Autocad for 3D
Autocad for 3D
(OP)
Ive been playing around over the last few days with autocad in 3D (autocad 2008) and have come to the conclusion that its not very efficient for 3D work. The reason I say this is because for example rendering is so tedious and there are so many different variables that autocad seeks.
Also the end result it seems to me is rather toyish.
Am I missing something ? I would lve to hear comments by 3D users who disagree and why?
Also Im toying with google sketchup for 3d work (my work is architectural mainly light commercial).
Ive been looking at Chief architect and archicad about 3D work are there any comments on this software by users?
Maybe Im just becoming a little frustrated.
Also the end result it seems to me is rather toyish.
Am I missing something ? I would lve to hear comments by 3D users who disagree and why?
Also Im toying with google sketchup for 3d work (my work is architectural mainly light commercial).
Ive been looking at Chief architect and archicad about 3D work are there any comments on this software by users?
Maybe Im just becoming a little frustrated.





RE: Autocad for 3D
RE: Autocad for 3D
RE: Autocad for 3D
Glad to see that you are having a go at 3D: gets the brain all "spacial". I work for several architects and they are all going over to Revit for 3D. I designed a stair recently in 3D and I ran out of memory again (See attached). I could continue to add to the model in wire-frame but when I add the material to the model, the program begins to stall. I would love to go further and add light and shadow but not on my machine. I use Ecotect for my shadow work and the 3D facilities it offers are similar to sketch-up and I now note that AutoDesk have bought Ecotect.
RE: Autocad for 3D
I think autocad isn't really for 3d work at least for what Im doing.
RE: Autocad for 3D
By the way, we never used anything newer than ACAD 2004. I'm sure there have been enhancements since then to make it even easier.
Solidworks 2009 SP4.1
4GB Ram
Quadro FX3700
2.66GHz Core 2 Quad XP Pro SP2.0
RE: Autocad for 3D
I think many of the users competent in 3D design simply don't find time enough to familiarize with the rendering tools because always in wait line for another nonrendering task.
Autocad is great for simple 3D designs; if you develop the required experience with the rendering parts you will get fancy results easily ... but after the frustrating period of learning. Most practicing designers have not the time to dedicate to learn the tool, say 2 or 3 years for realistic appearance and some generality, so renderers appear in the market, young people that have had the time and the training.
For more complex technical forms, use Inventor, and if free form targeted to technical use, likely Rhinoceros. For less technical and more art minded people, 3D Max and Maya are as good, but I don't see anyone making very good renders with less than 2 or 3 years on the back.
You can mimick such results with some other programs (Hypershot?) in a couple of days, but the real thing requieres study; like the difference between a good engineer and one that knows how to fill the input for some structural design program ... maybe less apparent difference but as big in reality.
RE: Autocad for 3D
For 3D work, AutoCAD has no substitute. All of the tools of Sketchup, Ecotect, maya are in AutoCAD. AutoCAD is micro-millimetre perfect, no other program is. Other programs are for animation, media - not engineers. So why use anything else? civeng80 answered that question - its childish in its use. Solid objects have to built separately and then added to the model - cyberspace lego - very confusing with many objects and nearly impossible using line-drawn objects. Try to build a model using realistic entities and the computer stops: runs out of memory and I have over 3-gig. Which is a shame.
As for the time to learn how to draw in 3D, it takes a day, no, an hour (I did it in my lunch break - Dik will tell you, bet Dik did too) - but I knew what I wanted to build. Inventor, like VIZ and its replacement, are just plug-ins to AutoCAD and "I suspect" will be dropped by AutoDesk when Revit takes over. But I bet AutoCAD will get there in the end. At £3500 a program and £400 a year subscription I bet they will because if someone comes up with a fast accurate 2D into 3D program, it will be snapped up. AutoDesk cannot buy everything -can they?
RE: Autocad for 3D
I use Pro/Engineer for all my 3D work and print generations, then ill transfer into AutoCAD to add all the notes and dimensions. Allthough Pro/E does have a simple and easy ot use 2D program, the 3D is their bread and butter.
RE: Autocad for 3D
Together with Google earth its a very powerful design tool. And a free one at that !
RE: Autocad for 3D
Using AutoCAD (instead of other programs like SolidWorks) for 3D is like
.......fitting a motor to a pushbike(Bicycle) when you can buy a Honda Motorbike from around the corner.
RE: Autocad for 3D
RE: Autocad for 3D
I've done very little rendering in AutoCAD, because there was little need for it, for me, and Rhinoceros is better at it anyway.
I've been using Solidworks for about 2-1/2 years, and I'm just getting so I can get concepts down in Solidworks faster than I can in AutoCAD. But bare Solidworks against bare AutoCAD is not exactly a fair comparison. Bare AutoCAD, all I've ever used, is cheaper and more primitive. Inventor, or whatever they now call the deluxe superset of AutoCAD these days, is more equal in capability, and in price, I'm told.
One of the things I still like about doing 3D in AutoCAD is that solids just lay there where you build them. You have to manually move or change them.
By contrast, Solidworks can cause objects to move and change shape depending on how you 'push' them with 'mates'. Until you get used to it, it's like building stuff with wet soapy balloons.
