Altair Inspire vs. OpenRoads Designer

This software is incredibly intuitive and really does provide a great finished product. The software runs relatively quickly and will usually throw an error right away, which is a nice feature. I didn't use the geometry editing parts of the software, but it looks promising to be able to edit files directly in the program.

Incentivized

ORD is really focused on modeling of roads infrastructure projects, but includes a few design workflows that are in other disciplines such as stormwater and drainage design and site modeling tools for developments. This is really handy because you don't need a third-party application that you have to transfer your design files over to to carry on with the project. Including LumenRT for free with ORD is by far the most helpful feature because of the visualisation capabilities which most software does not include. ORD is well-suited for what the name of the product says - designing roads. I wouldn't say there are any scenarios in road design that it is less appropriate for.

Incentivized

• Defining the actuators, pin joints, sliding joints is very easy.
• Defining a motion sequence is straightforward.
• The UI tends to make you follow a sequence of steps to be successful in doing a motion simulation and finite element analysis study on a design.
• The motion simulation results are automatically transferred to the FEA solver.

Incentivized

• Creating linear models, since the app is based on alignment models and templates to extrude along the alignment.
• Precise long section/profile along horizontal alignment. The app practically flatten the horizontal alignment for profile generation.
• Template control. Though the template creation takes a bit of effort to create due to the point rulings. However when done right allows the model to be specifically modified with use of functions like super-elevation, point control, widening, parametric etc.

Incentivized

• I think the tools to create CAD are a bit difficult to use. Consequently, it is now easier to develop the part in other software, which is bad since we need to use more than one tool at a time.

Incentivized

• Buggy at times and crashes
• Requires a lot of training to use the tools effectively
• Model management requires some work

Incentivized

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

When I needed clarification on how do use a feature or best way to define the constraints for a design problem, the response was quick and solved my needs.

Incentivized

Working Model, MathCad, Dynamic Designer, Algor, and Mathlab had poor UI's and poor ways to define actuator and motor motion profiles. The force results and vectors were not easy to input into the FEA software. SOLIDWORKS Motion does not have an excellent way to define a linear actuator or its motion profile. Altair provides a UI that guides you through defining your linear actuator or motor's motion profile quickly.

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

• In my personal opinion, we think that this product does not have any negative aspect that makes us feel very uncomfortable.

Incentivized

• Drawing creation from model have speed up drawing delivery by 80%
• Model creation for linear project based on simple design speed up model delivery by 80%
• Capturing model change due to alignment change have help speed up change capture by 80%

Incentivized