Structural Drafting - Software Recommendations 1

[human909]

Hi All,

As the subject says what are your software recommendations for somebody wanting to do basic structural drafting for residential projects? I'd prefer to use something more simple and modern that AutoCAD.

Essentially my workflow will be:
-importing architectural DWGs and stripping them down to the basic layout
-marking up members and other relevant structural details on the drawing
-including standard and sometimes custom connection details as required

While I have heaps of experience in industrial fields and 3D cad, my 2D cad skills aren't great and I'd prefer not to use AutoCAD as my main tool. Though I do have a bunch of templates and AutoCad blocks for purpose I'd prefer to start with something fresh. (Ideally I'll be getting somebody else to do my drafting but I want to build my own capabilities and create a work flow for others to follow.)

So what do other people here use? And what do people recommend?

Thanks, in advance.


A bit of background:

I'm in the midst of branching out into a moderate side hustle to my main structural gig. I've had the good fortune to have acquired a small but successful one man business from an engineer heading towards retirement. Most of the work is residential which for me has a learning curve. Other parts are industrial which has been my expertise for years. I'm inheriting clients, and 30 years of calculation and drawing resources. Both the calculation and drawing resources I want to replace with more modern tools, though I'm happy to run with what is there and works until I am in a position to switch.

 

[lexpatrie]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned NanoCad5, the free version. Pretty decent for what I do. Current extra fancy bell and whistle version is 23.

There's also (as I recall) an AutoCAD web version that is free where you upload the file and work in the cloud, I forget if that's free or it's a 30 day trial or something like that. I couldn't figure out how to change paperspace in that so there was a lot of consultation with internet searches to get some fairly run-of-the-mill things done. I don't think I ever managed to set up an 11x17 sheet in that.

 

[SE2607]

There's also (as I recall) an AutoCAD web version that is free where you upload the file and work in the cloud, I forget if that's free or it's a 30 day trial or something like that. I couldn't figure out how to change paperspace in that so there was a lot of consultation with internet searches to get some fairly run-of-the-mill things done. I don't think I ever managed to set up an 11x17 sheet in that.

I'm surprised and more than a little disappointed with the attempts to "race to the bottom" for a CAD program. Drawings are the main vehicle to convey our structural design. AutoCAD LT is about $400US per year. That's $35/month! Sure, there are other competent programs but, with ACAD LT, one has a stable tool, can hire CAD techs with confidence and can focus on creating the best structural solutions rather than to see how do convey those solutions for the least possible cost, free if possible.

SMH

 

[milkshakelake]

@SE2607 Isn't it worth it to save money on software? I agree that the best tools should be used. I'm a huge advocate of that and have said that before. But it's worth exploring options. For example, I just moved away from Enercalc and Tedds, saving a few thousand a year. Just made spreadsheets for everything I use in those programs, using the paid programs to test it out. It took a ton of time to make those spreadsheets, but it has a net positive effect on money. Similar "value engineering" can be done for CAD software, if it can do the job well. If the free software doesn't do the job, then it shouldn't be used, but it's good that it exists, and it might work for someone out there.

 

[Celt83]

I don't agree that what we are talking about here is a "race to the bottom" Autodesk is pretty complacent for a company raking in billions of profit pushing basically the same products year over year. If I recall there have been multiple years where the only change was to the loading splash screen to iterate the displayed year or most recently just refresh their branding image.

I prefer competition in this space especially these open-source options to try and ignite some real innovation, I mean it's 2024 and Revit still can't produce a proper column schedule or show window headers on the proper structural plan.

 

[SE2607]

Isn't it worth it to save money on software?

Of course and, starting in 2008, I've done the same as you regarding Enercalc, etc. But, I didn't do it solely to save money on software. I did it for productivity. One of the problems with software is that there is a lot of pre- and post- processing required. Using a beam analysis as an example, with a spreadsheet, I can enter tributary width and unit loads to calculate "W". "P" is just a reaction from another beam, so I just link them. A post load is just a reaction from a beam or reactions from several beams. A pad footing load is the same as a post load. I just link them all. One spreadsheet for an entire building. The only way I believe I could be more productive is to model an entire building and apply area loads which I am experimenting with now.

