Recommendation for offline Windows 3D modeling program?

[GnatGoSplat]

I would like to learn how to design 3D models from scratch, for 3D printing.  I've used Blender in the very distant past for modifying game assets, but that's about it.

My requirements is that it be Windows-based and offline, not cloud-based.  Also popular enough amongst the 3D printing community that I can easily find help/support/tutorials online.

Any recommendations?

[MarkF]

I've been using FreeCAD for sometime now.  It has some hiccups but it's free and totally off-line.
   Newer GitHub version of FreeCAD for Windows  or  FreeCAD Wiki for other downloads

Here are a bunch of tutorials that helped me get started:
   https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/recommended-3d-printer-for-printing-knobs-buttons-etc/msg3898820/#msg3898820

[free_electron]

solidworks. the gold standard

[kripton2035]

+1 for freecad
there is a learning curve, like any cad program, but there are plenty of tutorials on youtube
and it's free. and offline.
and works native on macos ( that's what decided me to use it in fact)

[Zucca]

I used a cracked Solidworks form some obscure Torrent for a while, then I discovered FreeCAD.
The FreeCAD community is amazing if you post your problem before to go in bed in the morning you get already the solution served on a silver plate.

Not the best program for sure, but it is free and well supported.
I always got the job done with FreeCAD.
If you know python then again another big plus for FreeCAD.

Finally the cherry on the pie was for me the integration with KiCAD.

[MarkF]

I'm able to export .step files from DipTrace, the PCB design program I use, which can be imported into FreeCAD in order to build enclosures around.

Examples:  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/3d-printing/sketchup-help/msg4078429/#msg4078429

[dferyance]

There are a lot of options out there so you'd need to be more specific to narrow it down. Are you looking to make mechanical parts, artistic models, figurines? Different tools for different jobs.

In general, Blender is a good choice. When I tried it for CAD designs it was problematic but my understanding is the new boolean engine makes it better. Still wouldn't be a good choice for mechanical designs.

I've been using Moment of Inspiration (MoI3d) http://moi3d.com/ exclusively for 3D mechanical designs. It doesn't have all the features a big CAD package has, e.g. cannot do parametric design. But has more of a focus on being able to quickly design something with a few simple CAD tools. It is NURBs based and booleans work a whole lot better than polygonal modelers. There is no online requirement and you can run it off of a USB memory stick.

I had good hopes for openSCAD but was disappointed while learning it by it's lack of NURBs surfaces and that it can only export polygonal models. Still, depending on what you need it could be good too.

Rocket 3F seems interesting but I haven't used it a whole lot to know if I'd recommend. I just end up going back to MoI. But I'd still suggest checking it out.

[GnatGoSplat]

Thanks for the responses.  I think I'm going to start learning FreeCAD.  The price is right (free), and the fact there's a Mac version might be nice because my laptop is a Mac Pro M1.  I probably won't be doing too much CAD away from my desk, but it's nice to have the option.

Mechanical design is what I plan to focus on, since I would like to make custom adapters, brackets, and that kind of thing.  It seems like parametric design would be very useful for that kind of thing.  Judging by the tutorials for FreeCAD, it looks like it's the appropriate tool for the things I want to make.

[MarkF]

If you're going to use FreeCAD on a Laptop, the very first thing you will want to do is select a different navigation mode.  It is so much easier to look at your model while using a touchpad.  In touchpad mode, holding down either the shift key or alt key while moving your finger on the touchpad pans and rotates respectfully.  (NO LEFT OR RIGHT MOUSE CLICK.)

Also select the units you prefer to work in.

[SiliconWizard]

I personally use OpenSCAD. It's a different approach of course, it's not point-and-click. It generates STL so good for 3D printing.

[Mechatrommer]

autocad and inventor. the diamond standard

[MarkF]

autocad and inventor. the diamond standard

AutoCad   $1865/year
Inventor   $2300/year

Need I say more.

[Whales]

I use blender for all my 3d printing modelling.  I'm also from a computer game background (polaygonal), I don't have experience with mechanical CAD software (CSG/generative/etc).

