|
Post by Rob on Oct 26, 2014 18:22:44 GMT
Hello chaps,
I'm looking for some CAD software. I did think about going down the route of a drawing board initially, but I thought why not get into CAD instead, since I work in the software industry.
Now, what do you chaps who use it at home recommend? I've tried the typical Google searches for "non professional" software, but so far I've not had much luck. Obviously, I don't particularly want to spend £5000 on something like Solid Edge etc. There doesn't seem to be any middle ground, it's either design your own kitchen style software, or full blown you're-never-gonna-afford-it-outside-industry software.
I can keep plugging away with Google searches, I'll find something eventually if it's out there, but thought I'd go to the source first to hopefully save some time!
Cheers,
Rob
|
|
|
Post by steambuff2 on Oct 26, 2014 18:33:20 GMT
Rob
2D or 3D? Also PC or Mac?
I've used TurboCAD Deluxe, does most of what I need in 2D, about to look what it can do in 3D.
There are a couple of freebies around..
Dave
|
|
jasonb
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,209
|
Post by jasonb on Oct 26, 2014 18:57:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 26, 2014 19:37:38 GMT
Dave, I'm happy with just 2D as initially it was just a way to replace my 'back of the envelope' drawings, but if it can do 3D all the better. PC also.
Jason, that looks ideal, and it's probably the first website I've looked at with a straight 'buy' feature with a price, rather than the usual style of sending you round the houses to resellers who want to know your inside leg size before they'll give you any details.
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 26, 2014 19:47:31 GMT
I really wouldn't go down the 2D route, it's obsolete and nothing like as useful as 3D. Don't be intimidated by what look like complex 3D models, many of them are dead easy to create and you'll pick it up in no time. Try Alibre which is now renamed as Geomagic Design. I've been told by users of Solidworks that it does a pretty good impression of many of the features of that package but at a fraction of the cost. Once you've tried it, you won't want to use 2D. Not only will you never have to draw any views again, the model creates the drawings, you'll be able to make moving assemblies of the parts you create so you can see whether they work or not. It's a revelation.
|
|
|
Post by Callum Darraugh on Oct 26, 2014 19:50:35 GMT
Hi robp,
We use Autodesk Inventor at work which is really good. I've obviously got that at home and I've also got a copy of TurboCad but I don't get on with that too well!
You can obtain Inventor from their website as a student version if you look in the right place. It does limit various things, but you can upgrade it if you know what you're doing.
Regards Callum
|
|
|
Post by steambuff2 on Oct 26, 2014 19:50:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 26, 2014 19:54:31 GMT
Thanks all, I knew asking here would save me a lot of time I did have a look for Alibre, which is possibly why I didn't find anything useful if everything has been renamed I used to do a bit of 3D modelling for games, so that aspect shouldn't be a problem. I've often wondered why the two industries don't have some sort of crossover product. Producing 3D models for games from works drawings would be so much easier than the traditional method of building models up.
|
|
jasonb
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,209
|
Post by jasonb on Oct 26, 2014 20:09:29 GMT
Alibre still exists but only as full blown packages that cost a lot but Cubify Design will do the majority of what we are likely to need they also have a couple of more basic ones in their range but they have limitations.
If you want gaming models then get one of the Cubify 3D printers and start knocking them out.
Plenty of video on Youtube to show you the basics for which the Alibre examples apply to Cubify.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 26, 2014 20:29:09 GMT
I meant computer games rather than real life models, but I did notice the 3D printers on their site and that made me think about lost wax casting...
