|
Sagebrush posted:Good Worth noting that both CATIA and SOLIDWORKS are owned by Dassault  It may be worth noting in the OP or organizing the different programs by what you can do with them (relatively easily) in the hobbyist space. SOLIDWORKS being easily gotten from the EAA for $40/year was is probably the best Windows-based CAD deal for...anyone. You can also check in with local libraries and makerspaces (like mine) to see if they include SWX access with membership dues. Strictly noncommercial licenses. 3DX for Makers is dropping in H2 of this year (May for students), and that's $10/mo or $99/year. That includes SWX Professional, and Dassault's cloud-based CAD applications xDesign (parametric) and xShape (subdivision surface modeling). Those last two run great on my Pixel Slate Chromebook, so it'll be a good deal even just for those. Not sure where it'll land on CAM (Standard vs Pro), but you can pull projects from those last two into SWX for assemblies or mold work or CAM very easily. SOLIDWORKS is great for 3D printing, CAM/milling/turning (turning on CAM Pro, which is included with SWX for Makerspaces, not sure about the EAA deal), hell you can even plot directly from SOLDIWORKS Drawings to Universal laser engravers instead of loving around with a DXF. The nice thing is that if you don't like the built-in CAM engine, you can pick up MasterCAM add-ins and all sorts of other things (I believe even Espirit have an add-in? Other CAM companies do for sure). xDesign is great for 3D printing - I pull down .3mf files straight from Tha Cloud to PrusaSlicer's Linux appimage on my Chromebook, and just plop the USB drive into my 3D printer. Fusion 360 was independent but got bought out by Autodesk and is having Autodesk things happen. I used it professionally for design and fabrication work for a few years and it's so sad that they've really shrekt their hobbyist version. 10 open documents at a time is just garbage. The nice thing, though, is that for hobbyists their CAM is still pretty good with 1 tool at a time. That'll cover most routers like ShopBots and Sainsmarts and what-have-yous. Unfortunately if you have a makerspace with something with an ATC, you'll have to shell out like $40/mo. Blender, Maya, 3DS, etc. are really most suitable for resin 3D printing, and FDM 3D printing is a close second depending on geometry. Illustrator, Inkscape, AutoCAD, DraftSight are great for laser cutting and contour milling (pick up some Vectric product if you're going to be milling from these programs). Vectric programs will let you do pockets and other 2.5D milling things from these programs. I have made and will be making even more outdoor signs on a ShopBot using VCarve and these 2D art applications. Re: architectural stuff, I've done some factory layout and flythroughs on discovery calls in SOLIDWORKS. I don't know how popular it is for it, but it does have some functionality there. Re: electrical, KiCAD and Eagle are the ones I have heard of the most. Eagle is now included in Fusion 360 somehow, I've never used it, though. SOLDIWORKS, again, has a massive Electrical tool that I have not touched but have had my eyes glaze over a lot when people talk to me about it. Everyone should have a Rhino license because it is great. It'll pretty much eat any file and yeet any other file. I've used it for conversions, surface modeling repair, and all kinds of other garbage. There is a RhinoCAM that I have not yet used, but am v. interested in. I'm a SOLIDWORKS Application Engineer with a big ol' VAR, so I do a lot of training and tech support for it, so if you have questions hit me up. I'm also starting to learn how to write post processors ahead of the 3DX for Makers program launching so be prepared for CAMworks chat from me
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 16:00
|
|
!