The things I do to make my meshes are probably sinful in the eyes of cadders, but it's quick and I get the job done

[Le_Bassiste]

don't know about the width of the support base, but it surely deserves mentioning here:
https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/plmapp/education/solid-edge/en_us/free-software/community

[Ian.M]

I personally use OpenSCAD. It's a different approach of course, it's not point-and-click. It generates STL so good for 3D printing.

'Vanilla' OpenSCAD is not the easiest to fully get to grips with, as its *your* responsibility to avoid generating non-manifold meshes, by extending 2nd (and subsequent) children of difference() operations so they extend past the surface of the first child,  and by overlapping the children of union() (and implied union) operations, and its difficult to do so unless you fully embrace parameterizing all dimensions of your models so you can 'do the math' and have it calculate the required sizes, rotates and translates at render time. 

Also, its too easy to get into the mindset of doing everything by unioning and differencing its 3D primitive objects, which rapidly gets out of hand when you start wanting stuff like radiused edges.   It is often preferable to calculate a list of points for a polygon with the required curves then extrude that, either making the required 3D shape directly, or use it as a difference tool to 'punch out' the features you want.

The biggest conceptual hurdle to those used to procedural languages is that OpenSCAD is a declarative language, thus any variable can only have a single value for its entire scope (although it can be overridden with a new value in an inner scope).  i.e. you cannot do a=a+1;   which obviously limits the use of iterative algorithms, unless implemented by recursion.

Another issue is broken or out-of-date OpenGL drivers on your PC may cause problems with OpenSCAD Preview, resulting in either no visible object  or in preview artifacts.  It all 'comes good' when you actually render the object as that doesn't call on the graphics driver to perform 3D Boolean operations.  As a workaround you can use transparency and the 'Thrown Together' view to get a feel for child object positioning before committing to a render.

I had good hopes for openSCAD but was disappointed while learning it by it's lack of NURBs surfaces and that it can only export polygonal models. Still, depending on what you need it could be good too.

Its not NURBs but OpenSCAD can do arbitrary computed surfaces.  In 'vanilla' OpenSCAD, that's limited to importing heightmap surfaces from an external file, but The Belfry OpenScad Library, v2 (BOSL2) adds the capability to generate a surface from an array or an arbitrary function [ref].  You can also generate Bezier surfaces from an array of control points [ref].

BOSL2 also simplifies combining 3D objects while avoiding generating non-manifold meshes as you can simply attach them with a defined overlap, removing the need to carefully and explicitly calculate all the translations and rotations required to do so [ref].

[TERRA Operative]

I use Rhinoceros 3D, been using it for 20-odd years. Does the job and is intuitive to use.

[GnatGoSplat]

Thanks, everyone.
So far, FreeCAD looks like it's going to work quite well for me.  Managed to learn enough to fully duplicate a bracket from scratch and modify it to suit my purposes.
[ Specified attachment is not available ]

Exported to .stl and Cura is able to slice it.  Now I just need to buy a spool of material and see if I can make a decent print of it.  Thinking maybe PETG.

[GnatGoSplat]

Thanks, pretty happy with FreeCAD so far.  I've just been making simple brackets and adapters which is quite easy to do in FreeCAD.

The model I posted earlier came out close to perfect.  The inner dimension was supposed to be 140.35mm and came out 139.86mm when printed in PETG, despite having perfect results when printing a 20mm test cube, but nothing a little filing wasn't able to fix.

[MarkF]

If your prints are a little off, you may want to check your X, Y, Z and extruder e-step calibration.

This will get the mechanical movement exact:

For distance movements, I taped a needle onto the extruder fan cover and laid a ruler on the bed.  Position the extruder on the left side of the bed, place the ruler along the x-axis and position the ruler 0 under the needle.  Then run the hotend to the right side (noting the distance you told it to move) and read off the distance moved.  If the distance moved doesn't match what you told it to move, calculate a new number of e-steps and store it into the printer.  Repeat for the rest of the axis.  (I try to move the full distance of the X and Y axis to get the best accuracy.)

