# learning cad



## jixxerbill (Feb 24, 2013)

I want to learn cad, but whats the best/easiest to learn... i have downloaded several trial ones over the years but learning curve seemed steep.. It will still be steep but i really want to learn it for eventual use in cnc machine... A little background about myself. I took drafting in high school, back when it was pencil and paper (1984).. Since then  I have worked construction and being able to read and understand prints has been invaluable... I currently have the turbocad trial version and i can sketch out parts in paper mode (takes a while lol) but in model mode i cant get zoomed in far enough....Turbocad web sight has a tutorial video for sale .. I was wondering if anyone had used it before...Thanks Bill


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Feb 24, 2013)

jixxerbill said:


> I want to learn cad, but whats the best/easiest to learn... i have downloaded several trial ones over the years but learning curve seemed steep.. It will still be steep but i really want to learn it for eventual use in cnc machine... A little background about myself. I took drafting in high school, back when it was pencil and paper (1984).. Since then I have worked construction and being able to read and understand prints has been invaluable... I currently have the turbocad trial version and i can sketch out parts in paper mode (takes a while lol) but in model mode i cant get zoomed in far enough....Turbocad web sight has a tutorial video for sale .. I was wondering if anyone had used it before...Thanks Bill


 

are you a student
if yes you can have a free CAD student version from auto desk


----------



## Woodster (Feb 24, 2013)

I use Solid Works 2012 and started using it just by going through the included tutorials. It really is the easiest thing to use once you get your head round it. It's expensive to buy, but if you know how and where...........


----------



## jixxerbill (Feb 24, 2013)

Luc, i wish i was a student. I been out of school for almost 30 years.. 
Woodster, ill check out solid works. thanks..


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Feb 24, 2013)

jixxerbill said:


> Luc, i wish i was a student. I been out of school for almost 30 years..
> Woodster, ill check out solid works. thanks..


 
It's expensive to buy, but if you know how and where........... 


the same thing can be done with CAD :hDe:with CAD I can supplie you with 3000 pages manual for free cheers


----------



## Tin Falcon (Feb 24, 2013)

check out alibre CAD. IIRC a free trial download is available then the licence for the Personal Edition PE is about $200. Solid works is great if: 1) you are a professional and can afford the licensing fee because you earn your living from it.  2) you are a teacher and get a free licence .3) are a student and get a cheap licence. 
alibre is relatively affordable for the rest of us. the beauty of Alibre is you draw a part in 3-d then in few minutes it will make dimensioned 2 d drawings. yes there is a learning curve.
Tin


----------



## vascon2196 (Feb 24, 2013)

Bill,

I started with pencil and paper, then AutoCAD, then Mechanical Desktop, then Pro-E, and finally ended up using SolidWorks. I now teach several CAD courses that are part of a Mechanical Engineering Technology program and have seen every level of CAD student cross my path.

I have never used TurboCAD but if you will be using it for 3D CAD design then let me at least throw out some comments that you may find helpful.

Regardless of the program you choose, if it's 3D, the rules of 3D CAD design are almost all the same.

1. Choose a sketching plane (Top, Front, or Right)
2. Draw a sketch (a rectangle, circle, any shape)
3. Create a Feature (Extrude, Revolve, and so on)

The last think you should do is give up! Learning CAD can be frustrating at first but the more tutorials you can do and the more practice the easier it will become. If you love Model Engineering...knowing 3D CAD will open up a whole new world for you.

I am currently teaching a gentleman that is more than twice my age...he never turned on a computer until he entered my CAD-1 class. He is doing just fine and loving it.

Best of luck to which ever CAD program you end up with.


----------



## jixxerbill (Feb 24, 2013)

I just looked at some tutorials on that alibre Tin was talking about and it seems like its a little better than others.. it actually makes changes to a drawing when you change the dimension of a line or circle...etc.. I wish there were tutorials that walked you thru how to make a part and let you do it along with the tutorial...Then get more and more detailed as it goes along....I guess thats why i only lasted 2 years in college ! I can read all day long and that evening if you ask me what i read i will not remember any of it... But if you show me one time I will recall 80 to 90 percent of it...Its a learning problem i have i guess.. There is a name for it,,, slow maybe ?? lol Thanks everyone for all the great responses....Bill


----------



## Dave Sohlstrom (Feb 24, 2013)

Bill

If you use Skype I can walk you through Alibre CAD using there share screen feature.
I spent 3 hrs yesterday with my friend in England working with Alibre.

Dave  skype name dave.sohlstrom


----------



## littlelocos (Feb 24, 2013)

Hello,
I have used various CAD programs at school, work, and home over the last 25 years.  At work it's AutoCAD (we do facilities work).  At home, it's TurboCAD v19pro.  I have used TurboCAD for about 10 years or so and have enjoyed it.  For the price, it is very powerful and does not require a yearly subscription to keep using it.  I have never used the TurboCAD tutorials, but can highly recommend Don Cheke's TurboCAD tips.  He has a HUGE amount of info available on his web site and does not charge for it.  The TurboCAD forums at TurboCAD.com are also very friendly and helpful.  Don can be found on the forums and at http://www.textualcreations.ca/Don_Cheke's_TurboCAD_Tips.html

I have never used Alibre, but understand it is easy to use.

TurboCAD has several different "levels" available from simple 2D design/drafting to full-blown solid modeling.  The first thing to decide in any CAD package is what do you want to do with it?  Is is more importante to draft in 2D and produce a usable drawing or sketch, or do you want to produce 3D renderings of a full project?

Todd.


----------



## aonemarine (Feb 24, 2013)

Having used both turbocad and alibre, The alibre is much more fun and IMHO easier to use. You can download alibre for a free trial period and there is also a forum that can help you out if need be. I cant afford solid works, but doubt I would buy it if I could. Alibre does what I need...


----------



## dman (Feb 24, 2013)

i dont know why people always suggest proprietary applications when some wants to get started. 

windows has open source and freeware just like the free operating systems. 

http://free-cad.sourceforge.net/

it's written in python and has some quirkyness, but then again so does the uber expensive proprietarty applications. i drafted in highschool and know a few programs including autocad, mastercam, featurecam, some of visual nadstrum(working model) and i dable in some of the free ones. i tried solid works but like solids in mastercam better, solidworks may be better for high polygon counts and i think it handles moving parts. my friend is a professional draftsman for an engineering firm and we've both come to the conclusion that all cad programs have issues. 

for blueprints i like autocad. the infinite lines and layer system make construction easy. the 3d is ok for wire frame. solids are a pain if you don't get things right the first time and the program has weird rendering errors if you do too much zooming.

for solids and surfaces i like mastercam but that's not what it was designed for, still it is great at editing solids especially after they are created. but it has a learning curve for wire frame because it isn't as interactive and is missing a few features i like in autocad. there is more inputting point coordinates and creating features from the origin and translating them to the location.  

for cam mastercam is best for 3d especially multi axis, and featurecam is easy for getting things from concept to program as it handles things in a similar way to how you would make parts manually. 

there is a ton of other stuff out there my friend knows but i can't comment on it. some sounds interesting but a pain to use.


