10 ms·

CAD Sketcher, free and open-source project bringing CAD like tools to Blender3d

336 points by lastdong 4y ago

Avlin67 4y ago
so after a few minutes of trial, I have to admit I did finally have a proper way to CAD on windows. Constraint sketching on open source, well, did try all options, at least now I can do it. Also the last version of blender did improve accessibility
codetrotter 4y ago
GitHub link is https://github.com/hlorus/CAD_Sketcher https://github.com/hlorus/CAD_Sketcher for anyone else looking for it
sschueller 4y ago
This is awesome, I have been struggling with FreeCAD after switching from Fusion 360. However I find blender a joy to work with for 3d art so I have to give this a try.
- hummus_bae 4y ago
  Thanks! And welcome to the CAD-Sketcher users community :) I hope you will continue to stay with us :)
ranting-moth 4y ago
If Blender and FreeCAD could have a baby together then that would be amazing baby.
- progbits 4y ago
  Blender has nice UX (the new versions, used to be horrible) but sadly what is holding opensource CAD back for me is the poor constraints and parametric modeling backend. Anything beyond simple polyhedra and booleans runs into a problem. Fillets, chamfers, sweeps and lofts don't work well. It's a shame.
  - ezst 4y ago
    Things have improved quite a bit in the latest freecad versions, and I remember reading somewhere that the next one promises to solve whatever's left over. My biggest gripe with freecad isn't necessarily that (it's easy enough to work around), but that going back few steps to edit things and apply it forward is very fragile. There are ideas floating around to better handle this workflow but we'll have to see how well that goes (it's probably a very difficult problem to solve with no general solution). In the meantime this gives me a lot of frustration and rework, but, running on Linux, there's no real alternative as far as I can see.
    - jstanley 4y ago
      There is certainly no general solution. Consider: You make a base sketch and pad it up to create a square part with a single hole in the centre. You chamfer the hole. You change the base sketch so that it is now a rectangular part with 2 holes, 1 at the left and 1 at the right. Should the chamfer apply to the left hole, the right hole, or both holes? Obviously there are special cases that FreeCAD doesn't currently handle optimally, but a general solution is impossible without FreeCAD reading your mind. (You could also asy "any of those 3 options is better than trying to apply the chamfer to a random bit of un-chamferable geometry". But a general solution is still impossible.).
      - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
        The chamfer applies to the first hole only, unless it is a copy of the first. Any changes to the first hole only apply to the first hole, unless that second hole is a linked copy of the first. ____ Is there an argument against this general solution?
        jstanley 4y ago
        Who's to say which hole is the "first"?
        4y ago
ezst 4y ago
I'm super glad this exists, this space definitely needs compelling open source alternatives to bring back the hobbyists scene from proprietary offerings (mostly fusion360), and every effort should be encouraged since this is a very difficult nut to crack. I known my way around CAD software and so I gave this a shot around 4 months ago, but it looked frankly alien and relied a lot on blender idiosyncrasies and baggage that most people with a CAD background would likely be missing. Basic things were hard to find and simple things were hard to do. I also had doubts that the foundations are sound (whatever engine props this up seems to be using floating point numbers instead of parametric equations, so things like pockets on top of coincident lines would incorrectly leave infinitesimal volumes of material). I should give it a new look but the road ahead will likely be very long.
- BMc2020 4y ago
  Autodesk has gone out of their way to destroy free F360. I finally quit when you had to reload the free version with a new account every 30 days. Forcing Eagle into F360 was just evil. Trying to use either is the hobbits being shown Frodo's clothes levels of anguish and despair. This may make me look at Blender again (too hard to learn at the time). Designspark Mechanical isn't too bad if you have become an F360 refugee.
  - eropple 4y ago
    FWIW, "reload the free version with a new account every 30 days" does not match my experience with Fusion 360. Can you explain more? Don't get me wrong, I am not a big fan of it, but it does (mostly) work.
    - BMc2020 4y ago
      Your Term Has Expired You can still administer your teams, but you now have 'basic' access to Fusion. If you would like to restore full access, click Subscribe Now. With basic access you can still: View projects Comment on and mark up files Download files It used to be you had to switch every year. But the ts and cs are buried on the web site if they are public at all. You have have it installed to see your license details, which I no longer do.
Avlin67 4y ago
The addon utilizes the solver from solvespace (...) This is really nice, a proper solver So you get a really good solver and a really good 3D engine
samwillis 4y ago
I always love to see these projects attempting to create an Open-source parametric CAD tool, but I think they will never get the the level of functionality and stability required. The fundamental issue for all of them is the lack of a robust open source "parametric CAD kernel", these the the central core that understands BREP and implements the geometric operations. The most widely used kernel is OpenCascade, the kernel used by FreeCad. However it is outdated, unstable and limited in significant ways with no realistic future prospects. It is unfortunately the limiting factor of FreeCads functionality and prevents any serious use of it. The most widely used commercial kernel is Parasolid, used in many packages including SolidWorks, OnSpace, and NX. What I would love to see is Siemens adopting a model similar to some of the game engines (Unreal and Unity) where it's free up until a revenue limit. Opening up Parasolid for "free" open source and small commercial operations would be both brilliant for society but also for Siemens, it would only result in a growth in the use of Parasolid and increased revenue.
- nine_k 4y ago
  To have access to something commercial for free may be nice. The ideals of free software though call to produce free and open code because it remains free, open, and available. Siemens, were it to graciously offer some free tier access, would be also in a position to limit or withdraw such access at any moment. (This even applies to the paid licenses.) However limited OpenCascade is, it's here, and it's usable, up to a point. I hope that a successor to it will emerge, if there's a need.
- traverseda 4y ago
  >these the the central core that understands BREP and implements the geometric operations. I've seen people quote a good modern CAD kernal as a 100 man year project. It's probably not going to happen, maybe there's some avenue for government funding? Alternatively Signed-Distance-Functions are pretty nice. They're not BREP, but they're a lot easier to implement, and it might be possible to shove them into a BREP-shaped hole. Here's a signed-distance-function based CAD kernal written in a few thousand lines of python+numpy, that seems to be about as fast as openscad. Maybe faster. https://github.com/fogleman/sdf https://github.com/fogleman/sdf
Avlin67 4y ago
but I try really hard to cut a circle in arcs with intersecting lines but it looks impossible
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
Avlin67 4y ago
also the nice things, lots of quality videos on youtube about it
fIREpOK 4y ago
Blender is great when you get used to it... specially if you have a 3D printer... CAD is what is/was missing. You can even do similar to parametric editing aka non destructive editing workflow. Geometric nodes are great too.
dsign 4y ago
I'm glad that Blender is getting some CAD-like workflows, they allow to create types of models which are very hard otherwise. I had to disburse some cash, but I've been complementing Blender with Rhino 3D for a few months now and it's a good mix. Blender is amazing for meshes and renders and animations, Rhino 3D is an amazing BRep modeller and both Grasshopper and Kangaroo 2 help in "getting just the right look".
- eggy 4y ago
  The same for me. I love Rhino, and Rhino8 will have RhinoCode that I can use with F# instead of C# or Python. I was one of about 50 to 100 people who gave money back in early 2000s to take Blender opensource, and I used it to create wood carvings from photos using a shape-from-shading algorithm originally developed by NASA(?) to extract more information from single-lens, greyscale satelite imagery. I also used it to create other useful tools for myself. I am glad to see this CAD Sketcher developed, but as a long-time CAD user, I don't think it will reach critical mass or technical ability to compete with things like Fusion 360 ($400/year) but it includes so much - simulation, FEA, rendering, and a bunch of other goodies in a focused, minimal gui.

