Topic: AutoCAD Structural Detailing

[MickD]

... has anyone used it yet?

if so what are your first impressions/thoughts?

cheers,
Mick.

[Kerry]

Haven't tried it yet Mick.

.... but I have been keeping it in mind 


It'll need to be pretty good to make me think of changing.

though recently (12 months or so ) I've been doing more piping and vessel work than Structural

[MickD]

Are you still using TSD Kerry?

I'm even looking at Tekla Structures (xsteel) but it better be as good as they say before we fork over that sort of money. So far though it's looking a lot better than it used to in it's xsteel days and you can import/export to spacegass which is a big help for us.

Inventor is nice for some of the work we do here but with structural it's a bit to constrictive in it's use, it's harder to model in a amin assembly but for semi mechanical work like conveyors and hoppers etc it's quite good.

For most of my structural stuff I've been using my tools but I don't have time (or inclination) to finish them off properly (read re-write ) and I'm after a more complete package.

[MickD]

I'm downloading a demo version now, I'll be back

[MickD]

hmmmmm.....so far so so

It's not very intuitive and drawing creation is clunky but I'm sure it's better than what I've tried to do so far.
With a bit of fiddling the auto output is tolerable but I've only managed to do some simple modelling to create a demo member for detailing.
I'd also say that it would need some localised configuring before being shipped proper (e.g. to suit Australian standards say) and I don't see too many 'ready to go' auto connections.
A deep study of the help is in order and I can't seem to find a tutorial anywhere but I'll persevere for a bit longer.

As usual with new app's like this it's got some bugs, I've crashed it twice and it dropped the ball if I didn't fullfill every item in a connection dialog, it just lost all commands and I had to reboot???

[Kerry]

Does it have an API Mick ?

If so, Which languages.


///...

I've been doing some playing with Mechanical BOM's
COM from Vlisp and C# .... torturous

... I'd hazard a guess that the BOM/Material List is completely different.

[MickD]

It's only got a COM api (with VBA included I think) for the vertical package, all else can be handled in your favourite language/s though.

I'm losing patience very quickly with it though, I can't even get a basic end plate connection happening without it dropping the ball and it doesn't seem to have any real parametric ability to suit member sizes from what I can see so far

The auto dim's are not as configurable as I'd like either, this is where nearly all of these verticals fall down (TSD is the only one I've used so far that details as you would 'by hand' that's the easiest to check).
These developers just can't get this part right (with the reason most likely being they don't detail or check for a living), it's pretty straight forward and common sense really and the drawings are cleaner to boot.

I wish I could produce a drawing Kerry so I could give the mat lists a go, they seem pretty comprehensive and configurable (so it seems at least).

I've been having a play with Tekla structures and even without any training I can produce a model and some details pretty quickly, with experience this would be a very powerful and very fast app! (The price tag hurts though...approx. $38k for Aussies a seat!!).
Dimension output is very configurable and the details are 'live' linked to the model and don't mess up your changes or extra dim's and symbols on updates.

We are also going to investigate Graitec Advance Steel (apparently written by an ex Tekla guy) which doesn't look too bad, I'll keep you posted.

[Kerry]

Thanks Mick.

If I was 30 years younger I'd have a good look at Tekla.(n3)  ... it's come a long way in the past 5-8 years.


(n3)
If so , I'd probably have the energy and inclination to burn candles and pay for it really quickly.


/// kdub

[MickD]

Yep, it's not my purchase though and we could be talking 2 to eventually 10 seats, that's a lot of dough!

I'd also like it for myself and probably do as you suggest but I don't have a lazy 40k lying around

[Dr. After]

Well, sorry to dig up an old post, but this is the only one on the board, it seems.

I've been head first into AutoCAD Structural Detailing 2012 now for two months and all I can say is, "wow".  Not necessarily a good "wow", but coming up from 2D in VanillaCAD 2006 to this was a huge leap.  I do have experience with modeling in many programs, but this is like learnin Chinese when coming from what anyone taught us about CAD.

With that said, I like it.  It's overly flexible they way AutoCAD has been, but with that said, get ready for the trial and error in setting things up best for you.  The automatic drawing creation will take some serious tweeking to make useful if your company produces diverse things like we do.  But if you are making something that requires the same views and details, a sheet could be set up to create a finished sheet.

I have had a butt load of crashes as of the last couple weeks and AutoDesk is not that great on getting me going again.  I'm trying a fresh install of only ASD (nothing else from my design suite) and see if I can get this running well.  But it seems to be flaky with positions and blocks and xrefs or the combination of those.  But, I like where they are at with what it will do.

I'd say the biggest change is drafting initially for the BIM process rather than just spitting out some submittals, so the upfront work is a lot more, but when it's time for fabrication, I just have it spit out the detail of that assembly or part that is all kept in order by ASD.  I'd say the time saved in creating partlists and tables is enough value alone.

[MickD]

I've been head first into AutoCAD Structural Detailing 2012 now for two months and all I can say is, "wow".  Not necessarily a good "wow", but coming up from 2D in VanillaCAD 2006 to this was a huge leap.

Yep, it's is a big step, so big in fact that you don't want to go back that huge step, good bye 2d!

ASD definitely has a future and looked pretty good the last version I saw it (2011) but it is still pretty 'green' compared to what's been around for quite a long time.
In a smaller office that can settle for the standard type of output and set your own standards around that it would be fine, when it comes to larger projects and larger teams of drafters, a more mature application is a better investment.