CAD thread? CAD thread.
>>993073which CAD software should I invest my time in?
>>993073Plasccity trial expired can't use it anymore, I feel sad
I actually did some stuff in FreeCAD with zero CAD knowledge. I hit a lot of bugs but it did work.
>>993112How could you be so sure they were bugs if you entirely lacked any prior knowledge?
>>993073For me, it's Autodesk Inventor with 30% extra session crashing.
>>993237>shit crashes>shit explodes (constraint solver finding a solution that's not a solution)
>>993073Tried 123design it's shit >>993102Once you trial it that's it, developers made s tier security and it's uncrackable
Freecad is a weird combination of totally usable and frustratingly limiting. I am able to design most of what I need (fairly simple stuff though) but as soon as I try to do something in an order it doesn't like, the whole thing crashes. Will be nice in 5-10 years I think.
>solidworks simulation>solution goes to 80% in 10 minutes>sits there for the next 5 hours going back and forth between 3 and 17 gigs of ram>"Study failed"Every problem involving contact interactions has been a pain so far. I'm not even mad anymore.
cadurday edition
>>993073>>993287nothing is uncrackable, he just paid crackers not to crack it
As an outsider I HATE 3d software. Why do I need to install some arcane software whos GUI is build by fucking brain damaged people to do one fucking thing? In this case engraved text on a curved surface. Why can't these fuckwits make even importing models intuitive?I made this in autocad btw and want text on the curved recess.I'm attempting to use inventor but this shit is maddening.
>>993097fucking none. learn a trade instead because shit is built by fucking twisted retards.Autocad is ok
>want to insert a file into current document?Hit OPEN. WTF fucking zoomer devs you total Cumbrians>imported asset>puts it in an asset tab with no visible way of importing into main workspaceI will murder on sight any 3D software dev I meet Meltie over for now
I hate the antichrist
>>993587I've managed to make a few things with freecad with it being the only cad software I've used. But it seema like I can never continue working on a saved project once it has been closed and reopened, nothing ever works again. I have to treat it like an 8bit videogame and complete it in one sitting.It is incredibly satisfying when you actually get that cumbersome hunk of shit to make something slick though.
I feel bad for people who don't use Catia
>>993097for me rhino, expensive as hell but easy to get around if you willing to renew the 3 month demo version with a different email each time lmao
>>993287>>993745I can crack it if you pay me.
>>994424how much do you want?
>>993705I deal with SW Simulation as a job, and I hate it with a passion, I tried asking management to get an Ansys license to no avail because it costs too much and there's not enough demand.Going back to SW Simulation, first off the progress bars mean nothing, seriously, they barely qualify as vague suggestions. Secondly if your simulation runs for 5 hours and then fails you've got a stupid fine mesh while the analysis isn't properly modeled. Try with a VERY coarse mesh first, see if it runs, see if the results make sense; then, when you know it runs, use a finer mesh or, better, add mesh controls on the surfaces and edges you want to see in more detail.If it fails, well I got a whole spreadsheet of errors and failures, full of possible causes and possible solutions, so I can't help you there without more informations. To be clear, solve time doesn't mean the simulation is fucked, I had simulation run for 25 hours (it was an entire electric motor for an e-bike) and produce good results, but it all comes down to what you're analyzing and how you set up the simulation.
I'm going to use Blender to do CAD work again because learning another software is a pain
>>993792Texturing with a displacement map would be way easier. You don't really see this type of process in real life machining because it's extremely complicated to perform.
>>994663Not sure, it's an electron app LMAO.
>>994671I need to do this to because converting files between programs is making me ultra-violent.How hard is it to align objects? This is the most basic function I need speaking as the autoCAD psycho above.It’s so unintuitive but I just want to zero in any shape I make and move by integer on an axis. That’s it.
Now every time I add a bolt connector in sw simulation the document units switch to meters. What the actual fuck. Every default I'm aware of is set to mm.>>994667In my experience coarse mesh fails the study more often than not, or at least yields questionable results. Fine mesh not so much aside from when solution takes so much time that I get tired of waiting and cancel it myself.In that particular case the issue was probably parts slipping against each other under load (it was actually the point of study to see if they will), but instead of prompting about large displacement like usual, the solver decided to bug out for some reason.