336 points by lastdong 4y ago

so after a few minutes of trial, I have to admit I did finally have a proper way to CAD on windows. Constraint sketching on open source, well, did try all options, at least now I can do it. Also the last version of blender did improve accessibility

codetrotter 4y ago

GitHub link is https://github.com/hlorus/CAD_Sketcher https://github.com/hlorus/CAD_Sketcher for anyone else looking for it

sschueller 4y ago

This is awesome, I have been struggling with FreeCAD after switching from Fusion 360. However I find blender a joy to work with for 3d art so I have to give this a try.

hummus_bae 4y ago
Thanks! And welcome to the CAD-Sketcher users community :) I hope you will continue to stay with us :)

ranting-moth 4y ago

If Blender and FreeCAD could have a baby together then that would be amazing baby.

progbits 4y ago
Blender has nice UX (the new versions, used to be horrible) but sadly what is holding opensource CAD back for me is the poor constraints and parametric modeling backend. Anything beyond simple polyhedra and booleans runs into a problem. Fillets, chamfers, sweeps and lofts don't work well. It's a shame.
- ezst 4y ago
  Things have improved quite a bit in the latest freecad versions, and I remember reading somewhere that the next one promises to solve whatever's left over. My biggest gripe with freecad isn't necessarily that (it's easy enough to work around), but that going back few steps to edit things and apply it forward is very fragile. There are ideas floating around to better handle this workflow but we'll have to see how well that goes (it's probably a very difficult problem to solve with no general solution). In the meantime this gives me a lot of frustration and rework, but, running on Linux, there's no real alternative as far as I can see.
  - jstanley 4y ago
    There is certainly no general solution. Consider: You make a base sketch and pad it up to create a square part with a single hole in the centre. You chamfer the hole. You change the base sketch so that it is now a rectangular part with 2 holes, 1 at the left and 1 at the right. Should the chamfer apply to the left hole, the right hole, or both holes? Obviously there are special cases that FreeCAD doesn't currently handle optimally, but a general solution is impossible without FreeCAD reading your mind. (You could also asy "any of those 3 options is better than trying to apply the chamfer to a random bit of un-chamferable geometry". But a general solution is still impossible.).
    - TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
      The chamfer applies to the first hole only, unless it is a copy of the first. Any changes to the first hole only apply to the first hole, unless that second hole is a linked copy of the first. ____ Is there an argument against this general solution?
      - jstanley 4y ago
        Who's to say which hole is the "first"?
        4y ago

ezst 4y ago

I'm super glad this exists, this space definitely needs compelling open source alternatives to bring back the hobbyists scene from proprietary offerings (mostly fusion360), and every effort should be encouraged since this is a very difficult nut to crack. I known my way around CAD software and so I gave this a shot around 4 months ago, but it looked frankly alien and relied a lot on blender idiosyncrasies and baggage that most people with a CAD background would likely be missing. Basic things were hard to find and simple things were hard to do. I also had doubts that the foundations are sound (whatever engine props this up seems to be using floating point numbers instead of parametric equations, so things like pockets on top of coincident lines would incorrectly leave infinitesimal volumes of material). I should give it a new look but the road ahead will likely be very long.

