
FreeCAD: A free and open source multiplatform 3D parametric modeler - creolabs
https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD
======
alias_neo
I started using FreeCAD recently after getting a 3D printer, because I wanted
something open source and runs on Linux which I could learn, and would become
my CAD tool.

I have no CAD experience outside of what I learned in university over a decade
ago, so it has been a challenge.

I have generally found it quite hard to achieve some simple designs, it's not
always easy to understand what a tool does from its name, and it's not always
easy to find a video online to help. Sometimes you know what you need to do,
but can't find the tool for it because you have no idea what it's called in
CAD land.

The bugs which cause parts to just disappear when you run certain operations
are an issue, and there is little help to explain the cause, I've gotten a few
designs into the broken state others have mentioned where you need to undo a
bunch of work to recover, which is unfortunate.

On the other hand, I found creating drill holes, countersunk or counterbored
incredibly easy and powerful.

I hope to find an up to date video series I can follow to learn more as I'm
sure it'll become a lot easier to use once I understand the tools better.

~~~
app4soft
As I'm working with CAD for a long time, I would recommend to install next
three FLOSS apps (keep them all side-by-side on your PC):

1\. _FreeCAD_ — main 3D CAD (CAx);

2\. _QCAD_ — main 2D CAD (CADD);

3\. _SolveSpace_ — helper 2D/3D parametric CAD & CAE for daily engineering,
sketching & relax.[0,1,2,3]

[0]
[https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace](https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace)

[1] [https://github.com/Symbian9/SolveSpace-Daily-
Engineering](https://github.com/Symbian9/SolveSpace-Daily-Engineering)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL53gPqUkbj3JndwS2T410...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL53gPqUkbj3JndwS2T410KTbBymaimbiD)

[3]
[https://twitter.com/app4soft/status/1181705677984735232](https://twitter.com/app4soft/status/1181705677984735232)

~~~
ardy42
> As I'm working with CAD for a long time, I would recommend to install next
> three FLOSS apps (keep them all side-by-side on your PC):

Do any of these easily let you build a map from only the distances between two
landmarks? I've been wanting to make an accurate map of the trees in my yard.
That should be pretty easy to turn into a map using basic trig, but I don't
want to do it by hand.

~~~
app4soft
> _Do any of these easily let you build a map from only the distances between
> two landmarks? I 've been wanting to make an accurate map of the trees in my
> yard._

Use _QGIS_ [0] or _OpenOrienteering Mapper_ [1] (simpler than QGIS) app for
any GIS/cartography/mapping tasks.

JFTR, GIS apps are "CAD for cartography"; FreeCAD/QCAD/SolveSpace are "CAD for
civil engineering", but could be used for some GIS tasks.

Anyway, _OpenOrienteering Mapper_ & _QGIS_ are CAD apps You are looking for!

[0] [https://qgis.org](https://qgis.org)

[1]
[https://www.openorienteering.org/apps/mapper/](https://www.openorienteering.org/apps/mapper/)

~~~
ris
They're not really the same thing. I haven't found GIS apps to have the
_parametric_ abilities that would allow the GP to perform the sort of
constraint-based modelling they desire.

------
kuon
I like FreeCAD but it has one major issue (compared to something like OnShape
which I use now), it doesn't have a smart naming topology.

For example, you create a cube, you make a hole in it (not fully through), and
then you chamfer one side of the original cube. If you go back in the
parametric history and change the depth of the hole for it to go through the
whole cube it will change the name of the faces/edges in the history and the
chamfer will then be applied to another face.

This is a very hard problem to solve, and that's where some commercial
packages shines.

[https://wiki.freecadweb.org/Topological_naming_problem](https://wiki.freecadweb.org/Topological_naming_problem)

I wish onshape was open source, but I guess it will never happen because it
uses siemens parasolid under the hood (at least I think it does). I don't know
if FreeCAD can come close to something like onshape with the current gerometry
kernel opencascade.

~~~
Joker_vD
Huh. Let me try with a programming analogue: so you have that statement
earlier in the program where a bunch of named variables are introduced (with
values assigned to them). You change this statement, so it now computes
differently named variables. Of course, all the later statements keep using
the names they're using, and things become weird. Is this roughly correct?

If so, then, uh, that's the problem of renaming the bound variables, it's an
annoying one, but it has been around since the inception of λ-calculus and has
several well-known solutions.

~~~
ajuc
You need to know which autogenerated names from the last generation correspond
to which autogenerated names in the current generation.

The problem with CAD is - you don't know.

Previously you had:

    
    
        [OK] create sketch_1 (a rectangle)
          [OK] pad the sketch_1 into a cuboid_1 (face_1, face_2, ..., face_6)
            [OK] create sketch_2 (a round circle) in the middle of face_2 (which is on the right side of the cuboid)
              [OK] pocket the sketch_2 creating a round hole in the cuboid_1
    

Then you change the sketch_1 making it a pentagon instead of a rectangle. The
tree becomes:

    
    
        [OK] create sketch_1b (a pentagon)
          [OK] pad the sketch_1b into a cuboid_1b (face_1b, face_2b, ..., face_7b)
            [X] create sketch_2b (a round circle) in the middle of face_?
               [X] pocket the sketch_2b creating a round hole in the cuboid_1b but where exactly ?
    