|
|
| # ¿ May 20, 2024 23:46 |
|
|
Oh piss I forgot to mention OnShape. It's pretty good, started by former SOLIDWORKS guys and lives entirely in the browser. The CAM situation is not great, but it's fantastic for 3D printing and general CAD work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
I've seen it about but haven't touched it. Is there any included CAM or anything of note? Everyone I know who's used it moved on to SOLIDWORKS a decade ago or so.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2021 06:31
|
|
|
Sure is a good spot for it! I believe in most packages, your path and profile need to intersect. I know in SOLIDWORKS that if they're just close, you need to make the profile of the sweep and the end point of the path nearest to it have a relation called "Make Pierce". I'd try moving the path inside the profile. It may also help to just sweep a circular profile and use the "Shell" command to remove the closed faces. Sometimes multiple contour things can get wibbly
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2021 17:16
|
|
|
How much money do you have? Materialise makes stuff like that, but it's five figured a seat IIRC. SOLIDWORKS does have a scan to 3D thing, but uhhh if you get it to work consistently, that would be an impressive feat. I'd say give it a go if it's included in your package. Rhino is rad because it'll take an STL and if you tell it to save it as a STEP, by God it will. You can use layers and visibility to get a really snappy reverse engineering setup as well (e.g. an STL will spit out a cylinder as interpolated n-gons, but you can extrude a cylinder referencing specific edges, trim out the n-gon and boolean union it with the cylinder). Or you'll still have a kludgy model, but you can pull it into SOLIDWORKS and do the same. STLs specifically are tough because they're triangles, and every modern parametric CAD system is using quads, so now you have to either split or combine triangles into quads. That's just the topological issues  STLs also don't really have wireframe information the way, say, a STEP does. STLs also can't store any other metadata. It's almost like trying to put a 45 in a PS5 and hoping you can burn a new song on there. So it's manual or shell out the bucks if you're starting at an STL, sadly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 00:52
|
|
|
Specific Rhino things also: If your model is fairly simple, i.e. a mechanical design that is just only out there as an STL, you can really easily build a wireframe referencing vertices in the STL. Again, layers are your friend here. You'd use line tools essentially to just click and drag from edge to edge, and use surface fills. If you can even get the "meat" of your design out of it, then saving the new work as a STEP and pulling it into SOLIDWORKS is great, and you'll be able to use a software you're familiar with to actually get your critical dimensions. I wish Rhino hadn't terminated my license - apparently not until recently you couldn't have it on more than one computer, so be aware that you'll need to make sure the current EULA supports it. Hopefully I'll be able to grab another license in a year or two when I'm done paying down this credit card debt from freelancing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 00:57
|
|
|
Fuuuuuuuck that rules so hard! I will probably be able to afford it around Rhino 9. Thankfully my work laptop still has a functioning installation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:I’m gonna go ahead and add informative Effortposts to the OP; i’ll PM and/or tag you if that’s the case, please feel free to let me know if you’d rather i didn’t. I got distracted by the other thing, but meant to ask about this. It seems like it occupies a similar niche to Vectric products - does that sound about right?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 19:22
|
|
|
The primary advantage with Rhino is that if someone sends you a high resolution STL, your computer doesn't immediately turn into a glow in the dark space heater. Rhino can just straight up and down work faster, and if you're billing, a license is worth it in a hurry.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
One question short on getting my CSWP-MM. It's not as hard as I had expected, but they do give you plenty of rope up hang yourself with on one or two questions if the tools aren't cooperating. I guess that's the SOLIDWORKS exam questions in a nutshell
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 18:09
|
|
|
There are sample exams and some really good blogs out there covering it. Primary tools I've run into are using mass properties and the measure tool for validating answers. There might be some coordinate system ones, especially for center of gravity checks on assemblies. Intersect comes up more often than I thought it would for mold design and CSWP. Primarily it's a handful of easy enough questions with just enough gotcha ones to keep you from passing. There are some weirdly phrased ones, but don't overthink it. They're really just asking you to do things in order. An example one was having a part, scaling it, and getting the mass of the part. Because you scale to account for shrink rate, I couldn't tell if they wanted the mass of the actual part or the scaled one. In that case, they wanted the scaled mass.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Yes, but the virtually scaled part will have a different density because the software assumes everything is solid in design!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
