LibreCAD

[awake]

I use LibreCad for 2D and OpenScad for 3D, and I teach all my apprentice to use them As well. It’s very easy to draw 2D in LibreCad using the command line and OpenScad is Command driven. You can convert 2D drawings to 3D in OPENScad and you can convert 3D to 2D in OpenScad. As I have a programming background it is second Nature to use the command line. Plus side is there a number of very good Downloadable tutorials to work thru for both to learn.. also Openscad will output your STL files.

Good to hear from another OpenSCAD user! I do use OpenSCAD quite a bit for anything that I will 3d print. Yes, I can design a part in FreeCAD and export the .stl for printing, but somehow I most often find myself turning to OpenSCAD instead.

BUT when it comes to designing a project that includes any machining (or woodworking), OpenSCAD is not the right tool for me. Modelling an assembly is possible in OpenSCAD, but easier and more powerful in FreeCAD ... and producing drawings to use in the shop are not possible at all in OpenSCAD, or at least I don't know any way to do that.

 

[Mike Henry]

I played with the Freecad 0.19 briefly and found it won't read Rhino's *.3dm files. I don't want to lose over 15 years of work in Rhino.

You might want to check out the free version of Onshape, which can apparently import 3DM files. The free version limits you to non-commercial work and public files, but that's not been a problem for my hobby work. It is a problem for some folks, though. It also runs in a browser, which means it will work in Windows, Mac, and Linux and just about any device including a tablet or smartphone, though I just use it in a PC. There is a responsive Onshape forum and a bunch of tutorials and walkthroughs available in their learning center.

https://www.onshape.com/en/products/free

 

[n1326e]

Is anyone using 'Carbide Create 3D' ? If so, any comments about your experiences would be appreciated.
I'm using it for small aluminum and brass parts on my TAIG and really like it. I came from Fusion 360 where the learning curve was just too steep.

 

[awake]

As a machinist - - - - it became very clear that NOTHING is exact.
(Grab a piece of pipe and chuck it up - - - - run an indicator on it for one example.)

In FreeCAD you are asked for a numeric value for the dimension - - - - you cannot - - - - at least I've never found a way to use it when modelling - - - you just cannot input something like 62.000 +0.000/-0.005 mm say for a bearing housing. I was working on a fairly high speed mechanism (looking for up to 10 500 rpm as a design max - - - limited by bearing capabilities in fact). Bearing information will give you the needed housing size, with those tolerances, and the shaft size, and its tolerances. Including ALL the important information in any kind of drawing is crucial imo. So when I cannot include any tolerancing the dimensions become almost worthless. There are lots of problems that are created when tolerances are not included - - - some of which are tolerance stacking, and tolerance direction for just two. (Tolerance stacking occurs when a number of parts are connected - - - - if every part is at the high end of the tolerances you will get quite a different assembly than if all the parts are at the low end of the tolerances (gets very important when you're playing with precision stuff - - - most commonly found in having bearing pockets and also machined shafting). Tolerance direction - - - most often tolerance are + and - a certain amount - - if a interconnected group of parts are all produced to the high side - - - - or conversely to the low side - - - - well there are now fit issues. (Also FreeCAD devs mostly seem to have worked with a tiny bit of what is available out in the real world - - - - see anything that includes pipe in their software. The range of pipe schedules is missing more than one or two items never mind their sizes - - - there are other such issues.)

That sorta help?

Please advise.

Hi Joe,

Short answer: No, it doesn't really help, but that is probably my limited experience / understanding.

I do fully understand the issue of tolerances! What I don't understand or have any experience with is how other programs might build the tolerances into the modelling process. I have seen only bits and pieces of how other programs work (e.g., in the course of YouTube videos where someone demonstrates how Fusion 360 was used to draw up a part or a whole project), but never in any of those bits and pieces have I seen anyone ever enter a tolerance into the modelling. (In the drawing that is made from the model, yes, but not in the modelling itself.)

FWIW, in my use of FreeCAD to date, I model things to "exact" dimensions, and then put in the tolerances when I produce the drawings. I would have thought this would be similar to the "old fashioned" approach using paper and ink - surely one of the master draftsmen of the past did not try to draw in the different possible locations of the edge of the part to allow for a +/- tolerance? Again, please forgive my ignorance - maybe this is exactly what they did, and I just haven't ever seen an example of it. And again I stress, I'm talking about the modeling (or in this case, the actual drawing) of the part. Of course, the designer must to take into account the potential effect of stacking of tolerances, and design and determine tolerances accordingly. But when this goes down on paper, the part is drawn just to one size, and the tolerances are added as text to that drawing - at least, as far as I have ever seen.