For the extruder, mark off 120mm for example onto your filament, extrude 100mm and measure the distance to the mark.  If not 20mm left over, calculate new extruder e-steps.  Measure on the printer frame where the filament enters for the reference.

My printer defaults were off a couple of steps.  The rest of your tweaks would be done in the slicer.

[HighVoltage]

One more vote for Solidworks.
Only drawback is the price you have to pay!

[Simon]

FreeCAD seems to be the only free option, I have grudgingly started to use it as I can't afford what professional software costs and I don't really want to crack stuff. At least freeCAD does not randomly crash anymore.....

[metrologist]

I use FreeCAD, but struggle with it. Mostly because I use it infrequently and have to start over every time.

Last time, I wanted a simple 3D trapezoid (flat top pyramid) and could not figure out all the dimensions. I have not gone beyond dropping in simple shapes and modifying them. It would be easy some times to start with a cube and then draw a slicing plane or line to complete a plane, but none of that is apparent how to do.

[GnatGoSplat]

I found this Youtuber's lessons to be an excellent resource for beginners.
https://www.youtube.com/c/FreeCADAcademy

He's an excellent instructor.  I followed along, interactively instead of just watching, and was able to apply what I'd learned from the lessons without any issue.  Creating my own projects from scratch has been pretty easy, granted, I haven't done anything particularly complicated yet.

[Ian.M]

I use FreeCAD, but struggle with it. Mostly because I use it infrequently and have to start over every time.

Last time, I wanted a simple 3D trapezoid (flat top pyramid) and could not figure out all the dimensions. I have not gone beyond dropping in simple shapes and modifying them. It would be easy some times to start with a cube and then draw a slicing plane or line to complete a plane, but none of that is apparent how to do.

In 'vanilla' OpenSCAD, a truncated square right pyramid is simply:

Code: [Select]

rotate([0,0,45]) cylinder(h=10, d1=20*sqrt(2), d2=10*sqrt(2), $fn=4);
You may well ask what does a cylinder have to do with a pyramid?
Well OpenSCAD allows you to use the cylinder object to make right regular prisms, by setting the number of vertices (and thus sides) with which it renders round objects.  The $fn=4 thus gives four sides.   You can also use the cylinder object for cones and frustums - you get a cone if you set r1 or d1 to the base size and r2 or d2 to 0 for a point at the top.  Set r2 or d2 to a size smaller than the base and you get a frustrum.   The only remaining complexity is the *sqrt(2), and that's because when using $fn to make prisms, the diameter (or radius) gives the circumcircle, so we are effectively specifying the diagonal of the base and top squares, not  their side length, so by Pythagoras, we need that correction factor.  Finally as the circumcircle is divided into four equal sides starting with a vertex at angle 0, rotating it 45 deg about the Z axis brings the base and top sides parallel to the XY axes.

If you are using OpenSCAD with the BOSL2 library, its a lot simpler:

Code: [Select]

include <BOSL2/std.scad>
prismoid(size1=20, size2=10, h=10);as prismoid specifically creates rectanguluar prisms and frustrums.

It also easily allows you to stack them e.g. to model the Bent Pyramid of Sneferu at a scale of 1:10000 (assuming the usual 3D printing convention of using mm as the unit):

Code: [Select]

include <BOSL2/std.scad>
prismoid(size1=18.943, size2=12.358, h=4.704) attach(TOP) prismoid(size1=12.358, size2=0, h=5.767);
I find it a lot easier to explore OpenSCAD, simply keeping the 'vanilla' and BOSL2 cheatsheats bookmarked in my browser, than it is to explore the myriad 'workbenches' of FreeCAD to find a reasonable method to do anything semi-fancy.

[Simon]

I use FreeCAD, but struggle with it. Mostly because I use it infrequently and have to start over every time.

