Alibre – A First Attempt

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

I hope Nigel doesn't mind me hijacking his thread for a mo.

To those who use Alibre Atom 3D, does it have a section view capability? If I had an object on screen and wanted to draw inside the object, could I create a plane in the right place and start a sketch on that plane with it acting as a cut away view?

Thanks.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Yes see the video part way down under Analysis & Measurement I use it a far amount particularly on assemblies to check fits and clearances

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

Thanks Jason, it's a feature I use a lot with Design Spark. I have watched the video and bookmarked the page to watch more later. Now going into the garden to mow the grass!

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Just carried out a quick test:

The drawing screen cross which if selected produces a red warning rectangle, closes that screen; but if necessary raises the changes warning. So far so good….

The Home page has both the Alibre roundel with a short Window menu including Close; and the Close All cross in the right hand corner.

The drawing window replaces the roundel with a tiny copy of the "New" L-shaped block symbol; and this holds much of the same Window menu.

Not ever so clear, at first!

–

Ian –

I think you've misunderstood me.

Many warned me not to think in one CAD format when using another, and I do heed that. I knew SE, Fusion and Alibre all work in 3D by default. So does TurboCAD, but it offers you direct 2D as well, and most of my TC drawings are in 2D.

My difficulty with TurboCAD was trying to learn to draw 3D models in TurboCAD.

My difficulty with SE and Alibre is trying to use them; but I treat them as themselves.

It is not due to their major differences from TurboCAD even in 3D mode, because I already knew they have those.

It is not because they are isometric rather than orthographic by default, because I already knew they are.

It is simply that sophisticated software – not just CAD – is difficult for me to learn.

….

I do not question the quality of the SE tutorials as instructions, apart from that confusing Synchronous / Ordered stuff. I found them easy to use, but hard to find in a very awkward site. With great respect, your professional experience means it's all easy for you!

I did start quite well in Alibre, apart from spoiling my first attempt by accidentally omitting a stage in the tutorial in its own web-site. I even managed a couple of simple drawings of my own. It only started to collapse part-way into the ex-MEW exercise.

.

Right, time for a brew and some swarf-making….

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 30/04/2023 15:49:00:

The drawing window replaces the roundel with a tiny copy of the "New" L-shaped block symbol; and this holds much of the same Window menu.

That is the PART workspace, The L-shaped block is the Alibre icon for a part.

It is important to be clear about workspace types / names. Atom3D has the following workspace types – each of which will have its own icon at top left corner (smaller versions of those shown on the Home Window);

• Part (for modelling a part)
• Assembly (for combining parts to model an assembly)
• 2D Drawing (for producing engineering drawings from your modelled parts or assemblies)

Correctly naming things helps to make sure we are discussing the same thing – it really does get confusing if I believe you to be having a problem in the 2D Drawing workspace, but your difficulty is actually in the Part workspace.

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 30/04/2023 15:49:00:

Just carried out a quick test:

The drawing screen cross which if selected produces a red warning rectangle, closes that screen; but if necessary raises the changes warning. So far so good….

The Home page has both the Alibre roundel with a short Window menu including Close; and the Close All cross in the right hand corner.

The drawing window replaces the roundel with a tiny copy of the "New" L-shaped block symbol; and this holds much of the same Window menu.

Not ever so clear, at first!

–

Ian –

I think you've misunderstood me.

Many warned me not to think in one CAD format when using another, and I do heed that. I knew SE, Fusion and Alibre all work in 3D by default. So does TurboCAD, but it offers you direct 2D as well, and most of my TC drawings are in 2D.

My difficulty with TurboCAD was trying to learn to draw 3D models in TurboCAD.

My difficulty with SE and Alibre is trying to use them; but I treat them as themselves.

It is not due to their major differences from TurboCAD even in 3D mode, because I already knew they have those.

It is not because they are isometric rather than orthographic by default, because I already knew they are.

It is simply that sophisticated software – not just CAD – is difficult for me to learn.

There it is again: your insistence that you know things that aren't true or relevant. You're right, you can't learn this on your own. You need a competent teacher.

