distrust. Only after several series of calculations (including analytical ones) for an object can one draw a conclusion about the validity of their results.
Georeconstruction
Hello, colleagues, I apologize for stirring up the topic after half a year, I just asked for a link to the revit-alplan discussion and accidentally noticed this comment from Mikhail Dubko:
> Alexander, better tell us about the collective letter from designers in your organization regarding the work of BIM managers!? I think after this many will understand why you write so much in defense of Revit
And here we have just what is called “time has shown.” Therefore, for the sake of history, I will answer this comment, maybe someone will analyze such discussions.
The collective letter was from the heads of several divisions of the PIK-Project about the activities of the development service, which was involved in regulating technical issues. processes - the reason, if my memory serves me right, was an order that all departments should work according to a single design technology, according to which labor costs are recorded. Then the owner defended these managers and blocked this order.
In general, in the end it turned out that these department heads did the work on the side and used PIK-Project employees in work time for your own purposes. Those. they were not interested in transparency of technological processes. When all this was revealed, these managers were fired.
Connecting the dismissal of people for one reason with a letter regarding work in Revit and BIM managers...... I will leave this statement without comment. In 2 years, designers and architects are all on the same model?
DeleteDesign organizations are currently actively selecting and implementing modern software tools that make it possible, if possible, to cover the entire cycle of work - from the development of design documentation to its transfer to the customer for further operation. At the same time, previous methods of working with data no longer ensure the accuracy, integrity, relevance and consistency of data while maintaining acceptable timescales. s x and material costs. This is due to the increasing complexity of designed products, a significant increase in the volume of data about them, and a large number of project participants. As a result, serious problems often arise in the exchange of information between participants due to the presence of communication barriers between them.
One of the first steps in overcoming these difficulties is to present all product data in in electronic format. However, when automating individual processes in the product life cycle, various application software are used, and therefore the task arises of integrating all data about the product within a single information space. We must not forget that a full participant in the life cycle of a product is its consumer, who also needs to provide access to a single information space of the product. To solve these problems, specialized software is used: product data management systems (PDM systems). They are designed to accumulate all information about a product created by application systems into a single whole.
If we talk about construction projects, then their unified information space should include such elements as design, technical and economic issues of operation, results of periodic inspection of the condition of structural elements, etc. Combining such diverse data into a single logical model difficult task which requires special software.
Such software already exists. A unified information space for construction projects, which also takes into account the interests of operating organizations, can be successfully built on the basis of the Allplan architectural and construction design system (Nemetschek, Germany), which Russian architects and designers are increasingly choosing as their main working tool.
Allplan a comprehensive design system for all stages of the project being implemented from sketch to preparation of working documentation, combining the efforts of all participants in the work. In this case, projects developed using such popular systems, like AutoCAD, ArchiCAD and MicroStation. One of the advantages of the Allplan system is the compliance of the drawings and specifications developed with its help with the requirements of GOST and SNiP (Fig. 1).
In terms of solving the above problem of accumulating all data about an object, Allplan is interesting in that it is not just a design system, but also a database that allows you to store a large number of attributes of both the entire object and its individual elements. It is also very important that the Allplan system allows you not only to use built-in attributes, but also to assign objects with additional custom attributes (Fig. 2). Currently, the package includes libraries of standard elements, the composition of which is constantly updated.
Projects always have accompanying documentation prepared using other programs. Many documents appear after the object is transferred to the customer, during its operation. Very often they are created in the MS Office environment, which is the de facto standard for preparing documents in many organizations. Linking these documents to any part of the project using Allplan is easy, and access to them is provided with one click (Fig. 3). The documents themselves can be located on any local computer computer network organizations or even on the Internet.
The main way to form queries to the Allplan database is through specifications. Already included in the system big set specifications, including those corresponding to domestic standards. Specifications can be exported to MS Excel or placed in project working layers. The development of new specifications is also not a problem. Naturally, performing all calculations based on graphic information(area, volume, etc.) is performed automatically (Fig. 4).
These system capabilities can be successfully used by real estate firms and operating organizations, for example, when building a certification system for buildings and structures. Allplan's capabilities are not limited to working with individual structures. The Geo module allows you to plan the development of land plots taking into account their actual topography, design roads and landscaping schemes, from which you can obtain data even about individual plants at any time.