----------



## jixxerbill (Feb 24, 2013)

littlelocos said:


> Hello,
> I have used various CAD programs at school, work, and home over the last 25 years. At work it's AutoCAD (we do facilities work). At home, it's TurboCAD v19pro. I have used TurboCAD for about 10 years or so and have enjoyed it. For the price, it is very powerful and does not require a yearly subscription to keep using it. I have never used the TurboCAD tutorials, but can highly recommend Don Cheke's TurboCAD tips. He has a HUGE amount of info available on his web site and does not charge for it. The TurboCAD forums at TurboCAD.com are also very friendly and helpful. Don can be found on the forums and at http://www.textualcreations.ca/Don_Cheke's_TurboCAD_Tips.html
> 
> I have never used Alibre, but understand it is easy to use.
> ...


 

As stated in first post id like to be able some day to use cnc equipment, so from what i understand i need to be able to do 3d ? If this is not correct let me know..Alibre says it will do 3d then make 2d drawings and also convert to g-code for input into cnc use..Again im probablly wrong.. Im just trying to make the first step toward end result of getting a cnc mill.. If alibre is easy to use and skips the first step of learning 2d then im time ahead, then if in fact it will convert to gcode it seems it would be an all in one package.. Plus it has a lot of tutorial free of charge but i cant get to it in the trial version...Thanks again everyone for the input...Bill


----------



## dman (Feb 24, 2013)

jixxerbill said:


> As stated in first post id like to be able some day to use cnc equipment, so from what i understand i need to be able to do 3d ? If this is not correct let me know..Alibre says it will do 3d then make 2d drawings and also convert to g-code for input into cnc use..Again im probablly wrong.. Im just trying to make the first step toward end result of getting a cnc mill.. If alibre is easy to use and skips the first step of learning 2d then im time ahead, then if in fact it will convert to gcode it seems it would be an all in one package.. Plus it has a lot of tutorial free of charge but i cant get to it in the trial version...Thanks again everyone for the input...Bill



nope, you hardly ever need 3d all. but it looks cool. most parts can be made with all the geometry in a single plane then you can use radius cutters or define sides with draft angles in the tool path generator tools. when you do cam you can step away from the mentality of including all the details. the heights can often be put into the toolpath tools.

if you want to do complex parts that need 3d you'll mostly use surfaces but take one step at a time. but when you get there a mistake people often make is that they forget they are working in 3d space through a 2d interface. it gets very easy to put things in the wrong place when you try to work in 3d instead of defining your working plane and view then using the coordinates inputs instead of just clicking on where things appear to be.


----------



## kf2qd (Feb 24, 2013)

If you are starting from scratch then any CAD program is going to have a wicked steep learning curve. The better, and more powerful the CAD program, the steeper the curve.

That being said - I have used Draftsight, from the folks who make SolidWorks. It is a 2D CAD and workd a lot like AutoCAD. I have also used ProgeCAD and liked it. It is almost identical to AutoCAD and actually has a couple features that I like better. 

Draftsight is a FREE download.(and there is a version that works with Linux) There is a 2D version of ProgeCAD, ProgeCAD Smart that is very similar to DraftSight. ProgeCAD Pro is $400US. 3D and very nice rendering. By playing around with settings it can come out almost photorealistic. ProgeCAD Pro also has the AutoLISP and the version I used had the VBA addon. I was able to create a Visual Basic for Applications program to generate some CNC code from the data in a drawing. Click the segmant and add it to the CNC code.A lot cheaper than AutoCAD.

While the users of various types of CAD ALWAYS (yes I mean ALWAYS) have a reason why their particular version is better, I think the bang you get for the buck is important. I have tried TurboCAD in the past and I was always frustrated by what it couldn't do. Biggest problem with learning any CAD program is figuring out what they call commands and such. The programs are very big, have a lot of options and it is easy to get lost trying to find some function or command. Once you find them, it gets easier because you will use a subset of the available functions over and over in every drawing you make.

For example = I wanted to rotate a line, relative to another line. Or I wanted to rotate something that was at an angle to get one edge ortoganal. It turns out that in AutoCAD you select ROTATE, the pick the center of rotation, and then type RE (for relative) and then pick the center and the 2 endpoints that indicate the rotation you want. The problem was that I didn't have a clue what the program called the operation so it was difficult to get an answer that helped me. The learning curve is figuring out what they call stuff so you can figure out how to use it. All CAD systems have the problem, they just use different names for similar functions.


----------



## Swifty (Feb 25, 2013)

Started press tool design a long time ago with a pencil on a drawing board. When I started with CAD, it was a while before classes were to start, so I sat down and figured out how to draw in 2D, just followed the way I did it with pencil and paper, X and Y axis lines and built on from there. 3D came a lot later, more to prove to myself that I could do it.

So I think that the way to go would be to master 2D first, then 3D. I realise that you can do 3D drawings and then let the package lay out 2D drawings for you, but it would be like learning to mill on a CNC machine first, then trying to learn how to work a manual mill. The basics need to be learnt first.

Paul.


----------



## aonemarine (Feb 25, 2013)

lots of varying opinions I see...  I still say go with the alibre. Its easy to use and easy to learn.
I did this in the first 2 weeks of having the program and learning how to use it...


----------



## kvom (Feb 25, 2013)

There are two basic classes of CNC milling: 2.5D and 3D.  2.5D uses 2D drawings (DXF) and essentially automates manual milling.  3D CAD uses files that define surfaces (STL).  These are typically milled with ball mills.

For the vast majority of the models that are mentioned on this site 2.5D CNC is sufficient, and you need only a 2D CAD program.  I use Draftsight, but any program that produces DXF or DWG files will work.

If you do want to learn a 3D CAD program, you can get the rendered images of your parts and assemblies like that shown above.  As long as the 3D model can generate 2D files, you can still use it for 2.5D milling of individual parts.


----------



## Brian Rupnow (Feb 25, 2013)

Jixxerbill--Just a heads up from someone who's been there and done that. Start with a 2D cad package like Draftsight, which is a free downloadable program, and is excellent. You are GOING TO HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO DRAW IN 2D FIRST!!! Once you master basic drawing and dimensioning in 2D then you are ready to move on to 3D. All 3D drawings begin with a 2D sketch, which you then extrude into the third dimension to create a solid part. That is simply a one click command. Regardles---You MUST be able to create geometry and be comfortable with 2D work first.-----Brian Rupnow (who spent 32 years on a board, 3 years on autocad 2D, and 13 years doing  and teaching 3D cad.)


----------



## Chriske (Feb 25, 2013)

aonemarine said:


> lots of varying opinions I see...  I still say go with the alibre. Its easy to use and easy to learn.
> I did this in the first 2 weeks of having the program and learning how to use it...



