8 ms·

FreeCAD Arch development news

75 points by buovjaga 9y ago

MichailP 9y ago
I think this project would gain much more traction if it was simple to integrate it within jupyter notebooks. Currently, it is possible, but FreeCAD window pops out outside of browser, or if it is inside the browser the scene is static (no interaction, selecting, zooming etc.) Anybody here knows solution to this?
- kwk1 9y ago
  This was a Google Summer of Code project that didn't get an applicant/accepted this year: https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/IPython_notebook_integration https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/IPython_notebook_integration
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
IshKebab 9y ago
Has anyone tried this recently? I did a few years ago and it wasn't really usable. The only good open source CAD program I've found is SolveSpace (http://solvespace.com/ http://solvespace.com/). It's a bit of a weird program but actually works well.
- galfarragem 9y ago
  The blog post author, according to his architectural studio github [1], uses it "in production". [1] https://github.com/uncreatednet https://github.com/uncreatednet
- bambax 9y ago
  Yes, I use it often. It works pretty well although it's really not perfect. It's the only program I know that's able to directly import files from OpenSCAD. I like to do a rapid sketch on OpenSCAD and then add fillet or chamfer in FreeCAD. It also does good extruding of svg drawings. I have tried other software, from Rhino (>$1000) to Onshape (free) but none match the simplicity of this workflow: openscad or svg to freecad, then export to .step
  - knolan 9y ago
    If you don't really care too much about parametric modelling, blender can import svg, extrude and bevel it quite well. It also has a nifty 3D printing addon that is useful for cleaning up a mesh. I've started using blender almost exclusively for my 3D prints because by the time I spin up my Windows VM and pull a SolidWorks license I would have my mostly simple models done in blender.
    - nine_k 9y ago
      Exactly. I've done a number of furniture projects in Blender.
    - bambax 9y ago
      But I love parametric modelling. I like thinking about elementary shapes (cubes, spheres, cylinders) and inputing them very precisely by setting mm and angles, etc. (really) I have not really tried blender yet; is there a simple tutorial that you would recommend?
      - knolan 9y ago
        You can be pretty precise in blender - you can manipulate geometry to real world units easily. However unlike parametric CAD the geometry is mostly faces, edges and verts. There are a lot of great resources online. BlenderGuru is probably the most popular. This is one I came across here on HN that I like https://learntemail.sam.today/blog/blender-for-hackers-3d-modeling-is-just-like-using-vim/ https://learntemail.sam.today/blog/blender-for-hackers-3d-mo...
- cm2187 9y ago
  I used it last year to do some 3d printing. It is usable but quite unstable, make sure you save regularly.
- victornomad 9y ago
  I used last year for modeling and later 3dprinting and really liked. I had some little problems with some crashes and undoes but otherwise its a really nice software.
- dekhn 9y ago
  Yes. I use version 0.16, as 0.14/0.15 was not usable. 0.16 is fairly good. I used it to design a microscope assembly. It took a ton of time to learn all the features required but once i did, it was fairly straightforward. I'd probably switch to Inventor or something else if I had the time (my coworkers use OnShape, which looks good enough for the basic stuff we do). To me the advantage of FreeCAD is, well, it's free, and it runs on all the major platforms (IE I don't have to leave Linux to use it).
  - delhanty 9y ago
    FreeCAD is great because it's free as in freedom. The technical weak point that will always hold it back is the kernel, Open CASCADE, when compared with Parasolid, which powers OnShape. Parasolid is in effect subsidized by the Industrial-Military complex. It was started in 1987 - around 20 developers then. [1] I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2] Disclaimer: Parasolid dev 1989-1995. [1] That doesn't include customer support etc - IIRC department headcount was over 40. [2] To quote GrabCAD founder Hardi Meybaum in his Kindle ebook The Art of Product Design: "Although Siemens is a public company the PLM division is such a small part of its total business that very little financial information specific to the PLM division is released."
    - nickpsecurity 9y ago
      "I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2]" You make it sound like a bad thing when it's actually a solution. What you in effect said was there is a pile of money in defense contracts that can be used to subsidize development of FOSS tools. Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). Whoever was trying to make FOSS CAD happen didn't do this and still isn't. If they want high-quality CAD, they need to figure out how to get defense sector funding paid, skilled programmers to build the hardest parts with easy extensions by volunteering contributors. I've seen enough people in defense sector griping online about low-quality CAD tools they have that there's certainly demand. Probably just needs to be priced much lower than a lot of the others.
- Sir_Substance 9y ago
  >Has anyone tried this recently? I did a few years ago and it wasn't really usable. I use it on the regular for making small mechanical parts for 3d printing. When I was on windows I used autodesk inventor for this, but that doesn't work on linux, so here I am. It's certainly got some issues, but they can be sidestepped with some basic experience. I wouldn't recommend it to an engineering design firm, but I'd happily suggest it to a student startup, at least to try and see if it works for them before they spring several grand for autodesk. Mostly I'm just happy that it continues to be worked on, and look forward to each new version.
- kwk1 9y ago
