# Design software



## 18bikes (Jan 15, 2007)

After seeing the thread about autoCAD, I got thinking about all the different software options, and what people find to be best in terms of value for money, ease of use for someone who isn't a computer nerd but still acceptable in bigger industries, i.e. if i want someone else to make something from my designs it isn't a wierd file type etc.

At school i used autoCAD a little and found it incredibly complicated, we also used ProDesktop, which i have a copy of now and find to be less complicated but still a bit stupid at times. It's also quite difficult to use when it comes to assemblies.

What do other people use/recommend?

matt


----------



## MichauxYeti (Nov 10, 2005)

Several production manufacturers that I've spoken with use Solidworks. It's also the most common CAD package mentioned on job listings for engineers in the bike industry. It is my understanding that it offers enough solid modeling capabilities to handle the needs of a bike design without the cost associated with Pro-E.


----------



## CajunAg08 (Jul 16, 2008)

+1 for Solidworks. As a parametric modeler it is easy to use, very intuitive. I used it throughout college both for projects and fun (I'm an engineer, so I'm a dork). Just like Legos the only limit is your imagination. Only downside is that versions other than student aren't cheap, but there are ways...


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

Full disclosure:

I used to work for this company and still own a lot of private shares in it.

It's a fraction of the price of SolidWorks but a very similar look and feel. It'll work for bike stuff for sure (I've been using it for my project). Like all things that are "cheaper" than the defacto standard, it does have some limitations but unless you're making a living in the bike industry, it's probably fine. Dassault Systems (French Defense Company) owns SolidWorks and the kernel that Alibre Design uses as well. The "native" file format for Alibre Design is STEP, so you can go as a featureless model into other systems should you want to send something out to have it NC'd.

https://www.alibre.com/


----------



## RoyDean (Jul 2, 2007)

Cannondale and Santa Cruz use Pro/E

I believe a base license (no FEA or mechanism analysis) is around $5K. I currently use Pro/E at work, and love it, but I think when you throw in the mechanism analysis, surfacing, and pro/mechanica FEA packages (that I use daily), the price begins to get a little out of hand. Not that I could afford a $5K base license, anyway....


----------



## smdubovsky (Apr 27, 2007)

I've used Alibre and solid works just a little (we have solid edge at the office but I've never used it) Alibre is a VERY nice product for their price point. The fact that they have a free basic 3d version is icing on the cake for smaller users. I don't know of anyone else that does that. Kinda makes the decision a no brainer for personal use doesn't it???


----------



## Francis Buxton (Apr 2, 2004)

Autocad is pretty much a drafting program, at least relative to bicycle design. As a drafting program, it is great. I have used Acad to draw +/-35 bikes, and it is my preferred program. I have LDD 2006 and Civil 3d 2010 available to me at work, and I am good in Acad, so that's why I prefer it. Acad allows me a lot of flexibility in changes to frames, laying one frame on top of another to see where they are similar/different, etc. 

A lot of custom builders use BikeCAD Pro. I have never used it, but I have a friend that has used it a lot, and he loves it. Makes designing a bike about a 15 minute process for him after he has all of the base measurements he wants/needs. It also has a side app that spits out all of his setup parameters for his Anvil frame jig, which makes that setup a 5 minute process. It's a very good, time-saving system if you are in a professional production arena. It's only about $300, which is pretty reasonable and very justifiable if you are a bike builder. I use the freebie web version a lot to play around with ideas, and I often start my bike designs in BC and then transfer everything to ACAD for all the final stuff. One of these days I'll get aound to buying the pro version, but I haven't been able to justify it yet.

If you're just building on a hobby basis (or even on a pro basis for your own company), I'd suggest BikeCad Pro. The 3d modeling programs are overkill for most designs.


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

Francis Buxton said:


> The 3d modeling programs are overkill for most designs.


And I totally agree with this as someone that is using a solid modeling program. I wouldn't recommend anyone do it. I still like to though as it's interesting to me and it lets me look at things differently. Now that I do have a real parametric model of a bike frame, I can change that in a few minutes and spit out an entirely new solid. It took me a LONG time to get that done though and a few iterations. I learned a lot and had fun doing it and that's what counts.

I will say that I found BikeCAD frustrating and the "free" version didn't spit out a full ANSI E drawing as best I could tell. Folks that aren't VERY familiar with solid modeling are going to find any of them next to impossible to use for frame design though, so BikeCAD would certainly be a better choice.


----------



## chiplikestoridehisbike (Aug 8, 2007)

Bang for the buck I am a big fan of Rhino. It is not parametric, but is an accurate, easy to use basic surfacing package that can do a lot and plays well with other programs. It does not do FEA and I am not sure you can constrain geometry for simulations. I am an industrial designer not an engineer so take this for what is is worth.


