Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: ADT vs vanilla AutoCAD?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

I use ADT for my work.  I don’t use the 3D wall routines or create 3D models.  It can be done.  Right now I don’t find it to be efficient.  However, I do use a lot of the bells and whistles that comes with it and that is where I think it is helpful.  I love the detailing routines.  I am always pulling in parametric shapes from masonry, steel, concrete and wood to use in creating structural details.  I pull in a bolt fully detailed in seconds and place it in the drawing.  It not only gives a side view, but can quickly change to head and nut view.  Just about every shape has at least 3 options for viewing so most structural items can be used in details.  I also use Express Tools a lot, but I think that also comes with the plain ACAD.


If you find yourself having to do minor architectural plans the walls, windows and door creation is terrific and can be quickly edited.  You can do some 3D structural modeling, but I haven’t had a need to coordinate 3D work with any architect I deal with.  I believe you get extra Palettes and Blocks in the design center with ADT over the plain version.  I have used ADT since R2000 and wouldn’t go back to plain ACAD.  My suggestion is to get at least one copy to see how you can use the detailing module to your advantage.





From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:07 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: ADT vs vanilla AutoCAD?


Okay, so I've come to a crossroads.  I have the opportunity to upgrade to either AutoCAD 2006 or ADT 2006 for significantly less than what a normal upgrade would cost (through my local vendor - no internet funny business).  Although I don't necessarily need to upgrade at this particular moment, my accountant has suggested that small capital purchases made before the new year would be advantageous.  I've been using the vanilla AutoCAD with a couple of add ons (and some routines which lock me into the full vs LT version)  for several years, and am fairly used to how things work. I've looked in the archives, but couldn't really find any comparisons.  I've noticed that Dennis Wish, among others, is using ADT for his structural work.

So for those of you, especially small structural-only shops, who have switched - are you finding that Architectural Desktop provides real time efficiencies over the base version - aside from drawing overlays from architectural shops?  Since there is still an $800 premium for the ADT version for me, plus the annual renewals, plus the extra cost sue to "lock-in" for extra stations as I need them, I'd like to hear that someone is finding it money well spent to go ADT, before I pull the trigger.

Also, was there anything (books, classes) which helped in the transition?



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * * * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at: ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********