Any of y'all work with vinyl cutters or anything? I'm eyeing the USCutter SC2, but I can't tell if it'll do fabric and those other materials. I think I'll also need a backing material for these? I'm truly unfamiliar. I'm aiming to do more with heavy weight paper and textiles. No particular wants on fabrics, so I'll find one that'll fit if the machine can do it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2021 21:37
|
|
|
You'll get there! Design intent is really hard to grok initially, but it sinks in. The thing that separates good from great designers is how little breaks when you have to change something way upstream! Today I learned an awful lot about model based definition, and especially STEP 242 files. Those things are rad as hell! gently caress drawings!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:Good poo poo about licenses and in context design. Nah, I'm on the VAR side and we can tell what edition is enumerated to what key. It'll fail on the automated license check when you reactivate. If you're updating for personal projects, I'm gonna be hooting and hollering about the 3DX for Makers program, which includes SOLIDWORKS. Should be sometime in H2 of this year. Cheap for engineering software at $99/year. Re: assemblies, Top down (all in context) vs bottom up (all pre designed) assembly modeling kind of answers itself based on what the project demands. Lately when editing in assemblies and hit a big gently caress off "no external references" button, that keeps things nice and clean. You can also propagate assembly features to parts from the assembly, which helps in the same way. Keeps things from having broken references. Bolt hole patterns kinda suck, but in some cases, I'll just convert entities on the pattern on the mating part, delete that converted entity relation and dimension it out. Or make it fixed, depends on how much effort I feel like putting into it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:Is SW ever gonna improve their surface handling? I haven't had to deal with it in a while but when I was doing mold design I was exporting my mold cavities from Rhino -> SW, doing my mold base design in SW, then going SW -> Rhino to replace my mold cavity surfaces because they always got hosed up by SW, then sending that file to my CAM program. If I went straight from SW to CAM all my surface blends would get messed up which was fun to discover AFTER cutting the mold, having not checked in masterCAM assuming that SW would have left my surfaces alone... Hmmm I haven't encountered anything in surfacing in 19-20-21 that would gently caress up blends and whatnot, unless you're doing something truly whacky like importing > boolean > scale, that would possibly keep surfaces from translating/offsetting currently. Maybe? The core surfacing functionality is not likely to change outside of stability and reliability. I base that exclusively on the push for subdivision surface modeling in 3DX rather than more traditional surfacing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2021 01:49
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:Maybe I will take a look at this 3dx thing, 100/year is pretty dang cheap. Will it run SW plug-ins like mastercam for SW? I try to avoid programming CAM in SW but for quick jobs it's nice to save the export/import loop and only have one program open and masterCAM is a pain to draw in. There's been no matrix listed yet, but disabling add-ons would be loving wild because that's how they manage a lot of stuff. I'll keep an eye out for any info on that. Sagebrush posted:McNeel saw the writing on the wall when Autodesk bought T-splines, and Rhino 7 has a new built-in subd modeling mode that is functionally identical to that plugin. McNeel rules and is everyone's friend. Massive bummer about Autodesk owning T-splines.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2021 20:56
|
|
|
I'm not there yet on the series I'm working on for the makerspace, otherwise I'd link it, but: Hit the "?" Button in the top right corner, and check out the tutorials. They're actually good and will help you get a grip on how SOLIDWORKS thinks. There are a lot of great videos out there, and some of the VARs do some good content. CATI, Go Engineer, and Javelin Tech are the major stateside ones, I believe. Their blogs and videos are going to be great for introductory topics. Making an account over at https://www.my.solidworks.com will have some great trainings as well. Free accounts will get the first few videos on each course, but they're still good. I think there's a CSWA Prep Course that will cover the fundamentals. There's a course for SOLIDWORKS File Management as well that will help. I was certainly thrown off when I cut and pasted an assembly to a new folder and it didn't work! It's less like Lars with Fusion 360 because SOLIDWORKS is sold on a VAR model instead of direct to consumer, and one of the major value adds VARs have is training. If you've got questions, though, I love making GBS threads up this thread 😉
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2021 00:57
|
|
|