Although I don't use it myself (I use Inventor) I'd pick Alibre to work with if I had to choose.
A few people I know use it and they make stunning things with it.

Nice work btw aonemarine..!

Chris


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Feb 25, 2013)

this links give you access to a *FULL FREE CAD 2D*
enjoy
http://www.emachineshop.com/


----------



## johnmcc69 (Feb 25, 2013)

I agree with Brian. If you haven't used CAD before, start with 2D. This will be VERY beneficial when you move to 3D.
In 3D modeling, the first thing created is the 2D sketch & is the basis of the 3D geometry. If you have a sloppy 2D
Sketch (unconstrained, bad dimensioning scheme..) this "simple" 2D sketch can create many problems further
down the road in your model. (You might have to change a Dim in that sketch & it may not give you the results
You want)

John


----------



## Brian Rupnow (Feb 25, 2013)

This is the link for free Draftsight 2D software.---Brian
http://www.3ds.com/products/draftsight/download-draftsight


----------



## Chriske (Feb 25, 2013)

johnmcc69 said:


> I agree with Brian. If you haven't used CAD before, start with 2D. This will be VERY beneficial when you move to 3D.
> In 3D modeling, the first thing created is the 2D sketch & is the basis of the 3D geometry. If you have a sloppy 2D
> Sketch (unconstrained, bad dimensioning scheme..) this "simple" 2D sketch can create many problems further
> down the road in your model. (You might have to change a Dim in that sketch & it may not give you the results
> ...



I must disagree on this one John.
I started my 'drawing career' learning AutoCAD 12 (2D)  For me it was a never ending learning process..!  . I was not busy drawing a part on my computer, no I was busy drawing lines on a screen. I got nuts drawing lines...!
Until someone proposed to try Inventor 7.  Starting Inventor 7 was kind of a revelation.  After a few minutes I had opened the program I drew my first 3D parts. There were a gazillion fewer conventions to work with the program compared with AutoCAD, Inventor is easy to learn, intuitive.
The most important issue about Inventor (and other 3D software)  : while drawing 3D parts, your 2D drawings are automatically generated out of that 3D part....!
Putting these 2D drawings 'on paper' takes you literal a few seconds.  You click and there is your front view, click again and you have an additional view, left, right, upper, you name it, only seconds to do that. Add some figures to the drawings and your done.

And of course larger companies still use 2D software. They have a long life licenses (and support) to deal with.  Not one new company will invest  in 2D software anymore.


----------



## aonemarine (Feb 25, 2013)

How about posting drawings of what you have done then let him decide what he really wants?  Honestly you wind up starting your drawing in 2d with any cad program, then just extrude it. so you are learning 2d cad as well. But the end result is way cooler   LOL


----------



## Woodster (Feb 25, 2013)

Solid Works, just using tutorials that come with it.


----------



## aonemarine (Feb 25, 2013)

Nice woodster!!


----------



## cncjunior (Feb 25, 2013)

Having read all the posts and seeing that each person has their own preference based on need and use, I myself use solidworks for manual machining projects.  I would use Mastercam for CNC machining/turning.  One thing to note Mastercam imports solidworks models.  I find Solidworks easier to draw with than Mastecam.  A bit of background here.  I learned AutoCad back in 88 and still use it for quick layout work of say machinery in a building.  I took a Solidworks training program and I find that it is much easier to use than Autocad due to it's use of solids.  Mastercam was part of the CNC training program I took at a technical institute.

As said above, each has there areas that they shine and other areas that need more polishing.  In the training at the technical institute there was a gentleman that had no experience in any drawing program and he had a hard time keeping up with the rest of us who had drawing experience in other programs.  He got it for sure after some frustrating times.  My main point here is that pick a program to start on and learn it.  With that experience you will be able to move into another program and not have such a steep learning curve and with a few under your belt it gets easier.

In the machining industry, Solidworks is the main program that is used.  In fact, some companies won't deal with those that submit drawing packages in Autocad or other 2D programs.

If you can find someone in your area that is willing to spend a few hours with you on a particular program then that will quicken the learning curve.  As others have also said, there are tutorials on some of the programs.  If these tutorials are available they are a great tool to get an introduction and get into more detailed techniques.

Daniel


----------



## Dave Sohlstrom (Feb 25, 2013)

I do not under stand why folks even suggest Solidworks. They are talking about a program that costs several thousand dollars and the maintenance is in the thousands.
Same with Gibbs Cam, Master Cam X5 or X6 13,000 per seat for each.

There are very few HSM that can afford those programs so why even suggest them.

There are a couple of good free 2D programs. Draftsight and Solid Edge.

If you want to do 3D CAD parts and assemblies I think that Alibre is the best for your $$. Personal Edition $199.00 and they will give you 30 day trial.

If you discover that you can make some money from you 3D CAD work you can upgrade to Pro or Expert and still not spend what you would for maintenance  in solid works

Next you want to do some CNC machine work on that mini mill you converted to CNC get a copy of CAMBAM. I think it runs around $150 and will handle 2.5D and 3D CNC machining. Will it do 5 axis NO

If you are having trouble with the learning curve ask for help on the forums. Ask if some one with Skype could do a screen share with you and help you through your rough spot.

Dave


----------



## jixxerbill (Feb 25, 2013)

I really do appreciate everyones replys, but after wasting 2 hours of Dave Sohlstrom's life last night he has me on track with alibre.. Im drawing up plans and printing them out, nothing to detailed mind you. More detailed drawings will come with practice me hopes lol...Thanks everyone..And mostly you dave !! Thanks a bunch...Bill


----------



## TorontoBuilder (Feb 25, 2013)

Chriske said:


> I must disagree on this one John.
> I started my 'drawing career' learning AutoCAD 12 (2D)  For me it was a never ending learning process..!  . I was not busy drawing a part on my computer, no I was busy drawing lines on a screen. I got nuts drawing lines...!
> Until someone proposed to try Inventor 7.  Starting Inventor 7 was kind of a revelation.  After a few minutes I had opened the program I drew my first 3D parts. There were a gazillion fewer conventions to work with the program compared with AutoCAD, Inventor is easy to learn, intuitive.
> The most important issue about Inventor (and other 3D software)  : while drawing 3D parts, your 2D drawings are automatically generated out of that 3D part....!
> ...



I would disagree with you chriske, or rather say that there are 2D drawing programs other than AutoCad, and I recommend that people first learn the fundamentals on one of the free 2D packages before moving on to 3D.

Too bad programs have becoming massively complex since the good old days. 
I have used literally dozens of CAD programs, and in my mind nothing beat the DOS version of AutoSketch 2.0 from Autodesk for pure speed and ease of use to make simple engineering drawings. 

Complexity and user friendliness was all downhill from there... and I followed along with many AutoCAD releases to finally settle into AutoCAD LT 2007. Of course, AutoSketch was seriously limited on the output device side of things... imagine no PDF output. 