  The development is moving along at a good rate [1] so if you haven't tried it lately, give 0.16 or even 0.17-dev a shot if you're brave enough to try compiling [2][3][4], there have been 4500+ commits since 0.16 with a lot of improvements. [1] https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/graphs/contributors https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/graphs/contributors [2] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnWindows https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnWindows [3] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnUnix https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnUnix [4] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnMac https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnMac
- wbl 9y ago
  BRL-CAD has been used seriously for many decades, but is more of a geometry modeling program.
  - nmz787 9y ago
    I use BRL-CAD for 3D modelling via Python (https://github.com/nmz787/python-brlcad-tcl https://github.com/nmz787/python-brlcad-tcl)... using it for the base CAD tool for my nano/MEMS fabrication pipeline
- pawadu 9y ago
  I have used it in a couple of projects and I find it very usable. I only have two issues with freecad 1. the constant switching between workspaces is annoying. we need less workspaces, better tools. 2. important functions such as assembly have been in development for years and are still not ready for use
  - jononor 9y ago
    You can customize a workspace, or create your own. https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Customize_Toolbars https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Customize_Toolbars
buovjaga 9y ago
My hat is off to LulzBot creators Aleph Objects for sponsoring FreeCAD development in addition to the two full time Blender devs. Maybe someone knows, if there are even more FOSS 3D projects they are funding?
- hugs 9y ago
  They also have sponsored Slic3r. (http://slic3r.org/donations http://slic3r.org/donations)
usernam 9y ago
I keep trying FreeCAD every 3-6 months, but it's so full of little bugs and crashes it's not really usable in my mind. I'm using the version from Debian unstable. The UI is unstable (very easy to crash just by fiddling around), and the geometric kernel has a ton of little issues that you have to work around. At every new project I have the liberty of giving it a try without many constraints (no import/export required, minimal assemblies of elementary geometry). I really wonder how can you actually go through the relatively complex projects I've seen as a tutorial, really. I would always give up after a dozen crashes. I've used SolveSpace in at least 4 projects, and I absolutely love it. The UI is different than FreeCAD, but in a very positive way (after learning the basics, I genuinely prefer SolveSpace's a dozen times!). It's a bit sad that SolveSpace's kernel is definitely inferior in terms of capability to FreeCAD (notably: no offsets and no chamfers!), but what is supported _is_ stable. I cannot say the same in FreeCAD, where chamfers would sometimes cause degenerate geometry or downright crash. The only minor complaint in SolveSpace is that currently it's not always obvious to see the construction tree, as it's represented linearly. I bought a copy of VariCAD that I use on linux. But while it's certainly a capable CAD, I really don't like the UI, and the parametric modeling is clunky at best. I don't think there's much more available in terms of parametric modeling on linux if we exclude prohibitive stuff like NX. I'd like to be proved wrong here. I still think the best modeler I've ever used is still Rhino, a joy to work with. But while it supported parametric surfaces, it didn't really allow parametric modeling when I last used it.
- delhanty 9y ago
  >but it's so full of little bugs and crashes it's not really usable in my mind See my comment below comparing Open CASCADE with Parasolid. Developing B-rep modeling kernels with support for curved surfaces is very labor intensive.
  - usernam 9y ago
    I know and cannot deny the enormous effort of OCE. I tried to develop a simpler parametric 2d cad once for almost two years, but couldn't keep up with the complexity before getting myself /something/ I could use. This is why I keep trying. FreeCAD is the closest package we got to a decent CAD in an OSS package, and I cannot wait to avoid using closed software in my designs. But I'm just stating facts here: I couldn't follow the tutorial without incurring in crashes. I similarly tried CadQuery, but incurred with mostly the same issues. But like I said, the issues are also on the UI, not just on the OCE engine. UNDO management is often completely broken. Undoing line properties for instance used to only partially revert line properties, but revert previous geometry changes as a side effect. I got crashes just by toggling snapping states (even before hovering over the geometry that would cause some actual computation to be done). I thought I could help on those issues, but the build process involving OCE is time consuming and requires some non-trivial time investment before you can become an effective contributor (as for most large projects - cannot blame anyone here). I occasionally use FreeCAD also as a simple 2d (non-parametric) CAD package. Still very frustrating. You would think we had more options for 2d drafting, but not really. I do not consider qcad/librecad to be real CAD packages. They're like toys in my eyes. I used inkscape (yes...) with greater results.
delhanty 9y ago
I think this a smart pivot for FreeCAD: from MCAD to Arch. The weak point in the kernel (Open CASCADE) is curved surfaces (and associated nightmare case analysis for blends/fillets/chamfers).. They just aren't that important in Arch. For example, SketchUp doesn't have them at all. So now we have in free (as in freedom) software: Arch CAD: FreeCAD - history based parametric architectural CAD - with no curved surfaces. MCAD: Solvespace - direct modeling with streamlined NURBS only kernel.
- jononor 9y ago
  Don't think this can be considered a pivot, just a couple of people putting extra effort into the Arch side of things. CAM (Path module) and a revamp of Part Design are (with groundwork for Assembly) are also happening in 0.17

