Hacker News Reader

Comment by JamesCoyne | Hacker News Reader

CAD is a bad place to make this argument. FreeCAD is the closest thing to commercial 3D parametric CAD, and it is still missing some key features. Further, teaching FreeCAD to engineering students would be a detrimental; the engineering profession that students graduate into has no appetite for open source CAD

View on HN

I'm talking about what to teach in school. FreeCAD does a lot, and it has gotten a LOT better recently. You could do things in FreeCAD that would cost thousands in other packages. For most of school, this is enough. When it comes time for CFD and FEA, there are tools better than FreeCAD, but not for long if FreeCAD had the user base the other tools get from schools

Does FreeCAD handle constrained assemblies yet? You can't kneecap students while making the argument that their participation will make the tool better for someone else, maybe, in the future.

Yes, it does, admittedly not as smooth as solidworks. FreeCAD has come a LONG way recently. With more users, it will just get better and better.

Suppose it doesn't though, I don't agree that it is knee capping students. My school started teaching CAD in 10th grade, and at that point you are just learning the basics like GD&T, so it isnt that important if the CAD package can make 1000 part assemblies and sub assemblies. You can teach all the basics with FreeCAD, no problem

All the assembly workbenches are external, doesn't count in my mind.

You're right, FreeCAD can handle the basics nicely. I was coming at this with my experience from university, where I don't think FreeCAD is good enough yet.

I want FreeCAD to be better; I financially support the development in a small way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com