If you're curious about creating an assembly using the new native assembly workbench, which can generate an exploded view and an automatic parts list, take a look at this new video at th-cam.com/video/k51YFdXIIek/w-d-xo.html.
I hopefully will be as well. Btw do you have any experience with blender on very low end specs? Or can predict how it'll perform. I'm a bit broke, and learning freecad, planning on simulating some... kinda sophisticated stuff, engine, pressure/vaccuum and whatnot. Would it be feasible on old i3 i.e 2nd gen. And integrated graphics. With 6gb ram (I've heard it's helpful to have more). I've heard older versions may work, but I've no idea of its practicality on my specs. I don't plan on simulating eye candy fluids and heavy stuff at high resolution, but I'll need diaphragm and balloon and pressure differentiation and some other things to simulate.
@yasirrakhurrafat1142 For both Blender and Freecad, I think your specs will be too poor for your expectations . I have run Blender and Freecad on an I7 4710 and gtx 850m, Freecad was OK but suffers when there are many objects in the assembly and for Blender, the viewport was ok but render times was extremely long.
@@deltahedra3D brother. You have any video, or can refer to me to a video about what viewport is? I've seen that it just seems like a half-ashe renderer. But I like that its not performance intensive. If i can just simulate everything, semi complicated fluids, gas, and pressure-vacuum, and soft bodies like diaphragms or something without beautiful rendering, I would be satisfied. I just need to simulate and figure out some physics interactions and whatnot. Would it be possible in viewport? I'm playing around with freecad, it doesn't seem very intensive, maybe it'll get more demanding if objects, sketches and parts increase and complexity, but no lag so far. Also, would older versions of blender perform better on my ancient hardware? I actually have an i7 870 and hd 3*** something something from amd/ati. These are so old, I didn't mention because I don't think most people will even recognise these.
@@yasirrakhurrafat1142you can do anything only thing that will be hindering you is that it takes more time on a low end machine. RAM might be a hard limit for very complex projects. So start your journey of learning with what you have, not everyone can afford a pro setup before becoming a pro.
@@Krmpfpks nahh bro ); I was looking to do some semi complicated stuff. Is it possible to see outcomes without rendering the stuff? Like you do fluid simulations, but don't want a video result. Like how we do in video editing, scrubbing through the timeline.. watching the video with effects applied without rendering? I just wanna do some engineering stuff 😭😭
Ja FreeCAD is super - unterrichte moebelbau (Teil von Produkt und Innenarchitektur). Ich baue aber das ganze System als eins ohne Assembly und schiebe dann die Teile ins Techdraw.
Clear and concise. Earned my sub. This is a bottom up design. It uses a lot of formulas, too many for my liking :). I would like to see a top down design in Freecad where shape binder is used ( or some other method) to transfer features from part to part. This should reduce the amount of formulas used. In other words the parts are feature driven, rather than formula driven. Less chances of user errors.
@bytekilla666 I usually use a spreadsheet, especially for more complex design where formula is needed, but I will try to add the varset in my workflow. Thanks.
Thanks, I had some solver errors with the assembly workbench as soon as I added the dowels, especially when I updated the spreadsheet with new values. If you want some details about the assembly built-in freecad, I have made this video th-cam.com/video/k51YFdXIIek/w-d-xo.html, where I made the assembly, the exploded view and a part list complied in a drawing.
Thank you for this great tutorial. Regarding assembly, I wonder if it would have been better to use the dowels instead of the edges to make the coincidences. That would help ensuring we did not make any mistake regarding the position of the dowels. And it corresponds to the way the cabinet is assembled.
You are right, it's better to use the dowels, but I chose the edges to avoid calculation error of the solver when adjusting the values of the spreadsheet. I have terrible results using the dowels with the Assembly workbench, so I didn't want to take risk, but your solution could work.
Most of the time I made my assembly in a new file, especially when using A2plus workbench, because you need to convert a part to A2plus so as to make it fix and I find that it make the tree structure messy with a different icon for the converted part.
