Light-Frame Wood Design Software with Modeling and Load Tracing Capabilities 2

[BaileyW]

Hi all,

I've been searching for wood design software for some time now and figured I'd check here to see if anyone knows something that I don't. I've been searching for a software that is capable of 3D modeling light-frame wood construction as well as load pathing/tracing automatically. I know several programs that do this (MiTek Structure, Javelin, BC Framer, etc.) but they are almost exclusively only available to distributors of their individual EWP products. The homes I generally work on are very large and complex (currently working on a design for a 16,500 sqft single family residence) so the usual Enercalc/WoodWorks/Tedds (single-member analysis programs) are very time consuming to utilize. I end up spending most of my time determining the load on a beam or a reaction at a pier than I do actually sizing members.

I know Ram and Risa are somewhat capable, but they really aren't suited for that or really even comparable to the programs I listed above.

Any thoughts or recommendations that may be worth looking into? I did some research and I think Javelin may technically be available to non-dealers, but I'd rather not put all my eggs in a single basket without some supporting evidence. I hadn't heard of Javelin until a few days ago so I wouldn't want to commit to something that may not be ideal.

Thanks

 

[Pmtottawa]

Simpson has their ewd software available to engineers

 

[lexpatrie]

I think wood works, (Canadian software company), strucalc (I think the name changed and it's a monthly model AFAIK), and ForteWeb have some capabilities in this direction but they may not do the 3D model, they just do load transfer. That sounds more like your bottleneck, otherwise there's always the spreadsheet route... maximum control, maximum customization, maximum effort (to set up).

I really am not a fan of EnerCalc and it's another monthly vig AFAIK and I'm not sure there's any load transfer features.

 

[BaileyW]

@lexpatrie - WoodWorks, StruCalc, and EnerCalc are all fine programs, they are good for what they are intended for, single member analysis, one at a time. WoodWoods has some other features but not to the level that would be beneficial. I've used StruCalc in the past and it was very good with residential design. I use EnerCalc frequently at the moment for designing all kinds of things, but its only single components. I'd agree that a spreadsheet would be nice but I can't imagine being able to compare an excel spreadsheet to full scale model with load tracing.

@Pmtottawa - I'm going to look into the Simpson EWP Studio program. That sounds like it may be what i'm looking for. I haven't heard of it before but based on the features it seems to be capable of what i'm looking for. With the added benefit of having access to multiple EWP manufacturer's rather than just one.

The essence of my search is essentially that lumber suppliers who are selling EWP products are using softwares like MiTek Structure, etc. and are able to pump out full construction level plans (I use 'construction level' loosely... Builders will build off of them, but they are by no means structural drawings) in a matter of days

 

[dold]

You mentioned RISA and RAM. RAM would not be suited to your needs but RISA very well could be. RISA Floor + RISA 3D would be my suggestion. Wood design in RISA can be tricky but it is accurate if you are well organized and take the time to truly understand material property assignments and all that.

 

[BaileyW]

@dold

I agree RISA is a contender, I'm just not a fan of the wire-frame type modeling for something like this. It works fine for steel framing, etc. but I'd really rather something is modeling in a more 'rendered' aspect rather than line work with nodes. I very well could be asking too much for the general engineering software populace, but I think the dream would be to have the drawing/modeling capability of CAD products with the analysis capabilities of the EWP design software. I got in contact with a field engineer we've worked with in the past with Simpson and he's getting me a contact for their EWP software. I'll post any updates I find

 

[Eng16080]

I'm not sure anything exists that does quite what you're asking. The closest would perhaps be the ones you already mentioned, although as you also mention, I think these programs are meant more for the vendors selling wood products than engineers trying to ensure that the overall structure is adequate. I do think this software generally works well for gravity loads in cases where the framing is generally straight-forward.

