It seems that 12d is taking over the civil software market in New Zealand at the moment particularly with the recent Christchurch earthquake and the fact most rebuild teams seem to be using 12D, Autodesk seem to have missed the boat completely here.
I keep joking with my reseller on a bad day with Civil3d that perhaps I should be moving to 12d as well, so I asked a colleague who used to work exclusively with Civil3d before moving company to use 12d, what his thoughts were on which package was best and have posted his reply below as it maybe of interest to others
In regards to your question about which is best, well…….each has its own strengths & weaknesses really.
From my own perspective:
- I am using V9.0. V10 is due to hit soon, which has a lot of improvements apparently.
- First off, 12d is a PAIN to learn. The menu system is very counter-intuitive and the help system is a DOG. That aside…
- 12d handles large datasets better (e.g. LiDAR), but no point cloud handling capability. It can pare down the data in a clearer fashion better than Civil3D seems to.
- Not that I have done field-to-finish work with 12d but from what I’ve seen they do here with it, I would give Civil3D the advantage here. The description key work that can go through to labels and how point groups works is a clear winner, PLUS manipulating and displaying (i.e. swapping triangles, changing surface styles) a surface is by far easier.
- Stability – 12d far excels C3D here. The only time 12d seems to futz out on the odd occasion is when is changing large amounts of data at a time or pad grading (a rudimentary version of C3D’s feature line + grading).
- Working with CAD – obviously C3D is a vertical of AutoCAD, so no guesses who wins here. In 12d you have export EVERYTHING to CAD. And then if you spot a mistake, you have to fix it in 12d and then export it all again.
- In addition to that, there is no real dynamism to 12d of the labels. If something changes (elevation/slope etc.), 95% of the time you have to clean the model (layer) and get them re-calced.
- In terms of design, it fairly even here – apples and oranges really. No such thing as sub-assemblies, only templates (which aren’t really visually-driven; more by figures/numbers). Alignments and profiles are combined into a single ‘SuperAlignment’ which is nice. The basic mechanics of it are the same though. 12d has a nice thing called computators, which come in handy for kerb returns as they act dependent on the incoming/outgoing roads, almost like a live intersection wizard, and can be used for other functions too. 12d seems to be able to do transitioning (crossfall/width/height) better though.
- Also 12d has a better recording system. It’s somewhere between the Action Recorder and a macro. Makes re-calcing a lot of instructions at once a breeze.
- Civil3D’s feature lines and the FL editor win hands down. Better calculation of grading along it and between objects.
That’s just off the top of my head really. There are a lot of other differences that I haven’t mentioned, but to explain them would take more time than I have.