That being said, I can complete design houses in AutoCAD and troubleshoot designs easily... the same with engineering drawings, so have a good foundation for 3D design once I settle into a program that fits my preferences... and budget. I have no desire to use a 3D platform for work.

I'd recommend someone first tinker with a simplistic 2D drawing program for the free trial period, there are plenty. Delta Cad comes to mind.


----------



## canadianhorsepower (Feb 25, 2013)

> Complexity and user friendliness was all downhill from there... and I followed along with many AutoCAD releases to finally settle into AutoCAD LT 2007. Of course, AutoSketch was seriously limited on the output device side of things... imagine no PDF output.


cant agree with you more AutoCAD LT2007 was users freindly, since then it's a hide and seek where they hide the ICON


----------



## Chriske (Feb 25, 2013)

aonemarine said:


> How about posting drawings of what you have done then let him decide what he really wants?  Honestly you wind up starting your drawing in 2d with any cad program, then just extrude it. so you are learning 2d cad as well. But the end result is way cooler   LOL



ok ...ok...I know...this is not correct because this is all drawn in Inventor, but I show it anyway...

One of this years project, drawing not finished yet.
Age of my guys building and drawing this project : 15 years old.  To have an idea, height of the drill-press about 6" .  This little 'workshop' will be driven by one Stirling engine built by older pupils. This Stirling engine is already up and running(not shown in the drawing)






This older project is a rather large one. All students in our school helped building this 'Project train'. It took us 5 long days to set this up for our 'Open door'. To have an idea of the dimension of this project : length : 13 meter width : 9 meter (it's about the same in yard)

Every single part you see in this drawing has been drawn by our students. I can assure you this is a huge undertaking...!   But lots of fun to.







And This is how it looks like in real .

Sorry again aonemarine...

Chris


----------



## Dave Sohlstrom (Feb 25, 2013)

You ask for examples. Here is an assembly of parts in Alibre. If you grab ahold of the shaft and rotate it the piston will move in the cylinder and the valve will cover and uncover steam ports. You can check for interference and correct travel.

It would take a lot more work to do this in 2D.

Once you have every thing worked out Alibre lets you take each part and do a 2D drawing of it with the standard views you need.
These drawings can be dimensioned and printed so you can take a drawing to the shop to make the parts.

Dave


----------



## littlelocos (Feb 25, 2013)

Hello Bill,
Sounds like Alibre is working out for you.  That is great.  Enjoy.

Just for the sake of completeness.  Turbocad also has free trials, forums, etc.  (http://forums.turbocad.com/).  The gallery of other people's work is quite impressive.  There is a 2-1/2D CAM plug in available for $199.

It is somewhat cumbersome, but it's a full-blown CAD package and I am fully invested.  BION, I purchased the print manual for the first time in about 5 years.  It reads like a phone book - 2" thick and 8-1/2 x 11.  Like I said, I really enjoy using it.  My only wish is that once rendered, it would animate like Alibre does.

You and others might enjoy a few renderings from my 'board' as well.

If you (or anyone else here) decide to go the TurboCAD route and need some assistance, let me know.  I am glad to help.

Have fun,
Todd.


----------



## Brian Rupnow (Feb 25, 2013)

Yes, the 3D cad shurely does make them pretty. But, as I said, every part in the model started with a 2D dimensioned sketch. Given that there are some really great free 2D packages, and NO free 3D packages, I still recommend starting with 2D. Find your way around in it, then move to 3D if you want to make pretty models. Just remember---No matter how pretty and impressive the 3D models are, its still 2D drawings that get issued to the shop floor for machinists to work from, and its still mainly 2D   .dxf files that go to the shop for cnc programming. For many people who are hobby machinists, thats enough.---Brian


----------



## wildun (Feb 25, 2013)

It all depends on whether you want to learn CAD in order to do some actual working drawings, or works of art to impress everyone and I'm not talking about any of you guys - I like to see that sort of stuff too! but I'm trying to say that if you are designing and building a project that you only need to satisfy yourself as to how much detail you will need in order to get the job done.
Not of course begrudging anyone having the higher end programs you understand! but with the really great ones, doing really great drawings and renderings often becomes the main focus and the actual engineering often gets shelved!

Sure you can have Solid Works and be a master of graphics (all at great cost), or you can be a practical engineer in your little shed actually desigining and making stuff, in which case you can download a trial version of DESIGN CAD which is perfectly adequate for doing a real job - They (Design Cad) will give you the full version for $80 (or $100 if you didn't download the trial from the IMSI site) when its time has expired, this is for Version 22 with 3D.  - that's also much cheaper than Turbocad.

You don't need to be a master draughtsman (draftsman to Americans )in order to design your own engineering project. 
This one is quite easy, - every cad program has a steep learning curve of course, but just have patience and it'll all come to you! -like riding a bicycle it will always stay with you - Check it out!


----------



## dman (Feb 25, 2013)

Brian Rupnow said:


> Yes, the 3D cad shurely does make them pretty. But, as I said, every part in the model started with a 2D dimensioned sketch. Given that there are some really great free 2D packages, and NO free 3D packages, I still recommend starting with 2D. Find your way around in it, then move to 3D if you want to make pretty models. Just remember---No matter how pretty and impressive the 3D models are, its still 2D drawings that get issued to the shop floor for machinists to work from, and its still mainly 2D   .dxf files that go to the shop for cnc programming. For many people who are hobby machinists, thats enough.---Brian



freeCAD is 3d and runs on any os. not to mention the whole program is free, not just a trial... gotta love the gnu licence, not that you could really live without proprietary stuff.... but there are areas where open source shines and without it to compete with the evils of micrsoft we'd all be using internet explorer to chat here ewww.....


----------



## kf2qd (Feb 25, 2013)

jixxerbill said:


> I really do appreciate everyones replys, but after wasting 2 hours of Dave Sohlstrom's life last night he has me on track with alibre.. Im drawing up plans and printing them out, nothing to detailed mind you. More detailed drawings will come with practice me hopes lol...Thanks everyone..And mostly you dave !! Thanks a bunch...Bill



Doesn't sound like it was wasted time. Just gives you an idea of what the learning curve is like. Now that you've started, the climb gets a whole lot less steep. It still continues for a ways, but you got a boost up on the initial slope.


----------



## littlelocos (Feb 25, 2013)

wildun said:


> It all depends on whether you want to learn CAD in order to do some actual working drawings, or works of art to impress everyone and I'm not talking about any of you guys - I like to see that sort of stuff too! but I'm trying to say that if you are designing and building a project that you only need to satisfy yourself as to how much detail you will need in order to get the job done.
> Not of course begrudging anyone having the higher end programs you understand! but with the really great ones, doing really great drawings and renderings often becomes the main focus and the actual engineering often gets shelved!
> 
> Sure you can have Solid Works and be a master of graphics (all at great cost), or you can be a practical engineer in your little shed actually desigining and making stuff, in which case you can download a trial version of DESIGN CAD which is perfectly adequate for doing a real job - They (Design Cad) will give you the full version for $80 (or $100 if you didn't download the trial from the IMSI site) when its time has expired, this is for Version 22 with 3D.  - that's also much cheaper than Turbocad.
> ...