|
|
|
Post by peterseager on Oct 27, 2014 7:22:07 GMT
Hi robp, We use Autodesk Inventor at work which is really good. I've obviously got that at home and I've also got a copy of TurboCad but I don't get on with that too well! You can obtain Inventor from their website as a student version if you look in the right place. It does limit various things, but you can upgrade it if you know what you're doing. Regards Callum I use AutoCad 2000 LT and will have to update Windows XP which will kill AutoCad 2000 LT. Saw the TurboCad stand at MMEI and enquired about using it. The Rep made the same comment that I might not like it after using AutoCad. Whats the problem? He suggested downloading the free trial. Have downloaded Draftsight for free but tend to aviod using it because I just have this feeling that Dasault will pull the plug on the free version. Peter
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 27, 2014 9:11:36 GMT
2D CAD is much easier to learn, and is not obsolete. I am the only one in a factory full of CNC machinists who uses 3D CAD, and I use it at home, not at work.
|
|
greensands
Part of the e-furniture
Building a Don Young 5" Black Five
Posts: 409
|
Post by greensands on Oct 27, 2014 9:42:37 GMT
For those of us who are still using AutoCad 2000 the inevitable upgrade from Windows XP can be a problem. In my case I overcame the problem by simply dedicating an older machine for drafting purposes and transferring all other software applications including access to the internet to the newer Windows 7 machine. PCs running the older versions of Windows can be picked up very cheaply and as far as running AutoCad 2000 is concerned it is of little consequence that that the installed operating system on the machines are no longer being supported. Reg
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 27, 2014 10:56:16 GMT
With the top end versions of Windows 7 you can use an XP emulator which will then run Autocad 2000 and LT98, this is how I got round it at work. You do have to be careful though, as the Autocad installers are 16-bit and will work with a 32-bit system, but not with a 64-bit system.
|
|
|
Post by sncf141r on Oct 27, 2014 12:47:51 GMT
May I present a dissenting view to some here?
Background: 3D graphics - low level stuff but complex math; throwing things onto screens, including CAD drawings. Quaternion rotations, matrix math - no problem.
Current modelling interests: building live steam locomotives.
Surprising Result: 2D CAD works, and is easy. I use QCAD.
Hiding my head in shame, I have not used 3D CAD for the workshop, despite having a package or two available! Maybe it's what I'm currently doing on my locomotives, but I seem to work fine with 2D.
One interesting bit of interest is that 2D CAD consists of arcs and lines; 3D is based on triangles, with flat surfaces. An arc has an infinite number of points on it, while 3D packages trade off speed (# triangles) for fidelity; I have seen some 3D designed parts where the faceting is visible on the finished product. Yes, you can interpolate flat line segments into an arc, but it is math-intensive, and prone to error. One 3D printing format, AMF, tries to do this.
JohnS
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2014 13:01:47 GMT
Solid Edge 2D is free. The current release (ST6) comes in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, but the next release due out next year will be 64-bit only. You can pay to upgrade to 3D at any time - when I enquired a year or two ago, I was told the cost would be about £2K. More than I can justify for just hobby use!
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 27, 2014 13:09:07 GMT
May I present a dissenting view to some here? Background: 3D graphics - low level stuff but complex math; throwing things onto screens, including CAD drawings. Quaternion rotations, matrix math - no problem. Current modelling interests: building live steam locomotives. Surprising Result: 2D CAD works, and is easy. I use QCAD. Hiding my head in shame, I have not used 3D CAD for the workshop, despite having a package or two available! Maybe it's what I'm currently doing on my locomotives, but I seem to work fine with 2D. One interesting bit of interest is that 2D CAD consists of arcs and lines; 3D is based on triangles, with flat surfaces. An arc has an infinite number of points on it, while 3D packages trade off speed (# triangles) for fidelity; I have seen some 3D designed parts where the faceting is visible on the finished product. Yes, you can interpolate flat line segments into an arc, but it is math-intensive, and prone to error. One 3D printing format, AMF, tries to do this. JohnS All of this is true, but those things are only of consequence if you're creating a 3D part from the computer model. However, most of the benefits of 3D modelling come from other things that 2D CAD doesn't provide. 2D CAD is just an electronic drawing board with a bit of intelligence thrown in to aid the process. 