I'm fortunate enough to have used a handful of CAD programs over the years. PTC Creo, AutoCAD, Fusion360, Solidworks, NX. All of them cater to different focuses and markets, something you guys highlighted well in the video which I think a lot of people miss that and get fixated on just sticking with what they know. I'll also say that there are simple practices that make designing parts in any software easier, like drawing the part you see in your head on a piece of paper. Even if you're bad at drawing, it can still be immensely helpful when you go to draw it in CAD. My day job is designing vehicle bodies for an OEM, where literally tens or hundreds of designers are working on a vehicle at any given point during the day, doing a top down approach simply wouldn't work but bottom up works great. NX is insanely capable, starting out it's easy to feel overwhelmed compared to other programs like Fusion or SW but in time you learn the nuances and the strong suits of the program and the models that can be made are far more complex and adaptable than less costly programs. At the end of the day it's a niche software and only large or niche companies can benefit from it (hence why licenses are absurdly pricey). My side business I use Fusion for all of the products we sell and since we're only selling single part products or small assemblies it's quick and easy to do top down modeling since I'm the only one working on it and can keep all of the updates in a single file as I go through new revisions. Even though Fusion is a "less powerful" program it's plenty capable for most anything you'll find in the racing world or aftermarket parts arena. Surface modeling is a bit more tough in Fusion than other programs but it's still a usable workflow process and I often find myself using surface modeling to smooth surfaces that come together at odd angles which aren't aesthetically pleasing or awkward to machine. The sheet metal operator is fairly intuitive and is one of the most useful tools in Fusion as well. Regardless of what program you use, none of them are useful if you don't understand design constraints. What material the part is being made from, what manufacturing processes are being used, how much space the part has to live in, what other parts does it have to interface with, are all valid focal points that should be understood before you embark on designing the part. The world of CAD is amazing and many things today wouldn't exist without it, having outlets like HPA to help spread knowledge and teach people who are interested by it but have no clue where to start is a just awesome and I wish I had more avenues like this when I was younger!
Well said and 100% valid! I think on top of getting fixated on what they are using some people also feel they have to justify what they are using to themselves (maybe due to costs etc) and inadvertently let that sway their public opinion. We all suffer from those rose-tinted glasses on something at one time or another and at the end of the day there are more good options than bad, they're just all a bit different in their own ways which matters more to commercial operations than someone wanting to learn. Always exceptions to that, but that is the general rule. Your comment on understanding the constraints of what you are working with over getting into the weeds of software are on point too. That is what is going to make or break things for most people out there vs a slightly different workflow! We are all spoilt more and more these days with the access we have to knowledge like HPA and countless other options out there for sure. It is great to see, and for us, it's great to be one small part of such progress. That said, no one learns from osmosis & we only help. It's still the individual that gets the credit for taking whatever help they get and putting in the work to make something of it 😎 - Taz.
Very useful info, thankyou! Started with PTC in 2001 and I still use that same software I got from school to this day as a hobbyists. It struggles to run on a modern system however, so I'm looking to move on. I now know that what I'm looking for is called a parametric bottom up software.
Will take a nose! After a quick look just now it's great to see they are not using the same UI and UX as FreeCAD as that is what puts us off using or recommending it for those starting out. Even so, it's nice for people to have options 🤘 - Taz.
@@hpa101 FreeCAD's UI, maybe workflow that may have been part of it, was exactly what put me off. Since it's already a powerful CAD system, perhaps even approaching the lines of AutoCAD, if Ondsel can streamline FreeCAD's UI and workflow-- which it may already have or is close-- its story might turn out kind of similar to Blender 3D's. As an aside, have you ever heard of applying AI to 3D modeling and, in that sense, heard of *Rodin* ? There are others, but Rodin seems the most accurate, at least for now. Unsure how that will affect how we model in 3D.
Shapr3D is a GREAT way to get started and I really like that I can make things from my iPad. Great second CAD if you want something for a tablet for when you’re on the go!
Having learnt on solidwokrs and now using fusion as a part of my job. Solidworks is worth the cost if you are using it full time. It is a far more mature software that brakes or errors less as you make changes up the timeline. Things like dimensions flipping sides, projected lines braking that can easily go unnoticed or can take hours to fix as repairs further break features down the timeline.
Similiar to the other post here, I have been around CAD and many different types of CAD. Solidworks is the best. If you want the features that a 3D software can give you in the long term, nothing compares to solidworks.
Question👋, I’m just starting out using CAD so I’m trying to navigate the different programs before potentially investing in one. 2 of the main things I’d like to use my program for is wiring and modeling. I’m not looking to manufacture anything. For example I’ll be making a wiring harness from scratch and I want to just plan things out. I’ll be installing a 9inch with ladder bars. I just want some visual references when I do this stuff. Is this something I can achieve in CAD?
You can and some CAD software has dedicated options for this but if you're not doing it commercially you might find you pay quite a sum for little gain. You might find this quick read helpful: www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/8-options-for-drawing-wiring-schematicsharnesses-in-motorsport-applications/ It's far from every option but it's a bit of a start for you - Taz.