Actually, it would be possible in FreeCAD to build the model up using parameters (which I routinely do), including a tolerance parameter (which I have never done, but certainly possible to do). Let's say the tolerance for the parts is +/-.01mm. Put .01mm into the tolerance parameter, regenerate the model, and voila - now you see what the whole thing will look like if every single part is at the maximum possible tolerance. Put -.01mm into the tolerance parameter, regenerate the model again, and now you will see what it will look like if every single part is at the minimum possible tolerance. This would be possible ... but I can't think of a situation in which that would be worthwhile for my needs ... which of course may just reflect the limitation of my needs!

To go a step further, I would assume that the chances that EVERY part comes out at the same end of the tolerance are surely pretty low, assuming there is not some sort of system-wide error at work. One could create multiple tolerance parameters to use in the FreeCAD model, even down to the level of a separate tolerance parameter for each and every dimension. One could then go through all possible combinations of tolerances to see what happens to the model. But now the issue would be the amount of time it would take to do anything useful with all of the various results. Let's say the project includes only 10 key dimensions across all the various parts, and each of those will be modeled at -.01mm, 0, and -.01mm. That will give 3^10 = 59049 combinations. I definitely don't want to take the time to look at every one of these ...

I know I keep saying it, but I'll say it again: all of the above may simply demonstrate my ignorance or lack of experience. I hope any respondents will receive this as my best effort to understand what it would mean to include the tolerances in the building of a 3d model (the building of the model, not the designing of the model), and have pity on my limited success!

 

[awake]

I still remember drafting board when I started working. Then I saw 2D cad programs and finally 3D cad programs. I have learned to use all of them and often multiple programs. So I have designed for an employer on Solid works a little, Pro E and Unigraphics significantly. Free 3D cad programs started with Granite from ProE and then their Creo, and I played with a half dozen others. No package creates surfaces that have tolerances. Tolerances information yes but the model itself no.

This made me feel better - I was tying myself in knots trying to imagine how it would work to include tolerances in the model itself!

Two basic approaches exist. The program records in order this process. So each time the model is updated it is built feature by feature from the first to the last. You can go back and change them but may effect later steps.

FreeCAD is notorious for having the "topographical naming problem." A quick example of this is applying a fillet to an edge; if you then go back to an earlier step and put in another feature, the edges get renamed, and now the wrong edge has the fillet. A very annoying problem especially as one is first learning. Over time I have learned how to build models in ways that minimize the problem, but especially when it comes to fillets and bevels, I often find that the best approach is not to use them, or at least to save them for the very last. (Supposedly there are some WIP that address / eliminate this problem, but they haven't made their way into the main branch yet ...)

The 2D drafting package in 16 and now 18 and 19 are not great. I seem to put the tolerances in a text block. I do however, think some effort is being put forth to do it the proper way. Have not explored it. Thus you have standard tolerances that apply to most surfaces and then a few special ones that get there own text which for me includes taping threads information.

There has been some significant improvement and addition of features in the TechDraw workbench, including quite a lot more flexibility with expressing tolerances. That said, some of the new features still need some polishing. (Hint: get used to resetting the Auto Horizontal setting to "false" on leader lines ... I still haven't found a way to keep this from coming up "true" every time.)

 

[cds4byu]

I really love Onshape. Web-based, files in the cloud (a negative), but pretty full-featured and easy to use. They have a commercial model, so it's not just some hobbyists volunteering their spare time. It's free to use, as long as you are willing to make your work public (which is not a problem for me).

The biggest risk is that they will drop their free plan and I'll be out of luck on my history of work. I guess my second-biggest risk is that there's no way for me to store my files (other than the pdf drawings), so maybe the company goes out of business and I'm just out of luck.

