CAD Preference personal poll  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Scratch Building, Aircraft Design, 3D/CAD >> CAD Preference personal poll
Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
CAD Preference personal poll - 7/10/2003 1:23:39 AM   
mikejhs82-RCU


 

Posts: 16
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
Ok my good friends. Here are your set of GIVENS:

1- You have access to or own Autocad.
2- You have access to or own Corel Draw.

3- The question. What, if any, advantage does one have to use Modelcad 3000. What features other than the obvious(written for model airplane design) does modelcad have over the alternatives as stated above? Does modelcad output files that can be read by lasers or cnc machines? Is modelcad a piece of software that a small shop could produce professional plans with?

Thanks in advance for all replies.

Plus if you have thoughts in addition to any stated above I wold be very happy to hear them .

thanks again!!!


_____________________________

AMA 507301
If it wasnt for gravity we would
       Post #: 1

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/10/2003 5:09:29 AM   
scalebldr


 

Posts: 541
Joined: 11/8/2002
From: allenstown, NH, USA
Status: offline
which drawing program do you know how to use?
i have corel 11 autocad r14 modelcad98 and designcad3000.because i the tutorial on modelcad 98 i like and use designcad 3000.autcad i have tried but so far go back to design cad or modelcad.yes you can get prof results with modelcad

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 2

what i know how to use - 7/10/2003 6:51:24 AM   
mikejhs82-RCU


 

Posts: 16
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
I am a student at ITT Tech. but start 3rd quarter in sept. I based on that know autocad...and will be learning it exclusively there.I have some experience with corel..but get confused with the commands trying to use both....lol


I am considering buying modelcad cause i downloaded the demo..and it seems kewl just cant learn enough to make a decision in the trial period....


_____________________________

AMA 507301
If it wasnt for gravity we would

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 3

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/10/2003 8:57:30 AM   
BMatthews



Posts: 9004
Joined: 10/4/2002
From: Burnaby, BC, CANADA
Status: offline
I taught myself TurboCAD and I'm more than happy with it. I can honestly say that I can do anthing other than very simple freehand sketches faster in TC than I can with paper, pencil and ruler. It took me about, guessing here, 80 to 100 hours of use to reach that point. But I did it all on my own with just a little searching for tips on the 'net.

One thing I've learned on the boards where CAD is discussed. Once you learn one program you stick with it unless someone is paying you to learn another. It's just too hard and frustrating to switch for no real reason. So everyone will basically vote for the one they are most comfortable with.

BUT..... strangely enough I see the occasional AutoCAD type that does know another CAD or two and they usually moan on about how hard AutoCAD is for doing some things that the others do so directly or intuitively. A message? Perhaps some AC users can confirm these "vicious" rumors....

_____________________________

Witty saying to be plagarized shortly.....

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 4

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/10/2003 9:11:13 AM   
EagleOne



Posts: 370
Joined: 5/18/2003
From: Curitiba, PR, BRAZIL
Status: offline
I also taught myself TurboCAD (the free version) and it can do almost anything I need when designing a plan. It's only drawback is the lack of 3D modeling, which can be useful in previwing the aircraft's final appearance. I solved this problem using Gmax. Gmax is a freeware version of 3D studio that has some handy features to make airplanes. Coupled with TurboCAD it's not complicated to get good results. At least for my personal needs this method is quite satisfatory, and above all, free. I never used modelcad, designcad or CorelDraw, so I can't comment on them, but I have used AutoCAD and it can do some really nice designs, but it's not easy and quick to learn.

My 2c....


_____________________________

"I didn't fail, I just found 10 000 ways that didn't work"

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 5

Re: what i know how to use - 7/10/2003 3:58:39 PM   
Highflight-RCU


 

Posts: 597
Joined: 2/28/2003
From: Houston, TX, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mikejhs82
I am a student at ITT Tech. but start 3rd quarter in sept. I based on that know autocad...and will be learning it exclusively there.I have some experience with corel..but get confused with the commands trying to use both....lol


I am considering buying modelcad cause i downloaded the demo..and it seems kewl just cant learn enough to make a decision in the trial period....
[/QUOTE]

The important point about what you say is that you are going to learn on AutoCad at school. If that's the case, your only good choice is Intellicad. That's the only CAD program that works almost exactly like AutoCad in all it's commands etc. Additionally, it's pretty much as powerful as AutoCad as well (the PE+ version has 3D capability like AutoCad).