There's no face_2 anymore - new side faces of the cuboid_1b are each in
different places and at different angles than side faces of the old cuboid_1.
You can decide basing on some heuristics, but that heuristics sucks in FreeCad
and is almost never right.

I only every used Free Cad so I don't know how other CAD solves this problem,
I can see using a better heuristic (like the least change of the plane and
distance of the sketch ? ) or forcing the user to specify which edge
corresponds to which when editing a sketch that isn't the final one in the
dependency chain.

You could also force the user to mark and name objects in the sketch on which
other sketches can depend - and when you edit the sketch you'd have to set
them up correctly after the edit.

~~~
zeta0134
So, could you potentially store more metadata than just the face name, like
it's normal for example, or the location and approximate surface area, and try
to use that to reduce the problem space for an educated guess?

~~~
UncleEntity
Or use a dependency graph where the operation are, umm, dependent on the
specific geometric component parent.

When something gets changed just go and find the place where the graph is
bonkers and rebind the sub-tree to the correct parent object.

Could even have a fancy auto-generated UI à la Blender's node editor.

------
qz2
I really want to like FreeCAD but it’s very very easy to screw up things
irreparably in the parts designer. For example if you want to cut several
faces and then realise you have made a mistake on one of the earlier sketches
or need to adjust something, the whole model can fall apart. It just
disappears. You have to unpick everything you did back to the point you did
the original sketch and do it again.

This is a shame because the constraint modelling is actually better than F360.

~~~
bambax
"disappears": there's a kind of weird bug that may be a feature (not sure)
where when you undo something, objects don't display anymore.

But they're still there. Just select them in the model window and press
spacebar and voilà, they're back.

In fact the whole tree of your operations is preserved at all times, and you
can do modifications at the very beginning of the chain without redoing
everything.

~~~
polack
As a total amateur I've run into states where I've been "spacebaring"
everything I can but it still wont work. I believe you when you say it's
possible to fix it, but for people like me that use FreeCAD to do some 3D
models to print once a while it's near impossible to change anything and end
up in a working state.

If I print a simple electronics case and realize I have to move a hole 1mm in
some direction I usually have to rebuild the entire box from the start. When
talking to friends they all have the same problem. I want to love FreeCAD, but
I usually end up hating it.

~~~
RogueScientist
In the part design workbench you can create a sketch, you draw a rectangle and
you can extrude your box to its precise dimensions with a precise wall
thickness.

Then you can create a sketch with your features on the surfaces of the part,
the sketch features such as holes(circles) connector cut outs can be placed
based on a dimensional constraint. Extrude and cut your features.

Now you have a 3D box with your holes where you placed them; now need to move
a hole change the size of the hole, its as simple as editing the dimension the
hole is defined in the sketch, all the other features will update as needed,
and you can layer the dependencies forming a feature tree dependency graph.

Should take about 10 min to create a pretty complex case enclosure.

~~~
polack
I agree, it only takes 10 min to make a pretty complex box. But to make it
nice you usually need fillets, and then you're better off making the design
again then to try to move the hole.

Since it goes fast to make a new box it's not a huge issue. Just incredibly
annoying.

~~~
jononor
Fillets should always be the last operations. That means when one wants to add
more features like holes/pads etc, one should add those to the object _before_
the fillets. Sometimes the fillet operation fails in odd ways though, usually
when the number of edges changes. Then one should re-do that last operation,
either by removing the Fillets and adding again. Or in 0.18 edit the Edges
that the Fillet operation is using in the Property window.

------
langitbiru
CAD software is so expensive.

Rhino is $995. Fusion 360 is $297/year. Solid Works is $3995 with an annual
maintenance fee of $1295.

Let's compare them to photo editing software and the likes.

Adobe cloud subscription is US$52.99/mo (all apps -> Photoshop, Illustrator,
After Effects, etc). If you only need Photoshop, the price is US$20.99/mo.
Affinity Photo is $49.99.

Nah, we have good opensource photo editing softwares like Gimp and Krita, a
good opensource vector editing software like Inkscape.

References:

[https://www.rhino3d.com/sales](https://www.rhino3d.com/sales)

[https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/pricing](https://www.autodesk.com/products/fusion-360/pricing)

[https://www.engineeringclicks.com/solidworks-price-
guide/](https://www.engineeringclicks.com/solidworks-price-guide/)

[https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html#](https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/plans.html#)

[https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/photo/#buy](https://affinity.serif.com/en-
gb/photo/#buy)

~~~
IshKebab
Sure, because CAD software is _dramatically_ more difficult to make than photo
editing software or even video editing software, _and_ it is a more niche
product _and_ it is mainly bought by large companies that can afford it.