Carl

 

[lee webster]

I have used FreeCAD 0.18 extensively for a year or more. Solid Edge for several weeks, and DesignSpark 5 more and more for the past month or so. I don't know if DS 5 does 2d drawings, FC 0.18 does, I have never used that feature. SE does it all, but it's very difficult to get into. All the programmes are free and of them all I am using DS 5 for (nearly) all my 3d work including with the help of FC 0.18 and Inkscape, producing an oval nameplate with raised text that has draft, 3d printed and that print used to cast the plate in aluminium. I am now using DS 5 to produce a fairly detailed 3d model of a small V twin I.C engine, just to learn DS 5. To produce the timing gears I first created them in FC 0.18 and exported them as a STEP file. DS 5 will import STEP files but states that they can't be edited. I have managed to edit all the STEP files I have imported into DS 5, one of them did break and couldn't be used. So DS 5 is a bit lacking in its import/export abilities, but it saves a fine STL for 3d printing.

 

[SmithDoor]

I like using Autocad too over others.
The input is better and faster.
Sightdraft in next best.
TurboCAD is ok too.

I have full license for Autocad and TurboCAD. The free download of Sightdraft.

Tried LibreCAD and FreeCad not same as Autocad for input and speed of use.

Dave

Hi Paul,

Like you I used Autocad for a number of years, having been given an un-dongled copy. I have used the community edition of Qcad for odd things and then when I retired and started hobby engineering bought a licensed copy, which I'm very happy with. So yes a purely 2D background.

My son would love me to get a 3D printer, but I'm afraid that he will be very disappointed. I have absolutely no interest in 3D or CNC.



Hi Bob,

I know very little about Rhino, but my understanding is that Rhino will output your drawings in several different formats one of which is "DXF" most cad programs today will read and write DXF format.
Why not convert a couple and see how they look in other cad programs.

 

[AndrewW]

Hi Peter - Just download Fusion360 for personal use - it's free and only has a few restrictions compared to the commercial version. Loads of tutorials on YouTube. Learn 2D first and the 3D just flows from there.
Cheers
Andrew

 

[simonbirt]

Interesting discussion, confirming my own limited endeavours. Years ago I used Autocad at the same time I converted a bench top lathe and mill to CNC. Many months later I could make parts (slowly).

Fast forward 15 years and having had a break from hobby machining I started again with a much simpler set up. However being a gluten for punishment I decided last year to purchase a 3D printer (Pruser kit), before splashing out the cash I decided to learn 3D modelling; I began with Freecad, which nearly drove me mad. I found it very clunky and sometimes unstable. I managed to produce a few basic designs and turn them into 3D prints, but was frustrated by Feecad. I then tried Fusion 360 which I found much easier to use and like very much. The big problem as I see it though is that they could stop the free hobbyist version at the drop of a hat, this makes me nervous. I have gone back to Feecad a couple of times but I still struggle to get it to do what I want. Fusion 360 does far more than I will ever need or want. I would be happy to pay for it, but not $450 a year.

 

[SmithDoor]

That is what paid for Autocad 95.
I have seen copy on ebay for $100.00
If get a old Autocad i help installing Windows 10 64 bit

Dave

Interesting discussion, confirming my own limited endeavours. Years ago I used Autocad at the same time I converted a bench top lathe and mill to CNC. Many months later I could make parts (slowly).

Fast forward 15 years and having had a break from hobby machining I started again with a much simpler set up. However being a gluten for punishment I decided last year to purchase a 3D printer (Pruser kit), before splashing out the cash I decided to learn 3D modelling; I began with Freecad, which nearly drove me mad. I found it very clunky and sometimes unstable. I managed to produce a few basic designs and turn them into 3D prints, but was frustrated by Feecad. I then tried Fusion 360 which I found much easier to use and like very much. The big problem as I see it though is that they could stop the free hobbyist version at the drop of a hat, this makes me nervous. I have gone back to Feecad a couple of times but I still struggle to get it to do what I want. Fusion 360 does far more than I will ever need or want. I would be happy to pay for it, but not $450 a year.

 

[PeterDRG]

Thank you everyone for your input. I have been reading it all with great interest. I do have LibreCAD, OpenSCAD and FreeCAD but as a bashful virgin, have still not gotten very far. Given the learning curves and time needed for other things (I'm still working at 74) I was keen to learn which I should be going for to avoid going down blind alleys.
Interesting to see, too, that like all my hobby groups, members seem to mostly be of a certain age ! The web serves us well. At one time, people retired and went from an environment where everyone knew what you were talking about, to one where no one did. The lifetime´s knowledge of retirees went onto the scrap heap. The web has kept the knowledge alive and all of us with a screen can still participate. For me, living in a non industrial area, the access to help and information is wonderful.
Cheers
Peter

 

[RM-MN]

I like using Autocad too over others.
The input is better and faster.