ModelCad is OK and so are the rest, but Intellicad is the only CAD package that emulates AutoCad and is as capable as well. I also like FastCad but it's almost $800 which still puts it out of reach for most hobbyists. Intellicad can be had for about $200 or less I think.

Highflight

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 6

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/10/2003 10:04:54 PM   
Cdallas2



Posts: 547
Joined: 2/7/2002
From: Kamloops, BC,
Status: offline
Actually you can get IntelliCad from [url]www.cadopia.com[/url] for a free trial till September (I think). I found it's a little slow on my dinosaur but it will do most of the same stuff as AutoCad.

I have upgraded to AutoCad 2002 and don't know why I didn't do it sooner. I've only scratched the surface of what it can do and I'm already very impressed.

_____________________________

Help!!!! Help!!!! I'm Being Repressed!!!!

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 7

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/11/2003 6:04:41 AM   
CoosBayLumber


 

Posts: 3047
Joined: 1/20/2002
From: San Bernardino Calif
Status: offline
This subject has been beat up numerous times since about May. Don't base your needs upon a dollar figure, but moreover the intended (and future) needs, suitability and compatibility. CAD is not something loaded up on the computer which you want to show off to another, but something to get some work done with. I used Modelcad a few years ago under one of the 30 Trial options, and sent it back in less than a week. It just did not have the capabilities nor support for what I intended to do, plus there was a lack of compatibility with other systems, software and hardware. What wasn't explained at the time of purchase was that the system is set up for specific printers, and if you didn't have one, you didn't print out. Most annoying thing was the pallet size, and drawing size parameters. I had to scale everything to fall into the less than 34 inch size. I am thus down on anything which has "Model" in the title.

I have also used Corel Draw, and it is a fast way to show off something, but it is mainly based upon your hand placed linework and text. No compatibility of links between drawings which I feel is VERY important. If you ever plan to do three-views, you need this capability. Your linework also cannot be simply written to a disk and taken to a blueprint or graphic shop for plotting. They have to be set up similar to your thoughts in order to get a nice reproduceable. If you are on the one-sheet basis, it may be OK for you, but most readers think otherwise. It also works best with a PS printer or plotter.

I am moreover in favor of REAL CAD. CAD is not something loaded up on the computer which you want to show off to another, but something to get some work done with. If you want to communicate with others, you need to use software similar to what others use. If you want to draw up accurate plans and connect to industrial grade hardware, you need to use what others have. The TOY-CAD, Cheap-CAD and other little softwares do not have this capability unless their optional plug-ins are purchased. One of the software sellers required a $395 "ADD-on" which enabled you to be compatible with others.

I have loaded up, Autocad (by Autodesk), Autocad LT, Intellicad (by Visio), Key-CAD, Turbo-CAD, DesignCAD 2000, DesignCAD 3000 and a few $3 per disk softwares. To use each, you need to be trained, and each system is becoming more and more compatible with Autodesk, but then Autodesk is trying to distance itself from any other product. See if the new software is compatible with Autocad R-11 through R-14. Although there are newer versions now, most CAD operators readily refer to these titles, as do hardware servicemen. These release numbers are obsolete, but cost-wise it is better for you to locate software developed during this era as it is more compatibile with others and hardware. Expect to spend up to $500 for a full version of these, as the REAL CAD community still uses these and makes real dollars far in excess of the initial outlay.

Software drivers are very important in decision making, and specifying a "Windows Compatible" one or the $395 Add-on have to be taken into your consideration. Intellicad 98 can be obtained for around $100 or less, it has a pen plotter and a Windows driver, just as the Autodesk products do. It has a backdate filter in which you can export to an earlier version of Autocad. Eventially, you will wander over to eBay and bid upon a plotter in your area for less than $100 and wonder how to connect. Autodesk makes theirown ADI drivers and they only work within. Those $100 plotters will work in Autocad and Intellicad and some main frame systems, but will not work in CorelDraw, and several of the late model CAD softwares. A new 36" by 60" plotter will cost you about $14,000 now to be compatible with Windows XP, but a used $100 older one will only work with older software. I have a laptop computer loaded up with a multi-boot system and an umbilical cord. It operates under several operating systems as the CNC mill only understands DOS5, the old pen plotter understands DOS6.2, the faster plotter runs out of Windows 3.1, the laser cutter with only work on Windows 95/98. Some smarty will tell you he runs on Windows XP, but that software costs a whole lot less than a ten year old 1/2 million dollar CNC 6 axis mill and all the tooling to upgrade and get the same results.

