Total new-comer to CAD. Which programme to choose.

petertha said:

So could Rhino patch some bad geometry & fix a broken 3D model from another app? Sure. Well, maybe. As long as you know here to look & how to stich a surface.

Click to expand...

Yes, if you know where to look and know how to match surfaces, that's what Rhino does with some effort.
I used SW for several years professionally over ten years ago. I found it would often struggle to make water-tight work. It crashed, a lot. I hear it still crashes a lot. From what I hear their surfacing has improved a lot. I would go with SW if I had to pick between the two, but my issue with it is you still have to rent it for a large sum of money.

Solidworks is not perfect; but it will do a lot, and the commands are generally pretty logical.

I have read some comparisions between high-end 3D program users, and one guy who used several programs said SW was far more stable than some of its competitors.

It is really about stability of the software first, and anything after that is gravy (in my opinion).

When AutoCad was becomming popular, it was very unstable, and would sieze up randomly.
They finally got AutoCad stable about Rev. 2004, which is what I use.

I use SW 2012, and it does have its quirks, but very rarely does it just lock up (I can't recall it ever locking up).
Generally if you get into a bind, you can just hit the undo button, and try something else.

Often I have to try a few methods in SW to find a combination that works for a complex application.
There are often multiple ways to do the same thing in the 3D world.

I think all 3D programs struggle with complex shapes/contours to some extent, as far as how accurately things are managed.
I am glad I don't write 3D modeling software; that would be nightmarish.

.

Zeb said:

but my issue with it is you still have to rent it for a large sum of money.

Click to expand...

SW Maker seems to be somewhat inline with other subscription modelers. But it, like the other apps mentioned, has pros & cons depending on ones own perspective; knowledge level, hardware, learning resources, cnc vs non, what you can or cannot live without... on & on. And always lurking in the distance with any subscription is the proverbial rug pull, welcome to our new pricing model, thus holding your files ransom.

Yeah, I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from using SW. I certainly hope my inflection in previous posts is not derogatory to people's preferences. I make the assumption most here are hobbyists and maybe the wrong assumption that people want hobby level access and pricing.
Less on the hobby level, the main difference I found working with NX, was that I spent a lot less time troubleshooting feature tree failures and optimization was much better when the assembly part count was very high. For model engine making those factors are negligible.

Luckily I got SW2012 for a lump sum one-time fee ($4,000.00), which now in 2023 seems like somewhat of a bargain.

4,000/11 = $363 per year, which is quite reasonable all things considered.

I really had to get into the 3D world for doing some designs at work.

The drawback of SW is that there is no version compatibility, I guess no backwards compatibility, and that is a major problem if you want to share files with other SW users that use different versions.

With AutoCad, I can use their conversion program to save a 2023 AutoCad dwg file to 2004 format.
The backwards compatibility of Autocad dwg files makes Acad 2004 worth its weight in gold, for someone who uses 2D all day every day for production work like I do. Everyone I work with/share files with, has upgraded many times, and they all use modern versions of AutoCad.
They generally pay thousands per year per seat. That is a shootload of money over long periods of time.

Autocad 2004 works perfectly for my production 2D drawing work, and so I don't fix what is not broken.

SW for me was a way to get into 3D modeling without having to get AutoCad's yearly expensive subscription for their 3D program.

If Autocad had offered a one-time lump sum fee for their 3D program like SW did, I would have purchased Autocad 3D back in 2012.

Regardless of how anyone feels about any software, all of these discussions are very good and useful, since they flesh out the pros and cons of all the various software that would perhaps otherwise never be known, and bring in a multitude of interesting opinions/perspectives.

Great conversations we are having in this thread, and very enlightening.
"It is all good" as they say.

.

GreenTwin said:

Luckily I got SW2012 for a lump sum one-time fee ($4,000.00), which now in 2023 seems like somewhat of a bargain.
4,000/11 = $363 per year, which is quite reasonable all things considered.

Click to expand...

Amortization is a good way of looking at it. Now are you saying you have received perpetual version upgrades the past 11 years, or you just didn't bother with maintenance fees & still running 2012? (Hey, I'm not judging! LOL). I don't think they pull the plug on a seat, they just don't provide support in any way. Which I mean, who cares if you know what you're doing & happy with the version. But I'm not too clear about re-installations. I think the prior incentive versions for Students, EAA, Military are on a time interval renewal & they reach out to the Mothership for validation like most apps these days. No pay, no play. I think that might be what Maker is slowly edging towards if it hasn't already enveloped those 'incentive' versions. 2020-SP5 was the the last Win-7 version but I'm not sure if prior versions work on Win-10. Also design tables align with ~corresponding vintage of Excel which might start presenting compatibility hiccups if Office is significantly newer.