----------



## 18bikes (Jan 15, 2007)

We have bike cad pro, i was meaning for things other than geometry etc, bike cad pro is perfect for that side of things. I'm thinking more for dropout design and chainstay/seatstay ideas so that interferances can be looked at in 3d. I feel that with bike cad pro you can design a frame and build it, provided you aren't doing anything out of the ordinary, if you need to look at things in more detail i think you need more, hence my original question. 

I'm not going to bother putting entire bike frames in, just rear ends, and possibly only the chainstay area.

I will probably carry on with prodesktop just because i have it, although i may try Alibre as i have heard of it before and if there's a free version, it can't hurt to give it a try. If i need someone to make me something, e.g. dropouts, i'll see whether prodesktop can give them what they need, or i'll just print a drawing out from it

cheers

matt


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

I use Autocad for most stuff since I use it daily and have all the CLI commands wired. Though lately I've been using SketchUp for a lot of stuff since it's very fast tand easy to tweak and modify designs. Compared to a engineering solid modeler it's very limited, but somehow being limited works in its benefit for fooling around with ideas and prototyping.

Other than that, I used Solidworks at my old job and definitely recommend it.


----------



## Francis Buxton (Apr 2, 2004)

ACAD works well for designing dropouts and getting clearances on chainstays, etc. I pretty much do that stuff 2d b/c I'm Civil and it's been a long time since I've drawn parts type drawings 3d. If you're looking at purchasing a new software package to draw that kind of stuff and you're not really familiar with any of them, the Alibre that Jay recommended might work best. At $1000, it's probably cheaper than even the base Autocad, and it can't be any harder to learn for a newbie. Acad is a great program, but it isn't very user-friendly for a beginner without experienced help.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

If you aren't already vested in AutoCAD, learning it is a complete waste of time. It's dead software.

Any parametric solid modeling package is a good choice. I feel that Solidworks is best mainly because it's ubiquidous, so your closest machine shop is using it. That's important.


----------



## DWF (Jan 12, 2004)

pvd said:


> If you aren't already vested in AutoCAD, learning it is a complete waste of time. It's dead software.
> 
> Any parametric solid modeling package is a good choice. I feel that Solidworks is best mainly because it's ubiquidous, so your closest machine shop is using it. That's important.


Agree. If I had it to do over again, I'd have gone SolidWorks over ProE, which I rarely if ever use any more. Modeling is too time consuming unless you're doing complicated assemblies and all of the modeling packages manufacturing/machining cells that I'm familiar with still suck the big one...which is why your local machine shop, 9 times out of 10, uses MasterCam and will just import your SolidWorks/IGES file.

Give me MasterCam or give me death. It's the only thing I can think of where if I didn't have it, I'd rather close up my shop than continue on without it.


----------



## compositepro (Jun 21, 2007)

Alibre used to be free didn't it and its a great little package even at 1k

I use unigraphics now but thats mainly because of the surfacing and composites and motorsports connection

I personally would get what suits your needs Solidworks in the UK cost 4250 
however i can give you the contacts of a guy who can get you 60% off due to development funding for buisnesses in the Uk for the yorkshire derbyshire area

If you want to see what it can do designwise for bikes theres always the pop down and give you a demo solution

remember you can use it as a 2d sketching package not ideally what it was intended for but for laying down quick blocks for kinematics etc its a quick fix and they say its added functionality ...lol

skeleton models are another thing you shoul be looking at once you have set it up ie a framework for your geometry you can pretty much chop and change stuff on the fly quickly


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

compositepro said:


> Alibre used to be free didn't it


Yeah, when I worked there (before it was Alibre) that was the vision. Of course, that was just before the bubble burst and folks figured out they had to charge money to make money I left a few years ago after we'd been selling it for a while.

There is still a free "feature limited" version. I think it limits the number of parts in assembly mode and may leave off the drawing package. I'm not sure what the deal is there. I don't follow the marketing that much anymore.


----------



## Jon Edwards (Aug 20, 2004)

18 - There's a guy just over the hill from you who designs bikes for a living  . Have a chat with him next time he pops in. Pretty sure he uses Solidworks. He's a lovely chap (although potentially a little cycotic), so I'm sure you can tap him up for info and training...!


----------



## Francis Buxton (Apr 2, 2004)

pvd said:


> If you aren't already vested in AutoCAD, learning it is a complete waste of time. It's dead software.


Autocad is not a dead software. For your purposes, yes it probably is. Try to design a building or grade a 100-acre site without it and you'll see it's not dead.


----------



## balog (Dec 5, 2008)

I use Rhinoceros... it´s really easy to work.

I know many people say Solidworks is better, but Rhino is just too easy to work with.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

Last time I asked, a full up version of Solidworks with FEA was over $8k U.S. I think I could make money with it, but that's a lot of money.