>>995022>every time I add a bolt connector in sw simulation the document units switch to metersThat's a new one.>coarse mesh fails the study more often than notNot to backpedal, but I meant "coarse" in a relative way, which is always dependant on the problem at hand. In any way, a failure after 5 hours is usually a symptom of bad modeling and mesh issues. Ideally you want that failure to happen much faster so you can troubleshoot your mesh (check for high aspect ratio elements, negative jacobian, shit base geometries, etc) more efficiently.>parts slippingConctact analysis is a bitch in SW, getting it to behave requires esoteric knowledge not even Dassault has. Be mindful about the sleazy trick SW plays on us every time you mess with the model and then go back to the simulation: it may automatically switch the contact between faces you had previously defined to a self-contact, which usually doesn't work when you have two different bodies. I have wasted DAYS of machine time on this shit, fucking hell. Also, if you're studying slipping I assume you set a proper friction coefficient, but keep in mind SW doesn't like very high coefficients, and on the other side of the spectrum it won't go below 0,05.Also, what's your usual node count? My workstation at the office is a somewhat recent Xeon with 128GB of ECC memory and a proper nvme drive, and I try staying below 3~4 million nodes at most (an analysis like that takes from 10 to 25 hours), and below 1 million if I can help it, with running times in the order of 4~8 hours; less than 500 thousand if I want something to shit out results within the day; if the problem allows it, I can use less than 200 thousand nodes if I want it to finish in a matter of minutes.
>>994663$120, the code is compiled using bytenode, it's hard to decompile and the file seems to have an extra layer of obfuscation on the top.
>>995037>a symptom of bad modeling and mesh issuesFor one, that model had lots of unnecessary details that now that I think about it could be simplified or cut out altogether.>it may automatically switch the contact between faces you had previously defined to a self-contactAh so that's what it was. I had a really cursed study a while ago where either some contacts would fall through each other for no obvious reason, or the study would fail due to "numerical difficulties". That's what probably was happening. Good to know.>keep in mind SW doesn't like very high coefficientsThe real coefficient would be at least 0.3, and the max 0.2 sw takes without complaints should've been just barely enough in theory (under the assumption of uniform contact pressure - which it isn't, hence the study) so the idea was that if 0.2 will work then the real thing will work even better.>Also, what's your usual node count?I don't really pay attention to that. I usually just tune mesh size by feel depending on how much time I'm willing to spend on it. Solution time can vary wildly depending on number of contacts and how well the model behaves after all. The study right now with 750k nodes, with every contact that have to watch out enabled just finished in 4.5 hours. With only essential contacts that move by design it takes 1h 40 min. With everything bonded it finishes in under 7 minutes. I'm running it on i5-12400, in a VM with 24 Gb of ram.When I'm just fiddling with stuff I usually try to keep the solution time under half an hour, and only run longer studies when I want to verify the final design that I'm reasonably sure I won't have to fix and run again.
any fusion chads here? also i write websites in php and use an iphone. feels good to get paid and watch you nerds squeal over tools lmao
>>993705>>994667Have you tried Catia V5? I have an old R20 somewhere.The V5 is the standard for Airbus and our aviation business overall.SW is honorable but it's not as powerful.
>>995164How do i contact you?
>>995885>>994667 here. I work in a studio, we have all the softwares so whatever our client has, we can work with it too. I've seen CATIA, but never used it. UI is shit, and that's pretty much all I can say about it. As for the "powerful", I think it all comes down to handling large assemblies with millions of components and integration with a robust PDM that might set it apart from everything else. As for actually modeling in it, I don't know, but one of the good thing about SW is that being so widespread there's always something online that will help you learn or solve a situation, while the same can't be said about CATIA. In the end all CAD work pretty much the same (more or less). Just today I was reading SW2025 highlights and my impression is that DS is doing basically the absolute bare minimum to keep all these softwares afloat, because SW works like absolute ass, but the features and fixes are so few and far in between to be laughable. Also, unless you work in some massive corporation that does massive projects it's infinitely more likely for you to encounter SW than CATIA.
>>995886What os?
Plasticity user here. How can I start learning to make AAA quality firearms? I know modeling in general fairly well but guns have been quite difficult for me in CAD software. Any good pirated courses? What guns should I create as a beginner?
Is there a CAD package that>is cheapish (max $500/yr, inb4 pirate)>has parameters that integrate with Google Sheets/Excel>has text parameters that can be imported to a model/2d geometry>has g-code export (not a need, but a nice to have) I want to do a little sign business out of my garage. Ideally I would have products that are customizable without having to go in and change the model with each iteration.I want to be able to put Basic Girl's(tm) last name/family motto/marriage date w/e into a spreadsheet and have a router table shit out "(Basic Girl Name) and (Basic Guy Name) married (year) at (stupid town they live in)"or w/e.I use Inventor at work, string parameters are abhorrent. I have to do a work around to import text parameters from excel. It's also more than I need for mostly 2d signs.