I am still running my original 2011 software, no upgrades.

I have had to re-install it three times.
The first time I had a computer crash about a month after I got SW.
I had to get a guy on the phone to reload to another computer.

Second time, my computer started giving ominous warnings of memory failure.
I discovered that SW lets you upload your license to the cloud, so I did that.

Then I was able to reload my software to a new machine, and download the key from the cloud.

Third time, another machine started to act up, and so again the license key was uploaded to the cloud, and then downloaded to a new machine.

Its a pretty good system I think.

SW seems to care about its users, as far as keeping them up and running.

I don't need support, and I have never had that on any CAD or 3D modeling software.

I picked up AutoCad 2D pretty quickly, within a few months I guess.

It took me a year to begin to get proficient with SW.
3D is an entirely different mindset.
3D modeling is like doing 2D CAD on acid (for the record I have never done drugs, but I have talked to some former acid users, and so I think that is an accurate assessment).

.

That's interesting. And good to hear actually. At one point a few years back I read dealers were laying heat on companies falling behind on fees - if they continued more than X years they would charge them full price for a new seat. Much Gerfluffle in the Land. Not sure about the circumstances or how it ended. Now maybe they were providing 'service' or maybe it was a shakedown aimed at bigger users, I can't say.

Are you running Win-7? You might have to keep that OS alive. I've heard conflicting stories about trying to run older versions on Win-10 ranging from No, Yes, Something in between. Its specific about hardware so maybe when people are upgrading they mean new graphics card or whatever & that could be stirring the demons. I have a friend who is on his last XP box for the app he runs. Apparently getting scarce to find hardware in garage sales, he may have to break into a museum LOL.

https://www.javelin-tech.com/main/support/pdf/solidworks_windows_compatibility_matrix.pdf

I am using a recently purchased HP computer with 16 GB ram, 64 bit OS, running Windows 10 home.

The SW came with two disks, one was 32 bit, which was what I originally loaded, and other was 64 bit.

I have started using the 64 bit version of SW with the new machine.

I have not had any problems with Windows 10 running 64 bit with either Solidworks 2012 or Autocad 2004.

I do have some backup Windows 7 machines, but they don't have enough ram for what I do nowdays.

I have started putting all of my Autocad drawings for a given project in a single file, so I can copy/past from sheet to sheet, see all the sheets at the same time, and open one file to see every sheet.
I have files with up to 100 drawings in them.
Careful backup is a must with this method, but it saves me a lot of time and effort.

Typical Autocad users say I am crazy to put all my sheets into one file, but then I ask them if they make a living using Acad 2004 every day and processing a lot of drawings. They always say "no".
I do what works, not what is popular or commonly used.

I have found that generally once a CAD person has been trained, they won't change to a more efficient process for any reason.
An example is paperspace.
I stopped using paperspace many years ago, and use XCLlP only, and that works really well, and provides a "what you see is what you get" drafting environment.
I have never be able to get another CAD user to change from using paperspace to XCLIP.
Paperspace got so engrained that people could not even envision that anything could/would work better.

.

petertha said:

I used Rhino for many years ... It is not parametric

Click to expand...

Ouch - that has become non-negotiable to me. It is so incredible to change a parameter and see the whole model adjust itself to suit!

awake said:

Ouch - that has become non-negotiable to me. It is so incredible to change a parameter and see the whole model adjust itself to suit!

Click to expand...

In a great coincidence, in this morning's email I got an invitation to a training seminar on parametric modelling in Rhino 7. If you've seen much about Rhino 7, you've seen reference to a feature called Grasshopper, and I believe that's when Rhino became parametric.

Is it a good parametric modeler? I have no idea. As I said before, I'm using Rhino 5 so I've never even touched 7. Just thought I'd pass this on.

When testing the software and learning it, I made a steam engine cylinder generator in grasshopper that's parametric.

I would say to set all this up it's a step down from FreeCAD in terms of getting things to work if starting out. For visualizing math it is much better than "expressions" used in CAD products. Shared parameters get lost quick when it is not noodled visually. The applications aren't very useful, other than to make neat calculators. I feel I can go back later and adjust things quick though if I need to size a cylinder, so I feel the effort was worth it.

In this other study, I was able to model in Blender/Rhino for a dummy cowl and parametrize (is that a word?) later in Alibre. Alibre's surfacing interface is basically, "Screw it, we'll just make a button to import Rhino files." I can scale, thicken and cut holes parametrically in history after the surfaces are modeled, so it works for me. Below shows Blender subdivision surfacing, Rhino in middle, and parameterized in Alibre. Not an efficient workflow if you have the money for higher end software but it's doable and fast.

