Am I right in assuming Rhino is more universal in possible applications than JewelCad?. Is one or the other more easy to learn to use or more advanced in features and add-ons. Purchase price comparison etc. Any help much appreciated. I use Rhino and build all my objects from scratch.
|Published (Last):||3 July 2004|
|PDF File Size:||15.9 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.74 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Am I right in assuming Rhino is more universal in possible applications than JewelCad?. Is one or the other more easy to learn to use or more advanced in features and add-ons. Purchase price comparison etc. Any help much appreciated. I use Rhino and build all my objects from scratch. Therefore I am a big fan as you are not restricted to the "X-BrandJewlleryCAD" programs which have a library of objects that you piece together to create your item.
I suppose it is akin to one jeweller who makes his items from findings and settings and calls himself a jeweller and another jeweller who does the same but creates everything from scratch. My comment on the above is that the first jeweller will create pieces that will have a generic look and the latter will create slightly more individual pieces. If you are building from scratch in Rhino you have to do these steps yourself. My last arguement on the case is look at the objects in the Rhino gallery.
I have been using rhino since November 6 months. I have learned by following the tutorials on www. Jewelcad probably does the same thing. Matthew www. I am an AutoCad User and have been for many years now. Are there any add ons that will let me do jewelry work with AutoCad?
We use many of the software available for the industry I have used both Rhino and Jewelcad For us, Rhino is more versatile and more easily conforms to US prototyping standards It just makes more sense for someone who comes from a jewelry bench background there is definitely more people using it, much more support available when you need help.
Libraries are a starting point, and not a locked solution where you are being forced to create the generic jewelry as you call it. The fact of the matter, is that the individual has the ability to add to his or her library of parts at any given point. Even those drawn from scratch:- Other software solutions, have the tools to be creative and generate whatever shape, form or design intent you can come up with, and that could be with, or without a library of pre-existing parts.
This comment regarding libraries has cropped up several times in just as many discussions, and I find it mind boggling that individuals grasp onto certain buzz words such as generic and libraries and completely stop at that point. It seems at least to me, that some are completely blinded by that one phrase, and assume that the whole solution revolves around a small portion of the complete solution. Therefore, a setting drawn from scratch versus importing the same from a library is different and commands more respect?
The fact of the matter, both are in digital format, and both will be produced via RP or milling, therefore, both are equal as far as the final product is concerned. Both Matrix and 3Design will accomplish whatever you can do, but with more flexibility, functionality and more importantly increased productivity. Individuality is expressed in the entire creative design process, rather than just the vehicle that gets you there. The tools are there to assist and not to detract or limit the channel of creativity.
Understanding not only what the end product will look like, but also understanding how to utilize the fastest vehicle that gets you from point A to point B is very important. There is nothing wrong with starting out with a generic piece as you call it from a library of parts. The important factor and the key to success, is what can you do with that model from that point on?.
The fact that a generic model can be imported into a CAD file and then manipulated whether through dimensionally driven attributes or in the free form dragging of surfaces to skew, taper, distort or whatever into a form that is now not so generic, is the real power of added functionality. The real power is not necessarily in the position you start at, but the realization that you can modify on a whim and on the fly.
A block of clay from an arts and crafts store, is a generic form that each and every one of us can buy. Now the skill of an artist can sculpt and manipulate this into something very pleasing to the eye, in my case, it would probably look better as a block The same thing applies to CAD.
Chris, many software solutions, will allow many different directions to automate productivity. Personally, I use macros, Visual Basics scripts and other methods of utilizing equations via parametrics to automate any task that has an association in a family of similar parts. Spend the time doing one, and kick the crap out of the rest with one click of an icon and answer a few questions that control the features that need to be changed.
Have you ever created your own design table in Excel for the creation of derived parts stemming from an original model? Very Powerful stuff. Taking it to the CAM side of things, the same applies. Would you rather have the CAM system provide you with a generic canned toolpath, or would you rather program the whole job in notepad line by line? The key is, let the program give you automatically the repetitive tasks, and meanwhile, knowing full well, that you have the tools to enhance it further if you so desire.
To create a library component, someone, somewhere has to draw that part. In many industries generic parts saved into libraries are an essential time saver in producing many products, which today originate in many cases from a CAD solution. What may seem as a generic part to you, is to others an essential part that belongs to a generic family of products.
Do you think that mechanical engineers draw every single bolt, spring and washers for example. Do a search on items used in building fixtures such as bull clamps or spring pins, and most companies will have a downloadable CAD file of that same exact element, so that it can be used in the design phase of your tool.
