Don't be apologetic, it's good to stir. It's a perfectly valid question and
there's
a perfectly valid answer. Perhaps it should be added to the FAQ.
AutoCAD is a different beast. There are many many functionalities that are
considered elementary by AutoCAD and most full featured CAD packages and
even some free software. But they are not found on OpenSCAD. I did learn
AutoCAD way way back then and over the years I have dabbled in a number of
(even Pro/E) alternatives. But I only stuck with a particular package for a
job
or two or three. None has the staying power for me to pick as a "career"
choice.
One big reason is that they are too "heavy", full featured and powerful, but
it's
a drain to keep myself, my students, PC and facility in a state to exploit
these full
packages. OpenSCAD, being almost rudimentary, is perfect for myself and my
lab. A new student can read the whole manual (imperfect as it is) in an
afternoon
and start making useful things in a few days.
I don't always write OpenSCAD programs with mm as units. My habit is to
design
most things in 1:1 scale, say if I'm building 1:144 Millennium Falcon, I
would
design it in OpenSCAD at 1:1 using meter as (implicit) unit and (perhaps) as
a
final step scale(1/144) the whole thing. Or much more likely, just leave it
at 1:1
and only fix the scale at the slicing or printing step.
Of course it doesn't always work like that, as Alan Cox wrote, there's a
minimum
scale (wall thickness) and maximum scale (printable volume) so blanket
application
of scale() doesn't work for more complicated designs. Things like screws do
have
an absolute size. I have run into that problem as well, designing a
spaceship in 1:1
(with 0.001" thick metal foil) only to find out the elegant program code
must be
messed up lots of exceptions and branching to deal with absolute scale of
the 3D
printer.
--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/unit-of-measure-tp14926p14950.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Don't be apologetic, it's good to stir. It's a perfectly valid question and
there's
a perfectly valid answer. Perhaps it should be added to the FAQ.
AutoCAD is a different beast. There are many many functionalities that are
considered elementary by AutoCAD and most full featured CAD packages and
even some free software. But they are not found on OpenSCAD. I did learn
AutoCAD way way back then and over the years I have dabbled in a number of
(even Pro/E) alternatives. But I only stuck with a particular package for a
job
or two or three. None has the staying power for me to pick as a "career"
choice.
One big reason is that they are too "heavy", full featured and powerful, but
it's
a drain to keep myself, my students, PC and facility in a state to exploit
these full
packages. OpenSCAD, being almost rudimentary, is perfect for myself and my
lab. A new student can read the whole manual (imperfect as it is) in an
afternoon
and start making useful things in a few days.
I don't always write OpenSCAD programs with mm as units. My habit is to
design
most things in 1:1 scale, say if I'm building 1:144 Millennium Falcon, I
would
design it in OpenSCAD at 1:1 using meter as (implicit) unit and (perhaps) as
a
final step scale(1/144) the whole thing. Or much more likely, just leave it
at 1:1
and only fix the scale at the slicing or printing step.
Of course it doesn't always work like that, as Alan Cox wrote, there's a
minimum
scale (wall thickness) and maximum scale (printable volume) so blanket
application
of scale() doesn't work for more complicated designs. Things like screws do
have
an absolute size. I have run into that problem as well, designing a
spaceship in 1:1
(with 0.001" thick metal foil) only to find out the elegant program code
must be
messed up lots of exceptions and branching to deal with absolute scale of
the 3D
printer.
--
View this message in context: http://forum.openscad.org/unit-of-measure-tp14926p14950.html
Sent from the OpenSCAD mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
