Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
(OP)
For those of you that have used BOTH Ram Elements(Advanse) and Risa 3D, which do you prefer and why. Is there anything you can do with Risa 3D that you cannot do with Ram Elements.
In terms of cost, Risa 3D is more expensive than Ram Elements.
Risa 3D Initial Cost $3000 + $600/year maintenance/ license.
Ram Elements
In terms of cost, Risa 3D is more expensive than Ram Elements.
Risa 3D Initial Cost $3000 + $600/year maintenance/ license.
Ram Elements






RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Risa 3D Initial Cost $3000 + $600/year maintenance/license
Ram Elements Initial Cost $2500 + $300/year maintenance/license
I have used Ram Elements or prior Ram Advanse for the past 10+ years, but am considering switching due to their server type license. I'm tired of crashes and I prefer the portability of a hardware lock...which Ram use to have prior to being bought out by Bentley. It is my understanding that RISA 3D allows the use of a USB hardware lock, so I can have it on my laptop.
Thanks.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
My $.02.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Are you able to quickly crank out building designs in Risa Floor like you are able to do in Ram Structural Systems? Does Risa Floor quickly apply gravity, wind and seismic loads as Ram Structural System does?
I typically use Ram Struct System (Ram Frame, Ram Concrete, Ram Steel) for probably 90% of my building designs.
I'll use Ram Elements for the more unusual architectural designs.
I just downloaded Risa 3d and Risa Floor to check them out....they don't appear to be as developed graphically as Ram. Looks like Visual Basic programming.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
If you want a nodal lock, Bentley can provide that. It's not a physical hardware lock but a permanent license for one computer which is the recommendation if you don't need to use the program on multiple machines.
One of the potential crashes we have seen lately can be caused by using the Sparse solver (from Intel). We should have that ironed out in v13 this summer, but try the direct solver in the meantime.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I was asking for a response from engineers who haved used BOTH Ram Elements and RISA 3D to determine the difference between the two programs.
After using RAM software for the past 10+ years, I am thinking of changing to RISA...and here is why:
I want a physical hardware lock that I can use on my office computer and then switch over to my laptop when visiting clients or doing work on my laptop from home.
RISA offer a physical USB hardware lock...RAM/BENTLEY does not. (RAM use to offer physical locks prior to being bought out by Bentley).
I am tired of Bentleys select server locking up, wasting my time and costing me money. Regarding your nodal lock, I should not have to buy 2 licenses for 1 user.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
What crashes? I use RAM products religiously and haven't had any problems.
You do work on RAM Elements while visiting your clients?
Seems like you could use remote access to your office computer to work on laptop from home.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I have had problems with Ram Struct Sys crashing when running frame analysis. It started about a year ago when I purchased a new computer, so it might be the sparse solver issue that Seth mentioned.
I have also had issues with the Bentley Select Server...license checked out/not checked out...I have called tech support many times on this and it very well may be a problem on our end...However, this problem is eliminated by offering a physical hardware lock which RAM INTERNATIONAL use to provide.
"You do work on RAM Elements while visiting your clients?" I don't "do work" while visiting my clients, but I have brought my laptop (or use to when I had a physical lock) into my clients office to spin the model around and make sure we were on the same page with some of our more interesting projects.
"Seems like you could use remote access to your office computer to work on laptop from home." Yes that would be great...however if you're on a laptop at your clients office...they would have to give you access to their wifi for internet conn...again...no issue if you have a physical lock.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I selected RISA 3D over RAM when I purchased about 5 years ago. RISA's customer service is excellent. One of their very knowledgeable engineers is a member in here and is helpful here as well.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I've used RISA products since about 1989 (or earlier) including RISA 2D, 3D, Floor, Foundation, Footing, Base, and Section.
In terms of the 3D analysis - RISA 3D is great. I've not used Advanse so can't compare them directly.
In terms of apples to apples comparison between Ram Steel and RISA Floor - I think the Ram program would tend to provide a more mature, less quirky experience and is very fast. RISA Floor is good - OK - but still is maturing and there are aspects that are frustrating but overall nothing to cancel my subscription over.
My experience with Ram was that they were constantly sending my bug fixes and program updates. Almost bombarding me with bug fixes which in some cases were quite un-nerving ("this bug fix corrects the program in that it was previously incorrectly deriving the moment capacity of a WT member in compression and bending where the stem was in compression..."). OK - so how many projects in my history do I have to go back to and re-check or re-run?
Ram output (per haynewp) is very "full" in that a lot of parameters, assumptions, etc are provided.