Of course it's going to be more expensive. It does suck though. I wish
Solidworks would do an affordable hobby license.

~~~
yardie
They do. For members of experimental Aircraft Association, www.eaa.org. And
now that I know such a thing simply exists I’m completely fascinated with it!

~~~
IshKebab
Yeah I just found that. Unfortunately you cannot export to any non-native
formats with the student edition you can get from there, so not particularly
useful if you want to 3D print or laser cut anything.

~~~
yardie
Thank you. I’ve wanted to start using Solidworks for a long time. Just could
never justify the cost. If you can’t export other formats that’s a big
negative.

I guess I’ll be learning Blender!

~~~
IshKebab
Blender is a completely different thing. You can't do mechanical CAD in
Blender. Don't try.

Honestly given Autodesk's recent crippling of the free version of Fusion 360 I
think the best option is really just to pirate Solidworks.

------
y04nn
I tried to use FreeCAD, I'm new to CAD, and I found it very frustrating, I was
able do to some complex parts but it took me time, it crashed multiples times
and the drawing was not as parametric as I expected it to be (again I'm not an
export).

Now I'm using Solvespace, and I'm very pleased, almost never crashed, sleek
interface, there is a keyboard shortcut for every function, I can easily go
back to a previous sketch to update quotes, it has a short and helpful
documentation, the more you use it the faster you can do things (specially
when you know keyboard shortcuts). It has some drawbacks, it lacks some nice
functionalities you can have with FreeCAD plugins like threads, easy chamfer
and fillet. Also sometimes while drawing a sketch it goes in 3D constrains
mode and I can't extrude, very frustrating.

~~~
TacticalTable
This mirrors my experience, FreeCAD is practically new user hostile and
horrifically buggy. I'm very inexperienced and had really only used Autodesk
Inventor and Fusion360 previously, but FreeCAD was like moving from modern
Photoshop to an early version of Gimp

------
sugarkjube
Freecad is, imho, a terrific project filling a huge void: there are very few
free/open source solutions that are a substitute for the extremely expensive
commercial CAD solutions.

Freecad lags compared to commercial, but gets you a long way if you're
prepared to invest a little effort, and tolerate a few bugs.

I'm not affiliated with freecad in any way, but just want to remark if there
are any students around (or anyone with a little time availabe) reading this
with interest in both engineering and software development, contributing to
freecad could be a very rewarding experience, and probably good basis for a
project or thesis.

~~~
threatripper
Even more important than FreeCAD itself is the geometric modeling kernel.
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_modeling_kernel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_modeling_kernel))

FreeCAD like some other CAD software uses Open CASCADE. As far as I can see,
this kernel is the best available but still a bit rough and unstable in many
areas. (Operations like chamfering often lead to a segfault when it doesn't
like your geometry.) The main problem seems to be a lack of manpower since
development of such a software is a massive effort and takes decades of work
of highly skilled mathematicians/engineers/programmers. So far, FreeCAD has
made a lot of functionality easily accessible but often it is also held back
by bugs in the modeling kernel that can't be fixed any time soon.

If we could boost the development of high quality geometric modeling kernels,
we could provide an essential building block to many software projects that
currently are just not happening because there is no feasible way to get them
started.

~~~
martinpw
> The main problem seems to be a lack of manpower since development of such a
> software is a massive effort and takes decades of work of highly skilled
> mathematicians/engineers/programmers

Point of reference. I interviewed with a large CAD software company some time
ago. As I was being shown around, the interviewer pointed to an area with
maybe 8 developers, and said that was the team that works only on fillets and
blends.

One of the key differentiators of high end CAD is how the packages handle edge
cases (pun intended) when you have massively complex topologies. It's
relatively easy to handle most cases, but there is a long tail of really
tricky situations, and that tends to be where the high end tools shine. It's
going to be really tough to compete with that given the investment required.

~~~
threatripper
I think this is why we need an actively developed open source implementation
that is backed up by multiple universities in multiple countries. It needs to
be so useful and functional that it gains traction in commercial applications
a like Blender does.

------
mnemnc
Coming from Sketchup and being a Software Engineer, parametric design in
FreeCAD is a game changer for me.

For example being able to define a cabinet side length as the outdoor
dimension minus twice the side panel thickness allows you to decide wood
thicknesses after finishing the design without redoing everything.

However, FreeCAD seems to be highly unstable on macOS and Retina screens are
not supported very well.

~~~
mch82
You’re correct that parametric is cool & FreeCAD adds that flexibility.

One note about Sketchup is it encourages choosing standard sized items from
the parts library. Choosing from the library (for example, choosing a standard
2x4 board or a standard door) means you’ll find real-world equivalents at Home
Depot & avoid a lot of cost.

------
samcheng
My favorite part of FreeCAD is that it is scriptable. It's very satisfying to
define shapes via some math (or I/O) in python, then turn them into a solid in
FreeCAD, then export for 3D printing.

As an engineering tool, though, it still feels rudimentary (and sometimes
buggy) compared to e.g. Solidworks. Keep going, guys!

~~~
ehnto
I need a simple, low brain space but open source solution for 3D printing.
Would you recommend FreeCAD?

