Software Migration 2

[humanengr]

I'm wondering if anyone can share some experiences in migrating a relatively large organization from STAAD.Pro to RISA Suite.
I'm curious as to pushback (resistance to change) difficulties in adjusting to RISA, and any software limitations in RISA vs. STAAD.
RISA would be used primarily for industrial structures.
Impetus for changing software is RISA Suite is more efficient, particularly better GUI, integration of 3D, Foundation, and Connection design, and quicker
handling of results, modifications, etc.
In my experiencing migrating from STAAD to RISA is like a fish going to water, but STAAD may have made some improvements.

 

[canwesteng]

The GUI in STAAD probably got worse if anything. Although once you're good at it you can rip through models real fast, which is probably where you'll get pushback. Probably STAAD's only real strength is relative transparency and model building speed, at least compared to S-Frame and SAP2000. Never used RISA.

 

[phamENG]

Not sure if now is the best time to jump to RISA. Check out the "New Format" thread in the RISA forum. They changed leadership recently and just released a major update. Supposedly it's really buggy. I haven't used it since v16 - it was fantastic. Really intuitive and user friendly. A lot of people are reporting problems now, though.

 

[STpipe]

We are currently in the process of going through our own software migration. In our case, it's not much pushback due to resistance to change. Everyone on the team is confident that they'll eventually be as proficient with the new software - the resistance comes from the expected drop in productivity until we get up to speed with the new software.

 

[Agent666]

Based on my experiences (transitioning a company of 30+ engineers from Microstran diehards to Spacegass). Number one is instigating some thorough training, this is key. Get everyone in the same room and go through everything imaginable, show them they can do the same things in the new software and its not some massive hassle. Get someone to be the new packages 'champion', answering questions, helping people out when required, etc.

It's easy if you are going from a package people percieve (or is actually) inferior to a better package. The opposite if going from a better package to one people perceive as being worse or one that is actually worse.

There will always be one or two people who resist, we had one guy flat out refuse to change because in his own words he was a 'master' of the microstran software. Once the licenses expired he went so far as installing cracked versions of the software so he could carry on using it, I just gave up trying, management were useless and really didn't care.

Most software is similar, even if they do some things slightly differently. If you can use one, you can generally use another unless you're a 'master'.

 

[Settingsun]

If you can manage it, get your champions transitioned first so they do actually have some answers, unless they've already used the new software elsewhere.

Widespread pushback is more likely to come from bad management attitude. Eg busting balls because jobs are running over/late when this is due to company rug-pulling and obstacle-setting (ie the software transition). The jobs were bid on the basis of familiar software and this should be understood, or be prepared for grumbling.

Risa has a good reputation judging from posting here so I expect that shouldn't be the issue.

 

[Celt83]

Have been looking into a similar transition. One major hang up is we need to be able to access the structural models for existing projects for the remainder of their design and construction life cycle so at best we are looking at a 3-5 year period where we need to carry a license or two of the software package we are trying to migrate away from.

Open Source Structural Applications:

https://github.com/buddyd16/Structural-Engineering

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Risa has a good reputation judging from posting here so I expect that shouldn't be the issue.

Yes, RISA has had a very good reputation over the years. Though you might want to check out the latest in the RISA forums. The company is under new management and has had a large turnover in personnel. So, it may no longer be the same company you were used to hearing about. Lots of new policies that are not particularly user friendly. Lots of the most experienced / knowledgeable engineers are gone and in their place are newbies.

Caveat: I worked for RISA for 16 years and was the VP of engineering (more or less) prior to the Nemetschek take over. And, I wasn't particularly pleased with the way the new management forced me (and a number of other good engineers) out of the company. Also, I now work for one of RISA's competitors. Therefore, I am most certainly not an unbiased observer.

 

[r13]

As a relatively large organization, you shall be afford to parallel STAAD and RISA licenses for a certain amount of time. The transition shall go slow, start with a small, dedicate group, or engineers, then push forward. I used to use both, but I would say switch from STAAD to RISA might need little more efforts than the other way around. To me, the freedom on input methods of STAAD has very strong hold to its users, I still remember the input format line by line after having stopped use it for years.

 

[JAE]

Ashley please stop soliciting your product on the site here. Read the site policies.

 

[Sye123]

humanengr : Not sure if your engineers are using the STAAD.Pro CONNECT Edition as that has a new GUI and a new physical modeler specifically for those who prefer physical modeling. STAAD Foundation Advanced (for foundation design) and RAM Connection (for the connection design) are tools that are integrated with STAAD.Pro and may be worth trying if you are not already using these.

Personally I am not a great advocate for a software change (one way or the other) unless you are running into real road blocks as there is always a significant amount of data loss in migrating projects from one software to another which leads to lot of duplication of efforts, let alone the learning curve associated with the migration which has already been discussed by multiple people in this thread.

 

[CarlosAguera]

STAAD.Pro has certainly changed over the years as has all engineering software. The updates are designed are to keep ahead of changes in engineering practices and goals to improve productivity such as by providing better interop solutions. Sometimes these changes may be more beneficial to some engineers and less to others. Also it is fair to say that the way we interact with computers has changed radically with more use of remote cloud based solutions. I appreciate that some changes of these changes may be less welcome and others simply don't come fast enough.
So you know, I am the product manager so clearly it is important that I understand the issues and challenges you are experiencing as this will help in determining the directions. Please feel free to reach out to me directly or any of the team at Bentley so that we can ensure that your concerns are fully considered and can be used when setting the future plans that would be a benefit to you and other engineers who work in a similar environment.
Regards
Carlos Aguera
Senior Product Manager - STAAD.Pro

 

[r13]

War of software developers

 

[r13]

At one of my old employment, which employed more than a few thousand engineers (1200 structural alone, down sided to 500 later), we had GT Strudl, SAP, IBM Wang and in-house software. There weren't conflicts, as each package had its strength in certain applications. You may consider do the same.

 

[Klitor]

On a bit of offtopic.. features are getting better, but ludicrous licence policies are chasing people away

 

[AFreeM]

Hi JoshPlum (Structural)!

I really liked your review of the programs "Risa 3d Alternate?"

https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=439252.

Is it worth updating? We must look for an alternative RISA-3D v.18 - New format ?

 

[Lomarandil]

Tangential but useful

https://youtu.be/N9d0NqSztWA

----
just call me Lo.