Comments on: Tekla Structures http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/ A forum for AECbytes readers Fri, 25 Jul 2008 23:44:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Johan Boghansen http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-9439 Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:42:02 +0000 http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-9439 I completely agree with Niels Treldal. It is obvious to me that Tekla is a much more powerful and efficient BIM program than REVIT. As structural engineers we should not be forced to use an inferior product because it has a direct integration with the architects software. All BIM programs should be IFC certified. Another thing that caught my eye was that the largest Tekla model in practice was 25MB (over 1 million objects) when Revit models are typically around 200MB. What will happen when Revit develops the capability to model connections, the files will probably be close to 1GB. I completely agree with Niels Treldal. It is obvious to me that Tekla is a much more powerful and efficient BIM program than REVIT. As structural engineers we should not be forced to use an inferior product because it has a direct integration with the architects software. All BIM programs should be IFC certified.

Another thing that caught my eye was that the largest Tekla model in practice was 25MB (over 1 million objects) when Revit models are typically around 200MB. What will happen when Revit develops the capability to model connections, the files will probably be close to 1GB.

]]> by: Hector Luis Spinelli http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-8848 Thu, 15 Nov 2007 12:12:21 +0000 http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-8848 It seems a very powerful tool for the immediate future of project construction integration. It seems a very powerful tool for the immediate future of project construction integration.

]]> by: Niels Treldal http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-8835 Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:29:50 +0000 http://aecbytes.com/blog/2007/11/14/tekla-structures/#comment-8835 Yet another very well written and well documented review, thank you! But I totally disagree with the last remark regarding interoperability. As an engineeer working with many different architects, we need interoperability throughout software. Linking Tekla to a specific architect software like ArchiCAD would limit posibilities working with all our other architects working in Revit and Bentley Arch. Interoperability based on IFC allows us to co-operate with all our architect partners and be able to improve our own process regardless of partners in a specific project. Yet another very well written and well documented review, thank you!
But I totally disagree with the last remark regarding interoperability. As an engineeer working with many different architects, we need interoperability throughout software. Linking Tekla to a specific architect software like ArchiCAD would limit posibilities working with all our other architects working in Revit and Bentley Arch.
Interoperability based on IFC allows us to co-operate with all our architect partners and be able to improve our own process regardless of partners in a specific project.

]]>