3D CAD is quite different because it's entirely built on creating a model in a 3D space. You don't draw a 3D model in the Engineering Drafting sense although you use precisely those techniques to build the 3D form. The consequence of this is that the computer knows the shape you've created in 3D and is therefore able to create any 2D engineering drawing including sectional views that are kept tightly bound to the model. If you change the model, the 2D views change to suit. The usefulness of this is hard to over state. 2D CAD can't create plans and elevations for you, it's up to you to do that. In a race to draw something, a 3D CAD system would win by a huge margin. The ability to build separate 3D models and combine them with constraints is another thing that 2D can't begin to compete on. Not only can you assemble these parts including pivots or linear restraints to see how they move, but you can create 2D drawings of any complexity from those assemblies. By the time you come to make an assembly created by 3D CAD, you know how all the parts are going to fit. I think people are wrongly intimidated by 3D modelling because the results are so impressive on the screen. The illusion is a powerful one, and easily demonstrated by drawing a circle and then adding the third dimension to create a rod. It really is that simple, yet manipulating such an object on the screen still impresses me even though I know how trivial it is to create. So a nut is a stretched hexagon, a drilled hole just a circle on a face then extended into the body. You either stretch a shape to create a solid, or punch a hole in the shape of that sketch in a model to create a void. That's all there is to it. So the use of 3D CAD has massive advantages in the home workshop regardless of whether you're interested in CNC or 3D printing, and it's simple to use. Once you've used it, you'll wonder why you ever bothered with 2D CAD
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Oct 28, 2014 0:10:47 GMT
As Roger said, don't be intimidated about 3D CAD. It's far easier than you think.
I had never used a CAD software before (not even 2D) and went straight to Solid Edge ST6 3D CAD because a friend of mine recommended it. Since this is a powerful professional package I first assumed it would take me a lot of time to grasp and I would require a lot of training, but it was not the case. After about 1 month I am amazed of what I can do with it how easy it is. This software becomes very easy to use once you overcome the initial usual frustrations, and for what I have seen drawing things right on 3D is easier than attempting to do the same on 2D. The concept is quite different.
This particular CAD has a feature named Synchronous Technology that makes wonders on parts with symmetric or aligned features, which is almost everything. With this technology the software is able to guess what you intent to change on your whole part while you are editing a feature of it. In most common cases you don't have to define relationships or constraints among part features because the software will do just what you expect anyway based on common constraints such as circle centres, equal distances, symmetries, even patterns and more. This enables drawing common parts very fast.
And as Roger said. With 3D you will see the loco already build right on your PC screen and whether all parts fit well together with no collisions. This is not possible or very difficult to determine with a set of 2D drawings.
Joan
|
|
baldric
E-xcellent poster
Posts: 208
|
Post by baldric on Oct 28, 2014 8:38:44 GMT
I had never used a CAD software before (not even 2D) and went straight to Solid Edge ST6 3D CAD because a friend of mine recommended it. Joan, Can you give me an idea of cost for Solid Edge and where you got it? It seems most UK firms want your details before they will give you a price, there are a couple of firms that seem to have dropped the price from $5300 to $399, at that price drop it makes me think it may be a pirate copy. Thanks, Baldric
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Oct 28, 2014 9:55:00 GMT
Baldric, I am not sure about the price. I have a close friend that runs a medium sized machining and boiler-making workshop. He uses Solid Edge as a tool when designing or building mechanical parts for his customers. When I told him that I was interested in building a model locomotive he showed me the software. I already knew he was using some sort of 3D CAD for his job but I had no idea of what it was. I liked what he showed me and I asked how I could get the software, he told me that the software was expensive but he eventually had a spare license that I could use for now. Years ago I used to be a very important customer for him and I still recommend his services, so this is why he was so helpful. I will ask him how much did the software cost and how many licences did he buy. I assume the cost per single license goes down if you buy a package for several work stations as he probably did, but this is just a guessing.
Joan.
|
|