75 points by buovjaga 9y ago

I think this project would gain much more traction if it was simple to integrate it within jupyter notebooks. Currently, it is possible, but FreeCAD window pops out outside of browser, or if it is inside the browser the scene is static (no interaction, selecting, zooming etc.) Anybody here knows solution to this?

kwk1 9y ago
This was a Google Summer of Code project that didn't get an applicant/accepted this year: https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/IPython_notebook_integration https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/IPython_notebook_integration

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

IshKebab 9y ago

Has anyone tried this recently? I did a few years ago and it wasn't really usable. The only good open source CAD program I've found is SolveSpace (http://solvespace.com/ http://solvespace.com/). It's a bit of a weird program but actually works well.

galfarragem 9y ago
The blog post author, according to his architectural studio github [1], uses it "in production". [1] https://github.com/uncreatednet https://github.com/uncreatednet
bambax 9y ago
Yes, I use it often. It works pretty well although it's really not perfect. It's the only program I know that's able to directly import files from OpenSCAD. I like to do a rapid sketch on OpenSCAD and then add fillet or chamfer in FreeCAD. It also does good extruding of svg drawings. I have tried other software, from Rhino (>$1000) to Onshape (free) but none match the simplicity of this workflow: openscad or svg to freecad, then export to .step
- knolan 9y ago
  If you don't really care too much about parametric modelling, blender can import svg, extrude and bevel it quite well. It also has a nifty 3D printing addon that is useful for cleaning up a mesh. I've started using blender almost exclusively for my 3D prints because by the time I spin up my Windows VM and pull a SolidWorks license I would have my mostly simple models done in blender.
  - nine_k 9y ago
    Exactly. I've done a number of furniture projects in Blender.
  - bambax 9y ago
    But I love parametric modelling. I like thinking about elementary shapes (cubes, spheres, cylinders) and inputing them very precisely by setting mm and angles, etc. (really) I have not really tried blender yet; is there a simple tutorial that you would recommend?
    - knolan 9y ago
      You can be pretty precise in blender - you can manipulate geometry to real world units easily. However unlike parametric CAD the geometry is mostly faces, edges and verts. There are a lot of great resources online. BlenderGuru is probably the most popular. This is one I came across here on HN that I like https://learntemail.sam.today/blog/blender-for-hackers-3d-modeling-is-just-like-using-vim/ https://learntemail.sam.today/blog/blender-for-hackers-3d-mo...
cm2187 9y ago
I used it last year to do some 3d printing. It is usable but quite unstable, make sure you save regularly.
victornomad 9y ago
I used last year for modeling and later 3dprinting and really liked. I had some little problems with some crashes and undoes but otherwise its a really nice software.
dekhn 9y ago
Yes. I use version 0.16, as 0.14/0.15 was not usable. 0.16 is fairly good. I used it to design a microscope assembly. It took a ton of time to learn all the features required but once i did, it was fairly straightforward. I'd probably switch to Inventor or something else if I had the time (my coworkers use OnShape, which looks good enough for the basic stuff we do). To me the advantage of FreeCAD is, well, it's free, and it runs on all the major platforms (IE I don't have to leave Linux to use it).
- delhanty 9y ago