Again, the provided libraries of components are starting points, and often used to illustrate the fact, that you can build them yourself and additionally to call up parts used in conjunction with tutorials etc. Where you take it from there, is entirely up to you. I am confident that you have a library of items for your own use that you created from scratch, however, others who have a different solution, that just so happened to come with a library, will also have their own collection of non generic items drawn from scratch.
Had to put in my two cents worth - I use Jewelcad all day every day as the designer for a manufacturing company. It is not, as so often seems to be assumed, a program based on the use of a library of parts. I create most things from scratch, and do so easily and quickly with a series of relevant and specific tools that were designed with jewelry in mind.
I have worked with many other programs, including Rhino and Solidworks, and found it tiresome to have to learn these huge programs in order to boil it down to what I actually need. Which, if ANY of the programs include casting sensibilities like overly thin walls or pinch points of low? Which, if any of these programs can start with either a picture or a sketch or a scan of existing concepts trials? I know Solidworks was mentioned in the recent Lapidary Journal article, but want to know from someone who is really using it.
Although it is much more complex to learn to use, since it is an engineering CAD program, I still would prefer to design pieces from the ground up, and not have to use pre-made templates all the time I have some experience with CAD programs. Your comments are appreciated. Solidworks via the Cosmo interphace, and used for the analysies of different production criterias.
I use it to determine flows for plastic injection. Same criterias can be set up for casting also. Several other solutions can also do this. From the sketch and picture point, Solidworks can import a 2D blueprint with top, side and front views and convert into a solid model.
Type3 can bring in a sketch or a picture and manipulate within the native enviroment to create 3D reliefs. Several other solutions can also. From the scan point, I am assuming you mean as point cloud data. Therefore, Solidworks and Alphacam can handle, and manipulate point cloud data in real time, and as fast as the points are given.
This can be via CMM, or a manual touch probe such as a Faro arm or laser scanning system. Many other solutions can handle this also. Taking it further, most digitized files can be exported from the digitizing software in a variety of formats, therefore, many solutions can handle the task as either surfaces or solid models.
No doubt, Rhino is a very powerful software. The good thing is that it has plug-ins like Gemvision Matrix. If you decide to go for Rhino, you may want to have the plug-in as well. That will make your design work easier. JewelCAD is an old jewelry design software. One of the interesting features is Boolean and dis-Boolean. That means when you receive the design file, you can reverse the operations and modify small pieces and assemble again.
Many designers complain lack of support and help for JewelCAD. In fact, JewelCAD comes with a built-in help.
The official web site has English manual, tutorials, and evaluation version to download. Vicky vicky raisingintl. Maybe Neil George can step in and elucidate on that subject. I sometimes use a Rhino Visual Basic scripted bounding box that reports the size of a part in three dimensions. This measuring stuff sounds a bit complicated, but it usually only takes a few minutes to determine if a model is scaled to the correct dimensions.
The idea of using a picture or sketch as a starting point can be misunderstood. A sketch or a photo can be used as a starting point to trace a shape with curves or vectors which later, must be manipulated, edited and associated with additionally drawn curves to produce a successful 3D model.
You might think of 2D artwork as a rough pattern to get you started. ArtCAM is much more amenable to using 2D artwork because it works with color as well as vector lines. If you have a good high resolution image, it can be very quick work to generate a good model from a picture. Check out the Welch Dragon tutorial on this webpage:. This reminds me of an oft-repeated but erroneous criticism that ArtCAM Jewelsmith lacks for tutorials and training documentation.
I have a feeling this misis based on cracked versions of the program which are stripped of the 3D clipart libraries and all the tutorials. A legitimate copy of the program comes with an extra CD full of video tutorials, an extensive 3D clipart library, a vector pattern library, PDF tutorials, a hard copy training manual covering all aspects of the program and a help file within the program, also covering every tool and operation.
Best regards, Jesse Kaufman www. Professionals have pleasure to work with it because it aims at both beginners and expert in CAD technologies. Very clear interface, ergonomic icons, contextual help online… Nothing compared with the others. Inventor is part of the Autodesk suite of products i. Autocad and not Adobe.
Click here then scroll down to see all prices in a grid. JewelCAD Pro. Item: Total It has a completely new programming core that allows fast and up-to-date extension of features. Features: Non-engineering approach for easy learning and fast operation. Only basic knowledge in computers is needed to master the software in several weeks.
Software Tutorial,download,manual - http://www.dwcrk.com/
HOT Download. Ansoft TPA 5. Contact us. For the most part, the jewelry industry is not driving these changes; the changes are being driven by the automobile and aerospace industries. Needless to say, some of the software is much easier to use than others. Different sources of software currently exist for creating models for three-dimensional designs.