Last time, I wanted a simple 3D trapezoid (flat top pyramid) and could not figure out all the dimensions. I have not gone beyond dropping in simple shapes and modifying them. It would be easy some times to start with a cube and then draw a slicing plane or line to complete a plane, but none of that is apparent how to do.

I've used solid edge in my last job and to be honest, yes, freecad is a bit of a mess by comparison, the tools are nowhere near as flexible and easy to use, but it's free and I suspect that writing software to handle the required math is not easy.

For example, try making a rectangular solid and then round off two opposite corners so that the end is semi-circular, it can't be done, freecad cannot do the math to compute the two curves that need to touch each other in a tangent way. If you make the radius ever so slightly smaller so as to leave a small flat where the circular edges join it works. If you look at a cylinder you will see a line down it, this is a workaround.

In solid edge I would see similar errors in more obscure situations that were generally down to a mistake. They would be called a "0 thickness edge" which it could not handle.

[Ian.M]

For example, try making a rectangular solid and then round off two opposite corners so that the end is semi-circular, it can't be done, freecad cannot do the math to compute the two curves that need to touch each other in a tangent way. If you make the radius ever so slightly smaller so as to leave a small flat where the circular edges join it works. If you look at a cylinder you will see a line down it, this is a workaround.

Again OpenSCAD + BOSL2 for the win:

Code: [Select]

include <BOSL2/std.scad>
$fn=90; //use 90 line segments per circle even on small objects

cuboid([20,10,5], rounding=5, edges=[FWD+RIGHT, BACK+RIGHT]);  // Cuboid with semicircular rounded end

However its *ALL* flats, so maybe it isn't a fair apples-to apples comparison, though you can set $fn high enough (or $fs and $fa low enough) that curves are smooth enough for all practical purposes.

[MarkF]

If you are looking for tutorials, I found the videos from Joko Engineering Help to be very useful.

   https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7eiW2bt21YU6QEbly78kUgQCNEiDUwSH

[Simon]

For example, try making a rectangular solid and then round off two opposite corners so that the end is semi-circular, it can't be done, freecad cannot do the math to compute the two curves that need to touch each other in a tangent way. If you make the radius ever so slightly smaller so as to leave a small flat where the circular edges join it works. If you look at a cylinder you will see a line down it, this is a workaround.

Again OpenSCAD + BOSL2 for the win:

Code: [Select]

include <BOSL2/std.scad>
$fn=90; //use 90 line segments per circle even on small objects

cuboid([20,10,5], rounding=5, edges=[FWD+RIGHT, BACK+RIGHT]);  // Cuboid with semicircular rounded end

However its *ALL* flats, so maybe it isn't a fair apples-to apples comparison, though you can set $fn high enough (or $fs and $fa low enough) that curves are smooth enough for all practical purposes.

With a proper GUI yes, sorry but command lines are so 80's, the world moved on. The fact that apparently it has a better engine but not gui says a lot about it.

[Mechatrommer]

If you are looking for tutorials, I found the videos from Joko Engineering Help to be very useful.
   https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7eiW2bt21YU6QEbly78kUgQCNEiDUwSH

my respect to FreeCAD seeing what they can do with it. i have it installed but just basically to convert to STEP format and coloring something i modelled in AutoCAD to import to Altium (heck what do you think any hobbiest can afford to pay their rental fee? you are highly delusional! ) but as anything else, one thing i will search to learn a new SW is their documentation in pdf, have it printed out and read slow and steady as i work with mouse and PC at the same time... and it seems FreeCAD has it... https://www.freecadweb.org/manual/a-freecad-manual.pdf so my more respect, even if not complete, such as how to loft and sweep, but its a good thing as starter, the rest maybe we can ask in their forum or progressively watch youtubes, etc. but as you may not yet know, i'm a generation that stucked in AutoCAD from school, switching to another paradigm such as parametric modelling will need a total relearn, the time luxury i dont have yet anymore.. maybe next time when i have abundant amount of time to relearn and my infinite and ever growing list of to do things emptied down. i have Inventor as well another new and modern diamond breed of CAD complete with its documentations and printed out into a very thick book, its a no go as well, due to time contraint... so you know? ymmv.