@@deltahedra3D well sketchUp is easy to learn when you need only to draw boxes - but then it hits a snag. Professionally I work with Shapr3D which in contrast to Freecad is much easier to use (Better interface and workflow). However FreeCad and wood working is so well done. The spreadsheet sketcher modeling assembly and techdrawing are great tools to make a parametric model which you can then cnc. I just wonder why they throw money at SketchUp when you can have something better.
@@cekuhnen You can learn master class in any software. You would be suprised how an expert draws and plans in Sketchup. For the cost thing, I'm agree with you. 3-4 years ago, I was giving a 3h demonstration of how to design with sketchup at the Shaper3D's headquarters in Hungary. The presentation was to help develope Shapr3D. All softwares are good if you take time to learn them.
@forizsdaniel2128 I think you statement is a little over generalized. You can learn and master each software but they work very differently, offer different workflows and thus do not allow you to work the same way. Example: Blender Shapr3D allow editing multiple objects at once, SketchUp cannot.
Sketchup has free extension opencutlist to do nesting ofcabinet parts so you can go estimate your costs and know where to cut the boards. Freecad cannot do that.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
If you're curious about creating an assembly using the new native assembly workbench, which can generate an exploded view and an automatic parts list, take a look at this new video at th-cam.com/video/k51YFdXIIek/w-d-xo.html.
Thank you for the video. It was clear and at a good pace.
Thank you.
Great tutorial
Looking forward for your next videos on Freecad.
Thank you for the new session - Parametric drawing is instrumental and handy -
I‘m blown away! You have a new subscriber.
Thank you and welcome :)
Beautiful video. Sure you are as good blender user as you are in Freecad, it good be nice a follow up video of the animation at the beginning!
I hopefully will be as well.
Btw do you have any experience with blender on very low end specs? Or can predict how it'll perform.
I'm a bit broke, and learning freecad, planning on simulating some... kinda sophisticated stuff, engine, pressure/vaccuum and whatnot.
Would it be feasible on old i3 i.e 2nd gen. And integrated graphics. With 6gb ram (I've heard it's helpful to have more).
I've heard older versions may work, but I've no idea of its practicality on my specs.
I don't plan on simulating eye candy fluids and heavy stuff at high resolution, but I'll need diaphragm and balloon and pressure differentiation and some other things to simulate.
@yasirrakhurrafat1142 For both Blender and Freecad, I think your specs will be too poor for your expectations . I have run Blender and Freecad on an I7 4710 and gtx 850m, Freecad was OK but suffers when there are many objects in the assembly and for Blender, the viewport was ok but render times was extremely long.
@@deltahedra3D brother.
You have any video, or can refer to me to a video about what viewport is?
I've seen that it just seems like a half-ashe renderer.
But I like that its not performance intensive.
If i can just simulate everything, semi complicated fluids, gas, and pressure-vacuum, and soft bodies like diaphragms or something without beautiful rendering, I would be satisfied.
I just need to simulate and figure out some physics interactions and whatnot.
Would it be possible in viewport?
I'm playing around with freecad, it doesn't seem very intensive, maybe it'll get more demanding if objects, sketches and parts increase and complexity, but no lag so far.
Also, would older versions of blender perform better on my ancient hardware?
I actually have an i7 870 and hd 3*** something something from amd/ati.
These are so old, I didn't mention because I don't think most people will even recognise these.
@@yasirrakhurrafat1142you can do anything only thing that will be hindering you is that it takes more time on a low end machine. RAM might be a hard limit for very complex projects. So start your journey of learning with what you have, not everyone can afford a pro setup before becoming a pro.
@@Krmpfpks nahh bro ); I was looking to do some semi complicated stuff.
Is it possible to see outcomes without rendering the stuff?
Like you do fluid simulations, but don't want a video result.
Like how we do in video editing, scrubbing through the timeline.. watching the video with effects applied without rendering?
I just wanna do some engineering stuff 😭😭
Hervorragendes Video!
Für mich als Tischler beziehungsweise Schreiner sehr nützlich.