BMc2020 4y ago
Autodesk has gone out of their way to destroy free F360. I finally quit when you had to reload the free version with a new account every 30 days. Forcing Eagle into F360 was just evil. Trying to use either is the hobbits being shown Frodo's clothes levels of anguish and despair. This may make me look at Blender again (too hard to learn at the time). Designspark Mechanical isn't too bad if you have become an F360 refugee.
- eropple 4y ago
  FWIW, "reload the free version with a new account every 30 days" does not match my experience with Fusion 360. Can you explain more? Don't get me wrong, I am not a big fan of it, but it does (mostly) work.
  - BMc2020 4y ago
    Your Term Has Expired You can still administer your teams, but you now have 'basic' access to Fusion. If you would like to restore full access, click Subscribe Now. With basic access you can still: View projects Comment on and mark up files Download files It used to be you had to switch every year. But the ts and cs are buried on the web site if they are public at all. You have have it installed to see your license details, which I no longer do.

Avlin67 4y ago

The addon utilizes the solver from solvespace (...) This is really nice, a proper solver So you get a really good solver and a really good 3D engine

samwillis 4y ago

I always love to see these projects attempting to create an Open-source parametric CAD tool, but I think they will never get the the level of functionality and stability required. The fundamental issue for all of them is the lack of a robust open source "parametric CAD kernel", these the the central core that understands BREP and implements the geometric operations. The most widely used kernel is OpenCascade, the kernel used by FreeCad. However it is outdated, unstable and limited in significant ways with no realistic future prospects. It is unfortunately the limiting factor of FreeCads functionality and prevents any serious use of it. The most widely used commercial kernel is Parasolid, used in many packages including SolidWorks, OnSpace, and NX. What I would love to see is Siemens adopting a model similar to some of the game engines (Unreal and Unity) where it's free up until a revenue limit. Opening up Parasolid for "free" open source and small commercial operations would be both brilliant for society but also for Siemens, it would only result in a growth in the use of Parasolid and increased revenue.

nine_k 4y ago
To have access to something commercial for free may be nice. The ideals of free software though call to produce free and open code because it remains free, open, and available. Siemens, were it to graciously offer some free tier access, would be also in a position to limit or withdraw such access at any moment. (This even applies to the paid licenses.) However limited OpenCascade is, it's here, and it's usable, up to a point. I hope that a successor to it will emerge, if there's a need.
traverseda 4y ago
>these the the central core that understands BREP and implements the geometric operations. I've seen people quote a good modern CAD kernal as a 100 man year project. It's probably not going to happen, maybe there's some avenue for government funding? Alternatively Signed-Distance-Functions are pretty nice. They're not BREP, but they're a lot easier to implement, and it might be possible to shove them into a BREP-shaped hole. Here's a signed-distance-function based CAD kernal written in a few thousand lines of python+numpy, that seems to be about as fast as openscad. Maybe faster. https://github.com/fogleman/sdf https://github.com/fogleman/sdf

Avlin67 4y ago

but I try really hard to cut a circle in arcs with intersecting lines but it looks impossible

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Avlin67 4y ago

also the nice things, lots of quality videos on youtube about it

fIREpOK 4y ago

Blender is great when you get used to it... specially if you have a 3D printer... CAD is what is/was missing. You can even do similar to parametric editing aka non destructive editing workflow. Geometric nodes are great too.

dsign 4y ago

I'm glad that Blender is getting some CAD-like workflows, they allow to create types of models which are very hard otherwise. I had to disburse some cash, but I've been complementing Blender with Rhino 3D for a few months now and it's a good mix. Blender is amazing for meshes and renders and animations, Rhino 3D is an amazing BRep modeller and both Grasshopper and Kangaroo 2 help in "getting just the right look".

eggy 4y ago
The same for me. I love Rhino, and Rhino8 will have RhinoCode that I can use with F# instead of C# or Python. I was one of about 50 to 100 people who gave money back in early 2000s to take Blender opensource, and I used it to create wood carvings from photos using a shape-from-shading algorithm originally developed by NASA(?) to extract more information from single-lens, greyscale satelite imagery. I also used it to create other useful tools for myself. I am glad to see this CAD Sketcher developed, but as a long-time CAD user, I don't think it will reach critical mass or technical ability to compete with things like Fusion 360 ($400/year) but it includes so much - simulation, FEA, rendering, and a bunch of other goodies in a focused, minimal gui.