Learning CAD with Alibre Atom3D

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

No, Boolean tools are not available in AA3D.

With a bit of thought you might be able to shell the individual parts, removing any touching faces as part of the shell command. You might have to get a bit more creative with extrude cuts (after shell) if only part of a face should be removed. Depends a lot on the specific detail of your design.

[Lionel PullumParticipant @lionelpullum53107]

Thanks David. I guess I'll have to stop being so lazy, and recreate the parts mounted on a plate- I'm creating a mould plate for a flexible mould, and was hoping to recycle the parts

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Lionel, you can copy and paste the sketch(s) from one part into another, below is the model of a cylinder and I have just copied and pasted the sketch for the separate leg into that model and then extruded it. They are now one part.

You should be able to create a new part and model your mould plate and then "paste stamp" each of your separate sketches onto that and extrude, other features can also be copied over or may be quicker to add to the new model.

 

Edited By JasonB on 04/03/2019 08:08:59

[Lionel PullumParticipant @lionelpullum53107]

Thanks Jason that will certainly speed things up, although most parts are then also rotated or lofted, but it will definately speed things up.

[Douglas JohnstonParticipant @douglasjohnston98463]

I have been meaning to get stuck into the Alibre tutorial for a while. I started when I uploaded the software but other pressing matters meant that it got sidelined. What puts me off continuing however is if I invest a lot of time and effort into the software, all the benefit will be lost when the trial period ends unless I pay for the software. For a lot of people this will be fine, but for the limited use I may make of it in future it is an expense I might not be able to justify.

I would be interested to know how others feel about this cliff edge in a few months time.

Doug

[Colin HeseltineParticipant @colinheseltine48622]

I will be buying a licence. I have enjoyed working through the tutorial and am now waiting for the latest magazine and latest episode. To be honest I also have Turbocad 2017 & 2018 but have struggled with it. Have also tried Autocad and Draftsight back in the past in a limited way. I have found the tutorials in the magazine very well written. They would be helped if the pictures were always on the same page as the text, but I appreciate the editor and layout designers constraints. And in some cases having the pictures larger would help quite a bit, having to use a large magnifying glass to read some of them. I want to try and draw stuff up to be printed on 3D printer.

The tutorials on the Alibre website are also line by line detailed. It beats stopping /starting and reversing a Youtube video. Nothing wrong with Youtube videos but I find text/pictures much easier.

Having spoken to Mintronics a few days ago I gather the price will be announced shortly. With the six month trial you can get to grips with it before spending the cash. Better than buying it and then not getting on with it.

Colin

[Douglas JohnstonParticipant @douglasjohnston98463]

I think a lot will depend on how much the licence will cost and if any special deal will be available for hobby users. I thought the licence was around the £200 mark which would be too much for me to justify, but I would be interested at a lower cost.

Doug

[John HinkleyParticipant @johnhinkley26699]

I have just received an e-mail advising me that MEW Atom users with a trial licence get a discounted price of £166.50 plus VAT. The message includes a link to order. Maintenance is extra, but the basic licence is perpetual.

John

[Gary MagowanParticipant @garymagowan]

Hi everyone.

i have been a CAD user in industry for 43 years starting with AutoCAD in 1985 and following on to Solid Edge inthe 90's. Since my retirement I have tried various free or low cost CAD packages with limited success until I came across Alibre in 2010. I found this easier to become accustomed to and enjoyed using it until the free licence was withdrawn.

I have welcomed the current 6 month licence and I have been following the tutorial series in model engineers Workshop. I have been following the tutorial series and have come up against a problem with the thumb wheel.

All goes well until I reach the internal thread. I have a fully constrained profile sketch but when I fill in the details on the Helical Cut window the OK button is greyed out.

This has been my 8th unsuccessful attempt. I would appreciate someone pointing out where I am going wrong.

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

Gary,

The OK button being greyed typically means that a required piece of information is missing. Check carefully that you have your thread profile sketch specified in the 'Sketch to Revolve' field, make sure that there is something in the 'Axis:' field – this can be an Axis, a straight Edge of the part, a reference line from your profile sketch, or a Cylindrical Face – cylindrical face of the hole is used in the tutorial.

Check also that the plane you have sketch profile on and the axis chosen make physical sense in relation to each other.

If those 2 fields are populated, and OK is still not accessible, it is possible that your user profile is damaged – to fix that go to the Utilities Tab of the Home Window and click the link to 'Reset User Profile' – re-start Atom3D after doing so.

[TomkParticipant @tomk39956]

Can anyone tell me how to mate a spring to a shaft in Alibre 3d assembly. I have tried the Quick icon used to mate shafts with holes but cannot get it to work for springs. The screen shot shows the shaft and spring. I want the spring to be anchored to the small diameter on the shaft.

