Fitting the 3d model of a part to the footprint is indeed easier in freecad + stepup but it is not required to go via this toolchain. One can easily align the step model (or original model) in fusion (or any other MCAD tool) to the coordinate system as expected by kicad. Or one can directly use the step file as is and use the kicad alignment properties (offset and rotation).
The link shows that AirBus is organizing stages allowing the use of Catia or FreeCADā¦ that is already quite self explaining.
Moreover, @FreeCAD forum you can find AirBus subcontractors using FC for their daily job.
Thanks for your appreciation.
Regarding having all the functionality into KiCAD I donāt think it will ever happenā¦ and that is correct in my opinionā¦ Neither other ECADs follow this approachā¦ what they do is a connection between ECAD and MCAD, not moving MCAD inside ECAD.
And that connection is already possible through some push-pull tools of StepUp you donāt know/use.
I really doubt that a commercial MCAD software would ever offer a similar collaboration with an open source ECAD like KiCAD isā¦
The professional workflow is explained in some links I have already pointed out in other threadsā¦
A main worldwide acknowledged link is the following: http://www.ecad-mcad.org/
Moreover, what I can agree with you is that the leaning curve to efficiently use FreeCAD is steep.
And I can agree that using an already known package is easier than learn a new one.
But regarding FC functionality, you should have a closer look at some tutorial posted by a professional engineer used to stream only on SolidWorks (with 10K subscribers), but that recently started a channel for FreeCAD:
I think this should fulfil an ECAD designerās needs.
2 Likes
The link shows that AirBus is organizing stages allowing the use of Catia or FreeCADā¦ that is already quite self explaining.
Moreover, @FreeCAD forum you can find AirBus subcontractors using FC for their daily job.
Power to them then with FreeCAD. In my world making molds is done with SolidWorks (sadly, I donāt like working with it). If a mould needs to change, which is frequently the case during initial stages, the manufacturer often asks for the project files and SolidWorks is the only acceptable software. If one does not have SolidWorks, they make mods on the mold itself which I hate because it is not controlled and hard to trace. Iāve dealt with manufacturers in the USA and quite a few in China - none use anything else but solidworks. I donāt like this myself but it is understandable from their perspective; they canāt occupy their time with all sorts of software.
Regarding having all the functionality into KiCAD I donāt think it will ever happenā¦ and that is correct in my opinionā¦ Neither other ECADs follow this approachā¦ what they do is a connection between ECAD and MCAD, not moving MCAD inside ECAD.
So just to be clear what I meant; I would prefer it if KiCAD would accept STEP files as 3d models for the components (as it does now) but also to make any orientation corrections. I did not mean for KiCAD to create the STEP/CAD files also. Some Fusion360 plugins offer BOM component creation from STEP imports which I think is a totally bad idea, so I am fine with pushing output to Fusion360 manually and no further āautomation/integrationā.
Thanks for sharing the vids on FreeCAD, it probably makes sense to play with FreeCAD from time to time to follow how its abilities increase. Notice that a SolidWorks engineer now also streaming FreeCAD training does not mean he states FreeCAD is on par with SolidWorks - but I guess it does show FreeCAD is not just toy software.
Anyway, I donāt want to come across as anti-FreeCAD nor as a SolidWorks sales guy. KiCAD is great, this community is nice too and the future looks bright!
1 Like
In my experience, instead, the manufacturers only accept STEP modelsā¦ but I know that some of them are asking for SolidWorks sourceā¦ and then the game starts because you need to have the same software version of the manufacturer (having different releases may lead to issues even with the same sw brand)ā¦
Not trying to suggest that FreeCAD is on par with SW just because a streamer decided to add FC to his channelā¦ but probably you missed to follow the videos I linkedā¦ definitely not a simple tutorial for a basic shape, as you should notice because of you work with molds.
(grin) yes, it seems youāve been around the block a few times too 
Iāve been in serious trouble with them mold makers a few times, though not because of the SolidWorks version issues. Much more due to one of them making changes directly to the mold which was already complicated to start with and made more complicated as a result. I am looking forward to the day we can use alternative tech that scales and can leave the mold butchers behind ha!
Not trying to suggest that FreeCAD is on par with SW just because a streamer decided to add FC to his channelā¦ but probably you missed to follow the videos I linkedā¦ definitely not a simple tutorial for a basic shape, as you should notice because of you work with molds.