Ich grüße aus der geographischen Mitte von Deutschland.
Hubertus
Ja FreeCAD is super - unterrichte moebelbau (Teil von Produkt und Innenarchitektur). Ich baue aber das ganze System als eins ohne Assembly und schiebe dann die Teile ins Techdraw.
Ausgezeichnetes Video!
Danke.
FreeCAD rockt!
This is brilliant. Thanks for doing it.
Thanks
Great! You are gifted.
Great video. Thanks a lot.
Clear and concise. Earned my sub. This is a bottom up design. It uses a lot of formulas, too many for my liking :). I would like to see a top down design in Freecad where shape binder is used ( or some other method) to transfer features from part to part. This should reduce the amount of formulas used. In other words the parts are feature driven, rather than formula driven. Less chances of user errors.
@imoldovan I'm not familiar about the workflow you talk about but I will find out. Thank you for your comment and your constructive remark :).
Excellent tutorial thanks
Thank you!
In Freecad 1.0 it makes more sense to use the varset (icon {}) instead of spreadsheets. A more modern and struct way to do this.
@bytekilla666 I usually use a spreadsheet, especially for more complex design where formula is needed, but I will try to add the varset in my workflow. Thanks.
thanks, great video
Great video, but might I ask why you chose to use A2Plus instead of the built-in assembly workbench?
Thanks, I had some solver errors with the assembly workbench as soon as I added the dowels, especially when I updated the spreadsheet with new values. If you want some details about the assembly built-in freecad, I have made this video th-cam.com/video/k51YFdXIIek/w-d-xo.html, where I made the assembly, the exploded view and a part list complied in a drawing.
@@deltahedra3D Checking it out as we speak, thank you!
Thank you for this great tutorial.
Regarding assembly, I wonder if it would have been better to use the dowels instead of the edges to make the coincidences. That would help ensuring we did not make any mistake regarding the position of the dowels. And it corresponds to the way the cabinet is assembled.
You are right, it's better to use the dowels, but I chose the edges to avoid calculation error of the solver when adjusting the values of the spreadsheet. I have terrible results using the dowels with the Assembly workbench, so I didn't want to take risk, but your solution could work.
I'm interested why did you create new file for assembly instead of using the same file and just add an assembly.
Most of the time I made my assembly in a new file, especially when using A2plus workbench, because you need to convert a part to A2plus so as to make it fix and I find that it make the tree structure messy with a different icon for the converted part.
How can you send the program to a cnc router
too bad it's not covering the now native assembly tool of freecad. But anyway it's a great lesson for parametric design.
You can check this video th-cam.com/video/k51YFdXIIek/w-d-xo.html I use the now native assembly tool to make the assembly.
AI is terrible to listen to
woodworkers who dont use FreeCAD are insane - like those who use SketchCrap
People uses the softwares which they are comfortable with. Every softwares have their pro and cons. For my needs, Freecad is a good call.
@@deltahedra3D well sketchUp is easy to learn when you need only to draw boxes - but then it hits a snag. Professionally I work with Shapr3D which in contrast to Freecad is much easier to use (Better interface and workflow). However FreeCad and wood working is so well done. The spreadsheet sketcher modeling assembly and techdrawing are great tools to make a parametric model which you can then cnc.
I just wonder why they throw money at SketchUp when you can have something better.
@@cekuhnen You can learn master class in any software. You would be suprised how an expert draws and plans in Sketchup.
For the cost thing, I'm agree with you.
3-4 years ago, I was giving a 3h demonstration of how to design with sketchup at the Shaper3D's headquarters in Hungary.
The presentation was to help develope Shapr3D.
All softwares are good if you take time to learn them.
@forizsdaniel2128 I think you statement is a little over generalized. You can learn and master each software but they work very differently, offer different workflows and thus do not allow you to work the same way.
Example: Blender Shapr3D allow editing multiple objects at once, SketchUp cannot.
Sketchup has free extension opencutlist to do nesting ofcabinet parts so you can go estimate your costs and know where to cut the boards. Freecad cannot do that.