Hola alguien ha hecho una comparación completa entre aecosim y revit? Pueden compartir el resultado?
Gracias
Jorge Chavez Marquez
México
Hola Jorge,
Muchas organizaciones han estado utilizando el software de información y construcción (BIM Tools) entre ellos están ingenieros, directores de proyectos y consultores de costes en el diseño de infraestructuras. Revit y AECOsim son dos reconocidas herramientas en el mercado de BIM. Aquí hay algunas comparaciones entre ambos productos:
¿Por qué Revit?
¿Por qué AECOsim?
Why Revit?
Why AECOsim?
When Revit has a problem synch'ing to central, it gets very ugly > This mainly happens when there is a corruption in the file, like a corrupted family. AECOsim has same problem when there is an corrupted element in the model.
Not really comparable. You would say that ACAD files also get corrupted once in awhile. Recovering is a big pain.
Sure, but that is like saying 'it has four wheels, its a Bentley' :-) Apparently, lots of landscape architects find Revit for landscaping shockingly troublesome. “It will make you pull your hair out.”
I think that is the Autodesk kool aid Stockholm syndrome speaking. One problem I see with this way of working is that it creates an over reliance on clash detection meetings to resolve problems. There should be ore clash avoidance instead of retroactive clash detection. As mentioned above the old traditional CAD apps are much better at Xref'ing files and have much better situational awareness because of this.
Any project. Roads, railways, bridges, sewers, mapping, surveying, dams, factories, electrical towers, substations, airports, railway stations etc etc
Well, I can see that you are a die hard Bentley user and I respect that. For me AECOsim is not the answer because I would like to see a complete overhaul of the software before working with it ever again.
With respect, from you answers I don't think you know either very well.
Do a search for my posts on this website, you will see that I am not blind about a lot of things Aecosim and Mstn fail miserably at... and the slow overall pace of development
As mentioned, we use both in the office. There is a lot to like about Revit. But I don't think that it is the answer to everything... especially with large projects. Even Autodesk acknowledges its scalbaility and interoperability problems and are looking at things like Project Quantum in an effort to overcome these limitations.
Well, I know about your posts, I have read almost all of them. Sometimes when reading your post I really ask myself the question, why are you comparing Revit with ABD? If you know many products so why are you not comparing ABD with AutoCAD Architecture and/or Vectorworks? Revit is not CAD so I will not compare it with any CAD software in the market. Regarding Bentley products, believe me, I do know what Bentley products can do and can't do.
Every company has its own way of solving model/project problems and/or issues, this simply has to do with every project being unique. Some projects can be massive (scale wise) and some not.
There are companies which like to have the whole design in one model and some not. Now whether MS/ABD can handle big projects or not, it still requires time to load and update the model when changes are made to it. We split our models, this helps with reducing loading time and users/designers can pay attention to particular detail(s) in the model. I mean, loading time of a massive site (i.e. 7,50km x 4,80km) takes up time, whether using MS, ABD or Revit. Splitting the model reduces the loading time and it also makes it is easier handing over your model if required.
So it is not about bashing a software it is about your workflow regarding how you would tackle any project issues/problems and which tools are you going to use to solve that. There is nothing 100% perfect, whether it is a software or your car. You use it because it helps you with your daily stuff and/or work. Every software has its pros and cons, so every software is powerful in its on way.
Revit is the natural comparison to ABD in the UK and in the infrastructure sector.
I have also looked at other packages including ADT, archived, vectorworks, all plan, bricsad, tekla, microgds, vertex, elitecad, edificius, Renga, arc+, arcitrion/boacad, visarq, digital project and others.
I don't really believe in the division between cad ànd BIM.
It is just marketing hype.
Revit users still rely heavily on drafting to produce construction information. Revit users suffer because of the lack of cad origins.
Loading large files. Mstn and even acad still has the upper hand. You can rationalise as much as you want.
As mentioned, I think and has plenty of problems. But for a tool to tàke on most jobs in the aec sector, it is still has a lot going for it.
PS:
What is BIM versus CAD? Even in the infrastructure sector, everything is getting BIM deliverables as requirements.
Pretty soon, everyone will have to sign up to providing BIM deliverables and there will be no point talking about cad only, and therefore no point contrasting cad versus BIM.
Fosters I think are secretly waiting on Mstn to improve to the point where they can dev their own version of aecosim, after waiting for aecosim to correct its problems after so many years. Looking at ce, it isn't too far off I think.
Revits problem it's original authors did not think 2d cad and interoperability was necessary, and this has come back to haunt them.
2d or CAD is not inherently bad. What is bad is when it isn't connected or synched to the 3d or other 2d info. Which is Revits brand of BIM does very well... At a cost.
Bentley needs to get a parametrics breakthrough soon at platform level. It needs to build on its dependency API.
Needs to integrate GC with the new constraints solver, Functional Components.
Needs to provide the means for GC components to run like FC components w/o GC addon. Or build GC into Mstn or ABD.
GC needs to enhanced to expose more of the new dotnet API coming in with CE so that it is more comparable to Dynamo.