For everyone's sanity, take somebody(anybody) up on their offer of some one-to-one tuition as soon as possible. For instance, your issue of how to close a file could have been solved with one sentence and the demonstration of two mouse clicks – that's what, twenty seconds instead of several posts? It's highly likely that the revolve problem could have been solved in a similar fashion.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Sorry Nick,

…. but at risk of paraphrasing Donald Rumsfeld, I should know what I know and don't know.

I learnt long ago that Fusion, SE and AlIbre use a default 3D model approach even though I did not know how to use them. TurboCAD does not, on the face of it, but tries to persuade you to work that way. I was also told quite a while ago that this basically the default for most CAD work now.

And believe it or not, I do know better than anyone else when I have met something I can't learn, even though they find it so easy!

.

Yes, I am sure a competent teacher could show me how to use this elaborate software; but it also needs me to have the innate ability to learn it to any sensibly useful level.

I have had an offer of tuition and I promised I will think about it; but the trial licence has only two weeks left on it.

I feel I would just be a burden on him, for I should be able to sort the snags out myself, and I am likely to reach more and harder blocks not far beyond. Or indeed soon meet my natural limit for the whole subject; as with any other academic area. You can have the best teacher available, you can wear yourself out trying to learn the subject, but if you can't learn it, you won't learn it.

.

Yes, one big failure on my part – but by Nature not choice, not by other people, not by the software.

Yes, everyone else on this site obviously finds 3D CAD easy, but a few model-engineers I know elsewhere have admitted to me they abandoned trying to learn CAD as too hard. They made less progress than I have! Yet these are much more intelligent, educated and professionally higher-grade than was ever possible for me, which is at least a crumb of cold comfort for my failure.

'

Oh, and I have managed to save and close Alibre files safely, thankyou. I never said I did not!

I simply thought I must be doing so more by accident than design. (I think I saw that Alibre also has an auto-saving function, but I don't know at what intervals.)

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Nigel.

We know you are finding it difficult to learn 3d CAD.

You have two weeks left on your trial of Atom, so I suggest you stop contemplating, swallow your pride at your lack of progress and grab David Jupp's offer with both hands and see if he can help. Don't procrastinate – investigate!

Martin.

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

I have looked at the Alibre videos of what Atom 3D can do, and I am impressed. Keep plugging away Nigel, two weeks is a long time to find out if you will make use of the software. It certainly looks easier to use than SolidEdge, and has more features than Designspark Mechanical. I am tempted……

Any updates on your progress?

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Lee –

I've not seen the videos but I have seen others' Alibre drawings on this site, and they are impressive too.

I agree too that Alibre is easier than SolidEdge, and I also found Alibre's tutorial material better than SE's.

I like that active dimension system, and the function by which modifying a Part in its own file, its copy inside an Assembly follows suit automatically. I discovered that when correcting a dimension mistake I'd made. I think it also lets you readily share parts across different assemblies.

It's certainly far easier than TurboCAD!

.

No progress since yesterday though. I did some actual metalwork instead! I've just become so disheartened and worn down by my own inability to learn any make of 3D CAD, that I might abandon it.

…

Martin –

Maybe. See above.

I have learnt only some absolute basic moves, far below any useful level I doubt I could achieve in fourteen months, let alone fourteen days.

Besides, though Alibre Atom is not expensive by specialist software standards, for me it is still a serious gamble with no guarantee of "winning" – the prize being becoming able to justify its cost by serious use.

Nothing to do with pride. I am not proud of failure, ignorance or incompetence; but I do not want to take other's time in remote lessons deserved by those capable of learning such things.

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

Nigel, if you do buy Alibre then at least you will have all the time you need to learn it, or at least to learn enough to do what you want. I can't imagine ever using 10% of the features in Solidedge, but I did use 90% of the features in Designspark. Perhaps that's why I got on better with DS. It's a pity we can't pick and choose the features we want.

Alibre Atom 3D is £200. That's only 54p per day for the first year. You can't even get a Twix bar for that. Ooo, 365 Twix bars……

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 30/04/2023 23:35:08:

Martin –

Maybe. See above.