I am a software dev for a living so what I mean by low brain space is I don't
really want to be messing about with config files, setup and complicated UIs.
I already have far too much brain space dedicated to Blender, but I just can't
seem to get it to work well for precise measurements and CAD style work.

~~~
highmastdon
How about SketchUp?

~~~
mauvehaus
They're slowly crippling it. Make 2017 was (I believe) the last semi full
featured gratis desktop version. They've been pushing the web version pretty
hard for a while now.

Also (opinion) it kind of sucks. At least the gratis version doesn't support
any sort of parametric modeling. I've been using it because it's gratis, but
I've been looking to switch for a while. Now that F360 is off the table, I
suppose the decision space has gotten smaller.

------
RogueScientist
FreeCAD is awesome, and here is why:

1) Open CASCDE geometry kernel, this is the heart of the cad system, for
example Solidworks uses the Parasolid geometry kernel; which is owned by
Siemens.

2\. A powerful data structure; the feature tree that FreeCAD has is object
oriented, and capable of adapting to complex tasks.

3\. GUI written in QT, with a Python interface to instantiate the GUI. This
allows you to load FreeCAD while in Blender and vice versa load Blender from
within FreeCAD; this facilitate the sharing of geometry data, meshes, the
OpenGL geometry pipeline, etc.

4\. Support for Jupyter notebooks, this is important when you are doing
analysis or something complicated and you wish to share and publish that data.
Using SciPy , NumPy, and Octave its like running Matlab + CAD, its so powerful
that you can drive simulations this way directly effecting the FreeCAD GUI.

5\. BREP Internal data structure, in fact when you save a .fcad file
extension, that is essentially a BREP file format, which is essentially a STEP
file(a type of BREP). This is essentially what the professional CAD packages
do, they are BREP with custom data structures.

6\. BREP + STEP allows for extremely precise importing of model geometry. This
allows you to download parts from McMaster, Berg, Pic Design, SDP, etc and use
them in your design and generate a BOM from the precise part bing inserted.

7\. Support for different mesh tessellation methods, this is important since
working with manifold topology that is held internally by Open CASCADE or STEP
can be non trivial mathematically to interpret.

8\. Runs on Linux, OS X, and Windows natively.

9\. Open source, so you are in control of your own destiny.

While FreeCAD has some rough spots around its edges currently, where it will
he in the future if we invest our collective brainpower and knowhow into will
far surpass any offering from Autodesk, Solidworks, as the rate of evolution
of OpenSource compared to closed for profit systems is much more limited. We
can as a community experiment with edgy things and push into new frontiers
with our creativity and imagination and disrupt an entire paradigm the CAD
industry uses today.

Blender already has advanced support of GPU real time ray tracing supported on
the most recent GPU offerings, and is able to harness massively parallel
compute for rendering and ray tracing. We can harness those same capabilities
for an open source CAD platform, and use the GPU compute for the FEA
capabilities.

~~~
taneq
I 100% agree with this. However, FreeCAD is also NOT awesome because it lacks
the 'timeline' approach that Fusion 360 uses and so you end up with a million
random intermediate objects cluttering up your project.

FreeCAD has all the parts to be awesome, it just needs to also work on the
user interface, and especially the novice experience.

This is a universal feature of open source, where unless an individual
contributor has an individual bee in their bonnet about beginner UI, any given
user interface is just slightly less bad than is unusable and would force
someone to fix it. Any 'rough edges for beginners' are ignored because by the
time anyone cares enough to fix the rough edge, they're already an expert and
have found the workaround.

------
NamTaf
FreeCAD is truly impressive and wonderful software, but yeh compared to
commercial solutions it's lacking the same degree of polish (and that's not a
criticsm, considering the price-points!).

Both Dad and I use it at home for our 3D printing modelling, however at work I
get to use SolidWorks and previously have used NX. Compared to them, I think
the most common pinch point for me is how segmented sketches vs extrusions
are. In Solidworks, you literally click a surface (plane, surface face of
parametric solid, etc.) and just draw. Then you grab it and pull it out. It
automagically does all the line constraints, etc. and there's not quite the
same degree of separation as FreeCAD requires, where I have to make a
dedicated sketch in one area, then switch to the other area to do the
extrusion of it. Indeed, this sort of UI polish seems to be where most of my
issues lie, rather than specific features missing.

I get the suspicion that the people working on FreeCAD are probably the ones
who really enjoy writing an elegant parametric modelling program, so they're
all about the engine and the UX becomes a little bit of an afterthought.
That's not to criticise them, but rather highlight that a commerical entity is
able to pay money to get all of those 'less sexy' jobs completed to a high
quality. It's a timely reminder to me that there's a requirement for all types
in a community project, including people who aren't the flashy wunderkind
producing the sexy engineered solutions - you just as much need the person who
puts in the hard and thankless work making all the documentation neat, logical
and consistent.

Nevertheless, I don't think I'll be paying for a SolidWorks licence at home
anytime soon, so I'm really appreciative of everything that the FreeCAD team
has done.

edit: To be clear, if you're wanting to learn CAD then FreeCAD is an admirable
choice and will teach you well. Indeed, some of the extra steps it requires is
probably good from a learning perspective, because it makes you think through
the process more completely and logically. In that sense, the handholding and
coddling of some of the more sophisticated commercial packages can be
detrimental, because you don't really learn how every part goes together
specifically as you're developing your model.

I definitely don't mean any of my post to come across as criticism meant to
deter anyone from trying FreeCAD. I was more trying to draw out the broader
point that all too often, volunteer projects suffer from someone not doing
'the boring job', because using FreeCAD vs. commerical packages reminded me of
that insight.