----------



## proto2000 (Jan 27, 2007)

progeCAD is free as home use. Like Auto Cad in many ways.


----------



## justwan naride (Oct 13, 2008)

balog said:


> I use Rhinoceros... it´s really easy to work.
> 
> I know many people say Solidworks is better, but Rhino is just too easy to work with.


I've been working with Rhino for 8 years (amongst other CAD software) and it remains one of my favourites. While it's not parametric, it's relatively easy to learn, very fast once you get the hang of it and quite cheap compared to the "big" ones. 
Apart from work stuff (mainly jewelry & other decorative objects) use it to design surfboards & windsurfboards. I've only tried to design a bike once, something like a Giant Trance front triangle with a Marin suspension. Never got to finish it, stopped at this stage:


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

justwan naride said:


> I've been working with Rhino for 8 years (amongst other CAD software) and it remains one of my favourites. While it's not parametric, it's relatively easy to learn, very fast once you get the hang of it and quite cheap compared to the "big" ones.
> Apart from work stuff (mainly jewelry & other decorative objects) use it to design surfboards & windsurfboards. I've only tried to design a bike once, something like a Giant Trance front triangle with a Marin suspension. Never got to finish it, stopped at this stage:


Very nice! Post a picture of a nice Bump and Jump for me. That's what I used Rhino for back when I used to mess with it too. The biggest problem I had is that, and don't take this the wrong way, how are you supposed to build that frame now? I mean, it's great looking. But seriously, you're gonna be out $100k to make the hydroforms for the tubing. It'd better work as planned.

Anyway, not to bag on Rhino, but that's the problem with a surface modeler versus solid modeler is that you can't produce what you can design unless money isn't an object.

So have you built any of the boards you've done? Windsurfing is my 1st love, MTBing is my mistress.


----------



## chiplikestoridehisbike (Aug 8, 2007)

Actually the ability to quickly build complex surfaces is the power of a surfacing package. Also just because you can build complex shapes does not mean you have to. You can just as easily build a simple tube frame. I have used solid works, inventor, pro E, autocad, maya, alias, and rhino for projects. I am certified on works and inventor. Rhino would be hard to beat for a small operation. It would allow you to layout, document, and present frames.You would not be able to fea or constrain schematics. There may be some constraints available but I have not used them. The mid tier parametric packages have their strengths but don't buy all of the hype. I see people put a ton of time into parametric models daily and in reality if you step back and look at it, a parametric model is not always the most cost effective solution.


----------



## ScaryJerry (Jan 12, 2004)

Rhino and SolidWorks: two great tastes that taste great together.


----------



## justwan naride (Oct 13, 2008)

I don't really plan to builld the bike, if I wanted to then I'd probably model something based on existing tube diameters & sections. This was my first take on a bicycle and I just wanted to see how the nice Giant-like hydroforming would look with a Marin style rear sus. Plus I'm an industrial designer not an engineer, so I often I choose form over function  

Rhino for me is the Swiss Army Knife of CAD and a great introduction into design software. However, if you're serious about putting your designs into production, need to be able to handle complex assemblies and need parametric modeling, you can't beat VX. Very powerfull software, not cheap of course, but it easily competes with (and in many cases, according to colleagues of mine who use it, outperforms) ProE & Solidworks. It isn't widespread, but I've seen what it does and it's quite impressive.

I'll post a couple of surf/windsurf boards pics later, right now I'm at work, not on my laptop. I haven't built any boards yet, although I do have access to a CNC machine. My first attempt will most likely be a surfboard, eps foam with epoxy glassing as I have some experience with the materials from repairs etc. It's the same for me, windsurfing and now surfing are my first loves but mtb is also fun, a good workout and definitely not so weather dependent.


----------



## verticult (Jan 18, 2005)

Most established machine shops that accept small prototype jobs would likely prefer a simple shop drawing on a single piece of paper. Provide the machinist with the information needed and not much more.


----------



## jay_ntwr (Feb 15, 2008)

chiplikestoridehisbike said:


> Actually the ability to quickly build complex surfaces is the power of a surfacing package.


I think you misunderstood where I was going with that. Justwan caught that though.

My point is that unless you have full access to some bad arse CNC equipment (for free) then it's gonna cost an arm and a leg to have anything built. I'm not dissing surface modelers, just saying they aren't practical for the hobby builder to design with because they won't be able to afford to get anything produced that they've created. w/ a parametric modeler, geometry can be made very prismatic and a print can be generated that a guy on a manual Bridgeport can run. Or, if you do what to have something done on a CNC machine, that's still possible.

So your point is taken on the design part, I'm specifically trying to guide the "design for manufacturing" side of choosing design software as these guys don't have unlimited resources to do one or two frames versus what a Trek/Specialized/Marin/etc are going to do with surface modelers and sell thousands upon thousands of frames.


----------

