Can’t even take a short break from 3D designing stuff. Glad I’m switching over to FreeCAD. All I wanted was to grab some dimensions from an old model.
Can’t even take a short break from 3D designing stuff. Glad I’m switching over to FreeCAD. All I wanted was to grab some dimensions from an old model.
Almost the same situation here. However, my first designs in freeCAD had lots of errors and I experienced lots of crashes and bugs. Didn’t really get into it.
My tool of choice is now OpenSCAD. It does exactly what you are designing - not more, not less.
While OpenSCAD is amazing, it is limited in some ways. It is also very marmite-like. You either love it or hate it.
For those confused, OpenSCAD is a scripted CAD package. You effectively write code, rather than dragging the mouse around. I personally love it, but I know others who absolutely hate it for the same reasons. It depends a LOT on how you think about problems.
Don’t bring the marmite into this!
But it splatters so well, when you throw it at someone I disagree with!
But does it splatter better than Vegemite?
I might take a look - the learning curve on FreeCAD is pretty steep. Not that I wouldn’t expect any other CAD to be much easier, but I feel there’s a lot of assumed knowledge about concepts that appear to be unique to FreeCAD. Kinda increases the study load, if you catch my drift.
FreeCAD is definitely getting there. Not 100% ready for prime time, but definitely getting there.
any advice on getting constraints to actually behave? I can’t seem to get it to actually create geometries more complex than a box. (and forget master-sketches. that irritates me.)
Here is a tip: constraints don’t need to behave. You can leave parts unconstrained and it will still work.
You can just eyeball the placement, and make sure the constraints that matter are constrained. The rest you can leave floating freely.
Doesn’t thaT really scare things up later if (when) you need to make adjustments?
I’ve almost never left something unconstrained that I haven’t regretted later.
FreeCAD is already wonky if you try to adjust things later, whether they are constrained or not.
It actually makes it easier to adjust, because when it is loose you can move things around without it affecting the rest of your work.
Some things need constraints of course, but a lot of it can do without.
Doesn’t that create wonky geometry if you try and alter the parameters?
On the contrary, because they are not connected they don’t affect other parts. So you can just freely move things around.
And if things move, you can always just eyeball it again.
For many parts of a drawing, exact measurements aren’t important.
Which workbench do you mean? Are you okay with basic sketch/extrude, part design works well enough, but as you say constraints can be a pain. Tbh just assume you’re working with the points for the most part - polylines work fine for slightly more complicated shapes.
My “formal” CAD training was Dassault Systeme’s CATIA V5 training manual, so I tend to default back to that. For basic geometries, use basic polygon shapes/combinations of those, for anything more complex I tend to use a polyline and sketch out a rough shape, then fully constrain to the dimension I need. If the geometry goes all to hell then stop and just use the mouse to grab a point and pull it back to where it should be before you go any further and then constrain it. (My sketches tend to be noisy with constraints just FYI).
Mangojelly’s guides on YouTube will get you pretty far (though he doesn’t constrain as much as I personally would, I suspect this is just because he’s demoing techniques rather than giving best practice at all times. he knows the software/techniques super well and is great at explaining it).
Based on Mango’s recent video there are a ton of enhancements for sketcher constraints on the latest dev branch, so hopefully they’ll be on main soon too.
If it’s assembly constraints, the only assembly workbench I’ve used is assembly3 - it works kind of how you’d expect an assembly workbench to work, but you do need to hold its hand a bit. I’ve gotten into the habit of, import as step, rename part, add to list of parts, use linear translation with the mouse to get the part roughly where it needs to be and then start applying constraints to put it where I want it.
I’m mostly talking about part design.
I’ve discovered freecad is great for FEM, though. (well, the best option that doesn’t cost oodles.) Mostly I design…elsewhere and import the meshes for that. I’ll give Mango’s videos a look.
FreeCAD has an OpenSCAD plugin. Personally, I’d stick with FreeCAD regardless of workflow since you can do both in it. It has its quirks, but once you get used to it, it’s great.
Check out the Adventures in Creation YT (or Piped) channel. He does a very exhaustive set of tutorials from beginner to advanced that is well produced and explained.
MangoJelly (also on youtube) has a bunch of beginner friendly FreeCad tutorials.
Thanks for that. One of the things that really helped me start using F360 was the 3x20min videos made by Lars Christensen. Looking at the channel you’ve just recommended, he appears to have done something very similar. I’ll enjoy working through those. Cheers!
Fellow OpenSCAD user here. I’d recommend it to anyone as a thing to try, but not necessarily as a thing to certainly end up using.
I love how much control it gives you over your designs and how you can use that to make intelligently parametric parts. I’m continuously frustrated by how it expects you to make (or find libraries for) everything from scratch. For example, I’ve recently discovered ClosePoints which is (a) brilliant and (b) makes me wonder why the heck this functionality isn’t built-in or at least in a default library. I’ve also found that using it for anything complicated has forced me to learn how to write better-organized code.
You still have to put in work to learn how to use it. It’s just a different kind of work.
If it’s somehow possible to code up my design In OpenSCAD, it’s infinitely more preferable over FreeCAD
Rendering Comment Reply using CGAL…
…
deleted by creator