You are basically going to use twelve commands over and over again. Items within Autocad, TurboCAD and Intellicad that get used quite often are the ModelSpace/PaperSpace and the XREF/Insert commands. These enable you to draw the sideview to a fuselage using full sized dimensions, then pull that drawing into yet another drawing called PLAN. The separate drawings are automatically scaled to fit the page size, and you can then shift and rotate them around as one object. If CheapCAD does not offer these features, then you are limiting your compatibility. Autocad R-14 and Intellicad will permit you to insert scanned images, then manupulate and trace over.

In respect to a question, one of the other sneaky little items not being mentioned here is that you need a CAD software which will make an output file in the original pen plotter HP-GL or PCI languages if you want to convert the linework into G-code for CNC equipment, or laser cutting language. This is not being included in softwares which operate under Windows XP. Go to the Autodesk site, CADALOG, CADINFO.net, Lorand.net and read up on concerns of others and find free conversion programs for HP-GL. Autodesk has thousands of inquieries everyday in their forums as to problems/solutions. Google has an Intellicad 98/2000 forum, as well as others like Turbo-CAD and Key-CAD. Best thing is to establish your aims, read up before purchase, and to stick with whatever you purchase.

I had a reader here send me a PM three months ago as to a plotter problems. He bought a Calcomp 1043 for about $10 on eBay and could not get it to run. He had wrong everything. I directed him to professional sites, he dumped the toy software, bought real CAD software and is now making large sized plans at home using the $10 plotter that cost $10,000 in 1980.


Wm.

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 8

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/11/2003 6:25:55 PM   
nIgHthAwK17



Posts: 71
Joined: 4/28/2002
From: Starkville, MS, USA
Status: offline
Neither.... my preference by a long shot is Rhinoceros V2.0... Ease of use, simplicity, and ability to render objects in 3D far surpases all other CAD programs I've come in contact with(those including AutoCAD 2000, TurboCAD, ModelCAD, Unigraphics, etc.)

[url]www.rhino3d.com[/url]


_____________________________

-----------------------
Ad Astra Per Aspera

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 9

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/11/2003 9:30:30 PM   
Highflight-RCU


 

Posts: 597
Joined: 2/28/2003
From: Houston, TX, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by nIgHthAwK17
Neither.... my preference by a long shot is Rhinoceros V2.0... Ease of use, simplicity, and ability to render objects in 3D far surpases all other CAD programs I've come in contact with(those including AutoCAD 2000, TurboCAD, ModelCAD, Unigraphics, etc.)

[url]www.rhino3d.com[/url]
[/QUOTE]

For the purposes stated, using Rhino (a heavily 3D oriented program) to draw model aircraft plans is like using a shovel to install a light bulb.
It's the wrong tool for the job.

CoosBay's points were all relevant which is why, in the end, I'll recommend Intellicad hands down after ALL things are considered.

Highflight

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 10

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/12/2003 2:34:10 AM   
nIgHthAwK17



Posts: 71
Joined: 4/28/2002
From: Starkville, MS, USA
Status: offline
Sorry, but I thought the question was in regard to what people use to DESIGN airplanes, etc., not to draw plans for. However, with a heavily 3D CAD engine like Rhino, I am able to get more complex curves, figure out where all of my components are going, as well as a preliminary center of gravity with materials used estimate. For someone experienced in design, 3D CAD engines can make a good design better.


_____________________________

-----------------------
Ad Astra Per Aspera

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 11

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/12/2003 6:33:18 AM   
CoosBayLumber


 

Posts: 3047
Joined: 1/20/2002
From: San Bernardino Calif
Status: offline
NightHawK

I think was the above folks are tying to convey is to use what you already have at hand, and can trust. For $6000, I bought a Itallian made CNC mill five years ago which was already ten years old, with controls made by a prominent local Southern California company that were built around 1977. The thing ran fine, but I didn't use it enough, and sold it for $10,000. Thats a lot more than any software package discussed here so far, but it ran on elderly hand written code, which was from a perforated tape. It did exactly what I wanted it to do, and built an awfull lot of _____ with it. The tooling was relatively low cost. Had also a lot of modern geeks tell me to upgrade over the years. Then I found it was going to cost me about $25,000 to upgrade the controls, another $1,500 for the home computer, and $4000 for the new software, and who knows how much for Titanium tooling. I would then be running and designing all my work in Windows, but the same ol' end mill can only cut aluminum at one feed rate, no matter what the software brand. It still would have taken the same amount of time to cut the part, but it would have cost more too.