[Brianmagen]

I'm currently using FreeCad. Although the software interface is quite outdated, it's free and has a large community.
Blender is also a good option, it has a modern-looking and also, a very active community and lots of tutorial on Youtube
You can take a look at this list for some alternatives to Freecad and Blender: https://3dsage.com/best-free-3d-modeling-software-for-3d-printing/

[Simon]

I'm confused about blender. It's for animation? what 3D modelling capabilities does it have?

[Whales]

I'm confused about blender. It's for animation? what 3D modelling capabilities does it have?

Kitchen sink intended to be used to make anything, supports a few different "styles" of modelling but is traditionally rooted in polyagonal modelling.  Everything you have seen in a video game (tank, gun, person, alien, map) is possible in Blender.  It might be worth skiming through a variety of videos on Blender to see what it's like, some show boring features whilst others showing slightly crazier uses.

All of its features are optional and there are many ways to achieve each task.  It's not as structured or strict as a stack of operations in a CAD tool, your modifications to your model are more immediate-mode (permanent) instead.  If you have only ever used stacks then that might scare you, don't let it, it's just different.

I've not used the animation features in several years and before that I only ever lightly touched animation features when using 3Dsmax/Gmax.  Not my cup of tea.

[Simon]

well most 3D programs have history based modelling or the type you describe, each has it's advantage and disadvantage. I used Solid edge at my last job, I found the new fangled free hand mode a pain in the ass to design with as everything was so airy fairy and relied on memorizing things that were not explicit to control the model. It was far easier to work in history based modelling where you just drew what you wanted with no airy fairy crap. But once the design was done I would find it easier to make modifications by converting it to airy fairy mode, no that features were defined editing was easier and I could make edits that the history based method would not allow. If I needed another feature I would make it in history based mode and then convert to airy fairy once done.

[LinuxHata]

Also having a similar question.
Bought 3D resin printer from Amazon couple days ago, (Anycubic Photon M3) for my 9 year old daughter. She's all into design, drawing, sculpting and such art things (we printed Hatsune Miku as a 1st print). So is there any 3D modeling software for PC users of that age? (she's quite familiar with computer, uses photoshop and other apps freely)

[beanflying]

I'm confused about blender. It's for animation? what 3D modelling capabilities does it have?

Blender has a couple of so called 'CAD' addons, they are not and blender will never be CAD. It is great at what it does well and is a bad compromise for CAD. There is a couple of muppets on youtube promoting it now as a CAD 'solution' 

Also having a similar question.
Bought 3D resin printer from Amazon couple days ago, (Anycubic Photon M3) for my 9 year old daughter. She's all into design, drawing, sculpting and such art things (we printed Hatsune Miku as a 1st print). So is there any 3D modeling software for PC users of that age? (she's quite familiar with computer, uses photoshop and other apps freely)

For really simple stuff and basic shapes then maybe Tinkercad just to get a feel for it. There is a few others but Tinkercad has been around for a while and has some good tutorials for it. A lot of the other offerings are going to be a really steep curve for kids (and even some adults ) Also Blokify (never used it but worth looking at)

[SiliconWizard]

I wish there was something in the same spirit of OpenSCAD, but supporting real curves, and able to export .STEP files. It doesn't look like OpenSCAD is going to get any of those features any time soon.

[LinuxHata]

Checked some of these and come to conclusion that "good old" 3D Studio MAX is far far better

P.S. And if someone is new to 3D printing and thinks about SLA printer, I have a note for you - do not believe what manufacturers say  about "low odor formula". These things do stink, and they're definitely NOT bedroom/kids room/main room friendly. You will need dedicated area with good ventilation.

[Mr Transistor]

autocad and inventor. the diamond standard

AutoCad   $1865/year
Inventor   $2300/year

Need I say more.

Inventor is nice but pricey. I use Fusion 360 exclusively. I am grandfathered in on their original pricing so it only costs me $100/yr for a commercial license (currently $495/yr).

