|
Post by thumpersdad on Mar 19, 2019 7:50:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Mar 19, 2019 8:33:17 GMT
Or switch to Fusion360 which is currently free for hobbyists and small businesses. Whether that will remain free is open to question.
Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to be expected to pay for the use of these tools that have taken possibly millions of paid man-hours to create. You wouldn't expect someone to donate a free lathe for you to use, with free upgrades each time a new model was released. These are tools, and I expect to pay for them sooner or later.
|
|
|
Post by thumpersdad on Mar 19, 2019 10:02:38 GMT
Or switch to Fusion360 which is currently free for hobbyists and small businesses. Whether that will remain free is open to question. Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to be expected to pay for the use of these tools that have taken possibly millions of paid man-hours to create. You wouldn't expect someone to donate a free lathe for you to use, with free upgrades each time a new model was released. These are tools, and I expect to pay for them sooner or later. I do use Fusion360 for 3D work, but I don't like if for normal draughting. I don't find it intuitive, nor do I like cloud based software. I take your point about paying for software, but on the other hand the marginal cost of an additional user is next to nothing. While I would certainly consider buying software (and do); I do object to the subscription model for charging for software that most large vendors are now cleaving too. I would not hire any other tool that I intended to use regularly. Eric
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Mar 19, 2019 10:14:16 GMT
Or switch to Fusion360 which is currently free for hobbyists and small businesses. Whether that will remain free is open to question. Personally I don't think it's unreasonable to be expected to pay for the use of these tools that have taken possibly millions of paid man-hours to create. You wouldn't expect someone to donate a free lathe for you to use, with free upgrades each time a new model was released. These are tools, and I expect to pay for them sooner or later. I do use Fusion360 for 3D work, but I don't like if for normal draughting. I don't find it intuitive, nor do I like cloud based software. I take your point about paying for software, but on the other hand the marginal cost of an additional user is next to nothing. While I would certainly consider buying software (and do); I do object to the subscription model for charging for software that most large vendors are now cleaving too. I would not hire any other tool that I intended to use regularly. Eric To be fair, I haven't used Fusion360 so I can't comment on how intuitive it is or not. Alibre is pretty good in that respect, but it's expensive. The reality is that buying CAD/CAM software ends up like hiring it anyway. Yes, you don't have a subscription, but without updates you will always eventually find that you have to pay out again when they change the licensing arrangement for one reason or another. New versions of Windows ultimately wont work with old software either. Maintenance is something I try to avoid paying, mainly because they don't 'maintain' it ie fix the damn bugs I complain about, they use the funds to add new features to boost their sales! However, unless they have some soft of Maintenance amnesty, you end up paying the full cost of the years you missed so it ends up costing the same. So in my opinion the reality is that you can't buy software and have it forever unless you want to slip further into obsolescence and eventually become unusable. You also have to think about whether it will be possible to open the jobs you're creating today when they're saved in an obsolete revision. Ultimately, CAD software will cost you money one way or another on a rolling basis. All you can do is slightly influence when and how much you pay.
|
|
|
Post by 3405jimmy on Mar 22, 2019 13:40:19 GMT
The blurb says they are adding 3D capability, and it will be cloud based, sounds like Solidworks Fusion 360 killer. I agree to some extent that paying for software is not unreasonable its all a question of degree. For us guys in a shed paying a £1200 a year to keep Solidworks current seems a bit heavy, at least with Fusion 360 they recognise that by the differential pricing model. Which currently is free for the man in a shed, and long may that continue. While I still prefer my old version of Solidworks as an easier 3D user experience than Fusion. At the time 2.5D CAM was a costly add on. With Fusion you might not have the best intuition but its all there up to 5 axis and its free , I can put up with a fair bit of extra clicking for that price
|
|
|
Post by David on Mar 24, 2019 10:30:09 GMT
IMO F360 is terrible for 2D drawings. I work from the 'sketches' sometimes but that means I need my laptop nearby. I've tried to use the 'drawing' part of it many times to convert the 3D model into a 2D drawing and always given up in frustration.
Draftsight is miles better for 2D drawing if it's something you want to export as DXF or print to work from.