I did poke through the vids (looking at it with 1 eye I admit). I know FreeCAD is not simplistic additionally, the videos seem to show it is even more capable then I knew. But at the moment, I mainly use F360 and for 500/year it gives so much capabilities - hard to replace with FreeCAD. (btw, it gives headaches too, those are free of charge 
) I would not mind switching as long as the software I am switching to does not leave me behind in a major way. I think FreeCAD is not there for meā¦ yet. Are you saying that you rely on FreeCAD for all/most of your MCAD work?
Definitely yes.
I left all proprietary MCAD sw few years ago.
And I wouldnāt trust any cloud sw that can change its policy and then lock your data any time.
Iāll give FreeCAD an other try, as soon as it can generate reasonable G-code. For 5 axis simultaneous.
The few things I have done with FreeCAD were clumsy enough for me.
Nick
Why should g-code generation be part of the same software used for mechanical design? (I would not expect kicad to run the fabrication machines) These are two distinct and specialized tasks. The exchange format between the two tasks should ideally be an open standard like step.
Well, KiCAD does produce Gerber files. Thatās the same as G-code for mechanical design.
But maybe, you donāt know what G-code is?
Nick
No gerber is not the mechanical manufacturing counterpart of g-code. <simplification> G-Code really tells the motors of the particular machine what to do <simplification/> (I had the misfortune of working with a very old system where you still entered the g-code by hand, only help was a "simulated run of the path in 2d).
Gerber originally was used in the same manner but nowadays it is only used to exchange the graphical information needed (the processes have changed so much that the original intent is no longer relevant but there simply was no need to change the file format. Well it seems this will change within a few years as more and more additional information is required.)
I would say gerber is much more like step as step is then used by the cnc control program to generate the gcode necessary (similarly how gerber is used by the fabs program to derive the commands for their machine).
I donāt know which machine shops you used in the past but i never ever sent them g-code (how could i, i do not know which exact machine they will use, what the configuration of the machine is on that day, ā¦)
I sent them step file (or the original catia files depending on which shop we used)
And yes i am aware that fusion includes a g-code generator as it is kind of aimed at people who have a cnc and do not want to invest into two programs. (or at least part of their marketing makes it clear that this is definitely one of their target groups)
1 Like
Step is absolutely useless. Youād have to generate the tool pathes at the machine. Including strategies, tools, speeds and feeds. And if it takes several hours to generate the paths and block the machine for that time and then the part takes 10 hours to mill and you could prepare the next part, youāll understand why it is useless.
My shop. Lathe and mill. Both programmed with G-code. The mill is quite old (a MAHO MH 700 C), the lathe quite new, a Haas TL-2. And most of the time, I code by hand, except for 3D milling to make molds or patterns for castings. And thatās where I need a decent M-CAD that does know what features are what and which wold get lost with step.
Nick
Designing parts and determining speeds and feeds (and other manufacturing parameters) are two very specialized jobs normally not done by the same person. This is why one normally exchanges 3d data not g-codes (most likely in step format, or in the original program format especially if it is in house.)
And as you can read in my previous answer: fusion seems to be aimed at exactly your usecase so by all means continue using it. (I am quite certain that other mcad programs do not normally include a g-code generator. Catia for sure does not.)
1 Like
+1
Just a note: FreeCAD does include a G-code generator (Path module), but not for 5 axis simultaneous.
So your option is, as suggested, to stay with what you are using.
https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Path_Workbench
https://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/Path_FAQ#How_many_axes_can_Path_Workbench_handle.3F
At the moment, Version 0.18, Path Workbench can handle up to 3 axis milling. Currently, 4th-axis capabilities are under development for the next official release, with some Path Workbench operations already upgraded to basic 4th-axis status.
Funny enough, Catia DOES have a tool path generator. I have used it often enough.
And now, Iām quite certain, that you donāt understand the subject at all.
Nick
+1. Even if you knew, they would much rather do their own CAM. Running someone elses gcode always makes me sweatā¦
Most hi-end mcad packages are usually āProduct lifecycle managmentā suites. They include CAD, CAM, FEA, BOM and a host of other different modules. In this context, using the native file format makes a lot of sense. I LOLed at @nickmās comment that step is absolutely useless, because it clearly is not. But he makes a good point that in-house you wouldnāt use it because youād loose any work youāve done aside CAD.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.