3D v 2D

[guest12020101217]

Below is a made up situation and l am using to get a view on compearing designing in 3D against 2D for two high end, but very different cad packages.
I would to form anidea of the issue in compearing the above based on the following areas.

Time to produce a workable, detailed drawing.
Imagion your main aims are to reduce drawing time and have a good level of drawing detail, so as to minimise mistake in the building process and the drawing it self.

I am using a made up situation to get help me focus on key points and not everything about 3D v 2D.

Heres the example situation.
Your are the owner of two cad packages
Lets say Solidworks and Vectorworks
You are going to produce a underdeck drawing for a 10m motor vessel with twin waterjets showing frame positions, engine bed, fuel tank position, jet and engine position and other detail like a raw water pick fitting positon.

Your skills are the same for both package. BUT in vectorworks you can only drawing in 2D and can not use any 3D controls.

For solidworks you have a library of 50% of the parts already modelled for the main items you need to start like the hull. This don't include any of the structurual framing.
You don't have a solid engine model, but you do have a dxf to get the spacings of the engine feet. Your also only have a dxf of the waterjet but could use the dxf to produce a part (3D model) as the dxf is very detailed.
Once you have made the assembly with the model of the underdeck. You use it to produce views for a drawing to give to the person building the boat.
The view needed are plan, profile look for above, a body plan view of the transom but normal with the face of the transom (it at a angle) so you can give positions for things like holes to be cut for exhausts etc. The hull shell is already finished and out of the mould and supported on a trolley.

For vectorworks you have access to the same dxf's of the engine and jet. Your have to produce the same views as above to the same standard.
For items like the fuel tanks, you can draw them from a paper drawing with the dimensions or use solidworks to export view of the item from your parts
library in dxf format and inport them in to vectorworks.
The hull is a dxf from maxsurf or solidworks.

Is the 2D or 3D method going to be quicker, more accurany?
Which way would save you time and money if the builder came back to you as
a mistake was made and the frame spacing needs changing for example?
Would love to here peoples views based on this example situation.
Hope you spread 2 minutes to give your views.

Thanks for reading this post

[CGN]

VectorWorks it has been 2 months installed in my computer and I haven't been able to do anything with it, interface, displays commands I don't know but it has been really bad.

but I would like to add my two cents!

"Is the 2D or 3D method going to be quicker, more accuracy?"

How quick, if you are new to 3D forget it go for 2D you will kill yourself in time trying to model the engine bed (just to name one), you knew 3D, and you are little bit skilled in solidworks? you will stick with 3D because you will realize how huge is the difference between working vectorworks and solid, and way better speed/accuracy ratio.

"The hull is a dxf from maxsurf or solidworks"
I'm guessing that you imported your iges file from maser into solidworks, that's all you need, no 100000 lines and curves and etc. that you may need as a dxf for vectorworks.

Which way would save you time and money if the builder came back to you as
a mistake was made and the frame spacing needs changing for example?

Using 3D in solidworks.

Based in your example, I will model 3D, but I will avoid it every chance I can, it may be drawings or details that you may not need 3D, so why expend time doing it in 3D when you can fly in 2D and finish you work with accuracy. 2D in MCAD? for boats?, I don't use it. any nice CAD will do a great job.

Remember 2D-3D you do can have the same results in accuracy is just that ratio of speed/accuracy ratio that makes 3D taking just a very very small step ahead.

great example

[ludesign]

Your skills are the same for both package. BUT in vectorworks you can only drawing in 2D and can not use any 3D controls.

For vectorworks you have access to the same dxf's of the engine and jet. Your have to produce the same views as above to the same standard.
For items like the fuel tanks, you can draw them from a paper drawing with the dimensions or use solidworks to export view of the item from your parts
library in dxf format and inport them in to vectorworks.
The hull is a dxf from maxsurf or solidworks.

Why are you refering to VectorWorks as a 2D package?

It is both 2D and 3D and it provides pretty good solid modeling. Of corse you can maniulate the model in 3D. if you want to use controls and NURBS surface controls I suggests that you use IGES, which it has supported since version 9.5 for export and import /export since version 10.0. We are currently at 10.5.1

[ludesign]

Originally Posted by CGN

VectorWorks it has been 2 months installed in my computer and I haven't been able to do anything with it, interface, displays commands I don't know but it has been really bad.

I totally disagree. I have used VectorWorks professionally since 1987 and I love it!.

Unlike AutoCAD, which still has one foot in the seventies DOS world, VectorWorks is has a truely modern mainstream user inteface with a high guessing factor.

I have on several occasions made a blind test where I have provided a few simple tasks to a non-skilled CAD user and the result is always the same, the users gets it right in VectorWorks almost instantly and always gets stuck in AutoCAD.

The fact that VectorWorks also comes with a very reasonable price tag does not make it less attractive. Arround here it actually costs LESS than AC LT, making it a total enigma why anyone buys AC at all.

[Jeff]

Personally, I love the AutoCad (and Rhino) combination of the GUI menus/icons with a command line for quick and customizable shortcuts, if that's what you're referring to as having a foot in the seventies DOS environment. It's fast, allows you to focus on the drawing on screen instead of icons or popup menus, and it reduces fatigue (or at least spreads it out between both hands instead of forcing you to do everything with one.) (sorry for going off topic since the main thread is more interesting than my defense of the command line)

[ludesign]

Originally Posted by Jeff

Personally, I love the AutoCad (and Rhino) combination of the GUI menus/icons with a command line for quick and customizable shortcuts, if that's what you're referring to as having a foot in the seventies DOS environment. It's fast, allows you to focus on the drawing on screen instead of icons or popup menus, and it reduces fatigue (or at least spreads it out between both hands instead of forcing you to do everything with one.) (sorry for going off topic since the main thread is more interesting than my defense of the command line)

The command line is good if you got the commands in your head but a pain before you get there.