I have learnt only some absolute basic moves, far below any useful level I doubt I could achieve in fourteen months, let alone fourteen days.

Besides, though Alibre Atom is not expensive by specialist software standards, for me it is still a serious gamble with no guarantee of "winning" – the prize being becoming able to justify its cost by serious use.

Nothing to do with pride. I am not proud of failure, ignorance or incompetence; but I do not want to take other's time in remote lessons deserved by those capable of learning such things.

Nigel.

David Jupp has made it very clear that he is willing to 'waste' his time on you. Has it occured to you that this constant back and forth is 'wasting' the time of those on here offering their help?

If you accept David's offer and you make no progress, then you will have been proved correct in your stated belief that you can not learn Atom and you'll both have lost an hour of your lives. On the other hand, if David can move you on a little, then that is progress, but you first have to accept his offer.

As I said before, stop procrastinating by telling us what you can't do and grab the best chance you're ever going to get to show us what you can do.

Martin.

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by lee webster on 30/04/2023 23:58:46:

Alibre Atom 3D is £200. That's only 54p per day for the first year. You can't even get a Twix bar for that. Ooo, 365 Twix bars……

Can I remind you that there are about 365.25 days in the year to eat Twix bars?

Martin.

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

Thank you Martin. An extra 1/4 bar per year? I could manage that.

[IanTParticipant @iant]

Posted by lee webster on 30/04/2023 23:58:46:

Nigel, if you do buy Alibre then at least you will have all the time you need to learn it, or at least to learn enough to do what you want. I can't imagine ever using 10% of the features in Solidedge, but I did use 90% of the features in Designspark. Perhaps that's why I got on better with DS. It's a pity we can't pick and choose the features we want.

Not sure if you've looked at SE's 'Customise' features Lee.

You can change the UI in just about any way you want. I have a very slightly modified version of the 'Balanced' Theme but I do intend to get around to making more changes as I get further into it. I've changed a few key-stroke commands for instance but you can also hide Ribbon (the top bar) options if you find them too confusing. You can also make any remaining icons larger/smaller should you wish to. Just about everything in the UI can be changed….

I've attached a screenshot of the 'Draw' commands in the Ribbon as an example. There are a few options there that I've never used but I'm going to wait a while before I hide them – I'm still learning….

More detailed info here: Customising Solid Edge

Regards,

 

IanT

 

Edited By IanT on 01/05/2023 09:35:18

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 30/04/2023 22:23:22:

Sorry Nick,

…. but at risk of paraphrasing Donald Rumsfeld, I should know what I know and don't know.

Interesting that you bring that up, as his entire statement is about ensuring that what you know is actually right. That's what a good teacher(tutor, mentor, whatever buzzword you prefer) would establish and help you correct. The bit about 'unknown unknowns …… being the difficult ones' is especially apposite here.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 30/04/2023 22:23:22:

… everyone else on this site obviously finds 3D CAD easy, …

 

Where do you get these ideas from Nigel! No-one said that – we all found learning CAD difficult. False conclusions like this are part of the problem.

My experience is getting started in the first place is the most difficult stage. Learners are faced with a bewildering array of new controls and concepts. Poking CAD tools to see what happens is unlikely to work. It's essential to master the basics before moving on. As in house building, horrible problems develop when the foundations aren't good enough.

I think trying to run before you can walk is a major issue – expecting far too much of yourself, and then inventing unhelpful reasons for failure. Rather like buying a violin and being frustrated because you can't play Paganini's 24 Caprices on day 2. That the Caprices require talented violinists to develop their skills over several years, and then practice the piece repeatedly is ignored. It's in the same class as buying TurboCAD and starting with a Steam Wagon.

Go back to sketching and extruding simple shapes until lumps can be added and carved off at will. At this stage, with a simple object (not a tall cylinder), it's easier to master planes, rotations, zoom, snap and other control features. They're not nice to encounter by accident in the middle of a complicated exercise.

Take any and all help offered. Consider the problem caused by the new mouse being too fast. Assuming the speed was a feature that can't be changed is a mistake; what Nigel calls a 'block' and I call a 'mindset'. Instead of approaching the mouse as a problem to be solved, Nigel added to the list of reasons for not making progress.

