Hello everyone! So today we're going to be looking at a few different mechanical design tools: the surface modeling tool Rhino, the mechanical design tool SolidWorks and the free mechanical browser-based CAD package called on shape and the first test I'm going to be doing is modeling some electronics components because, well, Eevblog, the upcoming tests are designed to stress these packages and they're quite diverse tests each thing kind of targeting a different problem that a lot of CAD packages have and by no means am I using even close to the full feature set of any of these tools on shape and SolidWorks both have great parametric design facilities, and Rhyno has all kinds of advanced surface modeling tools, and SolidWorks and Liner have excellent renderers, and SolidWorks has an excellent simulator and all kinds of things that I'm not even close to fully utilizing. The next test is of modeling a Werth transformer. This thing doesn't have all the data and the data sheet, so I had to wing it for some of it. but I Thought this made a good test to compare the 3d modeling capabilities with respect to electronics components.

All right. So the first test being modeling a worth transformer, you'll notice that the Rhino package really flies out of the gate. here. It has no real need to set up constraints so you're not.

You're not slowed down by the process of thinking how to constrain all the geometry. You can kind of just go ahead and do it there constraints in on shape and SolidWorks is actually quite similar and while it slows down the modeling process, it makes the model much more versatile and flexible. If I were to change for example, the fill it radius in on shape or SolidWorks it would be a totally trivial thing. But if I were to do that in Rhino I would have to basically delete the existing billets and then and then redraw a whole bunch of stuff and it would really be a pain.

so you really need to know what you're doing in Rhino before you start. So I I know here: I'm already drawing the pins and as I am in SolidWorks but on shape is barely has barely gotten the base plate and done SolidWorks Here the the sketch editor has seen some trouble with two constraints, so that's what I'm trying to do in the solo box window to the bottom left and I'm really having some trouble. I actually leave it unconstrained because it was just making the tests irrelevant because it was taking so long to fully constrain the drawing. That means that all the geometry has formulated positions.

So Rhinos actually finished at this point and SolidWorks a non shape haven't even got the pins finished and on shape hasn't even caught the single pin profile finished. So really, Rhino did quite excellently here. SolidWorks is basically finished at this point, all the pins are set up in an array and I'm just setting up the materials so that it appears like a transformer. Probably should have picked a different color than that Copper on shape doesn't actually have a material properties thing or it kind of does, but it doesn't set up like textures or anything like that and you'll notice that despite all the the problems in on shape, it only finished a minute after SolidWorks Not bad at all.

So here we have a modeling of wire Toit them. A wire toy is that thing that goes beep when you hit the ring on the wire. So this can be quite a challenging and problem for tools when you have the profile of the wire turned from a circle to a square because it has to perform a operation called a loft along that along that curve while while the curve moves and three axes. so it's not at all clear whether that curve should rotate around the curve or how to solve it at all.

It's actually got many solutions, so a lot of these packages have a lot of trouble solving this problem now. Rhino In SolidWorks Here really have no problem setting up the drawings and all the planes. Cell box is a 3d modelling package which hasn't which with ease you can set up planes at various angles with respect to each other so it works. it's about the same you can.

You can just rotate things arbitrarily around arbitrary axis and on shape. On the other hand, setting up planes can be a real pain and you'll see later on that this this really is why on shape loses so badly in this test. So Rhino already has because setup now as a nice spline curve is what it's called and I'm already performing the loft operation in right now and it's It's basically done at this point, SolidWorks are very, very close behind so it's it's also basically done only it's a it's a surface at this point and and I just had to fill it in and the only little under a minute between them on shape. On the other hand, I haven't even done the profile to set up my 3d.

My 3d curve on shape doesn't really have the ability to do the same type of 3d curve at SolidWorks does, so it it is somewhat more difficult. The 3d curve it does have does allow for splines and stuff in 3d, so that's good. That allowed this problem to be solved, but it's nowhere near as sophisticated as SolidWorks 3d tool or Rhinos unconstrained drawings. Yeah, I'm still setting up planes at this point and got to set up at the angle between the planes and then I got to offset the angle from the previous plane and that's that's how much it takes to to set up the drawing planes.

In this, it's really quite a pain. So at this point I've actually got the curve set up and I'm just doing that final spline spine curve which will hopefully end. This is this modeling exercise what I was trying to do there was make it so that the start and end were kind of normal to the surface at the bottom, but it really just wouldn't do it. So I gave up on shape is the only tool that produced such a hopeless curve.