To set up that sketch plane, you'll want to first hit the hide/show eye icon in your graphics area, and make sure the view temporary axes button is selected, Second from the top on the right side. That should show the implied axis of your cylindrical hole. Then you'll go to Features > Reference Geometry > Plane. You can select a first reference, that being some plane or planar face that you'll want the new plane to be parallel to. Your second reference will be confident to that axis you showed in step 1. From there, sketch a construction line showing the axis of revolution and the profile of the o-ring grove at the appropriate distance and you're good to go for your revolved cut feature!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
Library parts are a little more involved, but useful. I believe there is an included library for o-ring groove features, but I haven't used them myself. Just in case you find yourself doing a lot of them, it might pay off to check out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:This is super valuable for any kind of shaft fits, choose your nominal diameter and desired type of fit and it'll put an appropriately dimensioned hole in the part for you. The years of borrowing someone's Machinery's Handbook when I left mine at home are over. I had no idea Hole Wizard could do shaft and hole sizes, that's fantastic. I had never really used it outside of fasteners.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 00:59
|
|
|
My favorite joke to crack in Essentials classes is to say "We're going to use the hole wizard - not half the wizard - the whole wizard"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 02:30
|
|
|
Ooh very glad you posted that update - I've got Vectric stuff through the makerspace, and I was super duper curious after you brought up MC Art.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 03:54
|
|
|
oXDemosthenesXo posted:
This is an extremely rare occasion in which I would recommend calling the police.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2021 04:31
|
|
|
The workflow for things like that generally assume a multi body single part at that stage of design. This is because most products of this type, e.g. enclosures, are first made from a single body that is split into halves for injection molding using things like the "Split Line" command. You're then able to save those bodies as linked, separate part files. Then, in an assembly, you'd incorporate the PCB, fasteners, both halves of the enclosure, etc, and get your BOM and drawings from there. Unrelated for my fellow CSWE chasers: there are some errata in the Mold Design exam that I'm taking up with SOLIDWORKS. I'll let you know how it goes. To avoid spoilers but give some workarounds: there is a suspiciously small shrink rate in one question. If you get that one, I would advise removing a zero. On another series, your mass may not update if you change from a plastic to the mold core and cavity material. It may be worth exporting bodies as a STEP, importing, and then assigning the mold material. Use your Measure tool to validate that your tooling blocks are actually being extruded as far as you said. Mine was about 0.75mm off, but on a block of that size my mass estimate was hundreds of grams off. Editing the tooling split feature showed the correct dimension, so just be careful. I hope those can help!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
If you're not needing to like do clearances, simulations, bills of material, motion studies, and things like that, then yeah just go straight to the 3D printer from the part file. This is one of those things where SOLIDWORKS is obviously built for teams. Change orders coming through, but only having to change one dimension of a "master" part is enormously useful. But if it's all just you, then save yourself the extra 3 steps or whatever to get that all into an assembly and mated properly. It tracks if you're in the main audience, but it's definitely fucky if you're coming from the hobbyist side like I did. E: definitely get all that poo poo into an assembly if you're doing more than just an enclosure. Interference and distance checks are enormously useful and can save you a lot of time and filament. Check out some tutorials on split lines and split commands. The end goal is to get everything into an assembly so you can make use of those interference and clearance tools. NewFatMike fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Apr 7, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2021 23:54
|
|
|
Check out this help article, it'll give you the full picture: http://help.solidworks.com/2020/English/SolidWorks/sldworks/c_Split_and_Save_Bodies.htm?verRedirect=1 The important part, though, is this: quote:If you change the geometry of the original part, the new parts also change. If you change the split feature geometry, no new derived parts are created. The software updates the existing derived parts, preserving parent-child relations. E: happy to help! I'm a massive proponent of the Makers program, I came up from a non-engineer background, and I wicked love being a nerd about CAD.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2021 00:04
|
|
|
If you do something like edit the dimensions of your snap hook and groove feature, then it ought to propagate to the child. All new features would have to be done above the feature that splits and saves, so you would use the rollback bar to do it. I.e. you split and save a part, use the rollback bar to get above that split and save, pull the rollback bar back down, and the child parts should update.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2021 00:19