Quite often, operating organizations are faced with a situation where the documentation for an object is not complete, is outdated or has become unusable. This leads to the need to create drawings again, taking measurements of the object on site. In such cases, this system installed on laptop computer, will allow you to quickly create a sketch of the room and automatically adjust it based on direct measurement data. The work will be especially effective when connected to a computer with a laser rangefinder, interaction with which is also provided by the creators of the system.
In the latest versions of Allplan appeared new module, performing project management functions, Nemetschek Office. With its help, you can set project parameters, maintain a database of its participants, designers, clients, inspection and subcontracting organizations, manage the deadlines for completing its individual parts, financial costs, etc. (Fig. 5). This module further expands the possibilities of combining documents created using various applications(Fig. 6).
Using Nemetschek Office is especially effective when connecting an organization’s computers into a local network and connecting it to the Internet, since in this case unified environment communication between work participants and electronic document management can be implemented.
Thus, Allplan has most of the properties of a full-fledged PDM system and can be used not only for design, but throughout the entire life cycle of buildings and structures.
Allplan- CAD for architectural and construction design which offers A complex approach to construction design in general.
Available free version Allplan Junior.
Technology implemented in Allplan- This software solution for all phases of the life cycle of a construction project: from the earliest hand sketch to comprehensive design documentation. Allplan, based on an object-oriented base of simple 3D objects, creates and maintains relationships between 2D and 3D drawings, sections, projections, etc. All of these views are simply different representations of the same 3D object-oriented data.
Allplan designed specifically for construction design professionals.
Allplan combines tools into an easy-to-use, integrated product. Allplan provides the tools needed to develop artistic concepts and presentations, as well as the detailed drawing tools needed to produce both rough sketches and plans and working documentation.
Using object technology developed in 1984, Allplan offers a set of intelligent objects - walls, doors, windows, stairs, roofs, etc. The wall knows whether it is internal or external, the door automatically stands on the floor, and the window opening fits into the thickness of the wall. Objects are automatically calculated when you insert or change associated objects at any stage of the design.
Allplan Significantly increases design efficiency through intelligent automation design work. Sections and projections with hidden lines removed create detailed orthogonal, isometric views and perspectives.
Package contents Allplan:
Allplan Architecture. System of architectural and construction design of residential, public and industrial buildings.
Allplan Design. An integrated structural design package for all stages of structural design.
Allplan Fem. WITH the remaining part of the Allplan Design package, intended for the calculation of plates and disks using the finite element method (FEM).
Sources:
Leave your comment!
"Allplan" is a system computer-aided design, intended for architects and civil engineers. This system was created by Nemetschek (Germany, Munich) for construction professionals and has a number of completely unique properties that distinguish it from other CAD systems for similar purposes. Already now it contains software solutions that are ahead of today's requirements.
The technology of the future, implemented in Allplan, is a software solution for all phases of the life cycle of a construction project: from the earliest hand sketch to comprehensive design documentation. Allplan, based on an object-oriented base of simple 3D objects, creates and maintains relationships between 2D and 3D drawings, sections, projections, etc. All of these views are simply different representations of the same 3D object-oriented data. You can use for design the view or views that the best way suit your style or habits. Allplan is designed specifically for professionals in the field of construction design and offers an extraordinary approach to design.
Allplan combines the tools into an easy-to-use, integrated product. You are getting creative tools necessary for developing artistic concepts and presentations. You get the comprehensive detailing tools you need to produce thorough work documentation. From rough sketches and plans to perspectives, presentations and working papers - precisely building up your material.
Using object technology developed in 1984, Allplan offers the most powerful and elegant set of tools of any design software. Instead of using ordinary geometric elements such as lines, circles, arcs, you design using intelligent objects - walls, doors, windows, stairs, roofs, etc.
The wall knows whether it is internal or external, the door automatically stands on the floor, and the window opening fits into the thickness of the wall. Objects are automatically calculated when you insert or change associated objects at any stage of the design.
