AutoCAD office debate- to draw in 2D or Model in 3D?

[WR3X]

In our office the structural engineer does most of the bulk drawing of the structure himself in 2D and lets the Draughts person do the finishing touches. We are looking at purchasing the AutoCAD 3D Package but debating wether it is worth it? Should the engineer model the structure and then pass it on to the CAD department to place it on the drawing?

 

[Ussuri]

I would say no. In my opinion that is more beneficial if doing mechanical design as opposed to structural.

I sketch up details in Autocad as it allows me to draw to scale (in 2D) and then manipulate the detail until I get something workable. I would then print this out and annotate it by hand and give it to the drawing office. They take this and spent the time and effort creating a 3D inventor model. It takes time and skill to develop a good 3D model. It is a full time job.

I think the structural engineers time would be used more cost effectively developing the design instead of drawing up a really good 3D model.

 

[RareBugTX]

No way!!!!!, IMO Drawings are by nature Two dimensional.Software developers (Who are not Engineers or Architects) are trying use this 3d Capabilities argument to sell more copies of their products. By drawing in 2D you are also making yourself a favor by forcing to rethink if what you are drawing in 2D makes sense. I would invest my time instead in writing software for analysis and design like excel spreadsheets, mathcad or matlab docs, etc,than wasting my time in this UNNECESSARY 3D myth. That is my opinion.

 

[WR3X]

I tend to agree with Rarebug. Our 3D structural analysis program isnt very compatible with AutoCAD 3D, meaning once you have modeled the 3D structure in AutoCAD you cant simply import it into the analysis program and analyse (Finite element analysis) and design. if this was the case i think it would have been worth it.

 

[SperlingPE]

I work in an A/E office. The 3d wave isn't all that people think it is. Nor is it all that the CAD marketing people say that it is. However, it is the future/present in the architecture industry that I work in. Analysis software will lag behind until the 3d software is further entrenched.

The 3d craze is similar to when AutoCAD became more available. There were people that thought youjust puched a button and it magically drew what you wanted. There were people that thought that you would lose touch with what you are drawing (since anyone could now draw).

 

[JamesBarlow]

As a devout user of solid modeling software I will say that I agree with much of what has been said.

I would rather be beaten with sticks then draw something in 2D but I don't design structures. I'm a machine builder and the introduction of 3D drawing, or solid modeling, was a god send for me personally. It's been over 8 years since I designed anything using using a 2D package and won't ever go back. I have turned down jobs simply because they don't use a solid modeling package.

Having said that though I agree that 3D is not the panacea that some make it out to be. Civil and structural are two places were it isn't there yet. I have designed some basic structures over the years and did them all in 3D. I can't honestly say it helped any in the design but I would not have been able to do them any other way. I have always strugled with taking the thing in my head and making 2D drawings of it. 3D made this process very easy for me since I think in 3D and it has helped me out tremendously is all my work.

If you feel you have a need, or that it would help, then by all means try out the 3D stuff but if everyone is good with the 2D and it's working then keep at it. It's just one of the many tools we as Engineers use in our daily work and just like every other tool it won't be the best one for everyone or everything.

 

[MarcbSE]

Looking at it from a strictly structural perspective, I personally do not see the benefit of going with a 3d drafting package unless you are dealing with very large structures unless it is fully compatable with your design software.

I don't know how many times my clients have mentioned Revit and talk about how great and wonderful it is. However, we have looked into it and from trying it, it is not that effective for structures - yet.

I would personally prefer to leave 100% of the drafting to my drafting department and the people who are the most efficient at it. I do design. That is what I am efficient at. It saves my clients' money, or makes me more profit, to work this way.

Besides that, unless it is a large and/or irregular structure subject to dynamic analysis I can usually go through the design myself faster than I could develop a full 3d model, debug it, make sure every connection is modeled correctly, etc., etc., etc...