|
|
|
You can override dimensions in any library feature you make, so there's not really any need to get too clever with it. The way I would get clever with it, though is, I would use the same sketch in creating the mortise and tenon, just using an offset. That would let you use the same dimension in sizing both. I would also locate them using center rectangles using a coincident relation on a point from another sketch, kind of like how the hole wizard does it. That means you could do a few sketches (or one 3D sketch if you're feeling real sassy) which just have points on the relevant faces.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 12:34
|
|
|
Ah, I may have misunderstood. My (pre caffeinated) read was that you were just going to insert a sketch as a library feature and extrude a boss or cut from there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2021 17:07
|
|
|
I really miss Rhino from time to time. I'll really have to pick up another license sometime. Modeling in a coordinate system is so fun. I think I'll always miss Fusion at least a little out of nostalgia, even though I'm substantially more competent and speedy with SOLIDWORKS. Shapr3D was super fun, but I think I really just miss modeling on an iPad. SOLIDWORKS CAM, despite being diet CAMworks, is probably my favorite included feature. I really like how it handles materials, and that it's super customization forward. It's so fun.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 02:04
|
|
|
K
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 12:35
|
|
|
Not even as a reseller, it's because the prompt was "what do you enjoy about your CAD software?" I answered honestly, and every time CAMworks comes up, you just can't help yourself. I'm having fun with it. I'm not in sales, and I sure as poo poo am not bringing things here I'm not actually interested in and having fun with. I'm not in a production shop anymore, I'm just doing my thing and sharing the stuff I'm having fun with. It's okay to have different preferences, I just find it hilarious that any mention of enjoying CAMworks gives biracial the unavoidable urge to make it known how bad his relationship is with it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 16:40
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:I guess there would be a difference in loving around with a software for fun vs. being forced to use it in a high-stress production environment. You should talk to your boss, VAR, or therapist about it instead of taking it out on folks saying they're enjoying something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
What I'm trying to convey here is that your response is disproportionate in the extreme. I'm genuinely trying to be kind here. I've really tried to build this bridge with you before and be supportive, because I like hanging out with fellow CAD geeks, but you really like to take any instance of bringing up CAMworks as an excuse to air your latest screed about it. Sucks that it's not a good for you and your work, but can you like not drop a payload on any thread where it comes up? I'm actually interested in folks' responses to "what feature do you like?"
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
That's a bummer about the forums, I stumbled on a few FreeCAD patreons a while back and they seem like they're working really hard. It's a super cool and accessible product. Have you checked out any Joko Engineering Help or Way of Wood videos for topics on FreeCAD? They do quite a few, if there's a particular technique you're looking for.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
I'm not defending the software, I really don't know where you're getting that from. I'm just trying to politely ask you not to dump your latest frustrations about the loving pack in CAM all over any thread where anyone dare publicly enjoy it. Although, based on the av, I'm not really surprised that my genuine request that you dig deep and reflect on how your behavior impacts others' enjoyment has not gone well. I'm disengaging. You have valuable and appreciated input on many other topics and I hope the conversation steers towards those waters. I hope that in the future, when folks publicly enjoy something, your first response is to enjoy their enjoyment and not to post your latest manifesto on why thing they enjoy is bad.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
I just got served an instagram ad for some company selling those Maslows as a kit - aren't they like crazy cheap to build in the first place? E: yeah, $500 for a 4' x 8' is great - especially since it's not bad on footprint. NewFatMike fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Apr 22, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2021 14:26
|
|
|
3D Interconnect is usually pretty good on the SOLIDWORKS side - are you going to be editing the geometry or just including it in assemblies/drawings? If you're not editing, it'll be great.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 20, 2024 23:46 |
|
|
I really hate working with IGES imports - it's like 50/50 if it comes through as a totally unknit surface body in SOLIDWORKS. STEP all day, especially if it's a fancy STEP 242 that brings in all the callouts in 3D.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2021 22:10
|
|