| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision |
| differences_between_cad_and_tad [2019/04/14 15:51] – admin | differences_between_cad_and_tad [2019/04/14 15:52] – admin |
|---|
| //(This topic is being written, and many points will be added; as indeed the differences are huge)// | //(This topic is being written, and many points will be added; as indeed the differences are huge)// |
| |
| ==== TAD and CAD ====\\ | ==== TAD and CAD ==== |
| |
| Here are the main differences between TAD and CAD | Here are the main differences between TAD and CAD |
| * CAD allows all kinds of properties on graphical shapes. But if you look carefully; they are all to do with graphics: line thickness, line style, color of line and plenty more. They do make the drafted drawing look very pretty. But that does not necessarily add value to the decision making to be done by architects. TAD on the other hand can talk about a huge number of properties -- so many that we gave a separate ARDELA interface for that. You can enter ANY number of properties on ANY element inside TAD but they are NOT properties concerning drafting. They are all to do with actual logical properties. You can INVENT the properties you want to note down as you go along designing. | * CAD allows all kinds of properties on graphical shapes. But if you look carefully; they are all to do with graphics: line thickness, line style, color of line and plenty more. They do make the drafted drawing look very pretty. But that does not necessarily add value to the decision making to be done by architects. TAD on the other hand can talk about a huge number of properties -- so many that we gave a separate ARDELA interface for that. You can enter ANY number of properties on ANY element inside TAD but they are NOT properties concerning drafting. They are all to do with actual logical properties. You can INVENT the properties you want to note down as you go along designing. |
| |
| ==== TAD and BIM ====\\ | ==== TAD and BIM ==== |
| Here are the differences between TAD and conventional BIM | Here are the differences between TAD and conventional BIM |
| |
| * TAD handles early stages of design quite well. You can start on a design, and may not be fully sure of the size and shapes of he rooms you plan to place in your design. Even then, you could possibly get some objective calculations going on in TAD. BIM is not very good at early stages of design | * TAD handles early stages of design quite well. You can start on a design, and may not be fully sure of the size and shapes of he rooms you plan to place in your design. Even then, you could possibly get some objective calculations going on in TAD. BIM is not very good at early stages of design |
| * There are architects who think that early stages of design is to do with playing around with //3D forms// This is called //massing// and there are some pre-BIM software that allow this (E.g. Form-it) But massing is NOT the only thing that architects do when beginning a design. TAD uses a type of programming known an //loosely coupled// That means the internal conceptual parts are not attached together rigidly. The architect can himself/herself decide which is the thing that is important to him/her. If it is massing, well TAD allows that too. But it also allows non-visual ways of looking into the design -- Many times in India, the architect wants to know how much carpet area is getting consumed or what is the FSI (local government body calculations) that is consumed. That is all done quite fast in TAD | * There are architects who think that early stages of design is to do with playing around with //3D forms// This is called //massing// and there are some pre-BIM software that allow this (E.g. Form-it) But massing is NOT the only thing that architects do when beginning a design. TAD uses a type of programming known an //loosely coupled// That means the internal conceptual parts are not attached together rigidly. The architect can himself/herself decide which is the thing that is important to him/her. If it is massing, well TAD allows that too. But it also allows non-visual ways of looking into the design -- Many times in India, the architect wants to know how much carpet area is getting consumed or what is the FSI (local government body calculations) that is consumed. That is all done quite fast in TAD |
| * BIM gets loaded with details as you progress. This prevents //iterative// thinking. When a design is being fleshed out, an architect need to go around in design cycles. Each cycle ends in a criticism of what was done in that cycle. Often to get into the next design cylce; the design has to be dismantled //(sometimes a bit, sometimes a lot more)// and then the architect gets a better job of the next design cycle. In conventional BIM, as one works on it; it becomes heavier in no-time; and therefore to dismantle and start again design cycles is quite hard | * BIM gets loaded with details as you progress. This prevents //iterative// thinking. When a design is being fleshed out, an architect need to go around in design cycles. Each cycle ends in a criticism of what was done in that cycle. Often to get into the next design cylce; the design has to be dismantled //(sometimes a bit, sometimes a lot more)// and then the architect gets a better job of the next design cycle. In conventional BIM, as one works on it; it becomes heavier in no-time; and therefore to dismantle and start again design cycles is quite hard |