Lol technically an option. I'm interested in re-exploring the rendering options, just because the last time I was messing around with rendering in blender was years ago and yafaray was the hotness, and I'm wondering how the tech has advanced since then though.
Depends what you're working on of course, but why eat soup with a fork when you have a spoon in the drawer I reckon - Taz. www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/parametric-vs-direct-modeling-whats-the-difference/
at 7:30. I use Inventor and Solidworks Daily. I use CAD since 1996. I can make ALL these parts with a single sketch, not 1 sketch for each part, a single sketch for all the parts, that includes the hexes etc, make 1 part, and then split it to those different parts, and make an assembly, and when i like, change the orginal sketch and everything updates Stay away from anything Autodesk. Used your online storage service of your choice, and you can rolll back easily, even if those programs have backup. Autodesk FEA is shit, It will only show FEA on the surface, so if you have a stress internally, well, you cant see it, you will have parts over their limits and will not show warnings, ultras Solidworks perpetual license + maintenance, will be cheaper at 4 years of paying for inventor that doesnt offer perpetual, and only subscription, that they can make more expensive any time Whoever even compares capabilities of solidworks with Inventor or Fusion, either doesnt know what he is talking about , or is getting payed by Autodesk.
Connor clearly states during this webinar that you can use either method (top-down or bottom-up) on a range of software options, some are just tailored more to a particular method. Yes, Solidworks pricing might be cheaper than Inventor, but that is out of reach for a lot of people and not comparable to free. Fusion 360 is a lot more affordable being FREE for 3D modeling to $500 a year for the full sub which is achievable for many of those starting out. Many CAD gurus in the industry proven that Fusion 360 is also plenty capable beyond just being a free or cheap option to start out with. By comparison, Solidworks is in the $1000s, unless you are talking about Makers, which isn't simply a scaled-down version of Solidworks, and is another conversation and an entirely different target market to general Solidworks or Inventor No one is saying Solidworks isn't great, of course it is, but you are assuming everyones use case is the same as yours, which it is not 😉 - Taz.
![Engine Break-In Myths Dispelled | Engine Break-In Tips And Tricks [GOLD WEBINAR]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5Ruk6GLJgbA/mqdefault.jpg)
![ILLSLICK - WINTER IS COMING [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dwTMeM1zIhQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm fortunate enough to have used a handful of CAD programs over the years. PTC Creo, AutoCAD, Fusion360, Solidworks, NX. All of them cater to different focuses and markets, something you guys highlighted well in the video which I think a lot of people miss that and get fixated on just sticking with what they know. I'll also say that there are simple practices that make designing parts in any software easier, like drawing the part you see in your head on a piece of paper. Even if you're bad at drawing, it can still be immensely helpful when you go to draw it in CAD.
My day job is designing vehicle bodies for an OEM, where literally tens or hundreds of designers are working on a vehicle at any given point during the day, doing a top down approach simply wouldn't work but bottom up works great. NX is insanely capable, starting out it's easy to feel overwhelmed compared to other programs like Fusion or SW but in time you learn the nuances and the strong suits of the program and the models that can be made are far more complex and adaptable than less costly programs. At the end of the day it's a niche software and only large or niche companies can benefit from it (hence why licenses are absurdly pricey).
My side business I use Fusion for all of the products we sell and since we're only selling single part products or small assemblies it's quick and easy to do top down modeling since I'm the only one working on it and can keep all of the updates in a single file as I go through new revisions. Even though Fusion is a "less powerful" program it's plenty capable for most anything you'll find in the racing world or aftermarket parts arena. Surface modeling is a bit more tough in Fusion than other programs but it's still a usable workflow process and I often find myself using surface modeling to smooth surfaces that come together at odd angles which aren't aesthetically pleasing or awkward to machine. The sheet metal operator is fairly intuitive and is one of the most useful tools in Fusion as well.
Regardless of what program you use, none of them are useful if you don't understand design constraints. What material the part is being made from, what manufacturing processes are being used, how much space the part has to live in, what other parts does it have to interface with, are all valid focal points that should be understood before you embark on designing the part. The world of CAD is amazing and many things today wouldn't exist without it, having outlets like HPA to help spread knowledge and teach people who are interested by it but have no clue where to start is a just awesome and I wish I had more avenues like this when I was younger!
Well said and 100% valid!
I think on top of getting fixated on what they are using some people also feel they have to justify what they are using to themselves (maybe due to costs etc) and inadvertently let that sway their public opinion. We all suffer from those rose-tinted glasses on something at one time or another and at the end of the day there are more good options than bad, they're just all a bit different in their own ways which matters more to commercial operations than someone wanting to learn. Always exceptions to that, but that is the general rule.
Your comment on understanding the constraints of what you are working with over getting into the weeds of software are on point too. That is what is going to make or break things for most people out there vs a slightly different workflow!
We are all spoilt more and more these days with the access we have to knowledge like HPA and countless other options out there for sure. It is great to see, and for us, it's great to be one small part of such progress. That said, no one learns from osmosis & we only help. It's still the individual that gets the credit for taking whatever help they get and putting in the work to make something of it 😎 - Taz.
