GeoHECRAS vs. OpenRoads Designer

It is well suited to determining the capacity and flood levels for existing structures and sizing proposed structures based on the existing flood levels. In cases where we do not have sufficient information for proposed developments that need to be included in terrain for modeling, it can be challenging to modify the terrain, however, I think this would be the case for most software.

Incentivized

For any linear model creation that follows an alignment. Not suitable to vertical modelling like Buildings.

Incentivized

• Ease of use - functionality
• Accurate results
• Considers all types of scenarios and structures etc.

Incentivized

• Integration with other disciplines. If one uses Bentley's companion products like OpenBridge Modeler or OpenSite Designer, there is no need to export any design information to other disciplines as the .dgn files can be directly referenced into other applications.
• Visualisation - ORD comes bundled with a free version of LumenRT which produces amazing engineering and architectural renderings and can even be used in VR applications.
• Design Environment. Being based on the DGN file format is brilliant - being able to have multiple models within a single file has so many advantages over the DWG file format.

Incentivized

• When dealing with large files, the interface can be slow at times

Incentivized

• Creating data. Currently will need to create data tag (e.g. volume, length, material type, material engineering criteria etc.) of component manually. Some of the commonly use data in AECOsim should be preset in OpenRoads.
• Ability to link geometric data values to geometric properties. Currently not linked (e.g. volume value, length value etc.) and had to be keyed in and/or changed manually.
• Opening (eg. for MEP interface) creation and modification still manual. There should be a smart opening creation that would create openings at interface location and auto enclose the mesh opening so that the volume will take into account the opening(s) created.

Incentivized

We would not use ORD if is was not for clients' contract requirement to use ORD.

Other software not on the list includes HEC-RAS and SWMM / PCSWMM. Initially, we had to use multiple software before going to HEC-RAS to complete projects. Now we are able to complete the entire project on GeoHECRAS alone with so many different features which enable us to analyze various different scenarios with ease.

Incentivized

ORD is a lot faster and a lot more modern than Civil 3D even though they're essentially the same product under different names (in terms of workflows). I find that the DGN file format used by ORD is far better than the DWG file format used by C3D because DGNs can contain much more information and multiple models per file. C3D is very heavy on memorizing keyboard inputs while ORD is a much more modern interface that relies mostly on using the mouse for inputs.

Incentivized

• Greatly improved timelines for finishing a project as everything can be completed together on GeoHECRAS without having to use other software etc.
• No negative impact thus far.
• Makes working on these type of projects easier.

Incentivized

• Positive definitely as all projects I work on require OpenRoads Designer
• Helps us meet the deliverable requirements set by our clients

Incentivized