Let's talk CAD!
for me, it's IronCAD. The tri-ball is GOAT
>>998446alibre, probably.
>>998615>>998446Just mucked around with it a bit - they don't do the integration I need. Currently I have to use an iPart in inventor, and then edit the iPart table in Excel since you cannot populate the regular parameter table with strings from Excel.I am sure this functionality exists somewhere - how many part configs have different things engraved in them? Surely they don't expect engineers to manually change the engraving for each different part iteration. wan00
>>994890>How hard is it to align objects?It's possible, the features are there, but it's very tedious to do in default Blender without addons
>>998636yeah I think you have to script it in python https://www.alibre.com/3d-cad-scripting/
>>998446Inkscape is easy enough to script. The gcodetools plugin might suitable.
>>993783The absolute worst take possible.>>998446Rhino has UserText on every object that you can export as CSV.In fact I can recommend Rhino to everyone in this thread. One-time payment, no bs subscriptions, not gonna change, whatever you can't do in Rhino, you can do with the Grasshopper plugin, whatever you can't do with Grasshopper, you can do with someone else's extensions to it or write your own..t currently creating a factory control system using it, from 3d models to CAM auto-programming, part tracking, management and customer relations.
>>994379I think this method doesn't work anymore.
>>1000881>.t currently creating a factory control system using it, from 3d models to CAM auto-programming, part tracking, management and customer relations.Very based. What kind of parts will be manufactured?
>>1000881>>1001040Buy an ad
>>1001059>unironically thinking an entrepreneur is going to do his self-promotion on /3/ where 99% of posters here are learning to make 3D tits and anuses on Blender.I think we are only two on this thread to use Rhino professionally and he seems clearly better than me so I'm curious what could be done with it.inb4. phoneposting
There was a thread on /g/ a few weeks ago that said Freecad 1.0 was actually pretty good now. I just tested it. It's still shit.
>>993073does anyone have good tuts on manually building surface for G2 tolerance?i tried to get into that shit half a decade ago but between a shit work environment and my own incompetence i bounced off it. thinking about giving it another try, there are a lot of jobs in my area that pay well if i can wrap my head around it to be clear, not B side or engineering, but for organic sheet surface, like auto industry standard tolerance also whats the industry standard software these days? catia? we were using alias, how well does that knowledge translate?
>>1001094go on /g/, apple shills are everywhere. The fact that you don't believe that a small startup wouldn't shill their products when a massive marketing agency like apple does confirms that you're a shill.
>>1001103>G2 toleranceTolerances are a specification on a technical drawing, not something you bake in your 3D model. They're an indication for manufacturing.>industry standard softwareAll of them. If you have to learn from scratch I'd say start with Solidworks which is widely used, easy to learn, and has you have an infinite amount of online resources at your disposal to learn from and troubleshoot any issue you might have. Alternatively I can recommend Onshape (same company behind Creo), which is browser-based, free2play, and very very modern. In the end all parametric CAD softwares share the same core principles, just different UI/shortcuts/gestures.
>>996273did you buy or pirate?
>>1001243nice try, fed
freecad doesnt let you preview anything. you have to know the exact value ahead of time and put them in the left panel instead of a pop up box its also butt ugly. no smooth animation when switching angles. you have to dig through its terrible ux/ui just to change the grid values.its not a decent alternative specially considering fusion 360 is free.if you insist on using linyx exclusively then use ondhape atleast.the only viable way to use freecad is by cutting primitives with the modifier. dont get me wrong all cad software has clunky gimp tier ux ui but freecad is just the worst.why cant i scale a segment or a shape in fusion 360 for example. why cant i fillet after using patch? why is the measuribg tool such shit when its so important.
>>998446OpenSCAD ?
>>998446theres a 3d printer plugin for fusion 360 not sure how good it is
I'm trying to make a quick thing and need to put a uniform indent all the way around on the selected face. Currently using Freecad, how would I do this? The closest thing I could find just clicking around would be the thickness tool, but it makes the indent too deep. Please be patient, am retard.
>>993073Is FreeCad usable now?