Thanks

Tom

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

If you right click on the spring and then select "show reference geometry" you can then mate the XY plane ( most likely plne) of the spring to the shoulder of the other part, may need to enter a distance depending where the plane is on the spring.

You can also align the central axis by the same method.

Quick will work the same as this

 

Edited By JasonB on 11/03/2019 18:29:05

Edited By JasonB on 11/03/2019 18:47:54

[TomkParticipant @tomk39956]

Posted by JasonB on 11/03/2019 18:15:26:

If you right click on the spring and then select "show reference geometry" you can then mate the XY plane ( most likely plne) of the spring to the shoulder of the other part, may need to enter a distance depending where the plane is on the spring.

You can also align the central axis by the same method.

Quick will work the same as this

Edited By JasonB on 11/03/2019 18:29:05

Edited By JasonB on 11/03/2019 18:47:54

Jason

I got it work with your instructions.

Thanks

Tom

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Just an update on my turret.

The upper part is proving difficult to print neatly with no fill.

And then my heater cartidge went open circuit. Once I've fitted a new unit, I will try printing with a low percentage of fill and see if it looks OK.

Neil

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

You will have to CNC it Neil

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Alibre in MEW:

It seems to be a simplified "trial" version. I worked through the first instalment, then as invited tried exploring it further, bringing a very sparse and patchy knowledge of CAD via still fighting TurboCAD and being defeated by Fusion360.

I soon found it not possible to place objects where I wanted, and close examination of the printed screen-shots and the tool-bars on screen, revealed some significant commands had been switched off. (Faded symbols)

I thought, "Oh aye? I wonder what it will cost when the 6-month trial ends if I want to use it for real and need such details as specifying co-ordinates?"

So by all means try it and buy the full version if you find it suits you, but be aware the MEW tutorial is using a stripped version.

If you are yet to try it, Alibre's publishers also regularly send you irritating, somewhat patronising and frankly pointless "marketing" e-posts!

I did find the Alibre course moderately easy as far as I went, but I was following the recipe in MEW, and in due course decided having gone so far with TurboCAD I was being daft to start again.

To be fair to both programmes though, I ought point out though my approach was totally different; and I know my own limits with CAD. The Alibre / MEW course says draw a 3D model then produce the orthographic workshop drawings from that. In TurboCAD, I stick to orthographic-only as its hellishly difficult 3D modelling is beyond me. Let's be honest though; software like TC, Alibre, Fusion and SW is really intended for professional users given costly, professional training. If you don't have the aptitude for teaching yourself industrial-grade software for which no proper manuals exist, you won't learn it to any very useful level.

I don't think I will be disposing of my industrial-grade, A0-size, parallel-motion drawing-board!

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Don't know about that. I started with Alibre PE which is basically what Atom is and then upgraded to Pro. Seem to be able to answer most questions here dispite being self taught.

You should be able to place anything where you want it on the screen which is known as a constraint. Post a screen shot of what you are trying to do and myself or David will put you right.

I have just looked through the first two parts of the series and I can not see anything there that is faded out and not usable. As far as I know the Atom trial is the full Atom package. Again if you can say what illustration you are referring two we can look into it.

Edited By JasonB on 12/03/2019 18:46:16

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

Nigel Graham 2

Jason is correct – the MEW Atom3D trial is the full Atom3D. Yes there are additional tools available in Alibre Design Pro and Alibre Design Expert – quite a few of these just shortcut tasks that would be laborious (but possible) in Atom3D, some genuinely offer capabilities beyond Atom3D. Tools not available in Atom3D have generally been completely hidden from the user interface, so you'll never see them, rather than greyed out – this is deliberate to try to reduce confusion by seeing tools you can't use. It's possible a small number slipped through.

If you have difficulty with a specific task, just ask – we'll try to help. All 3D CAD is fairly complex software, so does take a degree of 'getting to grips with'. Some will pick things up quicker than others, there will be some that prefer to stick to 2D CAD or even drawing board – both of which are fine. Many ways to 'skin a cat' – go with whatever works for you.

Use of constraints, dimensions, or even 'Direct co-ordinate entry' are available in Atom3D to allow placement of anything you might create. None of these are restricted, so I don't understand the reference to this as a limitation. Fully accept that a pointer may be required to find some of these, or how best to use them.

Marketing e-mails; well why do you think anyone offers free trials? It's for several reasons, one of which is to get people's details and hopefully persuade some of them to buy. Also just raising awareness of the brand. Alibre is fully aware of GDPR, so just opt out if you don't want to receive the marketing e-mails – it won't affect your extended trial licence.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Thank you David.