 

Wow!
a) I agree that if someone is just getting started in CAD, that the simpler the package and the closer to their needs, the better.  That would be great for a free to $100 package and is pretty-easily affordable.  Good suggestion.

(For reference, by now, I've got thousands of dollars and thousands of hours invested in TurboCAD.  I wouldn't expect too many hobbiests to want to make that kind of investment in CAD, regardless of what package they are using.)

b) Pretty renders ARE nice.  For me a 3D render functions as a visualization tool during design, then as a sales tool for when I publish the drawings.  Since most of the folks that purchase these have not been formally trained in reading engineering drawings, the 3D wireframes for each part are a big help.

c) What ever happened to drafting as an art?  I am much more inspired by a 100yo line-shaded etching than a machine-generated "working" drawing spit out by an automatic dimensioning routine.  A good working drawing should clearly convey the engineer's vision and guide the machinist to work logically and minimize errors in the shop.

d) I design for myself first, so that I can enjoy time in my little shop making chips with my manually-operated machines.  BTW, each of the renders above represents a different project of mine, designed to be machined from solid (except for the P/W which will be cast) with the equipment I have (10" Atlas, Grizzly Mill-Drill, Unimat, 15" Sebastian Gold Seal)

This render is a little more solid:  [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyelFqb7HW0[/ame]  Enjoy.

OK, the old engineer steps down from his soapbox.
Let's make some chips,
Todd.


----------



## jixxerbill (Feb 25, 2013)

Hope this works...


----------



## wildun (Feb 26, 2013)

I have been stuck on my soapbox ever since I did my post! guess I'll have to wait till my wife comes home from work!


----------



## aonemarine (Feb 26, 2013)

Chris, I really dont know why you are saying sorry... Your students are very talented. Keep on teaching and inspireing them, god knows we need them to take over and lead one day.


----------



## wildun (Feb 26, 2013)

LITTLELOCOS,
Very impressed with the 3 cylinder radial! and also with the renderings, I like those who can both "render"  and make the rendering reality!


----------



## Chriske (Feb 26, 2013)

wildun said:


> LITTLELOCOS,
> Very impressed with the 3 cylinder radial! and also with the renderings, I like those who can both "render"  and make the rendering reality!



Yes indeed,

littlelocos could you tell us something more on that 'Green machine'..?

Chris


----------



## Auzzie53 (Feb 26, 2013)

DraftSight -
Download
draftsight.en.softonic.com/

This is a full blown Cad package (looks and acts like Autocad) I have training notes as I used to teach Autocad. 

Regards
John


----------



## Dave Sohlstrom (Feb 26, 2013)

Auzzie53

I have a copy of draftsight. Can you tell me how I can get it to tell me how long the line I am drawing is. Other CAD programs I use have a read out of some sort tht tells me now long the line is as I draw it. I like drawing to the grid 

Dave


----------



## littlelocos (Feb 26, 2013)

Chriske said:


> Yes indeed,
> 
> littlelocos could you tell us something more on that 'Green machine'..?
> 
> Chris


 
Hello Chris,
The Green Machine is a 1/3-scale 1/2Hp Parsell & Weed engine as described in "Gas Engine Construction" first published in 1900.  I recently bought a complete set of foundry patterns, AutoCAD files, and the rights to produce kits for this little guy and his vertical brother.  Currently, I am spending my evenings converting the original 2D design to 3D, correcting minor errors and making the drawings presentable.  0.850" Bore, 1.312" Stroke, 5" flywheels.  I hope to have a prototype built and castings available by next year's Cabin Fever show.

The book was reprinted by Lindsay Publications until he (sadly) retired.  It is currently available in PDF on Google Books.
http://books.google.com/books/about/Gas_engine_construction.html?id=MO1MAAAAMAAJ

A pic of the original prototype (1993) is attached.
Enjoy,
Todd.


----------



## kf2qd (Feb 27, 2013)

Dave Sohlstrom said:


> Auzzie53
> 
> I have a copy of draftsight. Can you tell me how I can get it to tell me how long the line I am drawing is. Other CAD programs I use have a read out of some sort tht tells me now long the line is as I draw it. I like drawing to the grid
> 
> Dave



There is a readout at the bottom of the screen that you can configure. I used to use it, but found it much easier to draw lines long and then trim them afterwards. Unlike drawing on paper, you don't have to worry about the marks left after erasing and it is often easier to treat your detail lines like construction lines and then trim them to clean up after you get the pieces sketched in. I start a lot of parts with a linr in the X direction, then a line in the Y direction and then use the chamfer tool with the distance set to zero to make a square corner. The offset those 2 lines to the part dimensions and once again use the chamfer tool to square up the corners.

The CAD process allows you to use some of the ideas from sketching to get the drawing started, and then you clean up the details and have a finished drawing. As teh erasing just takes place with numbers, you don't have to worry about the mess left behind from erasing. If I used my CAD procedures on paper I would wear holes it the paper. But I can get from Idea to finished part much quicker than I used to, and I can easily modify a previously created drawing too make a new part.

Probably the hardest thing to learn is LAYERS. Once you figure them out, you can put each part of an assembly on a layer and turn layers on and off or Lock certain layers to work on portions of your without affecting previous parts. Works nice for 3D so you can get rid of some part while you fit other parts in place. Layers can also be used to provide colors for different materials. Everything on a given layer shares the same properties.

http://www.homemodelenginemachinist.com/f12/some-3d-models-19374/ has some 3D model of Elmers Engines that I started that I need to get backl to and finish...


----------



## Auzzie53 (Feb 27, 2013)

Dave Sohlstrom said:


> Auzzie53
> 
> I have a copy of draftsight. Can you tell me how I can get it to tell me how long the line I am drawing is. Other CAD programs I use have a read out of some sort tht tells me now long the line is as I draw it. I like drawing to the grid
> 
> Dave


Dave send me your email address and and I will send you some stuff.

for a line set your units imperial or metric if you a normal person (sorry) pick a point to start and type in distance. I will send you a how to any questions fire in I been on cad since 83

Regards
John


----------



## kvom (Feb 28, 2013)

My techniques in Draftsight for positioning lines  are these:

1) if I know the start and end coords I just type them in.

2) Draw a vertical or horizontal infinite line at the start point, then use move or copy function with the Displacement option to control length.  Then trim as needed.