>indian YouTube tutorial>Dude just doing an exercise from his school>Don't use any shortcut>Leave sketch unconstrained >You can hear farm animals in the background
>>1002227You may have already gotten your answer in the other FreeCAD thread, but here's an example of one way of doing it. You can define your profile in a sketch, then do a Revolution. In my image, I only did the top half of the profile, so I could mirror it later. You could define whatever crazy profile you need, or just a simple channel.
>>1002338Thank you! This helped a lot.
>>993706>grid onamateur
>>1001630It's a cool thing but gets really slow for more complicated designs. Also, making fillets is pain. I wish there was an OpenSCAD style software that did not have these limitations.
>>993097OpenScad
is something like pic possible in freecad? Wondering if I should invest my time setting up Windows again if its not possible with freecad.
>>1001103Do you mean G2 surface continuity? I learnt to surface by fucking around in Solidworks and Rhino and looking at online videos, tutorials and what used to be readily available presentations from Solidworks World. There was also Rhino stuff available but I haven't looked in ages.I've used Solidworks for about 25 years so biased towards that - I have my own license - and it probably has the greatest userbase. DS are twats, though. Rhino is good but has a slightly different approach which might be familiar if you have used AutoCAD (old versions anyway). Surface building in Rhino is closer to alias than SW. Fusion is actually alright if you aren't doing anything really complex. Can't get on with Freecad but haven't tried 1.0 yet.Solidworks is used a lot in manufacturing and product design (not always the best tool but ubiquitous) and Rhino in product design, furniture and architecture.
>>1002873Sure why not?>modeling threadsretarded
>>1002873yes, but it would be painful, I found positioning and interfacing of parts in freecad to be abhorrent.
I've heard that CAD models are the best for 3D printers, but I'm looking to make something with a pretty organic shape and have been told Blender would work way better for that, and then I've heard Blender models aren't great for 3D printing.Is this accurate?Is there a specific software that would be ideal for something that needs to be printable but needs smooth curves that would be hard to model with splines or extra planes?
>>1003138>I've heard that CAD models are the best for 3D printers, but I'm looking to make something with a pretty organic shape and have been told Blender would work way better for that, and then I've heard Blender models aren't great for 3D printing.Blender is fine for 3d printing just make sure your mesh has enough detail. Organic shapes might be better off with a resin printer over a FDM style.
>>1003138>mechanical partCAD>artsy piece of shit toyBlenderSimple as.>but but but blender can be used for engineering!!!!No, shut up, it can't.
>>1003142I'm doing both, so I'm guessing I should do the mechanical part in CAD and the artsy part in Blender and design them such that the artsy part can be connected with the mechanical parts with glued pins or snaps or screws or something? Can Blender do the precise measurements necessary to align fastening points?I'm torn right now between learning Blender or trying to find Solidworks tutorials for more organic shapes. I suspect the time commitment is similar, which would give Solidworks the win because then I could test how the shell and the mechanisms articulate together in an assembly instead of printing both out and relying on trial and error.
>>1003159You can import/export meshes into either and cut one part from the other, and cut screw holes from both. The inner part has to be a bit (say 0.4mm) smaller. Blender has an offset solid tool missing from freecad, though for a basic solid freecad's thickness tool can work too. Neither is very controlled so maybe you have to model the hole separately.
>>1003159If you have parametric needs in your organic shapes, Power Surface is an add-on for Solidworks that expands its capabilities for free-form modeling. But I don't know how easy it is to pirate, unlike SW which is piss easy. You're probably better off doing as >>1003201 said though.
>>1003139>and then I've heard Blender models aren't great for 3D printingI think that's mostly because modelers turn on smooth shading, which does not work for 3D printing, you need geometry
>>1003201>>1003202Thanks for the tips! That information is immensely helpful. I had no idea about the Power Surface add-on or that you could transfer meshes between the two.>>1003205>smooth shadingThanks for that. I didn't know it was a thing but now that I do I realize it was a staple in entire generations of video games.
>>993073I'm thinking about either doing Fusion, Freecad, or Plasdticity. I want to make game/animation assets but also 3D functional objects that work IRL. Whats the best one?
>>1003543For assets go Blender, for 3D functional objects you have to be more specific, but any parametric CAD will essentially work.
>>1003106>>modeling threads>retardedGood way to out yourself as a fucking amateur. I bet your repertoire includes dozens of reddit posts saying that modeling ANY threads is bad, without context.Look at that image again: the tolerances on the thread diameter are so tight, and the parts so small, that a good engineer/draftsman would model them just to be sure.>erm... ACKSHULLY I know every ANSI and ISO drill / thread diameter by heartFuck off nigger no you don't.
