[HN Gopher] FreeCAD 0.20 Release Notes
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       FreeCAD 0.20 Release Notes
        
       Author : gsg001
       Score  : 181 points
       Date   : 2022-06-16 08:58 UTC (14 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (wiki.freecadweb.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (wiki.freecadweb.org)
        
       | ur-whale wrote:
       | FreeCAD is "feature full", but ... bearer of bad news here
       | (sorry):                  1. The UI is simply *awful*. Reminds me
       | of the bad old days of Blender. Feels like a Motif style UI from
       | the 90's TBH. Freecad needs to do what Blender did, bite the
       | bullet hard and redo the UI from scratch to bring it into the
       | 21st century.             2. The underlying NURBS engine
       | (OpenCascade) is what's best in the FOSS world, but unfortunately
       | it can't hold a candle to the "kernels" (CAD lingo for engine)
       | that power equivalent commercial offerings (Fusion, Rhino,
       | SolidWorks, CATIA, etc...)
       | 
       | Finally, I really wish FreeCAD had an OpenSCAD-like domain
       | specific language for modeling that can directly create NURBS
       | (there is a kind of an OpenSCAD integration, but it can only do
       | poly meshes).
        
       | inamberclad wrote:
       | I like FreeCAD a lot, but it's too hard to create assemblies and
       | reference other bodies in an assembly. I gave up and moved to
       | Fusion360 where all these things Just Work.
       | 
       | However, I miss the KiCAD plugin with really good integration for
       | the updating board outline and component placements from CAD.
        
         | jbay808 wrote:
         | I find the FreeCAD shapebinder system for external references
         | is a lot more stable and maintainable than, say, external
         | references in SolidWorks. It takes more clicks and more work
         | though.
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | I have canceled my auto renewal for Fusion 360 as I have moved
         | completely to Linux and their product does not work without
         | using an unofficial Wine setup (also my space mouse does not
         | work in Wine, it works perfectly in FreeCAD and Blender). They
         | do have a web version but it is not available to paying
         | customers?! They also keep removing features from the paid
         | version I have. I'm done with this garbage. I can't even easily
         | export my work.
         | 
         | I tried a few times to switch but now I have to.
         | 
         | What's really cool is how easily I can export Kicad projects
         | and import them into blender. Check out my latest PCB render:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svU7NyfJJKY
        
       | btreecat wrote:
       | This seems like a really exciting release with all the
       | improvements to the sketch workbench in particular. I look
       | forward to installing the update!
        
       | jemzipx wrote:
       | FreeCAD deserves a lot more recognition. It is literally the only
       | serious open source contender to commercial CAD softwares. There
       | has been a lot of recent positive developments including
       | Realthunder's continuous effort to solve topological naming
       | problem. I use FreeCAD as my daily CAD software to design some
       | fairly complex assemblies and it has become a joy to use. Hope we
       | can get more developers and companies behind it and witness the
       | same revolution that happened with Blender.
        
         | stavros wrote:
         | That's fantastic to hear, I've been wanting to switch to it for
         | a while, as I hate how closed the commercial CAD programs are,
         | but I've never put in the effort due to its various issues.
         | 
         | Would you say it's as good as OnShape nowadays, in terms of
         | ease of use/stability?
        
           | jemzipx wrote:
           | Definitely. I'd recommend using FreeCAD Linkstage3 for now as
           | it has a fix for topo naming problem and a variety of other
           | improvements. For tutorial, I highly recommend
           | OficineRobotica youtube channel. His videos are the best
           | educational stuff I know of. With some practice you can learn
           | proper workflow which prevents a lot of problems down the
           | line.
        
             | stavros wrote:
             | Fantastic, thanks for the tips!
        
           | gaze wrote:
           | I don't think it's anywhere close in terms of usability, but
           | it is very powerful and capable.
        
       | flaviut wrote:
       | I want to point out that FreeCAD receives $450/week in recurring
       | donations (https://liberapay.com/FreeCAD/), and that that
       | probably has some impact on how quickly things are moving now!
       | 
       | I personally do CAD less than once a month, but I still donate
       | regularly. If open source CAD is a cause you care about, you can
       | too!
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | leoedin wrote:
       | FreeCAD is a sprawling, incredibly feature filled piece of
       | software that's slowly but surely becoming bug free enough to be
       | usable. It's really impressive how many different aspects of it
       | are under active development - and for simple things the part
       | design workshop is really usable.
       | 
       | The biggest thing I'm looking forward to (assuming it ever
       | happens) is the selection of a single "assembly" workbench.
       | There's a whole load of assembly extensions, all of which take
       | different approaches. A single "official" assembly workbench
       | would give me the confidence to sink time into big, assembly
       | heavy designs and know that it wouldn't all be wasted by the next
       | release.
        
         | incanus77 wrote:
         | Same here -- I taught myself CAD via FreeCAD tutorials and a
         | month of making one-a-day household items, but ultimately I
         | moved on to other tools (Fusion 360, Shapr3D) for better
         | assembly support as I got into real-world uses.
        
       | john_yaya wrote:
       | I really wanted to like FreeCAD, but I'd say out of the five or
       | so times I've attempted to use it, it crashed and lost my design
       | four times. I picked up Fusion360 instead, then OnShape, and
       | never looked back.
        
       | ssl232 wrote:
       | I noticed in the Assembly3 section that it uses SolveSpace as its
       | solver. FreeCAD uses OpenCASCADE as its main CAD kernel, and this
       | supports mating and constraints between parts (at least, CadQuery
       | supports it, and it's essentially just wrapping OpenCASCADE) so
       | I'd be interested to know why they chose to bundle and use a
       | different kernel there.
        
         | jemzipx wrote:
         | Assembly3 support various backends including Solvespace, and
         | another using Sympy and SciPy. Realthunder mentioned he was
         | working on supporting FreeCAD interal solver so I guess it is
         | still WIP.
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | >> I noticed in the Assembly3 section that it uses SolveSpace
         | as its solver. FreeCAD uses OpenCASCADE as its main CAD kernel,
         | and this supports mating and constraints between parts (at
         | least, CadQuery supports it, and it's essentially just wrapping
         | OpenCASCADE) so I'd be interested to know why they chose to
         | bundle and use a different kernel there.
         | 
         | AFAICT OpenCASCADE does not include a geometric constraint
         | solver like the one in SolveSpace. There are companies
         | licensing such things for use in OpenCascade derived products.
         | I think OCCT is used in FreeCAD for reading/writing files,
         | handling all 3D geometry and NURBS operations and rendering.
         | Only the constraint solver from Solvespace is being used in
         | FreeCAD (and only in one workbench), as there isn't an
         | equivalent in OCCT. The Solvespace geometric kernel is not as
         | mature or complete as OCCT, but it is about 100 times smaller.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-16 23:02 UTC)