[cpuerror]

Its defunct and unsupported, and more of a beginner sw, but my preference remains 123D Design if you can find a download for it. It is freeware and runs offline.

[Mechatrommer]

autocad and inventor. the diamond standard

AutoCad   $1865/year
Inventor   $2300/year
Need I say more.

Inventor is nice but pricey. I use Fusion 360 exclusively. I am grandfathered in on their original pricing so it only costs me $100/yr for a commercial license (currently $495/yr).

why you have to pay even $10/yr if all you do are some unions of boxes and then later 3d print for personal use? Legit fare only for legit company that risks being sued. I have a copy of fully functional inventor but i dont use it because i'm stucked with autocad notions.. for the longest time i was with R14 until recently that i need some fancy extrusion and morph functions that was not available.. the fact is.. they dont make it hard to get an illegal copy, consider yourself as their delegate to do later promotions, thats the most nobble thing to do imho..

[eugene]

they dont make it hard to get an illegal copy, consider yourself as their delegate to do later promotions, thats the most nobble thing to do imho..

There was a time, back in the days of MS-DOS, that I felt fully justified using pirated versions of Autocad (for example) for fully private use; no professional, money making activities. But I feel differently today. Now I realize that by using any software I am indirectly supporting the software, or at least the community that uses it. With that in mind, I choose to support FreeCAD and their community because they support me in return. Autodesk has no interest on supporting me, so I choose to not support them, even indirectly, if there are good options.

Having said that, I don't require software to be free. I am willing to pay a fair price for a perpetual license (no subscriptions please.) In that spirit, I do make monetary donations to both FreeCAD and KiCad.

[Mechatrommer]

Autodesk has no interest on supporting me, so I choose to not support them, even indirectly, if there are good options.

"Free World" is not fully supporting me as well imho.. ie complete documentation and complex/pro/de facto features. i have the complete inventor book printed out enough for me to go to a cave and learn inventor plugged out totally off grid from outside world if i want to. i havent found such concept in free tools, i either have to find online youtubes or links from official sites... if you want to stay in Free World community forever, then thats fine, you can be happy to work around whats available for you. but if you have an ambitious plan to start a company, i think having the pro tool skill set ready, is advantageous after you have your legit license in hand, rather than to start relearning a thick book and new notions while doing business. its like picking side to a big guy without having to support them directly in term of money.. i also can have access to SolidWork if i want to, but i'm not picking that side, esp even if i have a big company to choose a legit license from.. and i hate to click support mail button anyway and try to wait few hours for them to reply, regardless to either paid or non paid tools. i just want the tool to work, and pro tool usually just works, for small quirks, the fixes can be found in the net anyway similar to free tool. ymmv.

[hpw]

Autodesk has no interest on supporting me, so I choose to not support them, even indirectly, if there are good options.

"Free World" is not fully supporting me as well imho.. ie complete documentation and complex/pro/de facto features. i have the complete inventor book printed out enough for me to go to a cave and learn inventor plugged out totally off grid from outside world if i want to. i havent found such concept in free tools, i either have to find online youtubes or links from official sites... if you want to stay in Free World community forever, then thats fine, you can be happy to work around whats available for you. but if you have an ambitious plan to start a company, i think having the pro tool skill set ready, is advantageous after you have your legit license in hand, rather than to start relearning a thick book and new notions while doing business. its like picking side to a big guy without having to support them directly in term of money.. i also can have access to SolidWork if i want to, but i'm not picking that side, esp even if i have a big company to choose a legit license from.. and i hate to click support mail button anyway and try to wait few hours for them to reply, regardless to either paid or non paid tools. i just want the tool to work, and pro tool usually just works, for small quirks, the fixes can be found in the net anyway similar to free tool. ymmv.

Hmm, just a simple question, is FreeCAD able to delete, of your decomposition sdl lecroy front bezel, any curved objects??

[Mechatrommer]

check reply #28 and earlier, there are lot of links to learn freecad, i just dont have the time.

[pcmad]

design spark mechanical