  FreeCAD is great because it's free as in freedom. The technical weak point that will always hold it back is the kernel, Open CASCADE, when compared with Parasolid, which powers OnShape. Parasolid is in effect subsidized by the Industrial-Military complex. It was started in 1987 - around 20 developers then. [1] I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2] Disclaimer: Parasolid dev 1989-1995. [1] That doesn't include customer support etc - IIRC department headcount was over 40. [2] To quote GrabCAD founder Hardi Meybaum in his Kindle ebook The Art of Product Design: "Although Siemens is a public company the PLM division is such a small part of its total business that very little financial information specific to the PLM division is released."
  - nickpsecurity 9y ago
    "I would guess (conservatively) that they have at least 10 developers still working on it now in 2017. An average of 15 developers over 30 years - gives around 450 person-years - all paid for by the Industrial-Military complex that funds the opaque behemoth that is Siemens PLM. [2]" You make it sound like a bad thing when it's actually a solution. What you in effect said was there is a pile of money in defense contracts that can be used to subsidize development of FOSS tools. Some people are doing this (esp Galois Inc). Whoever was trying to make FOSS CAD happen didn't do this and still isn't. If they want high-quality CAD, they need to figure out how to get defense sector funding paid, skilled programmers to build the hardest parts with easy extensions by volunteering contributors. I've seen enough people in defense sector griping online about low-quality CAD tools they have that there's certainly demand. Probably just needs to be priced much lower than a lot of the others.
Sir_Substance 9y ago
>Has anyone tried this recently? I did a few years ago and it wasn't really usable. I use it on the regular for making small mechanical parts for 3d printing. When I was on windows I used autodesk inventor for this, but that doesn't work on linux, so here I am. It's certainly got some issues, but they can be sidestepped with some basic experience. I wouldn't recommend it to an engineering design firm, but I'd happily suggest it to a student startup, at least to try and see if it works for them before they spring several grand for autodesk. Mostly I'm just happy that it continues to be worked on, and look forward to each new version.
kwk1 9y ago
The development is moving along at a good rate [1] so if you haven't tried it lately, give 0.16 or even 0.17-dev a shot if you're brave enough to try compiling [2][3][4], there have been 4500+ commits since 0.16 with a lot of improvements. [1] https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/graphs/contributors https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/graphs/contributors [2] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnWindows https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnWindows [3] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnUnix https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnUnix [4] https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnMac https://freecadweb.org/wiki/CompileOnMac
wbl 9y ago
BRL-CAD has been used seriously for many decades, but is more of a geometry modeling program.
- nmz787 9y ago
  I use BRL-CAD for 3D modelling via Python (https://github.com/nmz787/python-brlcad-tcl https://github.com/nmz787/python-brlcad-tcl)... using it for the base CAD tool for my nano/MEMS fabrication pipeline
pawadu 9y ago
I have used it in a couple of projects and I find it very usable. I only have two issues with freecad 1. the constant switching between workspaces is annoying. we need less workspaces, better tools. 2. important functions such as assembly have been in development for years and are still not ready for use
- jononor 9y ago
  You can customize a workspace, or create your own. https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Customize_Toolbars https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Customize_Toolbars

buovjaga 9y ago

My hat is off to LulzBot creators Aleph Objects for sponsoring FreeCAD development in addition to the two full time Blender devs. Maybe someone knows, if there are even more FOSS 3D projects they are funding?