Software is a funny thing. With all the open source stuff out there we're so used to not paying for it, it comes as a shock when someone asks for money.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Mar 24, 2019 11:12:20 GMT
IMO F360 is terrible for 2D drawings. I work from the 'sketches' sometimes but that means I need my laptop nearby. I've tried to use the 'drawing' part of it many times to convert the 3D model into a 2D drawing and always given up in frustration. Draftsight is miles better for 2D drawing if it's something you want to export as DXF or print to work from. Software is a funny thing. With all the open source stuff out there we're so used to not paying for it, it comes as a shock when someone asks for money. I'm really surprised to hear that about creating drawings from Fusion 360. I know when I first used Alibre I was frustrated because I was used to directly drawing the views in 2D CAD, and you don't add lines directly to drawings automatically created from 3D CAD models. Now I'm used to it, I'd never go back. I just select the views I want, and they're updated if the model changes. I suspect that Fusion360 works the same way. You can't fight these systems, expecting them to work in a way that they simply don't. If you get used to them you will see why they work that way, and it makes life much simpler.
|
|
|
Post by cplmickey on Mar 25, 2019 22:45:59 GMT
Software is a funny thing. With all the open source stuff out there we're so used to not paying for it, it comes as a shock when someone asks for money. I think that's the problem - the shock is going from something that's free to $99 each year. I don't mind paying but as I perhaps use it once a month then it becomes a bit expensive paying an annual fee. Thing is I like Draftsight especially as I use AutoCAD at work and Draftsight recognises many of the AutoCAD commands so it's very easy for me. TurboCAD didn't do it for me, although it's many years since I last tried it. I'll have to try some of these others but I suspect I'll end up stumping up the money in the end.
|
|
|
Post by atgordon on Mar 25, 2019 23:56:16 GMT
IMO F360 is terrible for 2D drawings. I work from the 'sketches' sometimes but that means I need my laptop nearby. I've tried to use the 'drawing' part of it many times to convert the 3D model into a 2D drawing and always given up in frustration. Draftsight is miles better for 2D drawing if it's something you want to export as DXF or print to work from. Software is a funny thing. With all the open source stuff out there we're so used to not paying for it, it comes as a shock when someone asks for money. I'm really surprised to hear that about creating drawings from Fusion 360. I know when I first used Alibre I was frustrated because I was used to directly drawing the views in 2D CAD, and you don't add lines directly to drawings automatically created from 3D CAD models. Now I'm used to it, I'd never go back. I just select the views I want, and they're updated if the model changes. I suspect that Fusion360 works the same way. You can't fight these systems, expecting them to work in a way that they simply don't. If you get used to them you will see why they work that way, and it makes life much simpler. Roger, you are right on the money. I taught O and A level technical drawing for many years (A level geometric drawing too - mind bending conical intersections in space, with accompanying surface developments come to mind). Going from a drawing board to a 2D screen system has it's challenges (I was part of the team that introduced AutoCAD to the S-o-T FE college in 1985). From a 2D CAD package to 3D can be challenging since your "perspective" (no pun intended) is a very different. All the 3D CAD packages I have used (F360, Solidworks and CREO) will produce 2D drawings that match anything I could have produced on a board ... and just as you observed, the 2D drawings are dynamically updated to match changes in components and assemblies. I rarely use 2D drawings any longer (anyone want a used HP A-1 plotter going cheap, complete with ink and 30" wide paper rolls). OK, my usage is a little different in that I want to be able to drive CNC systems (initially a mill, and now a waterjet too). So after many years of AutoCAD + Ma$tercam, followed by $olidworks and Ma$tercam, I decided I couldn't afford the ongoing license costs and moved to F360 (and anyone out there thinks that F360 is challenging - or any other CAM package - just try your hand at Mastercam for a mind-bendingly difficult, but powerful, package to use). The world of CADCAM has had to move to 3D, and lamenting that such packages (F360 for example) don't support a 2D view of the world will not change the reality. There are (and probably always will be) 2D packages to suit those that are happy with 2D drawings. Criticizing 3D packages for not matching your expectations doesn't make any sense since they are targeted at a different population of users: if they don't work for you, don't use them.