Allplan significantly increases design efficiency through intelligent automation of design work. You'll be able to satisfy ever-growing customer appetites and eliminate costly mistakes. Sections and projections with hidden lines removed create detailed orthogonal, isometric views and perspectives. Change any element and the change will be reflected in all views, drawings, specifications.
With Allplan, you will never again have to suppress your imagination, creativity and design spirit to adapt to clunky drawing programs. This number of advantages clearly shows that Allplan is best choice in Structural Design Software.
"Allplan" is not a "thing in itself". Its developers have provided the ability to communicate with others popular CAD, which is carried out through files of the IFC, DXF, DWG and DGN types.
This system is also interesting because it is not just a design system, but also a database that allows you to store a large number of attributes. Allplan now includes a new module that performs project management functions - Nemetschek office. With its help, you can set project parameters, maintain a database of its participants, designers, clients, inspection and subcontracting organizations, manage the deadlines for completing its individual parts, financial costs, etc. the same module further expands the possibilities of combining documents created in various software environments into a single project.
Creating a 3D model of a building in Allplan Architecture.
Allplan Architecture supports both conventional 2D technology for creating working documentation based on segments, arcs, circles, dimensions, text and other frame objects, and 3D modeling based on special 3D elements (walls, ceilings, window and door openings, stairs, columns , roofing, etc.). This technology involves creating a 3D model at the first stage. At the second stage, working documentation is compiled based on the model. This approach provides all the advantages of a 3D building model, but also retains the functions of creating working documentation.
The overall 3D model is divided into layers. Let's say the first group of layers contains the geometry of the 1st floor, the second group contains the geometry of the second, etc. All layers and groups of layers are named, so the work manager or system administrator very easy to find necessary information(unlike AutoCAD!). Such a well-thought-out layer structure is of great value and is used repeatedly to speed up the design of similar objects. Each layer is assigned a layer owner and employees with access rights.
Within a single layer, you can control the display through attribute layers. It's similar to AutoCAD layers, but with much more functionality. Attribute layers can also be accessed through user groups. Let's say an architect created the geometry of a building, and an electrician needs to provide cabling to the building. Allplan allows a group of electricians to provide read-only access to architectural layers, and read-write access to layers where wiring will be designed.
All wall design is usually done on a plan (see figure). The height of the walls is determined by the level of the lower and upper planes, which is set for each layer.
The analysis of the 3D model, taking into account the assigned textures, occurs in a separate animation window (see figure).
Associative views and sections
Associative views and sections allow you to work with different projections of a building in the main Allplan window. All types have associativity. For example, deleting an object in one of the views means deleting it in all. The function is quite flexible. You can select only a portion of the objects that should remain in the view. There is a dialog box for adjusting the image in the view and section.
Macros in Allplan are smart symbols, the display options of which depend on the specified scale and display mode. A macro can be a 2D or 3D object. This is a unique, original technology from Nemetschek. With its help, a representation of windows, doors and many other objects was created.
For example, window macros for a scale of 1:100 and a scale of 1:50 have completely different appearances (see figure). All macros are stored in a library consisting of separate folders. The user has the means to create his own macros and save them in the library.
Interface with other systems.
Allplan supports a two-way flexible interface with AutoCAD. To exchange 3D models with other architectural CAD systems (ArchiCAD, Revit, etc.), there is a two-way IFC interface for importing and exporting geometry with all descriptive information.
A very convenient new feature is the export of a 3D model to PDF format. When opening such PDF file in a regular Acrobat Reader, the user sees a 3D model and is also able to control its position. Additional benefits has Acrobat Professional. With its help, you can create dynamic sections of the model and take measurements. Drawings are also output in PDF format.
A very good interface has been created for transferring the model to the SCAD preprocessor, the Forum program. The forum then splits the model into elements and then performs the calculation in SCAD. The reinforcement calculation results are read into Allplan for isofield-based reinforcement layout.
Of particular importance is the direct two-way interface with the Cinema 4D program (developed by Maxon). The 3D model is exported from Allplan to Cinema 4D for high-quality photorealistic rendering and the creation of various special effects. Objects of complex shapes are exported from Cinema 4D to Allplan.
Exchange with other specialists using Allplan is supported by transferring the entire project or one layer (NDW format).