Very useful info, thankyou!
Started with PTC in 2001 and I still use that same software I got from school to this day as a hobbyists. It struggles to run on a modern system however, so I'm looking to move on. I now know that what I'm looking for is called a parametric bottom up software.
*Ondsel* , an apparent fork of FreeCAD, seems to be growing and tightening FreeCAD's previous act by leaps and bounds.
Will take a nose! After a quick look just now it's great to see they are not using the same UI and UX as FreeCAD as that is what puts us off using or recommending it for those starting out.
Even so, it's nice for people to have options 🤘 - Taz.
@@hpa101 FreeCAD's UI, maybe workflow that may have been part of it, was exactly what put me off. Since it's already a powerful CAD system, perhaps even approaching the lines of AutoCAD, if Ondsel can streamline FreeCAD's UI and workflow-- which it may already have or is close-- its story might turn out kind of similar to Blender 3D's.
As an aside, have you ever heard of applying AI to 3D modeling and, in that sense, heard of *Rodin* ? There are others, but Rodin seems the most accurate, at least for now. Unsure how that will affect how we model in 3D.
Shapr3D is a GREAT way to get started and I really like that I can make things from my iPad. Great second CAD if you want something for a tablet for when you’re on the go!
Nice one! Haven't tried to use CAD from a tablet before. Great you've found something that suits what you need from CAD software 😎 - Taz
Having learnt on solidwokrs and now using fusion as a part of my job. Solidworks is worth the cost if you are using it full time. It is a far more mature software that brakes or errors less as you make changes up the timeline. Things like dimensions flipping sides, projected lines braking that can easily go unnoticed or can take hours to fix as repairs further break features down the timeline.
Great you found an option that suits you and how you use software. Cheers for sharing 😎 - Taz
Similiar to the other post here, I have been around CAD and many different types of CAD. Solidworks is the best. If you want the features that a 3D software can give you in the long term, nothing compares to solidworks.
Great you found one option that personally suits you so well 😎 - Taz
Catia and NX are miles ahead of Solidworks.
@@shaunhutchinson4707 Catia vs NX , which one is better ?
Solidworks has probably been the easiest and most productive for myself. Siemens NX is pretty good, but it's less intuitive imo.
Question👋, I’m just starting out using CAD so I’m trying to navigate the different programs before potentially investing in one.
2 of the main things I’d like to use my program for is wiring and modeling. I’m not looking to manufacture anything.
For example I’ll be making a wiring harness from scratch and I want to just plan things out.
I’ll be installing a 9inch with ladder bars. I just want some visual references when I do this stuff.
Is this something I can achieve in CAD?
You can and some CAD software has dedicated options for this but if you're not doing it commercially you might find you pay quite a sum for little gain.
You might find this quick read helpful: www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/8-options-for-drawing-wiring-schematicsharnesses-in-motorsport-applications/
It's far from every option but it's a bit of a start for you - Taz.
For any sort of automotive/aero surface application, nothing comes close to Catia or NX.
Blender for CAD, because i'm contrarian.
Lol technically an option.
I'm interested in re-exploring the rendering options, just because the last time I was messing around with rendering in blender was years ago and yafaray was the hotness, and I'm wondering how the tech has advanced since then though.
Depends what you're working on of course, but why eat soup with a fork when you have a spoon in the drawer I reckon - Taz.
www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/parametric-vs-direct-modeling-whats-the-difference/
@@hpa101That's the answer
at 7:30. I use Inventor and Solidworks Daily. I use CAD since 1996. I can make ALL these parts with a single sketch, not 1 sketch for each part, a single sketch for all the parts, that includes the hexes etc, make 1 part, and then split it to those different parts, and make an assembly, and when i like, change the orginal sketch and everything updates
Stay away from anything Autodesk. Used your online storage service of your choice, and you can rolll back easily, even if those programs have backup. Autodesk FEA is shit, It will only show FEA on the surface, so if you have a stress internally, well, you cant see it, you will have parts over their limits and will not show warnings, ultras
Solidworks perpetual license + maintenance, will be cheaper at 4 years of paying for inventor that doesnt offer perpetual, and only subscription, that they can make more expensive any time
Whoever even compares capabilities of solidworks with Inventor or Fusion, either doesnt know what he is talking about , or is getting payed by Autodesk.
Connor clearly states during this webinar that you can use either method (top-down or bottom-up) on a range of software options, some are just tailored more to a particular method.
Yes, Solidworks pricing might be cheaper than Inventor, but that is out of reach for a lot of people and not comparable to free.
Fusion 360 is a lot more affordable being FREE for 3D modeling to $500 a year for the full sub which is achievable for many of those starting out. Many CAD gurus in the industry proven that Fusion 360 is also plenty capable beyond just being a free or cheap option to start out with.
By comparison, Solidworks is in the $1000s, unless you are talking about Makers, which isn't simply a scaled-down version of Solidworks, and is another conversation and an entirely different target market to general Solidworks or Inventor
No one is saying Solidworks isn't great, of course it is, but you are assuming everyones use case is the same as yours, which it is not 😉 - Taz.