|
|
Neale
Part of the e-furniture
5" Black 5 just started
Posts: 279
|
Post by Neale on Mar 26, 2019 8:06:19 GMT
I "converted" from TurboCAD to F360 via a brief dabble with Onshape a few years ago and use it extensively now. Sometimes for 3D printing, sometimes to produce gcode for CNC cutting, and currently to redraw the Don Young Black 5 drawings for the model I'm building. This exercise has clearly demonstrated that DY would not have made a significant error in the design of the tender if he had been using 3D CAD rather than a drawing board!
I have also run a few tutorial sessions to help fellow club members get up to speed with the techniques, which has made me ponder on why people have difficulty converting. One reason, I think, is that folk find it difficult to let the machine do a lot of the thinking for them. As a designer working in 2D, you have an image of the finished item in your mind, and have to transfer that image to paper via the various views available to you, and you yourself are responsible for making sure that a feature in front elevation matches the same feature in side or top elevations, etc, and that it corresponds with a mating part. You are also aware that you are producing engineering drawings for workshop use, so will pay attention to things like dimensions from a single datum point.
You have to forget all that when you are using a 3D modeling package. You now concentrate on "design intent" and not producing working drawings. Is there a difference? Think of positioning a hole in the centre of a 12mm square face. In 2D, you position the hole 6mm from each edge. In F360, you use the sketching constraints to say, "Align this hole with the centre of each edge". What's the difference? As an example, a few years ago I developed a design based on 50x12mm bar. Then my supplier told me they were out of stock, but could ship 2x.5" immediately. I accepted the replacement, went back to my F360 model, changed one reference to each dimension once only, and every part that used or was dependent on that dimension changed. No mistakes, no forgetting to update a detail view on sheet 2, or whatever. When I needed the engineering drawings to take into the workshop, the copies I printed included the changes with zero effort on my part.
That's a trivial example, but the sum total of all the trivial bits of effort saved add up to quite a lot at the end of a design development cycle, not including the inherent advantage of the self-checking nature of building up a collection of inter-related components that the computer understands, rather than a set of independent drawings that it is up to the draughtsman to maintain.
There is a significant shift in mindset needed - it took me a while to get into the swing of it - and I have seen for myself that some people do not see the advantages gained being worth the learning effort needed. Personally, I'm a great believer in Babbage's comment - "I wish to God these calculations had been done by steam!" - and if a computer can do a job for me, then it's not worth me doing it the hard way!
|
|
|
Post by David on Mar 27, 2019 5:32:13 GMT
I don't have too much trouble modeling what I want in 3D in F360. There are a few things I've not figured out yet eg blending wheel spokes into the hub and rim, but I can't think of anything else I've needed to model and couldn't. What I can't do is drop that 3D model onto a drawing page and then make a usable drawing from it. It sounds like Tony can so it must be possible, but damned if I can make it work. I can drag a 2D view out from the 3D representation but once I start adding dimensions I either can't make the dimension I want or it just looks horrible. I admit I haven't spent much time on it because I can often get away with using the 2D sketches used to build the model, and I don't want to spend the time on learning it. It's pretty intuitive how the 3D modeling works but I haven't found the same for the drawing mode.
|
|
Geoff
Hi-poster
Posts: 169
|
Post by Geoff on Mar 27, 2019 7:36:50 GMT
I to am having trouble converting my Fusion360 3D objects to drawings, and as Neale says above, I can't honestly see the need to produce drawings at all. To blend my spokes into the rim and hub, I used the Combine tool to make it all one object and then filleted the intersection line. You will notice that the fillet only worked where the rim meets the spoke (Ionly drew one spoke and patterned it around the hub) and I will have to go around and fillet the spokes individually where they meet the counterweight. www.flickr.com/photos/142763958@N04/40487672443/in/datetaken/
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Mar 27, 2019 8:15:47 GMT
Surely there must be YouTube tutorials on all of this you could watch, I really can't believe it's that difficult. On Alibre, you are just offered a palette of views to pick from and you can orientate the master view. Once generated, moving the master view moves all of the others with it. You can move the other views either closer or further away from the master view. Other than that, you can have it populate the view with dimensions, but it's a mess and I often don't need all the dimensions anyway. I often make things just with the 3D model on the screen. Clicking on an edge shows me the length or diameter of the selected line on the status bar, and that's what I used rather than create a 2D drawing and dimensioning it. This is the power of having live models available in the workshop. My screen is on an arm so it can be viewed on the lathe or mill, with the same computer controlling the CNC mill. Everything I need for drawings, control or the internet is available on that one screen. I never print out anything, and I only create 2D drawings if it's a more complex part I'm making on the lathe. I never create 2D drawings for anything made on the mill, there's no point.