Your Blender to Rhino 7 to Alibre workflow is one I'm not likely to be doing, but it's cool. For me, it's more likely to be either Rhino or Alibre. Which Alibre is that? Atom or the big one, Design?

I have Alibre Atom V23 that I got on sale about 15 months ago - Black Friday Sale '21 to make up a name. I did some lessons, made some parts and then got miffed that I bought V23 because it was cheap, and it was cheap because V24 was out. Basically, as soon as I sat down with it, they were trying to sell me V24. Had I known, I would have paid the higher price and bought V24. I guess I felt ripped off, got p****d at them and swore "not one more dime."

CFLBob said:

Your Blender to Rhino 7 to Alibre workflow is one I'm not likely to be doing, but it's cool. For me, it's more likely to be either Rhino or Alibre. Which Alibre is that? Atom or the big one, Design?

I have Alibre Atom V23 that I got on sale about 15 months ago - Black Friday Sale '21 to make up a name. I did some lessons, made some parts and then got miffed that I bought V23 because it was cheap, and it was cheap because V24 was out. Basically, as soon as I sat down with it, they were trying to sell me V24. Had I known, I would have paid the higher price and bought V24. I guess I felt ripped off, got p****d at them and swore "not one more dime."

Click to expand...

This is Alibre design version. The software is very stable so far, so there's no need for me to upgrade or get maintenance. If I had to chose between the two it would definitely be Alibre design.

Interesting. I've always heard that Blender is an order of magnitude harder to learn than anything else ... and also an order of magnitude more capable for the sort of organic 3d modeling for which it excels! I've only played around with it just a little bit, some years ago, and at that time the learning curve was indeed steep. Hopefully it has gotten better!

Blender is much more artist friendly now. NX Realize Shape or Solidworks Xshape do the same thing as Blender SubD. This type of modeling is tailored more for designers than engineers. As mentioned before this workflow can accurately be used for castings or similar odd shapes without having to dive into splines, patching, and other surfacing shenanigans.

GreenTwin said:

I am using a recently purchased HP computer with 16 GB ram, 64 bit OS, running Windows 10 home.

The SW came with two disks, one was 32 bit, which was what I originally loaded, and other was 64 bit.

I have started using the 64 bit version of SW with the new machine.

I have not had any problems with Windows 10 running 64 bit with either Solidworks 2012 or Autocad 2004.

I do have some backup Windows 7 machines, but they don't have enough ram for what I do nowdays.

I have started putting all of my Autocad drawings for a given project in a single file, so I can copy/past from sheet to sheet, see all the sheets at the same time, and open one file to see every sheet.
I have files with up to 100 drawings in them.
Careful backup is a must with this method, but it saves me a lot of time and effort.

Typical Autocad users say I am crazy to put all my sheets into one file, but then I ask them if they make a living using Acad 2004 every day and processing a lot of drawings. They always say "no".
I do what works, not what is popular or commonly used.

I have found that generally once a CAD person has been trained, they won't change to a more efficient process for any reason.
An example is paperspace.
I stopped using paperspace many years ago, and use XCLlP only, and that works really well, and provides a "what you see is what you get" drafting environment.
I have never be able to get another CAD user to change from using paperspace to XCLIP.
Paperspace got so engrained that people could not even envision that anything could/would work better.

.

Click to expand...

I quit using paper space too--too much trouble for such little return. but now I've moved over to Alibre Atom, does everything I need and much simpler.

CFLBob said:

In a great coincidence, in this morning's email I got an invitation to a training seminar on parametric modelling in Rhino 7. If you've seen much about Rhino 7, you've seen reference to a feature called Grasshopper, and I believe that's when Rhino became parametric.

Is it a good parametric modeler? I have no idea. As I said before, I'm using Rhino 5 so I've never even touched 7. Just thought I'd pass this on.

Click to expand...

I think that Grasshopper is included or can be installed for free in Rhino 5.

Henry said:

I think that Grasshopper is included or can be installed for free in Rhino 5.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Henry. Can't tell you how shocked I was to read that. Thought it couldn't possibly be the case, but I went and looked.

Sure enough, if you go the Rhino download page, there's a download of Grasshopper for Rhino 5. Bottom right side of the page. The file says it's a Work In Progress file, but no matter what I'd always expect the Rhino 7 version of it to be at least slightly different. That's the software world. Rhino 7 is different in several other ways.

It's in my downloads directory now and this might well be a weekend project.

I didn't know it went back to 5. 7 includes it on installation.