TrustRadius

OpenRoads Designer vs. SkyCiv Structural 3D

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
OpenRoads Designer
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Bentley Systems offers OpenRoads Designer, their civil engineering and design platform which replaces the former GEOPAK Civil Engineering Suite, InRoads, MX, and PowerCivil.N/A
SkyCiv Structural 3D
Score 0.0 out of 10
N/A
SkyCiv Structural 3D is an online structural analysis software, from SkyCiv Engineering headquartered in Sydney. This 3D frame analysis software allows the user to model, analyse and design a wide range of structures. The 100% cloud-based engineering software allows users to access their programs and files from a web browser, from anywhere, anytime! No need to install or update. SkyCiv aims to be an intuitive and easy-to-use structural engineering software for civil and structural engineers.
$69
per month (6 month contract)
Pricing
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic
$69
per month (6 month contract)
Professional
$109
per month (6 month contract)
Enterprise
$5000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details—Flexible plans (no contract) available. Student discounts available.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Considered Both Products
OpenRoads Designer
Tejsingh Rana, P.E. | TrustRadius Reviewer
Tejsingh Rana, P.E.
Project Manager and Business Development Lead
Chose OpenRoads Designer
I have used Bentley's Geopak before OpenRoads Designer (ORD) and definitely see that ORD is more powerful and advanced than Geopak in the task of design, analysis, and production of the road/highway projects. ORD makes Geopak obsolete.
Chose OpenRoads Designer
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 …
SkyCiv Structural 3D

No answer on this topic

Best Alternatives
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Small Businesses
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
Revit
Revit
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Likelihood to Recommend
1.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
1.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenRoads DesignerSkyCiv Structural 3D
Likelihood to Recommend
For any linear model creation that follows an alignment. Not suitable to vertical modelling like Buildings.
Lina Monica Ali | TrustRadius Reviewer
Lina Monica Ali
BIM Manager
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Pros
  • 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.
WM
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Cons
  • 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.
Lina Monica Ali | TrustRadius Reviewer
Lina Monica Ali
BIM Manager
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Likelihood to Renew
We would not use ORD if is was not for clients' contract requirement to use ORD.
Ronald Nordmeyer | TrustRadius Reviewer
Ronald Nordmeyer
Senior Project Manager
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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.
WM
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • Positive definitely as all projects I work on require OpenRoads Designer
  • Helps us meet the deliverable requirements set by our clients
Tejsingh Rana, P.E. | TrustRadius Reviewer
Tejsingh Rana, P.E.
Project Manager and Business Development Lead
Read full review
No answers on this topic
ScreenShots