For discussing the merits of alternative 3D CAD programs.

[OxymoronParticipant @oxymoron]

DrDave and Swarf Maker, many thanks for the information on Fusion360. I'll check it out.

Chris, I'm comfortable with storing some information on the cloud especially if it is locally stored as well, just need to be selective on what is put on the cloud.

Dave

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Chris Trice on 27/12/2018 03:07:48:

The Cloud = Someone Else's Computer.

The Cloud = Someone Else's Computers with a strong backup regime. Probably more secure than your computer. However I do both.

How to make local backups from Fusion 360:

**LINK**

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/fusion-360/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/How-to-make-a-local-archive-back-up-file-in-Fusion-360.html

Russell

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Interesting discussion on the merits of local backups vs. cloud with regard to Onshape:

**LINK**

https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/1115/how-can-i-archive-a-local-copy-of-a-model

Russell

[Graham Waterworth 1Participant @grahamwaterworth1]

Well I tried it and within minutes I have made my mind up its of little use to model engineers without spending on the pro version. A 3d cad system with no internal or external thread / hole making facility is just too limited.

I will stick to what I have.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Even with the threading facility it will not show an actual thread the same as many other CAD packages, all it does is puts the correct size tapping hole into the surface and gives the thread call out on 2D drawings. I have the package that includes threads and have also extended the standard range stored but 95% of the time I find it faster and easier to just sketch a plain hole.

I manage quite happily to make engines from my drawings and so have others. Lets face it model engineers have managed for the last 100 years to make from drawings that did not show the helical threads on the drawing, double pair of lines if you are were lucky, single a lot of the time.

You may also want to spend a little more time with it as it is possible to produce a "threaded" surface which will allow those with 3D printers to print threads with the basic Atom3D. here is one done with whats available in Atom

 

Edited By JasonB on 03/01/2019 07:55:57

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Graham Waterworth 1 on 03/01/2019 00:06:43:

Well I tried it and within minutes I have made my mind up its of little use to model engineers without spending on the pro version. A 3d cad system with no internal or external thread / hole making facility is just too limited.

I will stick to what I have.

Gosh, that's harsh!

I use FreeCAD (on Linux) and Fusion360 (on Windows) and they are both capable of making 'real' threads. In practice I don't use the facility much.

A disadvantage of modelling threads realistically in 3D is they consume a lot of compute power – a dozen them might slow a model down noticeably, and 50 could bring everything to a grinding halt. The extra number-crunching is a high price to pay when the builder probably doesn't need a plan to show more than, say, 'M4 x 0.5'. And arguably plans should be kept simple – unnecessary detail is just noise. (Not as sinful as missing or wrong details!)

In the past real threads were rarely drawn by hand on engineering drawings for the same reasons, it's a lot of hard work unless there's particular value in doing it.

Dave

[Anonymous]

I use Alibre Expert both for work and modelling. Unlike Jason I add internal and external threads so that they can be called out on the 2D drawings I use in the workshop. However, I don't need fully modelled threads, except in very special circumstances like a worm or a special square thread. I started drawing in the days of drawing boards and BS308 (still got my Rotring pens) – back then threads were not detailed but represented by dashed lines. Nothing has changed with the introduction of CAD.

Andrew

[Tim Taylor 2Participant @timtaylor2]

Posted by Andrew Johnston on 03/01/2019 09:57:08:

I started drawing in the days of drawing boards and BS308 (still got my Rotring pens) – back then threads were not detailed but represented by dashed lines. Nothing has changed with the introduction of CAD.

Andrew

I remember those days – took my first mechanical drafting class back in 1966, and I still have a complete K&E drafting set, complete with nibs for india ink, that was my fathers before he gave it to me on my graduation from high school in 1969.

And I agree, there's no need for fully modeled threads except in very special circumstances – a simple note with a call out is all that is really necessary.

Tim

[Graham Waterworth 1Participant @grahamwaterworth1]

I think you have misinterpreted my comment, I am not talking about modelling a thread I was looking at producing patterns of standard drilled, tapped, counter bored and chamfered holes on PCD's grids and lines with the simple dialogue, this to me is a basic 3D cad function but I guess this low end version is aimed at 3D printing.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Most of those things can still be done with the basic ATOM but it will need a couple of separate steps rather than being able to do it all from one dialogue so it is not as you say "little use" to model engineers it is just that you have to pay more for an easier to use version.

The only things you won't get with ATOM is a call out automatically put onto a 2D drawing, work out the tapping hole diameter for you and a tapped hole will not be shown as double lines. For personal use this would not be an issue for most and even if sharing the files as I said earlier many old model engineering drawings don't show the holes as double lines (Stuart for example) so it is just remembering to add the call out to the drawing.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Here is a part with the holes in one side drawn using whats available in ATOM and the other side with the hole function in Pro & Expert.

3D modeled part looks exactly the same. On the drawing the Pro callouts came up based on the model, ATOM I typed them on. You can also see in both the plan and side elevation that the Pro threaded holes ares gown with twin lines and the pro ctr lines of the holes are on the PDC .