----------



## dman (Feb 28, 2013)

to really get efficient at cad learn a little about geometric construction, you don't need geometric construction as much in cad as you do on paper but it still helps. also don't rely so much on the mouse. the more you get familiar with keyboard input the better. some programs are very flexible on how to construct lines and arcs, others are not. so some programs will need adjustments to your style, others will be more free flowing. the more ways you get to know how to put a feature where it needs to be the better when it comes to using different programs. 

learn to make up construction lines for the basic geometry using infinite lines or if they are not available lines of an arbitrary length that are longer than the part. use the vertical and horizontal line features in the software and either use the keyboard to input the x or y coordinate they pass through or make a cross off the origin and use the copy function (sometimes under a translate menu) to make lines where significant features lay. once you have starting points for the geometry laid out then using the mouse to put in the real outlines  becomes a lot easier. i find grids to be much less helpful than my own construction lines and never show grids or snap to grids. if the program has layers that can be used for lines then you can put construction lines on a seperate layer so they don't have to be deleted later.


----------



## lohring (Mar 7, 2013)

Around 50 years ago I was employed as a draftsman.  I worked for a lot of companies that made things from atomic submarines to zippers.  It paid for the schooling my current carrier required.  I started 2D computer drafting as a hobby with Generic CAD.  I believe it became Autocad Lite after Autocad purchased the company.  I'm currently learning Alibre so I can 3D print parts for investment casting master patterns and cores.  

I have problems with complex 3D passages and parts like the two stroke engine transfer passages pictured below.  The only way I can think of to do this is to define a lot of planes at various angles and locations, draw cross sections of the passages then loft extrude the passage through these sections.  Is there a better way?

Lohring Miller


----------



## wildun (Mar 7, 2013)

lohring said:


> I have problems with complex 3D passages and parts like the two stroke engine transfer passages pictured below.
> Lohring Miller


 
LOHRING & DMAN
I admit that I have only dabbled in CAD and using a low end program, (Design Cad) which is fine for me, but I have just downloaded Nanocad out of curiosity, so maybe I can rely on you guys to keep me straight. 
I'm retired and perhaps getting a little old now, but still as enthusiastic (just found out lately) as I ever was!

Lohring, your complicated core looks very impressive! - the whole design looks to be for extreme competition (motocross or kart maybe?).

The reason I am so interested is that I used to do factory development work mainly in CNC tooling, coreboxes and some wooden patterns for fluid valves ( nothing overly complicated as in your work) but I often got to design these or modify existing ones on the drawing board as well and I loved it! - I worked on the shop floor of course so my draughting experiences were relatively limited but I did consider them a bonus.

There was no CAD in those days, so now I would like to get to grips with the basics of CAD and find a program later with good 3D rendering (and for a reasonable price!).

At first I thought that your core was a rendering, but it looks too real for that! - dare I ask what make and purpose the engine in the drawing was to be used for?


----------



## Maryak (Mar 7, 2013)

Maybe try sweep or rail sweep with both twist and draft angle along a path between start and finish sections.

Hope this helps and works for you.

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## littlelocos (Mar 7, 2013)

Lohring,

Lofting would probably work well for complex shapes like that. I have usedit for rendering guitar necks and lapstrake boats to good advantage. If youtook each passage and cut a section thru the entry, the exit, then one or twoothers to control the loft, it would probably work very well.  I usually end up adjusting the sections and tweaking individual nodes to get the final shape to "look" right.

I don't know how sophisticated the lofting functions are in Alibre, but theones in Turbocad can actually be branched if needed.

Another possibility would be the SMESH function - Smooth-Mesh. Draw the part roughly to shape, w/ square corners, etc.  Apply SMESH and the whole thing is smoothed out to whatever level you want.

Enjoy,
Todd.


----------



## vascon2196 (Mar 7, 2013)

All of the above...

- Sweeps with guide curves
- Loft with guide curves
- 3D sketches and surfacing

All of which can be tricky and in most cases require a work plane or axis.


----------



## petertha (Mar 7, 2013)

lohring said:


> I have problems with complex 3D passages and parts like the two stroke engine transfer passages pictured below.
> Lohring Miller


 
I use Solidworks (un-professionally), mostly self taught, so take that FWIW. From what little I understand of Alibre, maybe it has similar 3D commands. 

I'll show some pictures of different methods I was mucking around with, maybe that will spark something you can replicate in Alibre.

- make the basic cylinder chunk, extruded circles
- make a profile sketch of the port outline on the base plane
- extrude the profile straight up some distance along inside the wall
- fillet the end nice & purdy


----------



## petertha (Mar 7, 2013)

method 2, very similar, this time more control of the shape
- make a sketch defining a path which the profile will follow
- use the cut-sweep command 
- this removes the port solid shape from the cylinder solid resulting in this representation


----------



## petertha (Mar 7, 2013)

method 3, 
- use a 3D curve to define an even more complex path for the port profile
- this one gets a bit funky because you then have to use a different SW command called 'intersect' to remove one from the other (port from cylinder). 

Different cad programs handle this operation differently, some subtract boolean solids of 2 distinct solid bodies. Anyway, just intending to give you some food for thought. You are probablynot limited to one section shape, you could vary it along the path. (That makes my head ache!). Best of luck, I hope to see your castings & engine one day!


----------



## lohring (Mar 8, 2013)

Thanks for all the suggestions.  The drawing is from an Aprilia 125 cc motorcycle cylinder.  The engine develops 54 hp and is considered to be the state of the art in high power, small two stroke engines.  It was developed without the use of CAD so I suspect the 3D rendering is built from scans of the core patterns.  I could build models like the 3D picture to cast molds to make the cores like the pictures of sand casting core molds below.  However, I thought I would try solid modeling since it has lots of advantages when combined with 3D printing for scaling or altering parts to test the effects of small changes.  

I'm studying lofts in Alibre and it looks like I can loft a section along a curve.  That will be a good place to start.  I can work up to a series of sections along a complex curve if needed.  It still looks easier to build a physical model, though.

Lohring Miller


----------



## wildun (Mar 9, 2013)

LOHRING,
The name Jan Thiel rings a bell from the late sixties, was he the guy who was involved with designing the 50cc racers for the Dutch Jamathi team of the late sixties/early seventies and later moving to Derbi?
If that is the case, then his knowledge of two strokes would be second to none. 
BTW, my school French was not quite up to scratch for the forum but I was able to get the gist of it!


----------



## Auzzie53 (Mar 10, 2013)

jixxerbill said:


> I want to learn cad, but whats the best/easiest to learn... i have downloaded several trial ones over the years but learning curve seemed steep.. It will still be steep but i really want to learn it for eventual use in cnc machine... A little background about myself. I took drafting in high school, back when it was pencil and paper (1984).. Since then  I have worked construction and being able to read and understand prints has been invaluable... I currently have the turbocad trial version and i can sketch out parts in paper mode (takes a while lol) but in model mode i cant get zoomed in far enough....Turbocad web sight has a tutorial video for sale .. I was wondering if anyone had used it before...Thanks Bill


send me your email address and I will send you some material

Regards
John


----------



## dman (Mar 10, 2013)

lohring that looks like a learning experience recreating that in cad. I'm just curious, what are you planing to do with all this? do you have an aprilia and looking for even more power? or trying to learn from it and reproduce it on something else? I'm thinking about getting into 2 strokes on a modification and performance level myself.. I'd really like to see where you go with this.