In fact, a too-fast mouse is a serious obstacle, even for lucky types with steady hands. The mouse has to be fixed, which is easy when you know how. Then the user has to understand how the mouse works in Alibre before advanced modelling is attempted. Practice putting the pointer accurately on lines, and find out what scroll and the right, middle, and left clicks do. Master sketches. If Alibre is like other 3D-CAD then ease of selecting a line, face or edge may depend on the view angle and rotating the model slightly resolves the ambiguity. Small stuff like this matters, and is best picked up by playing with very simple models.

I share Nigel's pain. After a 6 month break I went back to Solid Edge's 3D sketch-tool last night. It's good for modelling pipework. After 40 minutes cursing repeat failures I went to bed in a huff – I've forgotten everything! I know SE works, thought I'd understood it well-enough, but actually didn't absorb the basics adequately. Teeth gritted, this has become a problem to be solved, and I shall have get myself back on firm ground by practising simple examples until this part of SE clicks again. It's a frustrating time-waster, but necessary. For the same reason I have a junk box full of machining mistakes. I don't see them as hours wasted, it was time well spent developing skills!

Stop rushing ahead, and never believe your own propaganda. You can do it.

Dave

 

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 01/05/2023 11:10:13

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 01/05/2023 11:08:20:

…I share Nigel's pain. After a 6 month break I went back to Solid Edge's 3D sketch-tool last night. It's good for modelling pipework. After 40 minutes cursing repeat failures I went to bed in a huff – I've forgotten everything! I know SE works…

Dave

Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 01/05/2023 11:10:13

Dave.

What made it difficult to do?

Something like this?

Martin.

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

IanT,

Thanks for that. One more tick in the "Do I want/need Atom 3D".

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by blowlamp on 01/05/2023 12:19:14:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 01/05/2023 11:08:20:

…I share Nigel's pain. After a 6 month break I went back to Solid Edge's 3D sketch-tool last night. It's good for modelling pipework. After 40 minutes cursing repeat failures I went to bed in a huff – I've forgotten everything! I know SE works…

Dave

Dave.

What made it difficult to do?

Something like this?

Martin.

Exactly like that, except SE can also do dangly fire extinguisher nozzles that curve to a clip on the side. (Maybe MOI does them too?)

The problem is me. I've been using the 2D sketcher for months. The 3D sketcher is similar, and I've forgotten the differences, so it doesn't do what I'd expect (in 3 dimensions).

Dave

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 01/05/2023 13:01:37:

The problem is me. I've been using the 2D sketcher for months. The 3D sketcher is similar, and I've forgotten the differences, so it doesn't do what I'd expect (in 3 dimensions).

Dave

Isn't it just a matter of starting a line/curve in one view (say Front) and then continuing into Top and the Left view etc, until you have the shape you need, then finishing with a Sweep to make the solid?

Martin.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

This was one of my own attempts. The groove is a bit unsymmetrical, and any resemblance to any real Vee-belt size living or dead is purely coincidental. Oddly though I managed to make that Revolve Cut tool work on this, but not at all in the tutorial exercise.

Just spent half the morning fighting my way through that MEW tutorial to draw a scribing block.

I'd already fitted the column to the base, but with a parallel rather than tapered fitting.

So this morning, I've completed the parts but omitted the two threads and the knurling. In fact the text suggests the threads impose a huge overhead on the system, and to use a note on the 2D drawing instead: the convention of course is a thin rectangle to show the thread, and a dimension-note. I judged it too difficult anyway.

'

The scriber-point is meant to be drawn as was the column taper – a "Revolved Cut". That kept failing as well, with every attempt raising error-messages the user is presumed to understand. To Hell with it then: I created it as a long chamfer.

Something I found too, was where you are meant to enter a value for some features, it won't let you. You have to scroll or step through a counter instead. The Escape key is not always very prompt either, needing several presses. Could be a keyboard fault but I'd be surprised on a unit only about a year old.

I did though discover how to draw two lines of set length at a set angle directly, in this case for the scriber's centre-line; using the inside angle [180 – external] rather than by dimensions afterwards. (There's a proper mathematical name for that type of angle, but I have long forgotten it.)

