3 ms·

I have been using FreeCAD for a while for real projects where I would have used Inventor. My assemblies and parts are not huge, and being able to write things i

by eggy 9y ago

I have been using FreeCAD for a while for real projects where I would have used Inventor. My assemblies and parts are not huge, and being able to write things in python is awesome. You can even use FreeCAD without the gui from python. I am currently trying to get FreeDyn, a multibody dynamics simulation program to work with it [1]. I have used the FEM workbench to do simple FEAs too. It's an amazingly open platform with a lot of potential. [1] http://www.freedyn.at/

kwk1 9y ago
> I am currently trying to get FreeDyn, a multibody dynamics simulation program to work with it [1]. I have used the FEM workbench to do simple FEAs too. It's an amazingly open platform with a lot of potential. That would be really cool! I know there is a lot of interest in e.g. a kinematics workbench.
JamesCoyne 9y ago
How do you handle assemblies efficiently? I found the assembly workbench to be a major weakness of FreeCad when compared to Solidworks or Inventor.
- eggy 9y ago
  Typically I am not working on assemblies of more than 10 to 20 parts. You're right though, Inventor and Solidworks do handle them better, but with a lot of complexity that scales better when you are working on assemblies and subassemblies of over 100 parts or more. I used to work on machinery with more parts, but now I work on sub assemblies with fewer parts. The assembly workbench will improve when people who have a need for it improve it in FreeCAD. I used to do assemblies with CSG over 15 years ago, and it was complicated, but I was very frustrated in the early days of Inventor when you went down a path, and then found yourself painted in a corner by the history or constraint tree. Changing one thing, and watching it all blow up was my first letdown after jumping on the parametric/history modeling bandwagon (I also used SolidWorks and IDEAS). FreeCAD has come a long way, and I use it more often than before. Quick startup times and fast working with a great Python API (I used to program AutoLISP for comparison).

by eggy 9y ago

kwk1 9y ago

> I am currently trying to get FreeDyn, a multibody dynamics simulation program to work with it [1]. I have used the FEM workbench to do simple FEAs too. It's an amazingly open platform with a lot of potential. That would be really cool! I know there is a lot of interest in e.g. a kinematics workbench.

JamesCoyne 9y ago

How do you handle assemblies efficiently? I found the assembly workbench to be a major weakness of FreeCad when compared to Solidworks or Inventor.

eggy 9y ago
Typically I am not working on assemblies of more than 10 to 20 parts. You're right though, Inventor and Solidworks do handle them better, but with a lot of complexity that scales better when you are working on assemblies and subassemblies of over 100 parts or more. I used to work on machinery with more parts, but now I work on sub assemblies with fewer parts. The assembly workbench will improve when people who have a need for it improve it in FreeCAD. I used to do assemblies with CSG over 15 years ago, and it was complicated, but I was very frustrated in the early days of Inventor when you went down a path, and then found yourself painted in a corner by the history or constraint tree. Changing one thing, and watching it all blow up was my first letdown after jumping on the parametric/history modeling bandwagon (I also used SolidWorks and IDEAS). FreeCAD has come a long way, and I use it more often than before. Quick startup times and fast working with a great Python API (I used to program AutoLISP for comparison).