----------



## petertha (Mar 10, 2013)

Wow those core patterns are very complex looking. Yet another example of trade craftsmanship achieved long before computer drafting. Seeing those, I think my earlier examples may be barking up the wrong tree for you. I was attempting to show simplistic 'cuts' from a solid, kind of like port passages in a typical RC 2-stroke crank case.

Here is another example along the lines of the one core piece you show. It&#8217;s a similar principle oflofting a port shape into a main trunk body. But more along the lines of 'adding&#8217; material to build up some solid shape. I made 3 sections & a spline curve, lofted the solid into the cylinder & filleted the top. In this case I&#8217;m just radially copying the exact same arms for illustration, but nothing stopping you from having uniquely shaped and/or un-equalspaced octopus tentacles.

Now what you do with this positive shape is beyond myability. Possibly it could be submerged within a crankcase block & cut away yielding thecavity. SW has such tools & I mentioned other cad packages do this byboolean solids (adding or subtracting). One can also offset or shell a solid.The Cad raw ingredients are there, but how you physically go about designing it isa bit above my head. Fascinating stuff.


----------



## lohring (Mar 11, 2013)

dman said:


> lohring that looks like a learning experience recreating that in cad. I'm just curious, what are you planing to do with all this? do you have an aprilia and looking for even more power? or trying to learn from it and reproduce it on something else? I'm thinking about getting into 2 strokes on a modification and performance level myself.. I'd really like to see where you go with this.



I'm designing a high power 26 cc two stroke.  I race model boats and even the best available engines are considerably behind the state of the art.  My inspiration is this quote:

*"The best horsepower we attained at Aprilia last year (2007 125cc  GP) was 53,9 HP at 13000 rpm. This means a Pme of 14.88 at a piston  speed of 23,6 m/sec. Using these same values means that a single cylinder 50cc would give 29.5 HP at 17850 rpm and a 50cc twin would give  39 HP at 23600 rpm, measured at the gearbox output shaft. I am 100%  sure these values can be attained although it never will be proved due  to lack of interest and money. Remember that 50cc development was  stopped in 1983 and enormous progress was made in the following 24  years. Now, sadly, also the development of the 125cc two strokes has  stopped, the two stroke will only survive in karting but there will be  no progress because of the very strict regulations!"
Jan Thiel 2008*


That would mean that my 1/2 of a two cylinder 50 cc engine could produce 19 hp rather than the 8 hp at around 18,000 rpm the very best current engines have.  I would be happy with anything over 10 hp.  I was involved with the current RC gasoline engine powered speed record of 109+ mph set in 2004 that still stands.  The last complete engine I built was in high school over 50 years ago.  I belong to a restricted forum of two stroke builders that made the above pictures available.

I'm trying sweep cuts in Alibre to generate the transfer passages.  I hope to create one plane for each side of the transfer then sweep the shape shown in the 2D cross section around the bore from one plane to the other.  I can then fillet the edges of the shape.  So far it isn't working, though.

Lohring Miller


----------



## dman (Mar 12, 2013)

lohring said:


> I'm designing a high power 26 cc two stroke.  I race model boats and even the best available engines are considerably behind the state of the art.  My inspiration is this quote:
> 
> *"The best horsepower we attained at Aprilia last year (2007 125cc  GP) was 53,9 HP at 13000 rpm. This means a Pme of 14.88 at a piston  speed of 23,6 m/sec. Using these same values means that a single cylinder 50cc would give 29.5 HP at 17850 rpm and a 50cc twin would give  39 HP at 23600 rpm, measured at the gearbox output shaft. I am 100%  sure these values can be attained although it never will be proved due  to lack of interest and money. Remember that 50cc development was  stopped in 1983 and enormous progress was made in the following 24  years. Now, sadly, also the development of the 125cc two strokes has  stopped, the two stroke will only survive in karting but there will be  no progress because of the very strict regulations!"
> Jan Thiel 2008*
> ...



that'll get you sorta close but you may wat to try it with a mesh so things can be manipulated to get some of the more organic aspects of it closer. do you have a more readable copy of that blueprint? maybe in a .pdf or other vector format? mabe i'll try to draft someting up. it's been a while since i've done anything close to this. it turns out that this kind of drafting is rarely needed in what i'vw been doing
. 
just for fun i ran some of those numbers for some popular 2 stroke engines to see what they could make in full race trim.. (assuming the bore/stroke ratio is close, i really just ran the numbers as if the aprilia was scaled.) an lt500r quadzilla could make around 135hp at 8200 rpm. a banshee or rz350 could also make 135hp at 11,600 rpm. (weird how that works isn't it) and a 250cc engine could make 86hp at 10,300 meaning a kawasaki h2 machiv could make a scary 258hp and even an h1 could make 196hp at 11,800.

what i think is interesting is the numbers are around twice what the best stock japanese engines made when 2-strokes ruled motocross but the rpm isn't too much higher. sounds like aprilia had a lot going on in this engine. maybe my next motorcycle will be a 2-stroke.


----------



## lohring (Mar 12, 2013)

Thanks for your offer to help.  So far I think a series of cross sections along a 3D curved line is the only way.  The only drawings I have of the Aprilia cylinder are .jpg.  Below are the rest.

Lohring Miller

PS  I've at least been able to model propellers.  See below.


----------



## DanP (Apr 7, 2013)

Hi
I was not sure where to ask this but I thought I would start here.  A friend of mine is using a Mac drawing program, I don&#8217;t know what it is and he doesn&#8217;t seem to know either.  I am using AutoCAD 2006.  We have been collaborating on a Gauge 1/ Gauge 2 layout plan.  When he sends me his file in either DWG or DFX I can open them with AutoCAD and use them, add to them, change them, whatever I can do with a normal AutoCAD drawing.  When I send them back to him in either format he can see them but not use them.  I save them as 2000, because that&#8217;s what he says he needs.  So, the question, what are we doing wrong?


----------



## ausdier (Apr 7, 2013)

Hi Dan,
Does your mate have an educational copy of the program he is using ?
This sometimes means it wont open non educational drawings.
Cheers.


----------



## dman (Apr 7, 2013)

DanP said:


> Hi
> I was not sure where to ask this but I thought I would start here.  A friend of mine is using a Mac drawing program, I dont know what it is and he doesnt seem to know either.  I am using AutoCAD 2006.  We have been collaborating on a Gauge 1/ Gauge 2 layout plan.  When he sends me his file in either DWG or DFX I can open them with AutoCAD and use them, add to them, change them, whatever I can do with a normal AutoCAD drawing.  When I send them back to him in either format he can see them but not use them.  I save them as 2000, because thats what he says he needs.  So, the question, what are we doing wrong?



sounds like an auto cad licensing thing. i hate to agree with richard stallman mostly because i think he's insane but when he pushes open source or otherwise "free" software it's things like this he wants to FREE people from. not free as in free of cost. free as in who the hell are they to tell me how i can use my computer to manipulate files? you both should try draftsight unless you need 3d. it's very intuitive to autocad users. there is also freecad for 3d but it has a learning curve. 

i personally think proprietary is fine as long as it's not malicious but it too often is.