By default, you had to fiddle with the settings quite a lot and even despite the time it took, it still was around double the time for Rhino and that's that's really not very performant in this this test. Alright, so this is gonna be modeling a Ketel thing don't know what to call it, but it's designed to kind of show a major problem that I've bumped into like every other day with Rhino when I'm doing Phillip operations. III Have also had a similar issue with SolidWorks and with on shape in different scenarios, but I found the SolidWorks has the most robust Filat system if the three. but here you're gonna see Ryan are really really sucking him.

Yeah, yeah. so here I'm creating the base plate. This is an 80 millimeter cylinder and in SolidWorks I'm just showing off the constraints where you can make one dimension relative to another and it's actually really cool. But it did slow down the the result of the SolidWorks the kettle thing here and I'm Ryan I'm already doing the loft, but that's going to be about the end of Rona being a head on shape.

Really really close behind. in fact, on shape. is seconds from finishing. It is done at this point and all I'm going to do is set the material and it's done three minutes 44 seconds.

Both SolidWorks and Rhino have have barely started. So usually you're fighting with the tool and usually I'm fighting with on shape but on shape. Really had no problems with this exercise at all. So in Rhino here I'm having to manually do the fill it I'm having to trim the surfaces with respect to each other because if you do a fill it operation on two surfaces or on a solid in Rhino it will not work if you don't.

if the fill it crosses over multiple surfaces, it doesn't do the trimming properly. in SolidWorks I'm just about done I'm doing the fill it using its really nice, filling engine on and they go fill its last, fill it there and then I'm gonna do it operation called shell which makes it Hollow SolidWorks just finishing up now with six minutes 55 seconds. Really great. Rhino I'm still manually doing what looks like the simplest Filat on this whole damn thing except for the external Phillip Um, and and what I'm gonna do is blend between these surfaces and that basically means like smoothly moving between them.

That's what you've got here and it might result in the best-looking fill it I think I think my own has produced the best-looking I'm geometry here, but it wow. it was a lot more work and this test by it wasn't the first time I tried this I tried all kinds of things. if you know a good way to do it. put it in the comments.

but yeah I Found this to be a real pain. So what I'm doing here is basically I'm creating the shell I Didn't use a shell command this time because it failed too often and it felt worse than this offset operation. But even the offset operation failed. It didn't create a solid, it left gaps in it.

so I had to manually fill them up. So on. shape finished here third of the time of and half the time of. SolidWorks Really quite impressive.

A free online browser-based tool. So why am I comparing all these apples and oranges? Well, it's because I'm really showcasing how different the tools are. Rhino is an excellent surface modeling tool. It's great for architecture and industrial design.

SolidWorks is excellent for mechanical design and industrial design as well. And on shape is fabulous. For the hobbyist, it's free. It's I'll bet you have to have fun publicly listed models, but the tool is free, which is really wonderful considering its capabilities are similar to the other two.

If I were to recommend something to an electronics engineer I'd probably say on shape. if all you're doing is electronics component modeling for PCBs, it's free. Why spend a whole bunch of money on something that isn't a whole bunch faster? It'll only save you a few minutes. but if you're doing something like industrial design, the the answers a little bit more fuzzy.

If SolidWorks all Rhino will probably serve you really well. If you're an architect, people tend to not use solar books for architecture as far as I know, so probably Rhino But I don't see why SolidWorks couldn't do it, but it definitely doesn't have facilities designed for architects whereas Rhino does. so. We are clearly the winners in this great variety of tools available to us and and the hobbyist community through Almond Shape.

Really a winner. Free! CAD Almost made it to this video, but it wasn't really ready for some of these tests. It the the workflow in free CAD is is very different. the other two which made a video comparing the the tool to the others very difficult.

So as an example of a model you can produce in Rhino this is a CNC machine I designed about seven years ago. It's based on galvanized steel and Nemeth 23 stepper motors and I still use the machine today and is the kind of thing you can use. Rhino for a little hobbyist project and here is a 3d printer: I designed in SolidWorks It's parametric so you can change one number and it changes the size of a whole bunch of different parts and SolidWorks made this rendering as well. We also have this assembly here, a flippy dot assembly done in on shape.

This was just a little hobby thing and I've kind of just created some photos to make an animation for you. Everyone loves flippy dots right? So if you wanted other tools compared and As and I already realize people going to nag me to do all kinds of tools. and yeah, I'm opening the floodgates here. but leave it in the comments below.

and if you get enough thumbs up, maybe we can do a video comparing the the tools that you talked about in the comments. I Hope you liked the video. Have a great day bye.