Currently Autocad is a yearly license based package with a price tag of nearly $1500 per year. For that price it should do the work for you. Contrast that with the clunkyness of FreeCAD with a price tag of $0. For a hobbiest doing work for himself FreeCAD seems a better bargain. I did find Fusion 360 to be a bit easier to use but you need to renew your license each year and its abilities change with each renewal and can be discontinued at any time. FreeCAD resides wholly on my computer and all the designs I make stay on my computer.

 

[Ozwes007]

For those interested in Dimension tolerances, it is quite easy in LibreCad to do.
using the properties tool, just enter <> +/- 0.02mm into the box on the right hand side, or use one of the drop down boxes. The <> will add the actual dimension.

 

[ajoeiam]

Hi Joe,

Short answer: No, it doesn't really help, but that is probably my limited experience / understanding.

I do fully understand the issue of tolerances! What I don't understand or have any experience with is how other programs might build the tolerances into the modelling process. I have seen only bits and pieces of how other programs work (e.g., in the course of YouTube videos where someone demonstrates how Fusion 360 was used to draw up a part or a whole project), but never in any of those bits and pieces have I seen anyone ever enter a tolerance into the modelling. (In the drawing that is made from the model, yes, but not in the modelling itself.)

FWIW, in my use of FreeCAD to date, I model things to "exact" dimensions, and then put in the tolerances when I produce the drawings. I would have thought this would be similar to the "old fashioned" approach using paper and ink - surely one of the master draftsmen of the past did not try to draw in the different possible locations of the edge of the part to allow for a +/- tolerance? Again, please forgive my ignorance - maybe this is exactly what they did, and I just haven't ever seen an example of it. And again I stress, I'm talking about the modeling (or in this case, the actual drawing) of the part. Of course, the designer must to take into account the potential effect of stacking of tolerances, and design and determine tolerances accordingly. But when this goes down on paper, the part is drawn just to one size, and the tolerances are added as text to that drawing - at least, as far as I have ever seen.

Actually, it would be possible in FreeCAD to build the model up using parameters (which I routinely do), including a tolerance parameter (which I have never done, but certainly possible to do). Let's say the tolerance for the parts is +/-.01mm. Put .01mm into the tolerance parameter, regenerate the model, and voila - now you see what the whole thing will look like if every single part is at the maximum possible tolerance. Put -.01mm into the tolerance parameter, regenerate the model again, and now you will see what it will look like if every single part is at the minimum possible tolerance. This would be possible ... but I can't think of a situation in which that would be worthwhile for my needs ... which of course may just reflect the limitation of my needs!

To go a step further, I would assume that the chances that EVERY part comes out at the same end of the tolerance are surely pretty low, assuming there is not some sort of system-wide error at work. One could create multiple tolerance parameters to use in the FreeCAD model, even down to the level of a separate tolerance parameter for each and every dimension. One could then go through all possible combinations of tolerances to see what happens to the model. But now the issue would be the amount of time it would take to do anything useful with all of the various results. Let's say the project includes only 10 key dimensions across all the various parts, and each of those will be modeled at -.01mm, 0, and -.01mm. That will give 3^10 = 59049 combinations. I definitely don't want to take the time to look at every one of these ...

I know I keep saying it, but I'll say it again: all of the above may simply demonstrate my ignorance or lack of experience. I hope any respondents will receive this as my best effort to understand what it would mean to include the tolerances in the building of a 3d model (the building of the model, not the designing of the model), and have pity on my limited success!

I should have started my rant by stating as you have that all of what I said may be very colored by my ignorance or lack of experience.
Interacting with the 'gurus' at FreeCAD the responses were most often like 'that's the way it is'.
I suppose that's the problem for me - - - - I do remember the slogan from way back in the early 80's - - - "computing YOUR way" - - - ie not governed or limited by the IT department. Now today we have much the same kind of thinking in the microcomputer world. There is precious little flexibility in how to do things.
A lot of my frustrations with FreeCAD seemed to be that the 'experts' were engineers that seemed to be insisting that what they had done was wonderful. From my side I know how often as a trades guy I've had to change things provided by these experts (approved and stamped!!) to get the pieces to do what the 'gears' wanted them to do. I have found that even though there is a 'pretty picture' (sometimes called a totally fascinating model) of something really doesn't mean that the bloody thing is going to work.
Me I've learnt that almost everyone has time and money to do things right the second time. That's ok for them but me - - - - I prefer to do things right or well - - - - the first time. Ja - - - that makes me often pedantic - - - - but my 'stuff' (insert any expletive you like instead) works - - - - at least always has so far. The bean counters don't like this kind of thinking but then so far I've not had an serious production kind of stuff of my own.