~~~
leoedin
Are you using the PartDesign workbench? In my experience for simple things
(not 3D sketches) that almost follows the same workflow as Solidworks sketch
-> extrude.

~~~
NamTaf
I should have made it more clear: this may be my inexperience with the
software showing. I guess in SW it flows a bit more smoothly, probably due to
making some (apparently relatively safe) assumptions. For exmaple, when I
click on the surface of an extruded cube to sketch on it, SW will just assume
I'm extruding normally to that surface. I haven't (yet) been able to reproduce
that.

It occurs to me that I might be really wanting some sort of hybrid Part and
Part Design workflow, and that might be my issue.

For example, in PD I go sketch > select plane > sketch a shape > pad it to 3D.
Then I want to extrude a 2nd section out of one of those faces, so I'd in SW
click sketch, and click the face. However, I seem to only be able to click
planes.

I'm sure there's a way to achieve it, however in SW it is trivial - if I click
a surface with any of the sketching tools chosen, it (correctly) guesses that
I want to sketch on that surface, using that surface as the X-Y plane (and
thus extrude using a normal from that surface) and will automagically fill all
that in. I guess that's the main thing I'm getting at, which is why I said it
wasn't a criticism of FreeCAD per se.

~~~
sirn
I'm new to FreeCAD (and have never used other CAD software), but I think in
your case, you can click the face on Part Design view, then click New Sketch.
It will auto-select that plane with placement automatically set to the
selected plane. The UI/UX wasn't very intuitive, though, as it won't work if
you click New Sketch first, then select a plane.

------
Kosirich
I love the idea of FreeCAD and how much value it provides if you don't need
'advanced' stuff. That being said, it often leaves me with impression that UI,
UX could and should be so much better in order to become a go to solution for
hobbyist and licensing cost mindful people. p.s-Anyone here into StepNC
format?

~~~
rjsw
What is your interest in StepNC ?

~~~
Kosirich
I kind of stumbled on it since I work with CAM (recently more so). I was
surprised that I haven't heard of it before since from what I've seen the
framework is mature and the API's seem quite complete (?). The official
channels of ISO standard and especially company steptools.com provide a lot of
info on the framework, but what I'm missing is some more success stories on
implementation in companies (besides the ones that were part of development).
Do you work with it?

~~~
rjsw
The founders of steptools.com are the project leader and editor of StepNC.
Another source of information is the AP238 website [1].

I work on the underlying libraries and tools.

[1] [https://www.ap238.org/](https://www.ap238.org/)

~~~
Kosirich
Yes, forgot about that one (!) ups Thanks for reply, great to get an answer
from someone so close to it :)

------
MarcScott
If anyone is interested in a few tutorials to get started using FreeCAD, we
have a few on the Raspberry Pi Projects site
[https://projects.raspberrypi.org/en/projects?software%5B%5D=...](https://projects.raspberrypi.org/en/projects?software%5B%5D=freecad)

~~~
lsllc
Thanks for posting this, it looks interesting. However, I don't seem to be
able to get FreeCAD to even do things like pan in the sketch view on a Mac
using the trackpad (googling doesn't find any answers either).

~~~
MarcScott
Could you raise an issue on github.com/raspberrypilearning The repo name will
be the project's URL slug. The weekend has started now, and I know I'll forget
this by Monday.

------
osamagirl69
Frecad has come a LONG way since I started using it in 2016, and I encourage
those who had a hard time with it a few years back to give it another try.
Also - make sure you are getting a recent version, some distros have a
tendency to ship a horendously outdated version. The current stable version is
18.4, there should be 19.0 release soon with a ton of improvements, but it is
not quite there yet.

~~~
encom
Is it still a nightmare to compile? It's not in the Gentoo tree, because
aparently, getting FreeCAD to compile cleanly, ~~requires human sacrifice to
The Ancient Ones~~ is quite difficult.

I was forced to use Solidworks last year, as part of a training course, and I
didn't like it at all. I have some Autocad and 3dsmax experience from
admittedly long ago, but the way things are done in Solid felt weird and alien
to me. Not to mention I had to use a Windows machine for it, and after
removing it, it had still left its DRM tentacles deep in the system. Had to
pave the machine to make sure it was all gone.

~~~
osamagirl69
I have never tried to build it, but I imagine it is still a nightmare to
compile. Where I am in life these days I leave that to the package
maintainers.