My father had an old Buick which he used to drive downtown twice per week for supplies. Used about one quart of gasoline for this. However, the neighbor's told him to get a more modern fuel efficient car. So he went out looking, and by-gosh, he found nearly all the cars on the lot were more fuel efficient. Hell, they could do the same chores using a pint of gasoline per week. However, not only the initial cost was high, but so was required insurance, and a "technit'un" had to be summonded if it did not start up. It didn't take much explaining that the up grade would have bought more quarts of gasoline than he had years to live.

If it works OK, is affordable, does not get in the way, you are most familiar with it, and a host of other reasons, don't change anything.

There is an old saying. You can't teach a seventy year old anything. Nuthin. If you want him to do something for you, (and at a lower cost), then YOU are the one who has to learn.


Wm.

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 12

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/12/2003 9:39:08 PM   
Highflight-RCU


 

Posts: 597
Joined: 2/28/2003
From: Houston, TX, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by nIgHthAwK17
Sorry, but I thought the question was in regard to what people use to DESIGN airplanes, etc., not to draw plans for. However, with a heavily 3D CAD engine like Rhino, I am able to get more complex curves, figure out where all of my components are going, as well as a preliminary center of gravity with materials used estimate. For someone experienced in design, 3D CAD engines can make a good design better. [/QUOTE]

That's my point. The best way to DESIGN a model aircraft is in 2D because what's the point of designing something that you can't build with the output of your design? (Which you can't in 3D; you have to output 2D plots in order to cut parts and have plans to build from).
I think our terminology may not be in sync because what _you_ are doing is actually MODELING, not Designing
Rhino is fine if the final intended product is the graphic model of the aircraft, but you sure can't build from that. So I think the question really is what people use to DESIGN model airplanes, which brings us back to 2D.
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I think that others reading what you suggest and then attempting to design an airplane that way are being guided in the opposite direction to where they want to go.

Highflight

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 13

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/13/2003 1:53:30 AM   
CoosBayLumber


 

Posts: 3047
Joined: 1/20/2002
From: San Bernardino Calif
Status: offline
Well, my thought here is that everyone is entirely correct, and that Computer-Aided-Drafting and Computer-Aided-Design are getting thrown around too much to the point that they are becoming interchangeable. As mentioned, they are two different characters. For to use DESIGN, you ought add in engineering too. The noted systems do nothing in the way of engineering, statics, stress analysis, aerodynamics, etc. That has to be eyeballed first, then analyzed by what is behind your eyeball sockets. You really have to use you brain in all of this, and know what will, and what will not work. The computer image can be used to derive square areas, lengths,etc, but the above drafting systems will not calculate the results. And thus, by interchanging the terms noted in the original question, a few of us interpreted the intent to be just a drafting quality question. Could the proper selection of words have been: What system is used for electronically drafting up and checking a design? I think not,

This also opens up the situation mentioned that anything put onto paper cannot be 3D, as for practical purposes a page is only two dimentional. HOWEVER, we have to use paper to convey the representative image, and to provide notes and other written instructions as to create the real 3D item. Someone has to interpret a 3D object into three views. Rhino may be OK in certain respects, but it is a bit pricey (but still less than retail Autocad) and it too has a long learning curve for anyone older than 40, has more options than you could ever use at home. Like using an oxy/acetylene torch to light a cigarette. Worse yet it cannot plot out in 3D, as paper is only 2D. Smaller and cheaper may be all that is needed as the full majority of model A/C plans were done by pen or pencil on fade-out paper. A $10 plotter can easily do that kind of work. I may have had to lube the tool bits with a squirtgun on my former six ton monster CNC, but it did work of the quality I desired. There are at times I wished I had a fancyier one, but I did not use it enough to override that small initial investment. You gotta focus on what is economically good for the end user should the investment go totally wrong, but then again you do not want to buy something that cannot be expanded upon.

I predominently use Autocad here for my drawings. However for the lines I lay out TurboCAD would work just as good. For me, in switching between the two, I find the termonology and commands are not the same, and I get confused trying to remember how to do an item in each system. In Autocad you can hit the L on the keyboard for a line, and in TurboCAD .... I can't remember what. Each have capabilities and expansion beyond what I need to just lay out a few lines. Instead of thinking ModelCAD, the person ought to be looking into the slightly better and more compatible DesignCAD by the same software firm.

Wm.

(in reply to mikejhs82-RCU)
       Post #: 14

CAD Preference personal poll - 7/13/2003 8:10:42 PM