I've spent a significant amount of my free time trying to develop software like what you're describing, and all I can say is it's very, very difficult. The problem is that there are so many unique conditions that need to be accounted for with wood framing. And beyond that, this software would ideally not just be limited to wood, but would also support steel and concrete foundations.

I would consider RISA3D the closest engineering solution to what you describe.

 

[lexpatrie]

If I might suggest "custom" software as a first pass try to handle the 50% routine items and build your feature set out from there. If you want to handle steel and concrete foundations and wood, make it happen.

That will get you to a minimum viable product (for use "in house" or "developer only" (developer meaning software developer, the guy who created the spreadsheet or program) the fancier software can pick up the fancier stuff.

As time permits, add items, update codes, maintain a change log, etc.

 

[human909]

I don't see an easy software approach to frame analysis in timber structures. There are just too many members and load paths and too many subtleties. Also there is significant variation between regions in construction approach often even with the same country.

I've personally found ClearCalcs to be quite useful for residential design. I'm relatively new to residential design and it has been my chosen too after consider my options including a comprehensive set of inherited Excel calculation sheets. You can readily check and design members and link member reactions into other members to cascade you load paths, so it has load tracing but not in a 3D modelling environment. Most experienced engineers probably have their paper/Excel or other systems in place and might not see the benefits. But if you are younger and still seeking out the best approaches ClearCase is quite good.

ClearCalcs is still growing and seems to be mostly focussed on residential in the US and AUS markets. It has EU, CAN, NZ but these seem insufficiently support from what I've seen.

 

[lexpatrie]

It can be done, especially if you think it through before you set things up, and are willing to tear up 10 hours of work when it doesn't pan out the way you wanted. Programming experience helps (in the setup, I don't mean creating a program, I still mean a spreadsheet).

I forgot about clearance, I did use their rafter tie module a while ago, I'm too particular about how things look to really go for a commercial suite.

 

[XR250]

I have not found anything but I really have not looked. My HP 15C, some Excel spreadsheets and a 2D Frame program from 1990 are all I use. Well, sometimes BC-Calc. Most of my designs are dimensional lumber so there isn't a lot of companies beating down the door to design programs for this if they're not selling material.

 

[BaileyW]

I agree with all of you. The difficulty in wood is that construction wise there is so much flexibility. This search for a program stems from working with EWP distributors. I am frequently reviewing their plans/calculations and helping out where they need design guidance, differing materials, etc. With the programs they use, it’s difficult to analytically decipher the design results with the automatic pathing features. A big part of it is figuring out what the load on a member is based on their calculations. I can find the load on a beam easy enough myself, but 9/10 times it’s different than what their program provides, sometimes more sometimes less. That’s why I’ve been searching for a program with the same features. If I can use something that’s working in a similar manner, it’s going to be a lot easier on my end when I have to dig into these types of isolated calculation issues.

Just from a PE perspective, I can’t automatically assume their program has loaded things correctly. If I could use a similar software and set it up myself it would be easier to see where these loads are coming, especially with a 3d model and not having to fiddle with overlaying floor plans. It actually amazes me how Arch plans can be mis-scaled without anyone noticing (side rant for another day).

I appreciate all the feedback. You all have had some great ideas / comments. Maybe one day there will be a one-stop shop program for wood

 

[lexpatrie]

BC calc the predecessor to Forte?

 

[XR250]

BC calc the predecessor to Forte?

​

https://www.bccalc.com/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=/

It is Bosie's version of Forte. Still around.I use it because our local lumber yard sells their products and I am familiar with the software.

 

[Celt83]

If you’re mostly after load tracing then woodworks concept mode is passable. Autodesk Robot added in a load take down analysis in 2023 which functions ok within it’s limits, I’d say if you have robot already worth giving it a try.

 

[XR250]

Honestly, I would probably be done with the house before you even finish getting it modeled.
The more houses you do, the more shortcuts you learn. I can eyeball most beams at this point in my career.

 

[Celt83]

No argument there XR250 software like this is more beneficial for your 3-5 story multi-family project.

