I'm super glad this exists, this space definitely needs compelling open source alternatives to bring back the hobbyists scene from proprietary offerings (mostly fusion360), and every effort should be encouraged since this is a very difficult nut to crack.
I known my way around CAD software and so I gave this a shot around 4 months ago, but it looked frankly alien and relied a lot on blender idiosyncrasies and baggage that most people with a CAD background would likely be missing. Basic things were hard to find and simple things were hard to do. I also had doubts that the foundations are sound (whatever engine props this up seems to be using floating point numbers instead of parametric equations, so things like pockets on top of coincident lines would incorrectly leave infinitesimal volumes of material).
I should give it a new look but the road ahead will likely be very long.
Autodesk has gone out of their way to destroy free F360. I finally quit when you had to reload the free version with a new account every 30 days. Forcing Eagle into F360 was just evil. Trying to use either is the hobbits being shown Frodo's clothes levels of anguish and despair.
This may make me look at Blender again (too hard to learn at the time). Designspark Mechanical isn't too bad if you have become an F360 refugee.
F360 makes me so sad. I'd gladly pay for it, but I make like 2 or 3 models as a hobbyist per year and their cheapest plan is hundreds of dollars per year. I wish there was something in between that unlocked the full functionality. Or at least multi-page-PDF support.
While it definitely has missing features, I've found that their free tier works pretty well for most stuff that I run into for 3D printers or in my wood shop. I have about 80 models in my F360 account right now and I've never paid for it. Never needed to print multiple pages, though. (Occasionally a cut list for plywood, but there are plugins for that.)
Your Term Has Expired
You can still administer your teams, but you now have 'basic' access to Fusion. If you would like to restore full access, click Subscribe Now.
With basic access you can still:
View projects
Comment on and mark up files
Download files
It used to be you had to switch every year. But the ts and cs are buried on the web site if they are public at all. You have have it installed to see your license details, which I no longer do.
OK, so you were using non-free-tier features, and they were pulled when you were no longer in the non-free trial? That's a different thing.
F360 locks teams and some features (stress/strength modeling, for example) behind a paywall but for the actual free tier--useful for 3D printing, woodworking, etc.--is effectively unlimited for single-user use. (You have a limit of ten "editable" documents at once, which is silly but not of much consequence.)
I don't have a ton of experience with CAD software so maybe it's par for the course, but one of the things I dislike about F360 is how it runs like a dog regardless of your hardware.
I started using blender again recently and the UI has major improvements, but mostly learning the shortcuts pays off big time (i.e. rx for rotate x, sy for scale y, gx for move x : in global space, gxx will move x in local space and so on).
Changing space key in the settings to pop up a search toolbar, etc.
My point being, each software has its own mechanics and takes a while to become productive at it. Blender has a lot of content online from users, with tips and tutorials, so it’s currently a good space to be, learning wise.
CAD support is lacking though. Glad linking CAD Sketcher here found more users willing to try it out. Hopefully it gets feedback/support, helping to its development.
Not disagreeing with any of that, I was just thinking that very little of what's generally useful in blender for making art transposes well into something useful or convenient for CAD. The whole mindset is different: you generally don't scale anything when designing a mechanical part, you specify or parametrize dimensions (because catalogue items like fasteners won't care that it looks awesome at 123.6%), and similarly, you don't move things by arbitrary offsets in arbitrary directions, you add assembly constraints so the kinematics make sense.
I'm sure CAD Sketcher will grow a ton of convenient shortcuts too, I don't think they'll have much in common with the rest of blender.
I've been using Blender a few times for 3D printing. Functional parts with playful/artistic touch. I can recommend it for that. I tried FreeCAD recently but it feels, well, constrained.
FreeCAD is like entering values into a form, while Blender is like playing around with the model interactively. You can drag anything around, tear it apart, fix it again. It's possible to keep things editable, almost parametric, but this requires more planning and knowledge.
For getting started you definitely want to follow tutorials. One for basic mesh modelling, and one with focus on CAD. (How on earth are you supposed to figure out that you want a "subdivision surface" modifier. It's the first thing I add in every project.) But I'm thinking now FreeCAD may be just as hard to learn as Blender (unless you already know CAD).
(But now that I know the basics of CAD workflows, CAD Sketcher looks interesting. Before that, I wouldn't have seen the point.)
I would recommend trying out SolveSpace first, which is what CAD Sketcher is based on. It has a delightfully simple UI, and the basic sketching workflow is the same, so you can learn the concepts first in SolveSpace, then get familiar moving around in Blender and transfer your SolveSpace knowledge over.
I known my way around CAD software and so I gave this a shot around 4 months ago, but it looked frankly alien and relied a lot on blender idiosyncrasies and baggage that most people with a CAD background would likely be missing. Basic things were hard to find and simple things were hard to do. I also had doubts that the foundations are sound (whatever engine props this up seems to be using floating point numbers instead of parametric equations, so things like pockets on top of coincident lines would incorrectly leave infinitesimal volumes of material).
I should give it a new look but the road ahead will likely be very long.