personally exited to check it out for real constructive-solid modeling, as opposed to emulating that workflow over OpenCascade's (fickle but otherwise lovely) BREP modeling (ie. edges & faces) via build123d (which has been great but is increasingly vibe-coded :/)
I've been "vibe coding" with OpenSCAD with good results! OpenSCAD will automatically detect changes in the current open file and reload it, so I can use VS Code (with the OpenSCAD extension) to vibe code with Claude, and watch the changes appear on the OpenSCAD screen
So this is a smudge of like 4 projects? Huh. Definitely interested, but I wonder about the longevity of the system. That's one thing about the code cad systems I like: it's pretty easy to port code from one to another.
Dune3d comes off like a reskin of SolveSpace. SolveSpace is pretty awesome, so that's not a knock, per se. I'll leave it to somebody with more experience to fill in what value Dune3D adds beyond SolveSpace.
I found the UI far more approachable in Dune 3D than any other 3D CAD program I've tried and as the readme notes, Dune 3D imports STEP files and does fillets/chamfers which SolveSpace does not (in the current version)
If someone knows of a general introduction to 3D CAD which focuses on vendor-neutral descriptions of terminology and concepts, I'd be very interested --- I've done the tutorial for Dune 3D twice now (which is farther than I've gotten in any other 3D CAD tool), but keep getting hung up on subtleties/specifics which I have trouble describing for want of the correct terminology/understanding:
The documentation addresses that[0]. Basically, Dune 3D uses solvespace's solver, but it can do fillets and chamfers, and has a slightly more approachable user interface.
I have used this for throwing together some models for 3D printing. I've found it very intuitive, though I'm not sure how ergonomic it would be for complex assemblies.
I really like the space-key based command access and default shortcuts for all the commands.
Also check out modelrift.com which is based on openscad foundation. See the dynamic customizer which allows to edit any model parameter, re-render and get .stl: https://modelrift.com/models/customizable-liquid-funnel - it works _completely_ in your browser by using WASM
In case anyone is wondering, Dune3D as a flatpak is about 33mb. FreeCAD is 354mb. I enjoy having simple solutions that get simple things done. Will definitely give Dune3D a try.
(I seem to be cast in the role of FreeCAD advocate on HN these days, but here goes!)
For years I agreed with you - I tried FreeCAD multiple times, different versions, always sucked.
Then I watched this video [0] and discovered that v1.1 is different - and that it's good enough for solid reliable hobby usage. It's still a touch frustrating in a few areas (text, for example) but I've now switched over to it completely.
I really, really want that to be true, but my experience trying to adopt it has been really painful.
Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user?
Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth.
It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. I gather you can create a "master sketch" and selectively project geometry into other sketches. But the last few times I've tried the app, I haven't gotten far enough into my sketches before rage quitting to validate the technique.
Right now I am back F360 with their hobby license wanting to escape their regular messing with the terms and conditions.
I agree. freeCAD has become a tool that I just use without thinking about it. Earlier versions always made me question my choice and try out other software.
To echo others' comments: FreeCAD has improved significantly since v1.0, so I'm hoping this attracts quality & stability-minded develeopers, and a frequent release cadence.
I’ve tried FreeCAD multiple times, but I’m just too used to Rhino 3D. Unfortunately, it’s rather expensive. Anyone need a slightly used, low-mileage, one owner soul?
> Its not often you see 'fillets and chamfers' are tip-line features in the readme for CAD packages.
Well the readme states the following:
Solvespace on the other hand gets the workflow part right, but falls short by not importing STEP and the geometry kernel not supporting chamfers and fillets.
Code-based
- CadQuery - https://github.com/CadQuery/cadquery/
- build123d - https://github.com/gumyr/build123d
- OpenSCAD - https://openscad.cloud/openscad/
GUI (browser-based)
- Cadmium (abandoned, cool idea) - https://mattferraro.dev/posts/cadmium
guile scheme, bindings in Rust and Python
personally exited to check it out for real constructive-solid modeling, as opposed to emulating that workflow over OpenCascade's (fickle but otherwise lovely) BREP modeling (ie. edges & faces) via build123d (which has been great but is increasingly vibe-coded :/)
discussed previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12319406
a real constructive solid library (as opposed to emulation via modeling), with
SolveSpace - https://github.com/solvespace/solvespace
Awesome because you can build a model, expose the parameters, and allow web users to generate a model to fit their parameters.
There was a recent video on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1VNpC0nwF4
If someone knows of a general introduction to 3D CAD which focuses on vendor-neutral descriptions of terminology and concepts, I'd be very interested --- I've done the tutorial for Dune 3D twice now (which is farther than I've gotten in any other 3D CAD tool), but keep getting hung up on subtleties/specifics which I have trouble describing for want of the correct terminology/understanding:
https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d/discussions/118
When I tried to write up the usage of a far simpler program, one of the things which I tried to do was define all terminology as it was brought up:
https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d/2d-drawing
are there any tutorials for 3D CAD which attempt definitions along the way in this fashion?
0: https://docs.dune3d.org/en/latest/why-another-3d-cad.html
I really like the space-key based command access and default shortcuts for all the commands.
In case anyone is wondering, Dune3D as a flatpak is about 33mb. FreeCAD is 354mb. I enjoy having simple solutions that get simple things done. Will definitely give Dune3D a try.
For years I agreed with you - I tried FreeCAD multiple times, different versions, always sucked.
Then I watched this video [0] and discovered that v1.1 is different - and that it's good enough for solid reliable hobby usage. It's still a touch frustrating in a few areas (text, for example) but I've now switched over to it completely.
[0] https://youtu.be/VEfNRST_3x8
Even selecting things in the UI has sucked. I went in and increased the selection radius or whatever, that helped. But really, should I need to do this as a new user?
Getting the constraints to behave is like pulling teeth.
It also kind of sucks that you have to have really sparse sketches that only contain one closed figure. I gather you can create a "master sketch" and selectively project geometry into other sketches. But the last few times I've tried the app, I haven't gotten far enough into my sketches before rage quitting to validate the technique.
Right now I am back F360 with their hobby license wanting to escape their regular messing with the terms and conditions.
(1) agile Product Management,
(2) Product Design & continuous user-research,
(3) Improvements to test-driven development (TDD),
(4) transparent & open outcome-based roadmap,
(5) a vision to make the application easy to use for newbies in a maker-space, and (this is specific to my use-case),
(6) Improvements to the CAM module to make it easy to use this for CNC routers, and designing objects with sloped/curved surfaces.
- FreeCAD site: https://www.freecad.org/
- FreeCAD code: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD
- FreeCAD forum: https://forum.freecad.org/
To echo others' comments: FreeCAD has improved significantly since v1.0, so I'm hoping this attracts quality & stability-minded develeopers, and a frequent release cadence.
Source: been there, done that.
Well the readme states the following:
Solvespace on the other hand gets the workflow part right, but falls short by not importing STEP and the geometry kernel not supporting chamfers and fillets.
So I assume that's where that comes from.