Solidworks is terrible and chock full of antipatterns. I haven't used autodesk
in a good long while--my last memory with it was pretty bad. I was on a team
that won a design contest from Autodesk--the prize for which was a laptop pre-
loaded with the autodesk suite. The kicker was their software crashed
regularly on that machine even under light use...

------
serf
I hate what Autodesk did with Fusion, but the problems i've ran into while
searching for an alternative are:

1) Most packages don't have any included standards libraries; this makes
modeling a standardized drilled borehole a much more involved affair. It makes
hardware provisioning a more involved affair. Much nicer to have included
libraries for things like, for example, a #6-32 UNC bolt. No need to go find a
bolt and bust out the calipers to verify things like shoulder width and so-on,
it's just there. The F360 and Solidworks parts libraries are both great.
Nearly non-existent on the free/cheaper alternatives.

2) Most CAD/CAM software I have ran into deals with high poly models terribly.
Sure, the solution is to simplify the models, but it's just not a feasible
goal when dealing with very complex assemblies. Fusion/Solidworks deal with
high polygon stuff as gracefully as possible. Onshape becomes nearly unusable.
Freecad gets unstable. I can't comment on complexity with openscad, but it
dealt with modeled parametric bolts and nuts just fine in my case; a case
which lags most clients due to the high poly count on bolt threads.

3) THREADED HOLES. F360 and Solidworks can deal with standardized threads with
ease. Onshape requires a buggy community-written add-on where most standards
must be defined rather than found in a look-up table. OpenSCAD has lots of do-
able thread solutions. Freecad sucks at threads, as far as i've learned thus
far.

So, still, the search continues.

If I had all the resources in the world i'd buy a Solidworks license. I just
like it the best, the simulation packages are nice, the libraries are nice,
the UX is nice -- it just feels like quality. Too bad I can't afford it.

They were nice enough to let me have a trial license for awhile, but after
expiration I was driven to F360 -- which due to recent decisions they've made
I totally regret.

I wish SW had a free/low cost option, but I recognize that if they did it'd
probably compromise the product to the point where i'd no longer be
interested, as much as I hope otherwise.

~~~
noselasd
What did Autodesk do with Fusion ?

~~~
phkahler
>> What did Autodesk do with Fusion ?

They are reducing the features available in the free version. This is actually
a good thing, as it is forcing users to either go commercial or get behind the
actual Free Software alternatives.

------
loughnane
I want to likes FreeCAD, but it’s just not there for reasons mentioned
elsewhere in the thread.

I’ve logged probably thousands of hours in each Solidworks, Pro|engineer (now
creo) and onshape (current favorite), so I’m familiar with the productivity
costs of switching to a new program.

The inefficiencies of FreeCAD is way beyond any switching cost, probably 5x
less efficient to design and iterate.

------
DominikD
FreeCAD saved me a lot of headaches when I bought a flat last year. My wife
wasn't happy with me spending a lot of time drawing stuff by the entresol
ended up exactly as we expected and since I modeled and positioned every piece
of furniture in FreeCAD, only a single power outlet is in a wrong position
(and that's because we got a different locker than we origianly intended).

The bugs are there but you learn to work around them easily. And it's not like
commercial software is bug free as probably anyone dealing with video editing
can attest. ;)

------
numpad0
Also:
[https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD_assembly3/releases](https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD_assembly3/releases)

------
dmos62
If interested in free parametric 3D CAD, checkout SolveSpace:
[http://solvespace.com/index.pl](http://solvespace.com/index.pl)

It's very functional (as in functional programming) in its approach. Weighs in
at only a few megs. It's my go to tool for sketching things out when
woodworking.

------
jeromenerf
I do a lot of woodworking, from timber framing to small furniture and I have
yet to find a convenient software to design projects.

Woodworking may not require the same set of features, the same level of
precision ... For me, doing one shot projects, it is all about "test fitting"
the design, the joints, the cut list, etc.

I find 3D modeling and CAD tools usually complex, time consuming, expensive
with stupid plans and they also take the life breath out of creative projects.
Were I a professional, I may rationalize the time spent and their value if I
had to repeat the same jobs.

I get most of what I need from paper / iPad sketching app (I recommend
concepts app). I had to learn to draw and sketch, but it feels more related to
building than modeling.

Freecad is definitely complex to use (I spend hours learning by designing
dovetailed drawers). Openscad was a better fit for me. I could even integrate
it in org mode :)

~~~
marianov
I'm also interested in the "quick sketch" approach. Is there a tool for rough
things like a shed, a cabinet, welding something out of angle iron or
woodworking? It would take me more time to design shelves in Freecad than to
weld them.

------
klunger
I tried both this and Sketchup for a home modelling project. I ended up paying
for Sketchup because it was so much easier to use. I did not need the degree
of control you can get with FreeCAD, so it was just wasted time and energy.

------
_def
Does anyone know good learning resources when it comes to FreeCAD? (especially
regarding 3d printing)

~~~
samcheng
There are a few decent youtube videos, but I agree - it's a very steep
learning curve.

~~~
bambax
Is it? My workflow:

1\. design in FreeCAD (I only ever use the "Part" menu -- NOT "Part Design")

2\. export to "STL" format

3\. import to Ultimaker Cura

4\. export to gcode

5\. load into printer and print

If your computer is directly connected to the 3D printer you can skip steps 4
and 5 and print directly from within Cura.

FreeCAD can export to gcode but Cura does a much better job of setting printer
options such as infill, etc.

I'm really no expert, I only print small items for prototyping, on a sub-$100
printer, but I don't find it hard. It may be way more difficult if you're
trying to print "perfect" pieces for end use though.