>>1003789What the fuck are you talking about you retard those are completely normal threads, you write the size in the drawing and the machinist does them to spec and they just work.Another great thing about not modeling threads is that usually the modelled hole is the correct size for predrill and the outside surface as well so you can easily add predrill size into the drawing as well.
>>1003807Not other anon but modelling for rapid prototyping is common. Just did a load of pipe threads for MJF printed parts that worked very well. Did that to get all threads starting in the correct position and also wanted them working out of the bubblewrap without the user having to faff with taps and dies.So no, can't always leave threads to the machinist.
>>10038303D printing is a whole different ball game.And you actually end up having to manually model the threads which would be incredibly wasteful if it were a conventionally manufactured part.
>>1003861Final part will be a moulding or a casting (with a few mods). The print represents almost exactly what the moulding will look like. The casting would be post-machined with threads added afterwards. There's a few arguments to be had over that.
>>1003862Why not thread inserts?If it large threads like a bottle cap threads then yeah sure mold 'em.
>>1003865Internal threads yes of course where suitable (M5 mounting points) but not so much for external threads or watertight internal threads.
Can I use freecad to build something like a battleship?
>>1003889What scale and level of detail?Model / rendering purposes yes. Proper ship design uses specialist software or Catia, NX and lots of designers.
What new and interesting things have you discovered for 3d printing? For example I recently found 3dprintable.xyz. What else?
>>1003915Buy an ad
>>1003543Not freecad. Fusion is ok if you're willing to use cloudshit. I prefer plasticity though. And for functional 3d prints, I'd choose that over blender everyday.
>>993097for 3DSolidworks/Creofor 2DAutocadBut really, I dont know why would you just randomly learn CAD.
Just made my first pipe
>>1004011Nice.
I got solidworks, and I feel like I can rule the world now. Going to design a nuclear bomb after Im done with my steam engine
>>993073I want to be able to design stuff (or copy) to repair my headphones or other electronic appliances with 3d printing , is this the right place to ask? where should I start?
>>1004163if only you knew how bad things really are.
>>1004171Are you approaching this from scratch?Short form might be:1. Learn 3D CAD package (whichever you find easiest)2. Learn about different types of 3D printer and materials (fdm or SLA if home machine, SLS etc if you send out to China or Shapeways etc)3. Learn rules of designing for 3DP. 4. Take things apart (carefully), look at teardowns (ifixit) to see how things go together.5. Go print some stuff and see what works, or doesn't. L6. Iterate.
>>1004194Should probably point out that learning CAD might take a bit of time to be proficient in if you are new to it.
>>1004194yes I guess this should be what i should approach, thanks!yes I think it would be from scratch, because I haven't found one single person who has some at least some experience on this field
>>1004200any books, resources, threads in here , even plebbit that I should look into?
>>1004311>>1004312Will have a ponder. I have been involved in mech engineering and product design for 30+ years (formal instruction in both) with loads of learning on the job so not the best to suggest a starting point. However:At a beginner's level, one of my kids is doing DT at school and there's some useful, simple design stuff in the exam revision guides you can buy from book stores.CAD: FreeCAD and Solid Edge Community Ed are free (certain restrictions on SE). Also openSCAD, which I haven't used and TinkercadFusion 360 and Onshape have or had free plans.Solidworks has a makers edition which is apparently a PITA with embedded cloud shit. Shame as I use it at work and it is pretty good for what I do.Some of the packages (Solidworks particularly) have okay built-in tutorials and there are loads of specific examples of functions on YouTube.One good way of learning is to pick something you have lying around and just start modelling it. Begin with something simple and then increase difficulty. As a guide, blocky stuff like door hinges is easy, organic stuff like detergent bottles is hard. Moving on to take things apart for really in depth modelling will probably teach you more about how things go together than a bunch of books.3DP: there used to be some best practice guides for FDM available from Stratasys, particularly "FDM for end use parts". Not sure if this has been wiped or stuck behind a registration form now. Simplify3d had a good guide to print settings. Reddit's r/3dprinting "getting started" wiki has useful bits in it, though usual reddit caveats apply.There's useful info at hubs dot com resources pages.Phonefagging so formatting and speling may be a bit wonky.
Solidworks fluid simulator cost $14,000... Is there perhaps a cheaper way to do fluid dynamic simulations?
