![]() If Chief Architect had the same level of BIM and annotations as AC and Revit, it would be a no-brainer for me. I've read some of the previous discussions on this issue, and still am not sure which is best. existing is important (with AC's renovation filters), projects with large amounts of polygon faces, have very finicky requirements with tricky terrains, unusual walls (canted/sloped/trapezoidal) and/or highly detailed condocs, then AC will be better, but you pay a price in the overall speed of producing those docs. If you are doing extremely detailed residential work, like Victorians or very contemporary designs, remodelings where showing new vs. It also has better framing tools if you are showing much structural, like framing plans. Also, if you are doing lots of interior elements with cabinets and furniture, Chief is going to be a better fit since it has more extensive residential libraries. In a nutshell, if you are a one-person office trying to get condocs out the door quickly for pretty mainstream residential projects, I suspect you will be happier with Chief Architect. ![]() For calculating quantities, a normal materials list is very easy to extract from Chief not so easy from AC. If you had an example of what you are trying to label, I could opine on that. "Auto-labels" are kind of there, but you need to use embedded macros, the use of which is not intuitive or explicitly demonstrated. These elements certainly can be selected and edited from a 3D view. Regarding BIM, you can generally add a field type (say, door hardware function) to many element types and have it scheduled. But you certainly have the option to add 2D elements, like fill patterns, lines, or text, on top of these sections/elevations. You can't edit the schedule and have the object update.) Generally, there is no reason to explode the sections and elevations if they aren't right, it is because you haven't modeled them correctly. Add a door, and the door schedule updates instantly.) However, they are not bi-directional like ArchiCAD. It certainly isn't BIM to the extent that ArchiCAD is, but the last couple of releases have made significant progress. There are some misconceptions in the OP's understanding of Chief Architect. With all of that said, are there any former Revit or Chief Architect users that migrated over to ArchiCAD and have been very satisfied? Are you able to do your work much faster than Revit, and feel it is much more powerful for your needs than CA? At this point, I could go either way with CA or ArchiCAD, so I'd greatly appreciate your opinions on this issue. ![]() Other than that, it would be very fast and allow me to make money faster. I really like CA, but it's not full BIM, doesn't have auto labels, you can't schedule anything other than what they have, no live schedules, you can't click everything in 3D to edit like full BIM, the elevations and sections need to get exploded to edit the lines. I've also been following a training book on Chief Architect and slowly working on a house learning the software. I recently downloaded the trial of ArchiCAD, and so far very impressed. Revit is powerful and nice at some things, but a pain at any building that's not a square box with flat roof. I'm a current Revit (advanced) user using it for mostly residential projects, and I'm looking for a better solution that is faster and overall more efficient for simple and complex residential projects. Hi all, I'm brand new to this forum, so thanks' for responding to my post. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |