Posted: 6/30/2026 8:37:18 PM EDT
|
I would like to start modeling some things myself, so I need to learn some flavor of cad. Ideally I would be able to take a drawing or photo and trace over it to establish the beginning of the project. For my first project, I have been playing with freecad which seems capable but my ignorance is pretty frustrating. Is freecad a good place to start and worth watching some videos, reading and suffering through the learning curve or is there something better that I should look at? I joined the arfcad discord but it's a ghost town. |
"Freedom is a messy business." - LaRue_Tactical
I am a sack of blood, held together by un-tanned leather. . .
I am a sack of blood, held together by un-tanned leather. . .
|
Fusion, Solidworks, or Onshape. They all have their ups and downs but generally speaking they all work just about the same way and all have a very similar feature set. Freecad can work but from what I understand it is missing some functionality that the other three have. I've never used it myself. If you are a US or Canadian veteran then Solidworks offers the full premium student edition for $20/year which makes it an excellent choice, with the caveat that the license does not permit using the software to make money. Blender if you're making figurines or cosplay stuff. Avoid Tinkercad. |
|
Originally Posted By Blob: Fusion, Solidworks, or Onshape. They all have their ups and downs but generally speaking they all work just about the same way and all have a very similar feature set. Freecad can work but from what I understand it is missing some functionality that the other three have. I've never used it myself. If you are a US or Canadian veteran then Solidworks offers the full premium student edition for $20/year which makes it an excellent choice, with the caveat that the license does not permit using the software to make money. Blender if you're making figurines or cosplay stuff. Avoid Tinkercad. Pretty much this. SW is cheap even for non-veterans. I pay $25/yr. So it's still extremely reasonable, and frankly, even though I use all three that Blob mentioned in his first sentence, I still find it worthwhile to keep SW around. Each program has their strengths, and depending on what I'm modeling, I'll choose one over the others. I do a lot of custom threads. OS is the easiest for that. I do a lot of parametric customization modeling. Fusion is best for that, as it also allows you to upload the parametric variables to MakerWorld to let users modify the file on the fly like OpenSCAD does. And then SW is just overall an excellent program that I find is very well rounded. It also happens to be what I learned CAD on originally (SW 2005 and SW 2006) so I'm pretty loyal to that program as well, though the bloatware and forced updates from 3DExperience are enough to make you want to jump off a bridge. |
|
Originally Posted By User55645: Are you planning to stick with 2D or do you want to get into 3D modeling? A 3D program will also have 2D sketches so it'd be best to learn that instead of one then the ther. 3d. Right now I'm trying to turn a drawing of a knife I'm designing into a 3d print so I can play with guard and handle shapes |
"Freedom is a messy business." - LaRue_Tactical
I am a sack of blood, held together by un-tanned leather. . .
I am a sack of blood, held together by un-tanned leather. . .
Land of the once free & the home of the narrative.
Joined:
Jan 2012
Posts:
28872
EE: 100% (216)
AL, USA
|
Originally Posted By Mmamonster: Learn one , solidworks |
If some of you put this much fervor into your community or church, instead of arguing with people voting for the same politician, the world would be a much better place. -Skg_Mre_Lght
|
Originally Posted By OG1: I wish I did this. the boss got it for me but after a few years in Fusion, I just can't get the swing of it. I love the idea of not being forced into Cloud production work. That being said Fusion finally migrated the tools to cloud based so they are both here at work and the home shop. What can't you get the gist of? SW is almost spot on the same, with only a few minor differences. I know I'm in a club by myself but custom threads in Fusion are a royal PITA vs SW. Also reference geometry is way easier in SW as it is inferenced vs prescriptive. Usually when someone learns one, the others follow pretty easily. |
Land of the once free & the home of the narrative.
Joined:
Jan 2012
Posts:
28873
EE: 100% (216)
AL, USA
|
Originally Posted By -Obsessed-: What can't you get the gist of? SW is almost spot on the same, with only a few minor differences. I know I'm in a club by myself but custom threads in Fusion are a royal PITA vs SW. Also reference geometry is way easier in SW as it is inferenced vs prescriptive. Usually when someone learns one, the others follow pretty easily. |
If some of you put this much fervor into your community or church, instead of arguing with people voting for the same politician, the world would be a much better place. -Skg_Mre_Lght
|
Originally Posted By OG1: I have tried, perhaps it is the limited youtube vids where Fusion has thousands, I learned almost everything in Fusion on Youtube. I did build some models but man it took me forever where Fusion I can just make something pretty much instantly. Also, the CAM side is worlds different. I tried master cam but Fusions sim and setup is just natural to me like having a master tool library. I really want to learn SW and plan to when I get time. Mastercam blows chunks. The biggest hurdle I have when moving between different cad packages is that they all name the tools differently. Unite/combine, split/divide, knit/sew, fillet/edge blend... It's really just a matter of learning the name of the tools and where they are in the menus. |
|
Originally Posted By Blob: Mastercam blows chunks. The biggest hurdle I have when moving between different cad packages is that they all name the tools differently. Unite/combine, split/divide, knit/sew, fillet/edge blend... It's really just a matter of learning the name of the tools and where they are in the menus. Originally Posted By Blob: Originally Posted By OG1: I have tried, perhaps it is the limited youtube vids where Fusion has thousands, I learned almost everything in Fusion on Youtube. I did build some models but man it took me forever where Fusion I can just make something pretty much instantly. Also, the CAM side is worlds different. I tried master cam but Fusions sim and setup is just natural to me like having a master tool library. I really want to learn SW and plan to when I get time. Mastercam blows chunks. The biggest hurdle I have when moving between different cad packages is that they all name the tools differently. Unite/combine, split/divide, knit/sew, fillet/edge blend... It's really just a matter of learning the name of the tools and where they are in the menus. Same problem for me, the core functionality between all of them is roughly the same....the little differences between them can slow me down though. I learned on Inventor and have spent decades using it at this point....it's frustrating how even in the same AutoDesk ecosystem they'll do things different (Inventor vs Fusion). I use Inventor for work items and typically stick to Fusion for home stuff. I've messed around in SW off / on for work when we purchased a company that had all of their files in SW. On your previous 2D question, I still do a handful of work things in 2D....we have a couple old custom CNC machines that are simple XY tables that I need to create files for and 2D AutoCad is the easiest way to make them. Home stuff, if I need to have a 2D only view (like a floor plan), I just use a sketch in Fusion. It might be because I do less work in Inventor now as a manager vs Fusion for home stuff all the time but I think I honestly prefer Fusion over Inventor now. |
EP429: Today's lesson - Don't provoke ARFCOM. People will see your butthole.
Joined:
Sep 2022
Posts:
2926
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
Originally Posted By Blob: Seems like more of a hobby kinda thing than an actual productivity tool. But IDK I've never used it. Originally Posted By Blob: Originally Posted By voyager3: Any opinions about procedural CADs like OpenScad for someone who's new to CAD but very familiar with programming? Seems like more of a hobby kinda thing than an actual productivity tool. But IDK I've never used it. First I've seen it.....I can't imagine what a nightmare it would be to try and 3D model via code. @voyager3 / others, I know 3D modeling looks intimidating when you don't have any experience with it but it's not that complicated. Like anything there are levels but I'll bet a new user could download Fusion, watch a couple hours of YouTube videos and be able to create basic models. I'd guess most of the 3D models I make only use a handful of features, extrude / revolve / fillet / chamfer would probably cover a large percentage of them. Super complex models can be tricky but a lot of times the "trick" comes down to order of operations....the operations are typically the same as simple models, there's just more of them. I'd strongly suggest putting some effort into learning a real cad program vs trying to use OpenScad....I'll bet even with a programming background, within a few days you'll be faster with Fusion / SW / etc. |
EP429: Today's lesson - Don't provoke ARFCOM. People will see your butthole.
|
Originally Posted By -Obsessed-: What can't you get the gist of? SW is almost spot on the same, with only a few minor differences. I know I'm in a club by myself but custom threads in Fusion are a royal PITA vs SW. Also reference geometry is way easier in SW as it is inferenced vs prescriptive. Usually when someone learns one, the others follow pretty easily. Fusion is significantly different from SW. Fusion is junk. |
|
Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Horse shit. C= computer A = assisted D = design/drafting Sourcs...CAD designer/drafter since 1988 Specifically in the context of this thread, and broadly in the whole subforum, 2D cad is essentially useless. 2D engineering drawings even less so. |
|
Originally Posted By Blob: Specifically in the context of this thread, and broadly in the whole subforum, 2D cad is essentially useless. 2D engineering drawings even less so. Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. |
|
Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. You are misinterpreting what I said. This is 3D printing subforum, not metalworking forum. Nobody here is using 2D drawings to run their 3D printers. Regardless, in terms of modern day CAD, 2D drawings are a result of 3D models, not the other way around. Source = machinist who manufactures parts using 2D drawings on a daily basis. |
|
Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Originally Posted By Blob: Specifically in the context of this thread, and broadly in the whole subforum, 2D cad is essentially useless. 2D engineering drawings even less so. Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. You can put tolerances directly into the 3D model.....I've sent tons of parts to machine shops as only a 3D model, it comes down to the part and the shop doing the work. I've got an aluminum extrusion die being made right now from only a 3D model, this will be the 3rd one from this vendor made the same way. As someone who grew up using 2D AutoCad, I don't really consider 2D drawings generated from 3D models to be CAD....even though it meets the technical definition. To me, 2D CAD is drawing the part / assembly / floor plan / etc.....vs the annotating done on 3D model drawings. Maybe that's just me though. |
EP429: Today's lesson - Don't provoke ARFCOM. People will see your butthole.
|
Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. Originally Posted By DoctorCAD: Originally Posted By Blob: Specifically in the context of this thread, and broadly in the whole subforum, 2D cad is essentially useless. 2D engineering drawings even less so. Again...horseshit. Who makes parts without drawings? You don't want any shop that builds to a 3D model without a detailed 2D drawing showing fits and tolerances. The shop would just be guessing. It's becoming the industry norm. See ANSI Y14.41 for industry standards on Model Based Definition, pretty much always using GD&T per ANSI Y14.5. I've actually had vendors unable to build to just a 2D drawing because their QA stream needed PMI in the model |
|
I started with Tinkercad because I didn't want to learn anything more complicated. Then I realized how powerful Fusion was, so I started learning it. Now I'm okay with Fusion and use it for work, but our new ME uses Solidworks and is pushing me to get it  Not sure if it would be a big jump or not. Freecad is okay but a little more of a pain than Fusion to me. Onshape is a little more intuitive. |
"I may crossdress but I don't dress like a whore" - LittlePony
"I don't mind some dong" - Rustynutzz
"I don't mind some dong" - Rustynutzz