~~~
StavrosK
What's hard is #1 compared to other tools, the rest of the steps you mentioned
are the same everywhere. FreeCAD makes #1 hard, but it's a very very important
tool to exist. I'm looking forward to the day where I switch to it.

~~~
bambax
FreeCAD can import OpenSCAD.

But you can design in FreeCAD with the same approach / workflow as in
OpenSCAD: make elementary shapes, extrude them then join or cut them.

This can be done in the "Part" menu. Just click on the yellow shapes on the
left of the toolbar to create them, then go to their properties to
rotate/extrude them, and select two or more to join or cut.

This is the same brain process as in OpenSCAD.

~~~
StavrosK
I'm not talking about OpenSCAD though. Try OnShape/Fusion360/Solidworks,
FreeCAD is much less usable and featureful than those.

~~~
bambax
Do you actually use any of those?

Solidworks is the standard, but the price is crazy (from $5k to $10k per user
per year).

The online tools I tried I found to be much less usable than FreeCAD. But I
only design simple pieces, so my needs are easy to meet. It's possible that
for complex parts FreeCAD is too limited.

~~~
dcminter
For simple parts for someone willing to use online tools TinkerCad has a much
easier learning curve and is far less buggy.

Unless you need parametric design, want a GUI, and won't use closed source,
FreeCAD is not a good choice.

~~~
bambax
I don't trust online tools to still be there in the future. They can be taken
offline at any time. FreeCAD will still work then.

------
DanGPhoton
Anyone here ever try ironCAD? I've thought about buying a personal license of
a professional CAD package. Solidworks (my most familiar) is too expensive for
personal use. OnShape I'd consider if I could sign up month-by-month and go
dormant. But I'd like an old-school software package that I could keep
indefinitely but knew it could do all my entry-level work.

------
eggy
I use FreeCAD and Solvespace mainly for personal use, but I use Fusion,
Inventor, Solidworks, and Rhino at work with Inventor and Rhino being my two
main CAD programs. We also have Revit and I had been using IDEAS back in 1997.

I love FreeCAD for the Python API, and the now-integrated FEM workbench. I've
done some fun CFD work with this.

I like Fusion, but I do fear a web-based-only CAD. For this reason, I am
looking at Alibre Atom for $199 for personal use. It seems really polished,
easy to use, and it has been around for a while in different incantations.

Solvespace is great for four-bar linkages and other geometrical work, but
there is no way I could spend the time doing a three-hundred part assembly
when I could do it in Fusion or Inventor in much less time, and it could be
shared or worked on by others more readily. Solvespace is amazing for what it
is, and I will continue to use and follow it.

------
andi999
I tried it a while ago, i had 2 problems:

-how do you make assemblies out of parts (sugar on top explosion function) \- derive a technical drawing from the 3D model I could sent to the milling shop

Point 2 is a dealbraker.

I couldnt do it. Maybe it is me. Maybe I didnt find the right documentation,
maybe I didnt understand what I am looking for.

Using TurboCad now, not saying I am happy (docs are lacking, but it seems you
can buy training)

~~~
leoedin
Regarding point 1, there's a bunch of 3rd party assembly plugins (A2+, A3,
A4...), but no standardised assembly workbench yet. Hopefully one of the 3rd
party ones will be accepted as good enough to make the standard one soon. It's
not a great situation for the casual user who just wants to glue parts
together.

There is a project to build one true assembly workbench - but these things
take time.
[https://wiki.freecadweb.org/Assembly_project](https://wiki.freecadweb.org/Assembly_project)

Regarding point 2, there's a workbench called the TechDraw workbench which
allows you to make technical drawings. In my experience it mostly works, with
a few quirks and annoying bugs but nothing deal breaking.

[https://wiki.freecadweb.org/TechDraw_Module](https://wiki.freecadweb.org/TechDraw_Module)

~~~
andi999
Just to point this out: A3, A4 are plugins and not papr sizes?

~~~
jstanley
They're short for "Assembly3", "Assembly4".

------
varbhat
I think that it is good overall to support this project. CAD software that
runs on most Operating Systems unlike AutoCAD.

But, Training Users to use FreeCAD also matters. Also,it would be nice if
FreeCAD can read/write AutoCAD files.

------
fireattack
No Windows binary for 0.19_pre provided despite the description says so?

