RISA-3D vs Visual Analysis (and others)

[dauwerda]

First, I know that there have been many threads on the various structural analysis programs in the past, and I have read many of those. That said, these programs are ever changing and adding new features (and bugs) and I would like to hear people's current thoughts, specifically about RISA-3D and Visual Analysis, but feel free to give some thoughts on other programs as well.

I have been using RISA-3D since 2008, so I know the program very well (or did until version 18 came along ). I also use RISA Connection and Foundation through the integration that they use, however most of work I do is in RISA-3D. I was not overly impressed with the way RISA rolled out their major update and as much as I want to like it, I'm still not liking the version 19 interface. I say all that to say, I am seriously considering switching over to another software.

I started with the idea that I might switch to SAP2000 as it can do some more robust nonlinear analysis (depending on which level of the program you get), but after downloading their trial and running through the tutorial they provide, I am not going to pursue that any further. Building models is nowhere near as intuitive as it is in RISA-3D (in my opinion) and I don't need more powerful analysis options enough to warrant the tradeoff in modeling speed.

Another program I am considering is Tekla Structural Designer (the company I work for uses Tekla Structures for detailing), however I have not pursed that one too much as of yet. (Does anyone here have any experience with this program?)

The program that has really caught my interest is Visual Analysis, I have no experience with VA, I only know about the program because of eng-tips. I downloaded the free trial and have been watching their training videos. So far I really like what I see. It seems to be even more intuitive than RISA-3D, and just as robust (though I still have lots of exploring to do). I wish they had a pdf tutorial to work through like RISA and SAP2000 but I will make do with their videos.

For those that have used both RISA-3D and Visual Analysis, what are your thoughts between the programs? If you had to pick one to use which would it be? Is there anything that RISA-3D does that I would miss if I switch to VA? (I do not use RISA Floor). Are there any major difference that stand out between the two programs?

I appreciate everyone's thoughts and opinions on this matter (and again, please feel free to give thoughts on other comparable software as well).

 

[dauwerda]

I'm wondering dauwerda what you decided. Did you get the VA? If so what suite, subscription or perpetual license?

When I first started looking into new programs I actually had some extra time to do so. Unfortunately I got backlogged on work before I made it through my evaluation process and either had to renew RISA or semi-blindly select a new software package. I decided to renew RISA - I'm still running v17 however. I do still plan on vetting Visual Analysis more though and will probably make the switch at the next renewal period.

 

[RFreund]

I'm not exactly sure what all the options are for purchasing Bentley products, but the structural enterprise subscription is pretty good. I have griped and complained about Bentley because it can be difficult to know which software is best suited for your project, but once you get it figured out, you have everything you need. With the "enterprise package" you basically have access to everything. RAM Structural System is good for standard buildings, but you must work within its constraints. If it truly is a typical building, then no other package will be able to model and design the entire building faster (including connections and foundations) and it typically matches your "hand calculations" (i.e. tributary area design, separate gravity and FEM load takedowns, and designs composite steel beams). Ram Elments is good for most simple FE models and it has helpful modules for beams, retaining walls, connections, etc. STAAD Pro is better suited for complex models or concrete buildings, but I've been trying to use it on more commeon projects. It used to take a massive learning curve. However, now that they have the physical modeler, it is much easier to use and construct a model. If they keep developing the physical modeler and incorporating some options that come with RAMSS and RAM Elements, then I think you'd really have an all inclusive analysis/modelling machine. However, because of how fragmented everything is, I can make arguments for other software (and often have).
One software that looked really promising was SCIA Engineer (sorry Josh, another Nemetschelk company), but they don't really offer much design for US Codes.

I also like RISA and SAP. RISA is (or was) slightly more intuitive, but if you develop your own calculations, you start to understand any UI after while and start to realize why/how the setups are the way they are. As long as they are consistent, I can get on board with it.

Another thing that gets over looked when evaluating these programs are the calculation reports. Now that you have to submit calcs on every job, keep this in mind b/c some programs are easier than other to create a report.

 

[RPSCHMITZ]

I'm reviewing VA right now and it seems pretty decent the way it's laid out. I think I'd go with the building suite. I have a separate steel connections program but it's outdated. If I renewed it would probably be subscription based as well. I have the WoodWorks suite (Sizer, Connections, Shearwalls) but I see they are now subscription based too. I've developed a number of applications for concrete foundations, masonry, steel, timber, ASCE 7 wind loads and snow loads in MathCad over the years to fill in the gaps. Takes some work to keep updated. Need to review the foundations, connections and shapes parts yet. Be curious to see what the wood connection application capabilities are.