hugs 9y ago
They also have sponsored Slic3r. (http://slic3r.org/donations http://slic3r.org/donations)

usernam 9y ago

I keep trying FreeCAD every 3-6 months, but it's so full of little bugs and crashes it's not really usable in my mind. I'm using the version from Debian unstable. The UI is unstable (very easy to crash just by fiddling around), and the geometric kernel has a ton of little issues that you have to work around. At every new project I have the liberty of giving it a try without many constraints (no import/export required, minimal assemblies of elementary geometry). I really wonder how can you actually go through the relatively complex projects I've seen as a tutorial, really. I would always give up after a dozen crashes. I've used SolveSpace in at least 4 projects, and I absolutely love it. The UI is different than FreeCAD, but in a very positive way (after learning the basics, I genuinely prefer SolveSpace's a dozen times!). It's a bit sad that SolveSpace's kernel is definitely inferior in terms of capability to FreeCAD (notably: no offsets and no chamfers!), but what is supported _is_ stable. I cannot say the same in FreeCAD, where chamfers would sometimes cause degenerate geometry or downright crash. The only minor complaint in SolveSpace is that currently it's not always obvious to see the construction tree, as it's represented linearly. I bought a copy of VariCAD that I use on linux. But while it's certainly a capable CAD, I really don't like the UI, and the parametric modeling is clunky at best. I don't think there's much more available in terms of parametric modeling on linux if we exclude prohibitive stuff like NX. I'd like to be proved wrong here. I still think the best modeler I've ever used is still Rhino, a joy to work with. But while it supported parametric surfaces, it didn't really allow parametric modeling when I last used it.

delhanty 9y ago
>but it's so full of little bugs and crashes it's not really usable in my mind See my comment below comparing Open CASCADE with Parasolid. Developing B-rep modeling kernels with support for curved surfaces is very labor intensive.
- usernam 9y ago
  I know and cannot deny the enormous effort of OCE. I tried to develop a simpler parametric 2d cad once for almost two years, but couldn't keep up with the complexity before getting myself /something/ I could use. This is why I keep trying. FreeCAD is the closest package we got to a decent CAD in an OSS package, and I cannot wait to avoid using closed software in my designs. But I'm just stating facts here: I couldn't follow the tutorial without incurring in crashes. I similarly tried CadQuery, but incurred with mostly the same issues. But like I said, the issues are also on the UI, not just on the OCE engine. UNDO management is often completely broken. Undoing line properties for instance used to only partially revert line properties, but revert previous geometry changes as a side effect. I got crashes just by toggling snapping states (even before hovering over the geometry that would cause some actual computation to be done). I thought I could help on those issues, but the build process involving OCE is time consuming and requires some non-trivial time investment before you can become an effective contributor (as for most large projects - cannot blame anyone here). I occasionally use FreeCAD also as a simple 2d (non-parametric) CAD package. Still very frustrating. You would think we had more options for 2d drafting, but not really. I do not consider qcad/librecad to be real CAD packages. They're like toys in my eyes. I used inkscape (yes...) with greater results.

delhanty 9y ago

I think this a smart pivot for FreeCAD: from MCAD to Arch. The weak point in the kernel (Open CASCADE) is curved surfaces (and associated nightmare case analysis for blends/fillets/chamfers).. They just aren't that important in Arch. For example, SketchUp doesn't have them at all. So now we have in free (as in freedom) software: Arch CAD: FreeCAD - history based parametric architectural CAD - with no curved surfaces. MCAD: Solvespace - direct modeling with streamlined NURBS only kernel.

jononor 9y ago
Don't think this can be considered a pivot, just a couple of people putting extra effort into the Arch side of things. CAM (Path module) and a revamp of Part Design are (with groundwork for Assembly) are also happening in 0.17