Just started using AutoCAD for the first timeWhy does it seem like nothing has a hotkey? Do you genuinely have to type LAYER, press enter, then click a button in a GUI every time you want to make a new layer?
>>1004366OpenFOAM. As the name implies, its free and open source.
holy shit, CAD is so based, like actually, really fucking based. I'm going to coom
Hello everyone, I am wondering how can I fill this in? I am wanting it to fill from surface circled in red upward, but keep the hole in the middle, the two diameters are slightly different in sizes, and wanted to I guess loft? from one to the other and fill inside the shape to help strengthen it. But I am not sure how to do this, this is in freecad 1.0.0.
>>1004782If Z is the rotational symmetry, can you make the shape in the xy plane and extrude with a taper so it doesn't cross the other wall?
>>993782>GUI is build by fucking brain damaged peopleYou've used Blender, I see.
>>1004373no.
>>1004812I actually ended up doing that 10 minutes after I made the comment, and felt dumb for asking.
>>1004373I'm feeling like this too.and how do I permanently change where the "base point" or "insertion point" of an object is?I'm used to using turbocad where you just press D and click where you want it to be.In autoCAD you can change where it is for one operation by pressing B and enter, but then it goes right back to where it was.there is some CBPR command but you have to install it as a plug-in which is faggy and also it only works on blocks.Seems like it is missing this very essential feature that I used every day at my old job.>>1004819i need to know what to do please. I want a one button hotkey like R to rotate not R-O-space then click a base point to start rotating.turbocad for being really cheap did so much better of a job at this.R45 and it's done. change the base point with D if you need to. man I miss that little cheapo software. it sucked at a lot of things though too.
Any resources for learning SolidWorks as a total beginner? I'm doing an internship at a furniture company and my supervisor told me that I should git gud at SW soon, or else he would break my wagie body.
>>1005357SW' own tutorials are a good way to start, and then just look up on the jewtube for more tutorials, but beware of jeets. If you are stuck, try SW' Knowledge Base first (assuming those assholes at the company are actually paying for the license) and duckduckgo second: it's such a widespread software that chances are most of your issues have already been encountered and solved. As a last resort you can ask here, I'll answer when I can.>internship>they expect interns to just learn without tutorage, not even the basicsI'm sure they're the kind of company that only hires neo-graduates with 5 years of relevant experience, for minimum wage of course.
>>1005369i miss when the SW forum was publicly viewable, found so many answers using it. probably why they locked it as i'm a filthy pirate. thankfully there's still the wayback machine ;)
>>1004782Why not add a few break away supports? Tree type should do the trick.
>>1005369I'd love to have a "no jeets" add-on for my browser where people can flag jeet tutorials and it hides the channel for everyone else with the add-on.
>>1005369Thanks for the advice. I just started a couple days ago. There is a "200 SW exercises" book I found at anna's archive, just taking it easy with the first couple of models and fiddling around with the sketch and 3d tools.I was going to watch the CAD/CAM by Mathlaban channel for guidance, but he's a jeet. Do you have any recs for non-jeet youtube channels or good exercise compilations? I think those in the book are okay, but idk how good that kind of practice translates into modelling components for furniture.
>>1005631Any resource is as good as any if you're just starting out. I was half-joking about jeets: I hate how they speak, and that's on me, but the vast majority of their video tutorials won't really help you more than the stuff SW provides you with. That said, I came across good jeet channels, try watching a few videos and decide by yourself what you like best.Keep in mind that once you grasp the core concepts of parametric 3D CAD (volume generation from 2D, volume addition and subtraction, the feature tree and its order of operation), it all boils down to knowing the advanced tools, keyboard shortcuts, and overall knowledge of the specific software peculiarities.As for furniture, it depends: in principle you can do anything, but parametric software like SW aren't the best for flowy surfaces, like pic related. I mean: it can be done but it will be time consuming and painful. For basic shit like cabinets, shelves, and tables it's perfectly adequate.
>>1005638Perfectly possible to do flowing, swoopy stuff. You do need to have a good grasp of modelling practices, when to use surfaces vs solids, when to model features directly rather than struggling to get something acceptable out of standard tools (eg fillets). >>1004322 was me. Furniture has been about 10% of my work over the last 20 years. Hard surfaces are relatively easy, squishy, irregular upholstery is a pain in the arse to model quickly, but I have learned to use Fusion (sculpt module) for those projects.
>>1005381No that's just Dassault forcing all users on to their system. You will use 3DExperience and you will be happy.Idiots alienated the most fanatical CAD user base out there.