[https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases/tag/0.19_pre](https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases/tag/0.19_pre)

Bug trakcer [1] says you can only report bugs for 0.19 version, so using an
older version isn't an option.

[1]
[https://tracker.freecadweb.org/my_view_page.php](https://tracker.freecadweb.org/my_view_page.php)

~~~
dekhn
The download is here:
[https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases/tag/0.19_pre](https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases/tag/0.19_pre)
look for FreeCAD_0.19.22411-Win-Conda_vc14.x-x86_64.7z

~~~
fireattack
Thanks, they added it after I asked in the forum. It wasn't there.

------
Buttons840
How does this compare to OpenSCAD?

~~~
threatripper
OpenSCAD:

* You write a script that calls the functions to build the geometry. (Similar to LaTeX vs. Wordprocessor)

* The geometry is defined as a mesh. (Similar to Blender 3D for modeling.)

FreeCAD:

* While it can also handle meshes, the geometry it actually uses a geometric modeling kernel that knows spheres, cylinders, bent surfaces. For 3D printing you would convert it to a mesh when exporting to an STL. (This is a bit like vector vs. pixel graphics.)

* While you can do everything with a script (and sometimes that's more easy) it provides a classical CAD interface where you point and click with your mouse.

* There's a ton of additional functionality via plugins available such as FEM simulation, Architecture, CAM, ...

------
ktn00b
I am trying to create a CAD driven design tool for a farming project. An
equivalent from a different sector would be Helioscope
([https://www.helioscope.com/](https://www.helioscope.com/)) for Solar Plant
planning.

All I know is javascript based web development so am quite lost on where to
start. Tring to google only brings up general purpose CAD tools. Any ideas on
how to go about it?

------
throw0101a
How does it compare to OpenSCAD, which now also has an a story on the front
page:

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24514978](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24514978)

There was a presentation at SCALE 18x earlier this year (pre-shutdown):

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G39tJdmLuAI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G39tJdmLuAI)

------
turpialito
I work with AutoCAD, ACAD Architecture and VectorWorks. I think and hope in
the not-so-long-run FreeCAD will be serious competition for traditio9nal
mainstream/enterprise CAD. That being said, I do agree with some on the fact
that the UI needs a little work, and improved tutorials.

~~~
jventura
Do you know if it's possible to export a house plan in FreeCAD to use on
AutoCAD? I need to draw the 2D floors of my house and send to an architect who
is using AutoCAD..

------
sireat
What would be a reasonable FOSS alternative to Sketchup?

I know a number of architects who are dead set on using Sketchup versions
circa 2014 - 2017 for most of the preliminary work.

It seems to fit their workflow the best.

They only go to AutoCAD when absolutely necessary.

We are talking architects with 20 years of AutoCAD experience.

------
tamber
This is awesome! I should've looked into this kind of thing sooner, I've been
meaning to start playing around with CAD for a while now.

------
jventura
Anyone knows if it's possible to export a house plan in FreeCAD to use on
AutoCAD? I need to draw the 2D floors of my house and send to a professional
architect who is using AutoCAD..

~~~
mch82
[https://wiki.freecadweb.org/DXF#Saving_DXF](https://wiki.freecadweb.org/DXF#Saving_DXF)

------
pjmlp
Looking forward to those promoting FreeCAD given the recent Autodesk Fusion
360 news to actually sponsor FreeCAD developers.

Or is yet another set of free beer posts?

------
quyleanh
Is there any free and open source tool for chip design? I mean the alternative
for Cadence Virtuoso, Synopsys.

~~~
mch82
[http://www.geda-project.org/](http://www.geda-project.org/)

------
grufkork
Haven’t tried FreeCAD, but it kind of sounds like OpenSCAD (openscad.org).
There you only use scripts to generate models which is nice, but a bit too
clunky and slow to iterate. The lack of direct visual feedback makes for a
less intuitive interface. FreeCAD seems a lot better in that aspect, and in
difference to say Fusion360 you can use your models for commercial purposes!

~~~
jstanley
Why do you say it sounds like OpenSCAD? It's not very much like OpenSCAD.

~~~
grufkork
Ah, right, I was under the impression that scripting was an integral part of
the workflow, but with more graphical options for manipulating shapes after
basic generation. But I might very much be mistaken, I haven’t had the chance
to try it yet :)

I will definitely soon though, I am working on making a parametric trumpet
mouthpiece model for 3D printing, which what I have gathered so far FreeCAD
seems great for. The most difficult part is really finding accurate
measurements for sizes and curves, most tables and info only uses relative
sizes like “large” or “thin”. But I can just trace some splines from cross-
sectional sketches.

I have made a model in Fusion which is pretty nice once you get the concept of
constraints. But then there is the massive price tag, the free tier does as
mentioned not allow commercial use. Nobody has to know though...

------
thdrdt
Joko Engineeringhelp (channel with a lot of FreeCAD tutorials) just posted a
video answering questions like: should I learn FreeCAD, can it be used
commercially, how does it compare to industry standard tools?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udIBhVIy5MI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udIBhVIy5MI)

