cubify design

Talk about anything.
Post Reply
mec949
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Location: NSW Australia

cubify design

Post by mec949 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 11:34 am

Any thoughts or experiences with cubify's "cubify design" 3d software. there does not seem to be a free version which is very disapointing, and yet not a shock. Youtubes of it look interesting, thoughts?

User avatar
woofy
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:09 pm

Re: cubify design

Post by woofy » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:31 pm

= Alibre design.
That's what I use for engineering models, and it is good at what it does.
The only fault is it crashes a lot.

Here is a self balancing robot, designed with it.
balbot.jpg
balbot.jpg (97.27 KiB) Viewed 14820 times
UP plus, Ultimaker2 & Raise N2+ Printers.

mec949
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Location: NSW Australia

Re: cubify design

Post by mec949 » Wed Oct 30, 2013 1:33 pm

that's awesome yet beyond my ability.

i usually use sketchup, but associations where you can make moving parts actually move, well never figured out how to do that in sketchup

RINGMASTER
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 1:46 pm

Re: cubify design

Post by RINGMASTER » Wed Oct 30, 2013 3:51 pm

there is a free trial version for 14 days.

User avatar
JuliaDee
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Re: cubify design

Post by JuliaDee » Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:26 am

I'm not crazy about the "classic CAD" UI, but the moving parts/linkages features is great, and I don't know of anything that's got this power at this price.

roller
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:09 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: cubify design

Post by roller » Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:08 am

RINGMASTER wrote:there is a free trial version for 14 days.
I hate CAD like this that offers such a short trial period. It takes much longer than 14 days to get into a new CAD and really work out if it's for you. They really should extend it - I'm sure it would get them more sales.

mec949
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:16 am
Location: NSW Australia

Re: cubify design

Post by mec949 » Thu Oct 31, 2013 6:09 am

I agree roller. 14 days ain't enough. $200 is a bid high too. really the only part I'm interested is the moving parts bit. is that doable in sketchup

roller
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:09 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: cubify design

Post by roller » Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:17 am

mec949 wrote:I agree roller. 14 days ain't enough. $200 is a bid high too. really the only part I'm interested is the moving parts bit. is that doable in sketchup
There were some physics plugins for Sketchup but they needed the pro version to work. I haven't seen them mentioned for a while so I don't know if they died a few versions back but requiring pro makes it more expensive than Cubify's offering unless your a student ($50/yr for pro)

nickw
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 5:13 pm

Re: cubify design

Post by nickw » Thu Oct 31, 2013 7:32 pm

I'm not sure about cogs and wheels and such, but blender used to have a cool IK chain feature, and some physics simulation. The last time i used it was 2007, so i would bet they have made some improvements. Does anyone use blender here?

realrouge
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:15 pm

Re: cubify design

Post by realrouge » Fri Nov 01, 2013 9:56 am

I use cubify Invent and it works great for me. With the tutorial vids (and more on youtube) it is possible to learn the basics within 14 days.
And with those skills and knowledge I think you can make a good decision to buy or not (allthough I think the price is not really a showstopper :)

What I make up from the faq cubify design adds multiple part design but I cannot figure out what that would do for me.
So I would recommend Invent to start with (especially if you are not a cad/cam expert) and maybe jump to Design if you think the extra features are needed.

cheers

roller
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:09 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Re: cubify design

Post by roller » Fri Nov 01, 2013 11:08 am

I use cubify Invent and it works great for me. With the tutorial vids (and more on youtube) it is possible to learn the basics within 14 days.
That's what I mean ... 14 days is only enough time to get a wrapped around the basics. The qualities of a good CAD/prototyping system only become apparent when you have had a chance to slot it into your workflow for a period of time. You only come to appreciate the true qualities of a CAD when you become a power user. Most systems that I test sufficiently to appreciate enough to change your workflow. I spent months playing with Rhino before I put my cash down on it and in that time I still didn't use up all my saves.