Allplan also supports import and export of almost all raster formats.
Allplan - a complete system
The entire line of software products of the Nemetschek group of companies is very extensive. This includes the expansion of GEO (DTM, Urban Planning and Landscape), Allplan Precast (automation of the design and manufacture of prefabricated reinforced concrete products), Nemetschek SCIA (calculation of reinforced concrete and metal structures according to Eurocode) and much more.
Integrated system for strength analysis and structural design Structure CAD Office.
SCAD Office is a new generation system developed by engineers for engineers and implemented by a team of experienced programmers. The system includes a high-performance computing system SCAD version 11.3, as well as a number of design and auxiliary programs that allow you to comprehensively solve issues of calculation and design of steel and reinforced concrete structures. The system is constantly evolving, the user interface and computing capabilities are being improved, and new design components are being included.
SCAD Office - software package a new generation, allowing for the calculation and design of steel and reinforced concrete structures.
Certificates of conformity:
Gosstroy of Russia (No. ROSS ru.SP 15.H000276);
Gosatomnadzor of the Russian Federation (registration number of the certification passport PS No. 124 dated 03/01/2006).
Composition of the complex.
SCAD Office includes several types of programs:
1. Computing complex Structure cad (SCAD), which is a universal settlement system finite element analysis of structures and focused on solving problems of designing buildings and structures of rather complex structure;
SCAD - a computer complex for strength analysis of structures using the finite element method
2. Support programs, designed to “serve” SCAD and provide formatting and calculation of geometric characteristics various types sections of rod elements (Section Designer, CONSUL, TONUS, SESAME), determination of loads and impacts on the structure being designed (WeST), calculation of bed coefficients required when calculating structures on an elastic foundation (CROSS), import of data from architectural systems and generation of enlarged models ( preprocessor FORUM);
SECTION CONSTRUCTOR - formation and calculation of geometric characteristics of sections from rolled profiles and sheets
CONSUL - construction of arbitrary sections and calculation of their geometric characteristics based on the theory of solid rods
TONUS - construction of arbitrary sections and calculation of their geometric characteristics based on the theory of thin-walled rods
SESAME - search for equivalent sections
WEST - calculation of loads according to SNiP "Loads and impacts" and DBN
CROSS - calculation of bed coefficients of buildings and structures on an elastic foundation
3. Design and analytical programs (CRYSTAL, ARBAT, REQUEST, DECOR, FIREPLACE, SCOPE), designed to solve particular problems of checking and calculating steel and reinforced concrete structures in accordance with the requirements of regulatory documents (SNiP, SP), calculation of base elements and foundations, calculations and inspections of elements of masonry and reinforced masonry structures for compliance with SNiP requirements;
CRYSTAL - calculation of steel structure elements
ARBAT - selection of reinforcement and examination of elements of reinforced concrete structures
REQUEST - calculation of base and foundation elements
DECOR - calculation of wooden structures
FIREPLACE - calculation of stone and reinforced stone structures
SCOPE - analysis of the stability of slopes and slopes
4. Design programs (COMETA, MONOLITH), intended for the development of design documentation at the stage of detailed development of the design solution;
MONOLITH - design of monolithic ribbed floors.
COMET, COMET-2 - calculation and design of steel structure components
5. Electronic directories(CoKon, BUSH).
CoKon - a guide to stress concentration factors and stress intensity factors
KUST - calculation and theoretical reference book for the designer
The SCAD computing complex includes advanced tools for data preparation, calculations, analysis of results and has no restrictions on the size and shape of the designed structures.
Nevertheless, for a design engineer, in many cases, “simple” problems are important, the solution of which takes a significant part of the time. Such tasks include checking the sections of elementary beams, collecting loads on structural elements, and determining the geometric characteristics of composite sections. To solve these problems, additional satellite programs were developed. Together with the computer complex, they make up the SCAD Office system.
When developing satellite programs, commonality is provided in the presentation of data, management methods, the forms used for checking regulatory requirements and displaying the results of such checks, and documenting the work. Moreover, any of the programs included in the SCAD Office system can be used offline.
Due to the fact that the user of the programs can also be a novice engineer, skipping any of the checks presented in the design standards is unacceptable.
