ArchiCAD 9: 3D for architects: building modeler delivers drawings with easy to use modeling tools

ArchiCAD 9 arrived with what at first I thought were minor improvements. But they add up to quite a lot, especially for 3D work, visualization, and working on a laptop with a cramped screen (figure 1). The latter situation may occur often now that ArchiCAD supports terminal server technology that makes it possible to work over the Internet from a remote location.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

This new release also benefits from improvements in DWG compatibility and an improved library search system that enables symbols to be found by name (figure 2). About 2,600 symbols are included in the libraries that ship with the software All of this is particularly important to ArchiCAD's market of architects, builders, planners and facilities managers (there's a special ArchiCAD version for FM). Among major, full-featured (and, need we say, expensive) CAD packages, only ArchiCAD and Nemetschek's Allplan are specifically aimed at the builder market. Bentley and Autodesk add an architectural interface to their products. ArchiCAD can't match Allplan for structural design calculations, although it does feature a built-in truss designer and column designer. ArchiCAD provides a lot more power than the typical architectural design software package, but is still easy, nimble and intuitive to use.

As with v8.1, ArchiCAD runs on Macintosh and Windows 2000/XP machines. Graphisoft's minimum memory requirement for both platforms is 512MB. I found v9 usable on a Windows XP machine, but slow and crash-prone on an OS X Macintosh G4. I suggest that you spring for a gigabyte of memory for either platform. The new version is faster than v8.1, and I suspect it's faster than v7 (I benchmarked the older version on a slower machine, so I'm not absolutely sure). Crash recovery is better now--all the project files seem to survive.

Moving to 3D

I've been an ArchiCAD fan for well over a decade, since the days when it was Macintosh-only. Because I started early on with slower machines, I still tend to draw in 2D plan or elevation, knowing that a 3D object is being created at the same time (figure 4).

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

I've started to adapt, editing directly in 3D and then defining objects in greater detail later, as necessary. Younger architects usually draw in 3D from the start. ArchiCAD works well both ways, but this version makes 3D easier to use. This is not a true modeling package ranking with products such as form*Z. With it users can draw creatively, although this means that the model may look fine but won't give accurate results with programs that handle, for example, energy and weight analyses. But ArchiCAD is getting closer to that capability, and in the meantime, separate model-checking packages are available. Until the CAD vendors get this right, the structural and construction folks will continue to redo the model.

Look and Feel

Keeping its commitment to cross-platform compatibility between the Macintosh and Windows forced Graphisoft to make some compromises over the years in regard to look-and-feel. As the interface has evolved and software functionality has increased, the interface has tended toward telescoping palettes, multiple toolboxes, context-sensitive palettes that pop up with the windows they refer to and all the other tricks software designers use to keep as many command icons as possible close at hand while still leaving screen space for the drawing.

This version is the best yet. It clears up some of the icon clutter (mainly with more context-sensitive palettes that show all options for an element, no matter what tool is being used) while keeping everything handy. Suddenly, the screen looks 10-20% larger. There's a setting that provides up to 50% more space, but running that way forced me to open too many toolboxes on my own. A Classic setting puts an extra line of old favorites back on the screen. Of course, users can customize the interface any way they want.

Although I've become quite comfortable with ArchiCAD over the years, the new interface didn't cause much uncertainty. This is an upgrade that will require an absolute minimum of user reorientation and training, with good productivity benefits.