Tolerances are important in getting things to function. I have a wonderful experience where my co-worker, guy with tons of experience and plenty of 'knowledge' too, corrected my thinking re: tolerances as written on drawings. I maybe should write it out - - - grin!

 

[traction engine]

I used Acad 2000 till the computer crashed a couple of weeks ago. I broke down and paid $449 US for Progecad which accepted my Acads and is set up to work almost exactly as Acad. Took awhile to get the ribbons how I liked but otherwise I'm very happy.
The $449 is lifetime - not subscription.
I Have no idea of its 3D capabilities - I'm too old and otherwise busy to learn!

 

[ddmckee54]

traction engine:

Tell me more about this Progecad. I've used various versions of 2D ACAD since the 90's, and Draftsight at home 'til they got greedy. I am currently using Nanocad at home for 2D. I may be cheap, but $450 for a lifetime install I could live with to get an ACAD-ish clone.

I'm also pretty much beyond the "Best by" date, but us old farts can still learn new tricks. I use DesignSpark for 3D, the 3D cad was done in desperation - I got a 3D printer and wanted to print something besides the usual junk available on-line.(Or what was available wasn't exactly what I wanted/needed.) I tried Fusion 360, since it was made by Autodesk I thought it would be similar to the 2D ACAD - boy howdy did I get a big surpirse. It drove me nuts trying to use it, another long-time ACAD user that I work with had similar feelings about Fusion 360.

I read a white-paper a couple of years ago that discussed how everybody's brain is "wired" a little different and that for some people parametric modeling was more intuitive, while with others it was direct modeling that was more intuituve. A lot of 3D cad packages, Fusion 360 among them, are parametric modeling based. There are other packages that are direct modeling based, and DesignSpark is in this category.

There is a free version of Fusion 360 - it's not as powerful as it used to be, but for the "hobbyist" it is usually sufficient. DesignSpark is available free and is a dumbed-down version of the SpaceClaim software. However the free version is not as powerful as Fusion 360. (The biggest gripe I've got about DesignSpark is that it does not have a mirror function. This function has been requested through several version upgrades of DesignSpark. I believe the lack of this function is an attempt to get you to upgrade to the "premium" paid-for software - it's got the mirror function.)

Don

 

[Paul135]

As a Linux user most of the CAD programs mentioned are not available, hence I use QCAD for 2D and am bit by bit learning FreeCad for 3D. I do have LibreCad installed and have a play with it now and again. However I would not go back to Windows as a main operating system again.

 

[Mike Henry]

I really love Onshape. Web-based, files in the cloud (a negative), but pretty full-featured and easy to use. They have a commercial model, so it's not just some hobbyists volunteering their spare time. It's free to use, as long as you are willing to make your work public (which is not a problem for me).

The biggest risk is that they will drop their free plan and I'll be out of luck on my history of work. I guess my second-biggest risk is that there's no way for me to store my files (other than the pdf drawings), so maybe the company goes out of business and I'm just out of luck.

Carl

You can always export your files in neutral CAD formats, like STEP, but of course that produces a dumb solid with no feature history. Better than nothing, though. At the beginning, Onshape allowed 10 private designs in a free account but people took advantage or it became too unwieldy to maintain and they dropped the 10 private designs ability. Existing users were allowed to keep the private designs they had but were no longer allowed to revise them other than to export parts and such to neutral formats. In the event that they do away with the free account altogether, they *may* do something similar or at least allow some time for users to export for use in other CAD systems.

 

[Tim Wescott]

As a Linux user most of the CAD programs mentioned are not available, hence I use QCAD for 2D and am bit by bit learning FreeCad for 3D. I do have LibreCad installed and have a play with it now and again. However I would not go back to Windows as a main operating system again.

LibreCAD is a fork of QCAD that was undertaken when the QCAD folks abandoned their open-source branch.

It's what I use on my Linux machine for 2D drafting. I find it adequate, but it could have more features.

I use FreeCAD also, but I find it's a steep learning curve -- it seems to be a framework, with each "workbench" the product of someone with strong opinions about how things should be done, but without much oversight to make the workbenches play nice with each other. I suspect things may be different if I already know my way around 3D CAD.