The e-posts Alibre sends don't bother me too much, though their style is sometimes grating. I just delete them.

I realised very soon that Alibre would be no easier to learn than TurboCAD, even if I was mistaken thinking some tools had been switched off for the MEW course.

My problem was that Alibre was presented as a "model then draw" system. I recall a TurboCAD forum contributor stating TC is meant to be used in the same way, but I cannot learn its 3D side. I'd found similar with Fusion360. So I assume that all modern CAD programmes are much the same in intent if not methods.

3D CAD is extremely complex, and lacks useful manuals; but I want to make workshop drawings not brochure "paintings". However,I took up CAD partly for its facility to produce rotatable isometric assembly-drawings. Please don't get me wrong though: I respect the skill others master even for something as fairly simple as, say, the parting-tool holder that keeps flashing up in the side-bar ads. I can't play the piano, but I can still appreciate a Romantic-era concerto.

I made a mistake. I tried Alibre despite having already gone somewhere vague with TurboCAD: quite different but equally difficult. Worse, the MEW introductory course is straight into 3D CAD, which I'd already found too hard.

So on balance, I think it best to decide first if CAD is likely to be both feasible and helpful for you, and if so, to choose and learn just one make of CAD, to your own limit. If that limit is very modest, so be it, just accept and keep within it.

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

The workshop drawings drop out with very little effort once you have done the 3D model – with even section views generated in seconds, all based on the 3D model. The really good bit is that if you change the model, the drawings update to reflect the changes.

Each to his own. Not everyone will get on with the software, hopefully many will – even if only to get a better idea of whether 3D CAD is something they wish to take forward.

It was precisely the 'slow learning curve' problem that led to the 6 month extended trial for MEW readers. Many in the past has felt that 15-30 days trial just wasn't long enough to properly evaluate the software.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Thank you David.

15-30 days would be fine for a CAD expert to evaluate and review the programme. I would say it needs at least 6 months of very regular use to learn even fairly simple CAD from scratch.

I find what is lacking is any decent printed material. If you come to CAD cold from manual drawing, you are are faced with a huge knowledge gap. You understand making and using engineering items and their conventional plans, but CAD places an enormous extra skill gap between designing and making.

There is virtually nothing available to help you bridge that gap.

The software publishers assume formal, professional training in industry, so do not write manuals beyond ones like TurboCAD's pdf aide-memoire. They might produce training videos, but not everyone can learn from them. Further, the dedicated "manuals" assume you already understand CAD concepts as well as the engineering and draughting knowledge, and in depth.

Most big software firms duck responsibility by establishing "users' forums" and "[In]Frequently Asked Questions". Well, why not write decent instructions in the first place? Is there an Alibre book for example? (There isn't for TurboCAD.)

You can't just write "Select object X, click on Tool B". You need to know why Tool B, and crucially, what existing but hidden conditions in X are needed for B to work, such as mathematically rather than image-sight accuracy in joining and trimming, perhaps created much earlier,

I have two books that bravely try to convey the basic concepts. These, by D.A.G. Brown and by Neill Hughes, help, though I found the latter's "meter" for "metre" inexcusable and annoying. They explain some general CAD basics but still do not warn of the pitfalls. Like the CAD publishers, they assume you never make mistakes, and if it's in the computer it must be right. In fact CAD lets you unwittingly make those hidden mistakes I cited, because they do not stop the application itself; making the whole thing potentially an extremely frustrating waste.

So why the paucity of proper help in CAD? It's partly a commercial matter, but years of work and hobby experience has taught me that the world is full of experts in many fields, especially but not only IT, who understand it easily and almost instinctively, and cannot comprehend why mere mortals find it hard to learn. Instead they show what they can do and tell you it's easy (one reason I don't believe in "training videos&quot, and displays of highly-detailed CAD engineering and architectural artwork discourage rather than encourage.

So why do I bother to use/waste hours of potential workshop time learning CAD?

I thought it might help my model-engineering!

Most model-engineers work from published plans so might never need to learn CAD except for its own interest or if they wish to send CAM files to materials suppliers – or indeed use CNC in their own workshops.

However, I am trying to build a large-scale miniature steam-wagon from no more than scraps of archive material, no castings, much "recycled" material. I have to design as I build – lots of traps and reversals. So I could see the advantages of CAD's drawing, editing and copying abilities.

I could not have known CAD is so difficult and frustrating. I had to abandon the 3D nightmare, and stick to relatively simple orthographic projections. Anyway making parts needs 2D elevations, not pictures. For model-engineering, isometrics are useful for assembly-drawings but not essential, and rendered pictures really show only an undoubtedly high but extra skill in making rendered pictures.