One other thing that's hard to get used to is that a 'regen' equivalent sort of dumps all the primitives in a pile, and then stacks 'em up again, based on what you've told it to _not_ do. ... and it's easily confused about how you want thngs restacked, even when you just want everything back where it was.
On the other, other hand, once you begin to understand how Solidworks thinks, or doesn't think, you can with relative ease make it do things that would be very tedious in AutoCAD.
IOW, no matter what you do, you face a learning curve...
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Autocad for 3D
Inventor has nothing to do with AutoCAD, except that they're both sold by Autodesk. Inventor is very similar to Solidworks, and is entirely constraint driven and parametric.
That means that if you change a certain dimension in a 2D sketch, your 3D part / assembly and related drawings will automatically change.
Try moving a hole with AutoCAD 3D. Hell, try making a hole with AutoCAD 3D.
We have been an entirely 3D Inventor-based office for 7 yrs now. If anyone wants reliable Inventor info, you should check out the Autodesk:Inventor forum, not the misinformation posted above.
tg
RE: Autocad for 3D
Do you use inventor for structural work ? Because I always thought it was for mechanical engineering.
RE: Autocad for 3D
We use it in a mechanical engineering context, exclusively. We're modeling entire locomotives and other rail vehicles with it.
tg
RE: Autocad for 3D
With the assembly features and animation capabilities, Inventor is, if you'll pardon the pun, more geared toward mechanical engineering.
RE: Autocad for 3D
"Try moving a hole with AutoCAD 3D. Hell, try making a hole with AutoCAD 3D."
I do this all the time in AutoCAD 3D, with simple macros, some simple shareware and a few commands. Inventor must be super to work with, but then again, AutoCAD has the tools and one can get them to work.
RE: Autocad for 3D
No macros !
No problems !
Easy !
RE: Autocad for 3D
You should take an introductory Inventor course, maybe a 1 or 2 day thing, and then I suspect you'll realize just how powerful these parametric modelers are, no macro, no shareware, and 1 command.
Then, as often as you like, you can change the location of that hole (or that 300 part sub-assembly) by editing 1 dimension, and the change will be reflected in your 3D solid and your 2D drawings.
It has to be seen to be believed, when coming from an AutoCAD line of thinking, which is what we used to use.
Definitely agree that it takes some getting used to, to ensure that your models don't shift unexpectedly.
tg
tg
RE: Autocad for 3D
CDG, Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading
http://www.CivilDevelopmentGroup.com
RE: Autocad for 3D
tg
RE: Autocad for 3D
RE: Autocad for 3D
Are you familiar with Inventor and Vault?
If yes, how close are you to Canada?
tg
RE: Autocad for 3D
Has anyone a big 3D project that can be seen to be working? I have seen loads of little components but what about something useful like a football stadium.
RE: Autocad for 3D
CDG, Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading
http://cdg-ca.com
RE: Autocad for 3D
Brandon, Civil 3D was originally built for subdivision design. It has sophisticated grading design tools. Take the 3-day course from your local Autodesk Training Center and you'll get walked through the process.
tg: no experience with Inventor, but I threw one of my students a bone one week in lab and the next week he'd downloaded it from the Autodesk student site, watched a couple videos, and drawn up a 3D water slide (his hydraulics project). I've steered well clear of Vault because even the Autodesk people say it's a PITA and to use Data Shortcuts instead if you can. I guess Vault is good for a BIM/change management set-up but I've been glad not to use it. And with regard to Canada, I'm now about to move from TN to Indiana which is as far north as this South African child of the sun is prepared to move in search of the mighty buck. But if by Canada you mean Ontario, then there's a good chance we work for the same company.
RE: Autocad for 3D
CDG, Los Angeles Civil Engineering specializing in Hillside Grading
http://cdg-ca.com
RE: Autocad for 3D
Check out Dana Probert's blog: http://bimontherocks.typepad.com/
RE: Autocad for 3D
AutoCAD's 3D is a great mid-level tool! In fact, there's nothing I can model with any other tool that I can't do with AutoCAD (including some HUGE assemblies), and usually far easier. Its no nurbs free-form surface tool, altho 2010 has some surface tools and ACAD-3d as far back as r-12-DOS/AME had the ability to manipulate surface points and "smooth" the results. Not really the same thing, but there HAVE been improvements, and ACAD-3D is a fine mid-level tool. As for rendering, ACAD-3D has some AMAZING render tools, materials, and lighting. I was doing chrome parts laying on red-oak tables standing on green marble surfaces with gradient skies with clouds and time-of day/long-lat sun settings back in ACAD-14 3D and things have gotten better. NOW there's push-pull (2009 I think), AND basic constraints available in 2010, altho I haven't played with them much. I abandoned quick-keys long ago, as my ability to merge the output of one command as the input to another matured, so stick with the available icon menu options, and take the time to learn them ! They work very well, and will serve you well for a long time. You'll grow from there, and develop your own style. One trick I taught my students adopting 3D was that EVERY 2-D command also works in 3D, AND if they'll learn work planes and UCS's and the right-hand rule, they already know 75% of their 3D! Now all they needed was a good book and some practice time on the weekends, and some serious commitment to mastering their craft !
Good Luck and let us know how it goes !