All this is of course a matter of taste and most of us tend to prefer what we are used to. I simply prefer program that are close to the mainstram interface as it allows me to use many programs without having to start learning from scratch every time I start using a new one.

The reason for using many programs is of course that very few programs offer a "Swiss Army" do-it-all solution. Using many programs simply allows me to be more creative and productive.

[guest12020101217]

Originally Posted by ludesign

Why are you refering to VectorWorks as a 2D package?

It is both 2D and 3D and it provides pretty good solid modeling. Of corse you can maniulate the model in 3D. if you want to use controls and NURBS surface controls I suggests that you use IGES, which it has supported since version 9.5 for export and import /export since version 10.0. We are currently at 10.5.1

Dear Claes Lundstrom

I guess my example was a little confusing but I was not trying to refer to Vectorworks as a 2D only package. It does have powerful 3D modeling. Vectorworks is one of the packaages l use in at my work.
I would guess there are only a small number of 2D only packages in the main cad markets today.
The topic of "CAD" is huge and l want to look at specific points of 2D v 3D. Hence the "Example situtation" in which l set some variables like not drawing in 3D in one package but having level skills in both. The names of the software are the unimportant part.

cjdengate
P.s. l have v10 of VW whats changed in v10.5.1?

[ludesign]

Originally Posted by colindengate

Dear Claes Lundstrom

I guess my example was a little confusing but I was not trying to refer to Vectorworks as a 2D only package. It does have powerful 3D modeling. Vectorworks is one of the packaages l use in at my work.
I would guess there are only a small number of 2D only packages in the main cad markets today.
The topic of "CAD" is huge and l want to look at specific points of 2D v 3D. Hence the "Example situtation" in which l set some variables like not drawing in 3D in one package but having level skills in both. The names of the software are the unimportant part.

cjdengate
P.s. l have v10 of VW whats changed in v10.5.1?

I always use 3D whenever I can and whenever is reasonable. Extracting 2D drawings is usually more reliable than doing individual 2D projections. I also find it useful to generate "assembly pictures" from some suitable view t furhther clearify what I have drawn. This tends to increase the chances of actually getting what you have drawn, and it is especially true for mechanical drawings that can be somewhat confusing even if you are used to reading drawings.

It takes practice to get to be really good at 3D but once your there your will never go back. 3D modeling is often more similar to actually building the object in question. You essentially manufacture and assemble parts. 2D is more like drawing with a pen. I started drawing with a pen but nowadays I even sketch directly in 3D.

VW 10.5.1 is a free maintenace upgrade and can be downloadef fron Nemetschek (www-nemetschek.net) The upgarde includes several improvememnts in the 3D PowerPack so it is defenitley worth the effort to download it, at least if you have a good Internet connection.

[snakefeet]

I have to agree with Claes. Once you get good at 3D modelling, it becomes a completely different (and in my opinion, much better) process. Don't think of 3D modelling as "drawing the boat - but in three dimensions". Think of it as actually building the boat. Then your job is to help the builder reproduce as accurately as possible your virtual boat. From a well built model you can provide any kind of information that anyone might ask for.

A 3D model can provide the foundation of any kind of assembly, fabrication, arrangement or sales drawing you want. With enough time and patience you could work out all machinery arrangements, piping and wire runs, interior furniture, and hull or superstructure structural components. Then you could issue a complete set of construction drawings and let the builders put the boat together like a model kit.

Yes, it is not always as simple as that but it is an ideal to try for.

At work I use Microstation and Rhinoceros. I use Rhino as my 3D modeller and Microstation as my 2D drawing board.* When making drawings, whenever possible I build the object in 3D first - preferably within an existing model of the parts that will be around it - and from that model I extract any plans, profiles or sections I will need to get the idea across to the guys. Then in 2D I add small details, dimensions and whatever explanations the guys will need to weld, laminate, machine, or glue&screw the object I have modelled.

Its not the easiest way to go, and not neccessarily the fastest. However, I do think that it can prevent a lot of waste of material by eliminating trial-and-error building. And it can save time by helping you discover and answer questions that would otherwise have to be decided on the spur of the moment during construction.

Best of luck to you whichever way you decide to go,





*I'm sure Bently makes a lot of noise about Microstation's fabulous 3D abilities but I see it choke and crash on complex 3D objects (that Rhino has no problem with) too often to consider it anything but an elaborate 2D package. On the other hand, I know a guy who builds every last detail of interior cabinetry in 3D in Microstation, just as he would if he were physically building the furniture. Then he extracts 2D information and assembles fabrication drawings packages.

[Dragos Patilea]

I don't know most (that means 9/10) of programs reminded here...

Returning to question: when you receive documentation into 2d format (dxf) is prety hard to go to 3d, agreed, but:
Let's say, in that case, when you start the job (thank you CDBarry) you do spent 50% more when use a 3d tool (it's not about skills here, OK?), but your work can be:
- more reliable (no need to check all the views)
- easy to update - the reason for that is so obvious...
- easy to understand, and also you can see your work into more intuitive enviroment (how many designers/builders can 'read' at the first sight a drawing?)
- easy to duplicate/re-use into another project
- 3d/object may contain technical info (very important!), not like a bunch of 2d lines/arches etc.

IMO, 3d beats 2d hands down!

[CDBarry]

Actually, with good software, 3D is also faster.

Note that when Bender went to a 3D product model, it didn't take any more design time and reduced shipyard labor by 20%, due to better, more detailled and more accurate documentation.