I would say both are quite usable for model engineers, you pays your money for what you feel you need but definetely better than "of little use"

Edited By JasonB on 10/01/2019 08:09:28

[Anonymous]

Posted by Graham Waterworth 1 on 10/01/2019 00:14:40:

I think you have misinterpreted my comment, I am not talking about modelling a thread I was looking at producing patterns of standard drilled, tapped, counter bored and chamfered holes on PCD's grids and lines with the simple dialogue, this to me is a basic 3D cad function but I guess this low end version…..

Could have been a low end comment.

Andrew

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Posted by Graham Waterworth 1 on 10/01/2019 00:14:40:

I think you have misinterpreted my comment, I am not talking about modelling a thread I was looking at producing patterns of standard drilled, tapped, counter bored and chamfered holes on PCD's grids and lines with the simple dialogue, this to me is a basic 3D cad function but I guess this low end version is aimed at 3D printing.

Not sure what the problem is, it's easy to create a pattern of features in Atom3D. Just create one and then use linear or circular pattern.

Or are you looking at a different package?

Neil

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 10/01/2019 11:38:56:

Posted by Graham Waterworth 1 on 10/01/2019 00:14:40:

……………..simple dialogue………………………

Not sure what the problem is,

This is the main Difference, with the full monty you can do the drilled, tapped, CSK/CB all in one drop down which does simplify things.

You can get all those things the same with ATOM on the 3D model with a bit more time and effort. You get a slightly better 2D output with pro/expert.

For example in ATOM you would need to know or look up the tapping size to draw the circle and then cut extrude the hole, add a chamfer or sketch and cut a counterbore, point the end and type the callout on 2D. For Pro and expert you select thread form & size and it has a tapping size in the library*, you can select flat bottom or drilled hole, CSK, CB etc from the dropdown and size them all from there. PCD or other pattern is no different to enter for either

 

* It will not put tapping size on the 2D drawing so you would have to look that up in the workshop anyway if you did not know

Edited By JasonB on 10/01/2019 12:24:02

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

OIC.

I expect I will make library parts for things like common threads anyway.

Neil

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Talk on the Alibre Atom thread about modelling a bevel gear prompted me to have a go in MoI.

It's not too hard to do, but it takes a little while to model, so I've split the process into two videos. I'll make the next one later today.

Part 1.

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Part 2.

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Martin (or should it be Eddie ?) anyway, you do make it look easy with MOI, you certainly seem to know your way around that particular package, out of curiosity, what does it cost to buy?

Edited By Ian Skeldon 2 on 13/01/2019 16:43:31

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by Ian Skeldon 2 on 13/01/2019 16:42:59:

Martin (or should it be Eddie ?) anyway, you do make it look easy with MOI, you certainly seem to know your way around that particular package, out of curiosity, what does it cost to buy?

Edited By Ian Skeldon 2 on 13/01/2019 16:43:31

See here for the price, Ian.

I'm Martin, but my 'channel' is named after our dog, Eddie.

I'm no great expert with MoI although I seem to get it to do what I need. The real experts can model cars and engines and everything in between with it

Some examples from the MoI gallery.

[Turbine GuyParticipant @turbineguy]

After reading through the previous posts in this thread, I thought I would add a little to the comments of Rod Ashton 14/11/2018 and Muzzler 15/11/2018 concerning Onshape. Onshape was recommended to me by a friend for a CAD system after I retired. While working, I used SolidWorks but could not afford the cost for personal use. When I tried Onshape it took me almost no time to start making solid models. The assemblies have the parts connected with the same degree of freedom as the actual engine. On a engine model I can click and drag the flywheel (or any part) and move it the same way it would move in the actual engine. All the parts connected to the part being moved will also move the same as they would in an actual engine. This is a tremendous help for checking clearances, determining valve settings, and seeing the effects of adjustments. Onshape allows me to make any model almost as easily as SolidWorks without any cost.. The only downside is the files are public, so anyone on Onshape has access to them. This doesn't bother me since I feel if anyone whats to share my files for their own use they are welcome to use them. They can copy parts, assemblies (including all parts) and do what ever they want with the copies. They can't change the originals since they can only be changed by the creator.

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Hi Martin,

It does have some fine drawings in the gallery, like I said it would seem that you know your way around it pretty well.

ATB,

Ian

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Turbine Guy,

I have looked at Onshape a couple of times but unless your a student (or I have missed something), it seems pretty expensive $1500 a year.

Ian

[Rod AshtonParticipant @rodashton53132]

Never paid a penny!

[Ian Skeldon 2Participant @ianskeldon2]

Could be I am looking at the wrong thing, this is all I found **LINK**when looking for Onshape. As I am not a student or an educator it would seem that there is only the trial version available?

[Turbine GuyParticipant @turbineguy]

Ian,

I've never paid anything. You have to pay for the full version, but if you don't mind making your models public, the free version works fine. When my friend suggested using Onshape, I went to their website and created an account. I don't remember all the details, but it wasn't difficult.

[Author]

Posts