----------



## DanP (Apr 7, 2013)

I found out what program my friend has, MacDraft Profesional 5.6.6, maybe this will help answer my problem.


----------



## GailInNM (Apr 7, 2013)

Dan,
If you want, send me a file that is giving problems.  Send it in ACAD2000 format as I have 2000 in native format and I will see if I can manipulate it.  If I can then the problem is probably at Jim's end.   I have not had any problems reading  the files that he has sent me in 2000 format but I dont think that I have sent him any since his last software upgrade.  Just use my regular email address that you have.
Gail in NM


----------



## Draw-Tech (Apr 7, 2013)

Try having your friend go to autodesk.com and download the dwg viewer it is free, he will be able to read dimensions and measure the parts at least.

Hope this helps

Draw-Tech


----------



## kf2qd (Apr 7, 2013)

Or have him download the Mac version of Draftsight.

DXF is NOT a proprietary format. DWG is. His version may be looking for some ID info in hte DXF file, or it doesn't use some feature in a 2000 compatable DXF. You could try sending him a R12 or R14 DXF.


----------



## kjk (Apr 7, 2013)

I don't use autocad, but with many software products a program will read all files created by previous versions of the software but not files created by newer versions.

CAD software I use offers the opportunity to save files in formats used by other versions - does Autocad 2006 allow you to save in formats for previous versions of autocad?

Also - it may be that your friend's software only recognizes text files and not binary.


----------



## DanP (Apr 8, 2013)

My friend can view my files but can't change them.  When he sends me a file I not only can see them but change them.  Gail in NM knows who I am talking about and we will see if he can tell us why, I will let you all know what I find out.


----------



## DanP (Apr 11, 2013)

It only works when I initiate the drawing.  I save them as R12/LT2DXF.  If he initiates the drawing then all he can do is look at it and zoom in & out.  Gail in NM suggested it's a Proxy thing.  Oh well, on to more pressing matters.


----------



## Chriske (Apr 13, 2013)

Hi guys,

Don't know if this has been mentioned before.
As in 2DCAD programs also in 3DCAD programs files easily can be exported to be sent to other 3D CAD users anywhere.
STP or STEP format has to be used to export files. Almost all 3D CAD programs can open this type of  files. No need to save all parts separately, just the complete assembly will do.  If opened in another 3DCAD program all part from the imported assembly can be extracted and opened in a single file.

Very handy..!

Chris


----------



## kjk (Apr 13, 2013)

I received some drawings from a friend which I could not modify. For some reason as received these files were read only.

Try saving the files under another name, then re-opening them.


----------



## Auzzie53 (Apr 19, 2013)

Go here I have written a very simply into cad - Draftview (do a google search) is  free its operates same as Austcad


----------



## Maryak (Aug 3, 2013)

Hi,

I'm a dedicated TurboCAD user and have been since V14. It cannot do all the things Solidworks can do but for 15% of the price, for its' top of the range package, it's pretty damn good. One thing I would say is if you want to use 3D modeling, whatever package you select there is a learning curve and the base versions of pretty well all CAD packages don't do 3D very well or very accurately. There are workarounds but you'll soon tire, (ask me how I know), of faffing about using them. 

Turbocad is usually shipped with Ken Doyles CAD Fundamentals, a 2D training CD, plus a symbols CD and you can also buy his 3D training CD. I highly recommend both.

No affiliation just a very satisfied user.

Best Regards
Bob


----------



## Slider65 (Aug 3, 2013)

I am a Design Draftsman and use AutoCad, Inventor and solid Works and PTC Creo Direct ( which is the old CoCreate One Space ). And the easiest to know how to use would be PTC Creo Direct as it is a non history base format, Which means you can go back into and earlier part of you model and modify it without having to undo everything that was created after it.

They also have a lower spec free version for home users.

http://www.ptc.com/products/creo-elements-direct/modeling-express/

It is good for learning 3d Modeling.


----------



## Draw-Tech (Aug 4, 2013)

Maryak said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm a dedicated TurboCAD user and have been since V14. It cannot do all the things Solidworks can do but for 15% of the price, for its' top of the range package, it's pretty damn good. One thing I would say is if you want to use 3D modeling, whatever package you select there is a learning curve and the base versions of pretty well all CAD packages don't do 3D very well or very accurately. There are workarounds but you'll soon tire, (ask me how I know), of faffing about using them.
> 
> ...


 
  I disagree, I have been designing with Inventor since it was started, designed  many machines, with less than 2% error, accurate to 8 place decimal, if that's not good, I don't know what could be better.

Draw-Tech


----------



## Maryak (Aug 6, 2013)

Draw-Tech said:


> I disagree, I have been designing with Inventor since it was started, designed  many machines, with less than 2% error, accurate to 8 place decimal, if that's not good, I don't know what could be better.
> 
> Draw-Tech



At $7K, why am I not surprised?


----------



## TopEndScraper (Aug 6, 2013)

I purchased TurboCad 16 pro , platinum , for less than $300 , and it even came with a CAM addon for CNC ing 
i persisted for 6 months , and learnt a lot , ( no CAD experience ) i use it for 3D all the time , and its quick , yer you have to plan what you want to draw , 

The biggest mistake you can make in 3D it to drag and drop an object , it wont end up right , use the boxes on the bottom of the screen , and type in the distance you want to move , the size of objects ect , alot quicker and more accurate 

today i drew this , 15" duplex pump , in 4 hours , yes a long way to go , 




In turbo cad , i like the Snaps , once you learn the keyboard short cuts its so fast , even adding draft to all sides for mould making is easy , just do it before joining objects 

i think Turbo cad 16pro is cheaper now , at $200 ,ive only owned it for 18 months , and im still learning more , in the last 6 months im just getting quicker and quicker 


 

 

 



its so easy to draw , I did some " art work " for web pages , in CAD


----------



## picks27t (May 2, 2015)

Does any body know a cad program that will work in a IPad?


----------



## Dave Sohlstrom (May 2, 2015)

Onshape.com works on computers, Ipad, Iphone, Mac and lenix

Dave


----------



## picks27t (May 2, 2015)

Thanks I will give it a try


----------



## Ronald4418 (May 16, 2015)

If your looking for a Free Edition of CAD, look no further than DoubleD Cad XT. It looks and acts just like AutoCad 2012 and an instructional PDF is available for $99.00. I use it now exclusively after having taken an AutoCad online course as it takes up a lot less space than AutoCad 2012 and uses much less resources.


----------