With CAD, productivity is based on a smooth workflow, overlaying an architectural plan, drawing some lines and detail bubbles and then building detail sheets using a detail library. IMO, productivity producing plans and details isn't gained from trying to save a nickel on CAD software. Although, I'm starting to believe one could do this using Bluebeam. After all, lines, detail bubbles and details could be just markups, right? Maybe that's my next phase, if there is one.

Take care

 

[phamENG]

I agree that CAD software isn't the place to pinch pennies. If you can smoothly integrate one of these programs into your workflow without a hitch - great. By all means, save what you can. Our margins are thin enough so I'm all for pushing them a bit where we can do so honestly. BUT...what are we talking about here? 3 billable hours of value per year? If each project takes an extra 10 minutes because I'm saving $400/year on a not-quite-industry-standard CAD software, I'm actually ADDING $400 in cost every year.

I do agree with Celt - Revit needs to step up and fix a bunch of problems. But they have a pretty good moat around their business and the only way to shake it up is to create a comparable 3d modeling package that can interface with Revit Project files. Good luck...

 

[SE2607]

Autodesk is pretty complacent for a company raking in billions of profit pushing basically the same products year over year.

So what? It's still one of the best, if not the best CAD program out there. Plus, if you're hiring someone, it's easier to find someone who knows ACAD than any other program.

Yes, you could productively use alternatives and I suggested one myself (DesignCAD). But, DesignCAD, or TurboCAD or...., will not overtake market share. But, trying to find a "free" program to convey the structural intent, to me, is ridiculous.

If you are upset That Autodesk is "raking in millions", the best thing to do is buy their stock.

 

[Eng16080]

At my last place of employment, a decision was made to switch from AutoCad to Intellicad for doing site design. We ultimately ended up with 3 less seats of AutoCad at a substantial savings. My boss was told by the sales guy that the two programs would essentially be the same and there would be no issue making the switch. Long story short, the initial software savings was eventually overcome by lost productivity by the engineers who were already profient with AutoCad and being forced to switch to something else. There were also inefficiencies in sharing files with everybody else who was using AutoCad. We ultimately switched back to AutoCad after about a year of this. I have nothing against Intellicad (or these other alternatives), but like phamENG mentioned, it doesn't take many lost billable hours before it's all a lost cause.

Personally, I would have no issue switching to something else if there was a clear better alternative, but I'm not sure there is. Even an equivalent program with a learning curve is probably not worth it.

Also, for what I use it for, I find AutoCad to be a great program. (Revit, on the other hand, just seems painful.)

 

[Celt83]

I wouldn't necessarily call AutoCAD the best, maybe AutoCAD 2000/2006 but certainly not anything that has come out since 2007, Autodesk invests in marketing and pushing Universities to peddle their product which is why everyone knows it similar to what Microsoft does with Office. In my opinion the AutoCAD line has consistently declined in quality and become so bloated that simple 2D drafting can have noticeable lag (a search of their forum has a number of threads on the subject).

I'm not really upset that AutoDesk is swimming in money just incredibly disappointed with where their software offerings are relative to where they were 2-3 decades ago. If only more than a pittance of that money would get used to actually make their products better.

 

[SE2607]

Revit, on the other hand, just seems painful.

I agree, for a precise drafting tool. I do believe it's very good for architectural modeling (near automatic sections and elevations) and systems coordination (avoiding ducts going through beams, etc.). I love it when an architectural client sends me a Revit model. I can then set up floor plans the way I like with actual wall thicknesses (what a concept!) and I can cut sections to my heart's desire.

But, when going to construction documents, that's where one should switch to ACAD LT. Both have their purposes.

 

[milkshakelake]

The main reason I investigated BricsCAD was because it's faster than AutoCAD (though it's also nice that it's cheaper). AutoCAD is the best in the business, but it's quite slow and bloated. We have high end PC's in the office, and it's still slow at times. We spent a lot of time figuring out why, and going through guides on making it faster. I think it's because architects use specialized software to make their CAD drawings, and it outputs a bunch of garbage into the dwg files. When copying stuff from file to file, a lot of the garbage gets copied over and slows down the new drawings. There are ways to deal with it, like purging and super purging, but it's annoying and doesn't always work. BricsCAD didn't have those slowdowns on the same exact files. I mean something like clicking on something and waiting a second for it to be selected, which slows down the workflow.