|
|
|
Post by atgordon on Apr 1, 2019 0:55:01 GMT
I don't have too much trouble modeling what I want in 3D in F360. There are a few things I've not figured out yet eg blending wheel spokes into the hub and rim, but I can't think of anything else I've needed to model and couldn't. What I can't do is drop that 3D model onto a drawing page and then make a usable drawing from it. It sounds like Tony can so it must be possible, but damned if I can make it work. I can drag a 2D view out from the 3D representation but once I start adding dimensions I either can't make the dimension I want or it just looks horrible. I admit I haven't spent much time on it because I can often get away with using the 2D sketches used to build the model, and I don't want to spend the time on learning it. It's pretty intuitive how the 3D modeling works but I haven't found the same for the drawing mode. Applying fillets to intersecting parts in the 3D packages I've used seems to be a hit and miss thing. As has been mentioned, combining all components or parts in to one solid (using the "combine" command) does help greatly. In terms of 2D drawings, F360 operates in the same way as Solidworks (and probably a lot of other packages too). You move from the model to the create drawing page from within the model environment. This example might help. It is a screencast from F360 using a wheel from my Simplex. I must admit that I rarely use 2D drawings. Everything I do that has to be shared is in STEP or STL format where the part is read into another 3D package (or drives a CNC machine). Where I have found 2D drawings have helped is working out errors in Martin Evan's assemblies of the s/simplex valve gear (when I try to assemble components into an assembly, it they don't fit, I use the check Interference command in F360: once I see a problem, the only way I have found to work out what needs to be "adjusted" is to create 2D drawings of the assemblies, and work out gaps/interference. the combo lever and the center bearing on the coupling rod both being incorrect in his drawings.
|
|
|
Post by bambuko on Apr 14, 2019 15:27:02 GMT
...Best dig out that copy of TurboCad... Eric You might be better off downloading: nanocad.com/products/nanoCAD/It's free, and so far seems to be capable of everything that DraftSight offers.
|
|
|
Post by cplmickey on Apr 14, 2019 16:21:17 GMT
Thanks for that - I'll definitely give it a try. Ian
|
|
|
Post by thumpersdad on Apr 14, 2019 16:40:24 GMT
...Best dig out that copy of TurboCad... Eric You might be better off downloading: nanocad.com/products/nanoCAD/It's free, and so far seems to be capable of everything that DraftSight offers. Thanks for the suggestion. I've actually gone for QCad, which I find OK. There are some annoying quirks, but Draftsight had some of those too. Importantly for me, QCad seems to open Draftsight .dwg files without any problems, so far at least. Eric
|
|
|
Post by ettingtonliam on Apr 14, 2019 17:36:05 GMT
Whats the thoughts on Alibre 3D which MEW is plugging at the moment? As an absolute CAD novice, would I be better off starting with nanocad which I presume is 2D? 2D is probably all I need.
|
|
|
Post by andyhigham on Apr 14, 2019 17:58:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Apr 14, 2019 18:16:23 GMT
Whats the thoughts on Alibre 3D which MEW is plugging at the moment? As an absolute CAD novice, would I be better off starting with nanocad which I presume is 2D? 2D is probably all I need. Alibre 3D is more or less what I'm using and it doesn't have anywhere near as many features as Fusion360 which is what I'd be using if I hadn't got everything already in Alibre. To me it's a no brainer to use Fusion360
|
|