RISA tends to wait long periods of time between program updates with much fewer bug fixes but you have to wait a long time to get any updates. RISA's output is adequate but there is a lot of hidden parameters in the design portions that make it difficult to verify the programs assumptions and results.
I agree with Ron that the RISA service is excellent.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I have never used RISA, but I am curious if their 3d analysis and design capabilities are as far advanced as RAM. We have the entire RAM package and you can almost seamlessly design every major component of both steel and concrete structures, including foundations, connections, PT floors, and two-way slab. You input the geometry and loading criteria once.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Just due to the fact that 3D has been around much longer than RAM's product.
But can't testify under oath about that.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Now for my thoughts on the two programs. I think that RISA 3D is laid out a little better to get faster answers for simple problems. I do not think either program is really all that good at designing in that neither one takes into account composite sections easily. Typically I only use RISA 3D for simple floor analysis that does not take into account composite action (RISA Floor will). Luckily both RISA and Bentley have amazing technical support staff.
Our office is in between, we have people who really like to use RISA 3D and some people who like to use RAM Elements, I prefer to use RISA over RAM Elements, but as I said we have both.
Hope this helps.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Personally, I'd recommend downloading a Demo version of each program. RISA has a free Demo version which can be requested from their website (see below). RAM / Bentley probably has something similar.
http://www.risatech.com/forms/demo_request.html
Play with the demo programs a little bit and run through a tutorial or two. You should get a pretty good sense of how easy or difficult the program is to use. You should get a good sense of the level of quality / detail given in the output.
Also, some companies offer a number of Add-On modules not included in the base purchase price. So, make sure that the price quoted to you includes all the modules that you will be needing. You don't want to be 6 months in before you run your first dynamic analysis and find out that module costs another $500. You just want to make sure that you're comparing apples to apples price wise.
PS Full disclosure: I am an employee of RISA Technolgies. Therefore, I am not exactly an unbiased observer. I try not to shamelssly plug our software on these forums (cause I think that's inappropriate). But, a li
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
If you want a software to design you your building while you take all the liability, get RAM.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I think both programs are very user friendly, and similar in the way they function using spreadsheets to layout information rather than a more graphical approach you find with RAM SS, or even SAP and ETABS.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I called their support and was told this was correct. I asked them where the need for the large amount of rebar came from and they told me that the program alternated loads from above so the long continuous footing would have bending in it due to the discreet wall segments being loaded alternatively.
I told the guy there was no way that a 10 ft. tall concrete wall on top of this footing would ever bend the footing - no distortion means no moment (Hooke's Law). They simply disagreed with me. I told my staff to stop using RAM for continuous footing design and do it by hand or spreadsheet. The spread footings design in RAM was good - just not their continuous footing design.
The other issue that came up (and perhaps has been improved in recent versions) was the use of RAM Frame. This is the lateral analysis portion of the building modeler and in using it I found it was very black box. There was no way to determine the actual load paths of the lateral loads through the framing. I was simply given a completed X-brace design with the brace member forces but no way to "see" how the loads got there. We also stopped using it as a tool due to the inability to verify results.
I'm not trying to slam RAM here but just pointing out that there were limitations and (in the case of the footing) just wrong-headed design concepts....which is true in all software products to a degree.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
I know a couple of engineers that have RAM basically design them a building. They don't check much of anything on the output because how could it be wrong, its RAM/Bentley. From my dealings with RAM what you think you are getting isn't necessarily what you are getting(similar to JAE's examples) so you need to be careful. More careful than some other engineers I know. That is all.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
When it comes to the black box reputation RAM SS has, that probably comes from the amount of things that are automated, but there is an abundance of output to clarify the calculations that have taken place. You do need to be careful using software, any software, because it has to make assumption that might not be consistent with your own.
Regarding the continuous foundations supporting walls, the program assumption is that the foundation is like a beam on closely spaced compression only springs, and the stiffness of the wall above can be accounted for by multiplying the inertia of the foundation under the walls by 10. Then the forces from the wall above can be applied to the as a point load resultant at the wall centroid. That’s probably a fine assumption for a short shear wall on a thick footing, but not so good for a long footing supporting a CMU wall or tilt-up walls with small control joints.
RE: Ram Elements Vs. Risa 3D
Also, I am very much opposed to the "cloud" based idea of ownership. Basically, in the future, we will always have to rent, and never own, software. The big corps will only do this if it means more profit for them. This means more expense for us.
Those are my two reasons for switching.
However, now that I have RISA, it is much faster to use. I will not return to RAM.
I believe the draw for RAM was the outstanding service dept. It left within a year of Bentley ownership.