User avatar
woofy
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:09 pm

Re: cubify design

Post by woofy » Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:24 pm

Just drifting the topic a bit, I've been using Alibre 2012 PE for well over a year now. However I recently took a look at SpaceClaim in its stripware version (DesignSpark). I only spent an afternoon with it but I have to say I completely missed the point. The videos's of push/pull modeling look fantastic, but when I tried to produce a simple engineering part with it I struggled badly. Getting the rough shape is very easy but tying it down with dimensions was impossible. Sure you can set dimensions ok but with out constraints its all lost the moment a wall is pushed. I guess I am imposing my parametric constraint driven methods onto a program that doesn't have them. I just don't see the equivalent in DesignSpark though. I can see that layers go some way towards this but within a layer nothing holds any relationship.

So does anyone used SpaceClaim for engineering parts, because I've definitely missed the point?
For me, I need the feature tree/history style used by Alibre/Cubify.
UP plus, Ultimaker2 & Raise N2+ Printers.

User avatar
JuliaDee
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Re: cubify design

Post by JuliaDee » Fri Nov 01, 2013 1:46 pm

Great comments, woofy. I've lusted after SpaceClaim because I really like its "push-pull" paradigm, but I can't justify the cost - I didn't realize DesignSpark was an offshoot of it. I haven't used a CAD program with parametric constraints but I can see how it's important.

amd-tec
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 6:16 am
Contact:

Re: cubify design

Post by amd-tec » Fri Nov 01, 2013 6:33 pm

woofy wrote:Just drifting the topic a bit, I've been using Alibre 2012 PE for well over a year now. However I recently took a look at SpaceClaim in its stripware version (DesignSpark). I only spent an afternoon with it but I have to say I completely missed the point. The videos's of push/pull modeling look fantastic, but when I tried to produce a simple engineering part with it I struggled badly. Getting the rough shape is very easy but tying it down with dimensions was impossible. Sure you can set dimensions ok but with out constraints its all lost the moment a wall is pushed. I guess I am imposing my parametric constraint driven methods onto a program that doesn't have them. I just don't see the equivalent in DesignSpark though. I can see that layers go some way towards this but within a layer nothing holds any relationship.

So does anyone used SpaceClaim for engineering parts, because I've definitely missed the point?
For me, I need the feature tree/history style used by Alibre/Cubify.
Hi Woofy, I`m not sure with the engineering parts ;), but I use Spaceclaim, mostly to modify the customer parts for 3d-printing. What kind of problems you had, any samples?
"3D design with intelligent printing"
http://www.amd-tec.com

chippwalters
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2013 2:37 am
Contact:

Re: cubify design

Post by chippwalters » Mon Nov 04, 2013 12:53 am

I've used SketchUp extensively, and while it's great at whipping up visual models, it's extremely hard to build real solid parts. That's because it's a surface modeler and as such you need to continually examine the part and 'stitch' it together. Complex solids are most difficult, if not impossible. That said, I switched to FormZ (or Bonasi3D). They work very similarly and have the same push/pull building, plus many other nice features (radiusing, true NURBS) including, best of all, true solids.

Took me a couple weeks to make the switch fully (working an hour or so a night) and it's been great. Can't recommend it highly enough.

My criteria for a 3D modeling app (for 3D printing):
  • Needs to be easy to learn. This is because I can go months without using it and I need to be able to pick it up and start using it after a long layoff.
  • Needs to be affordable. Under $600 is good. I'm not too worried about this as long as it's the *RIGHT* program. But paying out heavy subscription fees (like Solidworks) is NOT something I'm interested in.
  • Needs to be from a reputable publisher and have decent support. I prefer forums (like this!) and a company which has been around for awhile. Nothing is worse than becoming expert in software and then the company closing it's doors or selling it to someone who won't support it.
  • Needs to be a SOLID modeler and export STL.

Post Reply