 

[Eng16080]

If I might suggest "custom" software as a first pass try to handle the 50% routine items and build your feature set out from there.

Based on my own struggles trying to create something like what OP is asking for, this is great advice and essentially the conclusion I arrived at. The hardest part about creating something like this is finding the right balance between something that is so simple it's useless and something that's so general, you'll never finish it.

With the programs they use, it’s difficult to analytically decipher the design results with the automatic pathing features. A big part of it is figuring out what the load on a member is based on their calculations. I can find the load on a beam easy enough myself, but 9/10 times it’s different than what their program provides, sometimes more sometimes less.

I do think their software generally works well, although I can also say I've gotten several jobs where the "plans" were done by the lumber yard using this software, and the builder was scared.

If you’re mostly after load tracing then woodworks concept mode is passable

I've also used this a few times and it seemed alright.

Honestly, I would probably be done with the house before you even finish getting it modeled.

I've done projects where I modeled an entire house in RISA3D in the hopes of realizing some efficiency gains. In the end, I'd have a great, very thorough model, but it would always take way longer than if I had traced the loads manually and run one off beam and column calcs. Similarly, every couple years or so, I'll attempt to model an entire structure in revit and then generate the plans. I know there are people who swear by it, and I know it has major benefits, but it always takes me longer, and I'm more frustrated the whole time.

 

[BaileyW]

[No argument there XR250 software like this is more beneficial for your 3-5 story multi-family project.]

Completely agree. The intent is not to model every single project. If we want to be real anyone can build a house without any form of engineering as long as it falls within the realm of the IRC. In that scenario it's a waste of time.

I'd only be creating a genuine model for a project that needs it. Like I said in the OP, right now I"m working on a single family home that is roughly 16,500sqft. I'm talking spans of 35+ feet over the kitchen and headers spanning 33 feet above accordion doors, Catwalks throughout the second floor with glass handrails, windows that wrap around corners thusly requiring cantilevered headers, the list of unique traits goes on

[I do think their software generally works well, although I can also say I've gotten several jobs where the "plans" were done by the lumber yard using this software, and the builder was scared.]

My current project is exactly this. This is usually always how I get involved. I work closely with the builder in this case on several other projects, but they use me when they are building the higher end stuff because the suppliers just aren't capable to do something like this on their own. Where i'm located if the house is under 5,000 sqft you dont need engineered plans so this is 70% of all residential construction at the moment.

With that being said, this isn't my first rodeo on a house like this (i'm usually only involved on houses that are 'like this'), so I am more than capable of doing this the old fashion way, it just takes some time. The point of the load tracing for me would be the ease of determining loading on certain components. I'm not planning on using the software to design floors or typical headers, but more so to speed up the process of tracing loads from three, four, or five stories and determining what the load on a ground level beam or header is. Not trying to dumb-down or simplify the already simple stuff, only the stuff that isnt so straight forward

As a general update for all commentors: I've had some meetings with Simpson on the CS EWP Studio software and it is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for. Its nearly exactly what the lumber suppliers are using. However, it has the added benefit of being able to size members from nearly 40 different EWP MFRs.

 

[KootK]

I used to run CSD for this which was, at the time, far better than anything else that I know of. I had high hopes for RISA but that never panned out for me.

CSD has been bought by Simpson and is now their offering: Link

CSD was an outgrowth of the old Mitek software analog previously offered by Jager Industries. So it very much does what one would expect something like mitek to do. It just offers non-proprietary member choices which is, of course, key from an EOR perspective.

When I used to run CSD, It was upwards of $200 CAD per month. Expensive but worth it in spades in my opinion if you do light frame wood at significant volume.

It is pretty easy to deal with wood with spreadsheets etc. There's little continuity to consider afer all. That said, I just like modelling stuff and watching it run at light speed. For me, it was worth the price of admission just for this so long as I was doing $5k+ worth of light frame each month.