.

It has you produce an orthographic drawing for the Clamp. That went moderately well but I was unable to dimension the width of the slot, nor to add the overall length dimension in the way it describes. It tells you to dimension the width next to the radiused end, and a special slot-dimension menu will appear. Oh no it didn't.

The little rendering is all at some peculiar angle of its own, as well, as the image below shows.

I had picked ISO which gives First-Angle projection but the menu also mentions something called "J-ISO" or something like that, and ANSI. I know ANSI is American but the 'J' one is new to me. Is that also American?

There might be a way to carry the colour over into this drawing's rendering, but I didn't see it, and it's not that important here!

.

I've now an Assembly drawing with five separate parts, none in the orientations shown in the instructions, and I can't find anything that will rotate them individually. The clamp is lying on its side, for a start.

Trying to align the two pairs of planes is a nightmare. It kept doing all sorts of strange things. The text says three pairs but the display had only two pairs plus one plane on its own. The text also refers to a 'Flip' command under Assembly Constraints, to turn individual parts the right way up, but wherever it really is, is not there!

I was unable to reduce the started assembly drawing enough to show all the parts. I thought I had done, but clearly not.

[lee websterParticipant @leewebster72680]

To my mind Nigel, you are making very good progress!

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

Nigel,

If you are having issues entering values into dialogue boxes, it is possible that you are suffering from one of two known issues. These could easily wreck your attempts to learn the software.

1. Grammarly is known to conflict with Alibre – it may be possible to workaround this with compatibility settings, but if you have Grammarly installed, simplest is to remove it.
2. Win11 for some users causes flickering of input boxes – a reported fix is detailed in this post on the Alibre User Forum

JIS – is a Japanese norm.

The projection angle (first vs. third) is inherited from the chosen drawing template, but can be overridden. Templates can also be customised to suit your own preferences. For example these days in UK ISO sheet sizes are typically used, but I see both 1st angle (as in mainland Europe) and 3rd angle (as in USA) projections both used. A customised template can combine ISO sheet size with 3rd angle projections, plus perhaps a Logo and some preferred dimensions styles.

The orientation for the 'Front view' in the 2D drawing is set when you select the part or assembly – there are controls to manipulate the model orientation before you commit to make the projections. All other views are relative to this Front view, so no you can't rotate them individually – it would mess up the projection angle for the views.

Please save these files – and please also accept my offer of help. I could talk you through this so much quicker than all these long complaints….

A Drawing of the Assembly would usually be of the assembled parts, not individual parts. Though you can add views of individual parts to the drawing should you wish.

Asking 'how can I?' is so much more positive than saying 'this doesn't work' or 'that can't be done'.

Jason showed the Flip command in a recent post which you seemed to acknowledge. The MEW tutorial is from about 5 years ago, the Atom3D user interface has moved on since then. If working from outdated screenshots is causing problems, perhaps leave that particular tutorial for the moment.

It looks like you've actually achieved quite a lot – you have most of the parts (maybe all) for the scriber – seems like you need some help getting to grips with assembling them, and then how the 2D drawing system works. Maybe later go back and look at revolve cuts for tapers and why you are struggling with that operation.

In assemblies one common issue we see is that if the user doesn't fix the first part in space after adding it to the assembly, then when constraining the next part to it things can fly off in unexpected directions. I strongly recommend fixing the first part in the assembly. To begin with the simplest way to do that is to place the part on the assembly origin, then to apply an 'Anchor' to prevent it moving. There are other options, but that will get you started.

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

You're doing fine from the looks of things

Just keep plugging away, things get easier and easier until one day you realise that you don't even view CAD as a challenge anymore

It's actually a lot like learning to drive, at the very start you wonder how anyone ever manages to do it, then after enough practice you're getting competent, then one day you're an old hand at it

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 01/05/2023 13:42:24:

This was one of my own attempts.

That's how you get ahead of the curve, set a task and do your own stuff

CAD is pretty cool in that you can set your own homework

Edited By Ady1 on 01/05/2023 15:18:20

[Author]

Posts