Would I use Alibre? Probably not now.

If starting from scratch, probably yes. It would have been sensible thanks to MEW's trial version and course. I have installed Alibre and I followed the first episode.

However, I've probably gone too far with TurboCAD to change now. It is a completely different method for the same task; I do not know if Alibre can take my existing TC drawings; and the Alibre + MEW, 3D-then-2D way, is wrong for me.

[Colin HeseltineParticipant @colinheseltine48622]

I have Turbocad 2018 pro and earlier versions but have really struggled to use it. I download added the trial AA3D and was able for follow the tutorials quite easily. I prefer the written notes in MEW and gave read through but not used as yet the trial design on the Alibre web site. This runs to a significant number of pages. I prefer written notes to videos that I have to keep stopping/starting/reversing. I want to be able to produce designs that can be 3D printed. Would also like to be able to produce plans for some bits I made for Cowells lathe and mill.

Colin

[David JuppParticipant @davidjupp51506]

Nigel – it MIGHT be practicable to use work done in TC as a basis for Atom3D files. From you comments I believe that all your previous work is in 2D – this could probably be exported as DXF or DWG (I've never used TC), then imported into Atom3D and used to generate sketch profiles for 3D work. This video covers the basic method – the video shows Alibre Design rather than Atom3D, but the process would work in the same way. It can sometimes be quicker and simpler to just start over though – all depends on the individual case.

I did write a short article on the basics of 3D CAD for MEW some while back (not sure which issue) – this thread would get a bit long if I repeated that here. At the very basic level, 3D CAD moves 2D profiles through 3D space to define 3D features. A feature can either add material to or subtract material from the model. The movement of a profile might be along a straight line, in a circle, or some more complex path.

Building simple features one upon another allows complex parts to be modelled – in some ways it's similar to fabricating a real world part – joining 'lumps' together and cutting / drilling / filing material away. Forget the 'drawings' until later in the process – though having ran courses, I know that some people struggle to change their workflow.

As for the mathematical accuracy of joining trimming – yes profiles have to be 'closed' for most operations, but at least the software analyses this and can point out where the problems are. Lots of problems start because users create one complex sketch (like a finished 2D drawing), where a number simpler ones spread over several features would be much easier to create, and to edit if changes are needed afterwards.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Each to their own!

I find Atom3D much faster than TurboCAD and did not take long to be doing things faster in Atom. Yes they are extremely different in approach and this means there are still some things I would do in TurboCAD. The big advantage is that Atom3D is parametric and includes access to an object tree, Turbocad Deluxe isn't so you can't revise your designs so easily.

Some say that 2D drawing ruins you for 3D. If you try to do 3D from a 2D persepective you just end up trying to make every object as a 2D outline and then projecting it up into 2D and get rather frustrated rather fast.

To get the best out of 3D you need to visualise the solids making up your objects and how they interact. The turret above was made from a series of reference planes on which I 'built' various parts to add or subtract the features of the final object. This made it easy to adjust the gross proportions by just moving the planes.

Neil

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

I empathise with Nigel, but I'm pretty sure he's the problem, not the the tools he's struggling with. Not deliberately or because he's stupid, exactly the opposite!

Here's the problem: drawing a 3 dimensional object in 2 dimensions requires a rather complicated set of mental gymnastics. How to make the translation was painfully learned when we were young and, because it seems so normal we've forgotten how difficult it was. Now Nigel is trying to invert an entire mental process: he has to tell a computer how to represent a 3D object directly, and the way it's done isn't natural to him.

In this kind of learning situation there's severe danger that the brain will seize on previous ways of doing things and expect them to work. When they don't, we get frustrated and become convinced that the new thing is somehow wrong. The effect is corrosive: who said it's better to strangle a new-born than to suffer frustration?

The issue is akin to trying to learn a new language where some words make sense, but most of the grammar and syntax is alien. It's hard. I suspect Nigel has been trying TurboCAD, Fusion, and now Alibre in hope of finding a CAD package that matches his world view. This is likely to cause even more confusion because they are different as well as mismatched to him.

The painful cure is to follow the instructions for using new software exactly making no assumptions whatever. Short of a mentor, the MEW tutorial is just what's needed. Don't expect any of it to work as you expect, adapt and obey. Don't skip ahead, don't rebel. The process is like learning to ride a bicycle – suddenly the new learning makes sense and you're off.

Like anything else, not everyone is good at relearning. No way will I ever learn German. It's why youngsters with zero life experience can work smart phones while poor old grandad fumes because they don't understand tape measures. I've had many run-ins with stuff I just don't get. Sometimes it's best to walk away. Life's too short for masochism…

Dave

[Author]

Posts