I get the sentiment about not saving a buck. A few hours would cover the difference in price, and it's probably cheaper in the long run.

 

[SE2607]

I mean something like clicking on something and waiting a second for it to be selected

That's really strange. My architectural models are probably simpler than yours, but I never have to wait. The longest wait I ever had was the spash screen and I found how to fix that. I've got lots of RAM, a good video card with a fast processor and lots of RAM and a SSHDD. If your boxes have those components, you shouldn't have to wait for anything except for an intern to bring you a cup of coffee .

 

[lexpatrie]

I'm a solo operator, and don't have a high volume of design that's got to be coordinated with anybody, and usually nobody sends me files (including the architect who won't share because they want our title blocks to look different. Anyway.), so I have to draw my own stuff and it's as minimal as possible, maybe a little above. I've done hand drawings occasionally, as well.

I'm not designing forty story steel buildings with cheepo CAD, I'm designing a reinforcement section, maybe a partial plan, okay, probably a partial plan. To me a recurring subscription on the off chance I'll need it this year is more of a flier than I undertake. Last time I tried to install a trial of AutoCAD I couldn't get it off the ground, some kind of firewall issue or permissions issue and yeah, I'm the tech support guy. NanoCAD5 installed and ran, no fuss. When you can't get the trial version to work.... that's a real sign to me. I know AutoCAD fairly well, for an engineer with no formal training in it, I got attributes and tags and all that, but it's just getting the software off the ground now is like some sort of ordeal, and it's not worth it to me, in terms of aggravation let alone the time necessary to troubleshoot something that should just WORK.

I get by just fine and the main line of what I do (reports, zero CAD needed) works alright as well. If I need a tool, I build it, or I buy it, but I don't have staff and don't plan on having staff. Yes, AutoCAD is standard, no argument there. I have a folder of typical details, half of which I haven't drawn yet (more, really) because they simply haven't come up. When they become relevant, I'll draft them into the computer. NanoCAD5 works and loads all my old AutoCAD stuff (I had to downconvert it using TrueView or whatever it's called, but that was because the master file got upgraded by AutoCAD web last year. I tend to stick with 2010 file version. There's nothing for me to interoperate with so all the fancy connectivity doesn't have much use to me.

 

[SE2607]

lexpatrie - I totally get it. I'm also solo, but about 40% of my time is drawing. I do all of my own plans, overlaying the architectural plans. Yes, my title block. I insist. I spend a LOT of time detailing because I want to ensure something can be built and it always turns out that a "standard" won't fit. Yes, most of my work is high end residential remodeling.

Maybe for you BB would work. Or, whatever you are using will work, too. I used to worry about legacy files back when I left DesignCAD for AutoCAD. I saved all my DesignCAD files (all details) on 3-1/2" stiffies. Still have the stiffies. Never had a need to look at them or use them.

 

[milkshakelake]

@SE2607 Yeah we have i7 and i9 processors, 16 to 32 GB RAM, NVMe SSD's, graphics card, all the good stuff to try to squeeze some milliseconds of drafting performance. Even the network has been tested and uses some beefy stuff. Definitely not lacking the hardware. The slowdowns happen with drawings from certain architects. They're probably using ArchiCAD, some weird AutoCAD plugin, or one of the other million things that architects use. It's somewhat rare (maybe 1 out of 20 architects), but it's aggravating when it happens. Then we need to clean up their drawings before we load them, and when they send a revision, we need to clean it again. It also slows down when we have multiple revisions of architectural drawings in one file, and sometimes that's needed to compare changes.

 

[moon161]

I think 2010-2012 or so was the last 'unplugged' version of ACAD. Now it needs to phone home for license verification pretty frequently if not always.

 

[human909]

Thanks again for all the comments on my original question...

Regarding the above tangent discussions. I agree that Autodesk is a complacent company but I also agree that saving a buck or two on software is not often beneficial. Autodesk is stopping support for Advance Steel which it bought out and now is closing down. WHY!? Sure Tekla is probably superior, but there are still plenty of Advance Steel users out there.

I would comment however that what I do in my salary job absolutely requires fast hardware. BIG 3D assemblies. It can take 2-4minutes to load. Manipulation becomes difficult... Sometimes suitable file conversion can take 0.5-1day of processing.

For my office it isn't about squeezing milliseconds, it is about squeezing minutes or half minutes.