What is the specific difference between Glodon and Luban?

Luban software is powerful and relatively simple to use, my friend said that Glodon's software is not very stable, and the upgrade training service is also poor.

They are all three-dimensional takeoff software, if you want to talk about the difference, your question is very general, I don't know what kind of difference you are talking about, the most basic difference is that Luban is using the 2006CAD takeoff platform, Glodon is a self-developed takeoff platform, relatively speaking, the latter has more advantages, it depends on personal preferences, as well as the understanding and familiarity with the software. The last sentence: The answer is not specific enough, and the master follows.

I have been engaged in the application of steel bar for more than 5 years and Luban for 2 years. More than 100 projects have been completed.

In fact, the service is almost the same, both are very good, but the software is mainly used by myself, and I mainly compare the difference between the software itself.

In general, the two software have their own advantages and disadvantages, but the overall operation effect of Luban is more flexible, and the combination of shortcut keys and mouse can be used, and Glodon is more rigid to draw points one by one, which is time-consuming, and it is easier to use Luban in the whole comparison. Let's share their differences with you:

1.The official installer and patch are released uniformly, and the upgrade frequency is high and free. Glodon charges a corresponding upgrade fee for each major version upgrade.

2.In terms of component definition: Luban legend plus ** definition, you can refer to the CAD diagram to quickly input attributes, intuitive, public attributes and private attributes are clearly distinguished. Glodon CAD project input attributes are troublesome, and they need to be switched between each other or entered the attribute modification.

3 In terms of drawing, for example, drawing beams: classification details, variable cross-sections, cross-offset beams and large and small head beams can be processed through in-situ annotation, and the support is more convenient. Glodon component classification is rough, the drawing is rigid, the axis positioning is required, and the cross offset needs to be modified in the in-situ annotation**.

4. Luban can use custom linear components to deal with nodes, which is more flexible to deal with. Glodon has no such component at all.

In terms of transformation, the transformation effect of Luban is better than that of Glodon. For the same drawing, Luban can convert at least 75% or more, and can freely set the conversion settings to improve the conversion effect. Glodon can only have 50% of this, it cannot be set, and it can only be handled by modifying the CAD drawing.

6.In terms of layer management: Luban has one component and one layer, which is flexible and easy to modify. Glodon layers are relatively rigid, and the corresponding components must be selected in the navigation bar before modifying them, otherwise they cannot be modified or selected.

7.Component method: Luban tree form, very intuitive, simple and flexible operation, between each folder can be directly copied and pasted nodes. Glodon has many operation steps, and nodes cannot be directly copied and pasted between folders, which is relatively troublesome.

8.In terms of calculation: Luban can be calculated by using hierarchical sub-components. Glodon can only calculate in layers, which has a great impact on efficiency.

9 Luban uses tree tables and custom reports, which are simple and clear, and convenient for quantification. Glodon does not have tree tables or custom reports.

10.New function: Luban has a new special-shaped water collection well, which is very convenient and can be handled by basically any form of water collection well. Glodon still uses old-fashioned water collection wells. Luban has a great advantage in the speed of the entire software upgrade.

So I used both software for a while. In the end, I chose Luban, and I have always felt very good until now.

Knocked for a long time, I hope it can help you!

Luban software is better!

Nationwide. Major version upgrades are free! The most complete professional takeoff software: civil engineering, installation, and reinforcement. Blanking overall. Steel structure 6 large takeoff software. Wide seems to be at least 2-3 kinds of takeoff software.

Luban modeling speed is fast! Use shortcuts and more! There are also mouse sprites to draw. Faster!

CAD transformation Luban can be described as speed. Glodon is not good yet. Only drawings in the 04 format can be used!

Upgrade Luban faster than Glodon!

Now I believe you have followed the choices below.

Hehe, the gunner's words are also believed.

Glodon will not go to such a place to say how good it is - no profit can not be early, the comrades below will knock a lot of words for you for free, do you think you owe you?

The calculation software Luban is good, and the pricing software Glodon is used more.

It must be Glodon. The main thing is that the market share is large. This is basically used everywhere, and Luban is mainly used in coastal areas to pump steel bars.

Is Glodon better or Luban better. There are many opinions on this issue. I have been studying Luban and Glodon for three years at the same time, and you can draw the following conclusions from me doing the same project and using two takeoff software.

1) To do the sprinkler system, hand calculation must be a very cumbersome thing, with Luban software to convert the sprinkler head and convert the command of the sprinkler pipe, can be easily and quickly completed. Luban can be converted according to the danger level of the transformation sprinkler pipe; Glodon's no.

2) To do HVAC, the horizontal air duct is connected to the vertical short air duct of the tuyere, which can be automatically generated by Luban; Glodon's vertical parts need to be arranged by hand.

3) Wire from the bridge: Luban can realize the same bridge with multiple starting points and multiple end points; Risers can be generated and arranged; At the same time, the cable can be matched with the corresponding pipe, and the internal and external line reports of the bridge can be automatically distinguished, and Glodon can only set one starting point for the same bridge; Some risers cannot be generated or arranged;

4) From the transfer of electronic drawings, Luban CAD drawings can be transferred in different floors, and the base point can be set to achieve the overall three-dimensional; After the Glodon CAD drawing is transferred in, all floors will display the same drawing, which is slow and the base point cannot be set.

5) From the display of view components, Luban components can be displayed or not according to floors, system numbers, and subcategories, and component labels can freely choose which attribute information to display, and the display control can hide CAD layers, and CAD fade commands can also be applied; Glodon components can only be displayed or not according to the category, and component annotations can only display the name of the component, and there is no CAD fading function.

6) From the speed of point components, Luban can use the conversion map list to quickly output the volume (including attribute definition); The result of Glodon conversion is only defined by the attributes of the component.

7) From the point of view of making electrical pipelines. Luban has a command to convert electrical pipelines, convert electrical single circuit, which is more in line with the habit of hand calculation, has a high intelligent recognition rate, and can be converted at the same time with the system number corresponding to different circuits, which is convenient for countermeasures; Glodon does not, although there is a line to pipeline command can automatically generate vertical pipelines, but it is sometimes not convenient to use.

8) Three-dimensional collision, Luban can carry out collision inspection with civil engineering to improve construction management efficiency and reduce costs; Glodon does not have this feature.

9) The most affordable thing is that the upgrade is free, unlike Glodon, which charges every year.

The above made a simple comparison, and there are some I will not explain in detail, I personally feel that Luban's installation of the calculation software is significantly better than Glodon in terms of the speed and accuracy of engineering modeling, and interested friends can learn and compare the two software at the same time, you will definitely find the advantages and disadvantages. In this way, we can choose the right software for ourselves, provide engineering modeling efficiency, and reduce unnecessary losses.

Glodon and Luban have their own merits;

1. Glodon needs to use locks to do engineering, and Glodon is more outstanding than Luban in this steel bar, and it is relatively simple to operate and will not be as cumbersome as Luban, and the others are similar to Luban.

2. Luban is more economical for Glodon, because Luban does not need to be locked, and the operation of Luban will be more cumbersome, but the quality of the project is still good, and it is economical and practical.