| 1 |
thoughts on onshape.com? |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
rgrds, |
| 4 |
cm. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ |
| 7 |
On Monday, 19 April 2021 03:40, Sid Spry <sid@××××.us> wrote: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2021, at 9:47 PM, caveman رجل الكهف 穴居人 wrote: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> > hi. |
| 12 |
> > i want to design complex shapes, and then |
| 13 |
> > send them to some manufacturers. so my |
| 14 |
> > drawings need to be very accurate, and |
| 15 |
> > compatible with the manufacturers. |
| 16 |
> > plus, it would be nice to have the ability |
| 17 |
> > of being able to test how structurally |
| 18 |
> > strong my design is. e.g. how well it |
| 19 |
> > supports loads, and where are the pressured |
| 20 |
> > points, etc. |
| 21 |
> > thoughts on what to use? should i use |
| 22 |
> > autocad? else? how should i think? any |
| 23 |
> > tips? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> As the other poster has suggested, FreeCAD cantechnically |
| 26 |
> do all of these things. But the biggest issue with it is that its constraint |
| 27 |
> engine is not as advanced (by way of heuristics) as that of Autodesk |
| 28 |
> or Solidworks. Practically what this means is if you change a base feature |
| 29 |
> FreeCAD will give you gibberish instead of what might make sense in |
| 30 |
> context. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> If you are a hobbyist, and are not very RMS-inclined, then just using |
| 33 |
> a subscription to Fusion 360 will be fine. It is what a lot of hobbyists |
| 34 |
> use. In fact, even if I were RMS-inclined, I'd probably use Fusion 360 |
| 35 |
> for prototyping and then put the design into FreeCAD. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Fusion 360 will do stress analysis for free, I think. The other CFD |
| 38 |
> analyses are paid, and can run upwards of $13k/yr, so in case you need |
| 39 |
> them it would be worth it to use FreeCAD. |
Archives