I think someday we will have to add constraints. There are lots of problems that are too painful to solve with this high school geometry approach. But in the meantime we will try to make incremental improvements to the snapping system
Hey! Thanks for watching the video. I put rant in quotes because it's not really a rant. The snap system is pretty powerful, and honestly I think a lot of people (including myself) like it because it's less rigid than your traditional CAD software. I just think there are some small things (that I pointed out in the video) that could help. A recap of my wishlist from this video: - Tangent circle: option to switch between specifying a radius and the ability to specify a 3rd (point, circle or line) to be tangent to - angle bisector snaps - easy dimensioning of angles between two lines But I understand you guys are a small software company (a startup essentially unless I've mistaken). And the product that you have so far is lovely and a joy to use (most of the time 😊)
@@davinchewk "Tangent circle: option to switch between specifying a radius and the ability to specify a 3rd (point, circle or line) to be tangent to " I think this one is already on the beta
Hi, at 4:55 you can select the Three Point Arc tool. The 1st point snapping at "Mid" of the top edge, the 2nd point snapping at "Curve" of the left or right edge, the 3rd point snapping at "Mid" or "Closest, End, Intersection" of the opposite edge. The rest is mirroring & trimming.
Hey! Thanks for the comment. I think I've tried doing that before, but was unable to determine where exactly on the left or right edge to click? The curve is a "fully rounded" curve which is why the circles and tangents are needed. But if you found a way to do this with arcs, that's great!
@@davinchewk You can do the same thing by using the tangent circle tool. 1st tangent snapping at "Intersection, Mid"" of the top edge, 2nd tangent snapping at "Curve" of the left or right edge, then drag the cursor to the opposite edge snapping at "Curve". This 3rd snapping point will also be tangent.
Finally I found a channel showing Plasticity used for CAD design! All the ones I found just focus on freeform for concepts or for assets for videogames and such which are nice, but I want to make parts for 3D printing so I need precision. Thank you for explaining things clearly and with examples as you go, explaining everything you do as you progress.
I'm glad you like the video! The other videos I have go through practice models created by @TooTallToby. Have a look at his channel if you're looking for CAD practice. He's also hosting the CAD vs CAD tournament that I referred to in this video. www.youtube.com/@TooTallToby
New to cad and have been looking at which one to learn. Cost and no cloud based has been big factors in determining the program. Plasticity and Alibre are my top two finalists. Fusion 360 would be an easy choice, but cloud and cost has ruled it out. Enjoying your videos, keep up the great work.
Yeah! Plasticity and Alibre are my two choices as well. My main use for CAD is usually to quickly model something functional for 3d printing. That makes plasticity my go-to. But Alibre is definitely more "featureful" and is more comparable to your other parametric CAD software but at a fraction of the cost.
@@davinchewk Thank you for the input. Bought a 3d printer a couple of months ago and want to use it on home projects in the near future. Building a home flight simulator and other home projects in the shop. I do not like the subscription model on software and would prefer to upgrade when future features I might need are available. Really limits the choices. The simulator I plan on using extruded aluminum for the framework,similar to racing sims, to attach monitors, instruments, flight and engine controls. Any input if this software could be used in the design using extruded aluminum or other software recommendations would appreciated. Might be a good future video for your channel. Lots of uses for extruded aluminum.
I do appreciate your explanation on the 7° angle thing. I never looked at it that way. In my brain, i know where it is 7° from, just because it is something I have done over and over, but I suppose my having a Technical Design degree, you get bombarded over and over in solving things like that. Stirs up a lot of old memories of school.
Very well explained. Once you know the tricks, you can draw anything with Plasticity. That’s also what makes it appealing to me. However, it needs to be right on the first try. Under time pressure, 30 degrees can quickly become 15 degrees because you often have to do it that way 🤦🏻♂️. Thanks again for your mental support. Good video, keep it up.
Yeah! I can relate simply from doing the practice models. It's why I wanted to make this video - to share a couple of tips and also a "rule of thumb" I've developed to make sense of some of the quirks in plasticity.
Nice video and discussion, that first model was based on one that I got in the tournament. That was a struggle in build123d as well, but thankfully build123d now has a full round feature for this scenario (introduced in response to that model, haha).
That's awesome. Nice to see software developing more and more features. I never heard of build123d until I watched your match. Seems really cool, and as a software developer I definitely approve 😂. Are you a contributor to the project as well or just a user?
Yeah! It's already a fantastic piece of software. It's just that it's missing some features from other CAD software - which is to be expected since this software has always been sortof a hybrid between blender and traditional CAD.
Thanks for the video. It's issues like these that stops plasticity from being my main cad software. When you are trying to bang out a lot of dimensions to get through some parts you need to make, the extra steps just yanks you out of your flow state. It's easy and fast to design something that looks like an actual part but much harder to design something that will be an actual part. I also find it too counterproductive to import and export files between cad programs to use the features plasticity is lacking.
The software is actually improving at an incredible rate and I've heard that the current beta includes a ton of quality of life enhancements. But yeah, without constraints these workarounds will sometimes be necessary. In contrast to your experience, I've found that designing something that will be an actual part actually pretty enjoyable in plasticity. I'm mainly learning CAD for 3D printing purposes, and the direct editing in plasticity has allowed me to quickly iterate on 3d printed parts.
I'm only learning CAD for 3D printing purposes. Now that I've used a couple of different CAD software, I would say for 99% of my use cases I would probably just do in plasticity. But things that require mathematical functions (eg: modeling iso metric threads), I don't think you can do (at least not easily) in plasticity due to the lack of mathematical functions. In those situations I would fallback to "traditional" CAD like Alibre or F360.
@@davinchewk solid I am as well! Mainly focusing on engineering grade parts. Sounds like my workflow can be a mix of both. I’ll check out some of your videos on albre. Appreciate it!
Great video, thanks! Btw is there a way to align/level a line’s endpoint to another line endpoint by axis? In blender we can just scale them along an axis to 0, and they’ll be aligned.
Thanks for the comment. I'm not sure exactly what outcome you want, but if you want to "flatten" a curve along an axis, you can select the curve (using edge selection) then "s" to scale. Press the key corresponding to the axis you want to scale by, then enter 0.
Hey! Thanks for the comment. You might be able to, but for me I found it a bit difficult because of the constraints. You're not given the width of the circle, so you would have to come up with a way to calculate that. The 2.625inch base and the 14 degree lines seems to be the elements that define the width of the circle for me, hence why I went and did those first. But let me know if you can come up with an easier way to build outline! The way I demonstrated in the video is quite tedious.
@@rcguy2175Thank you! I'm glad you find them useful. Please continue to leave me feedback so I can learn how to communicate better / make better videos. Cheers.
Trig??? Taking 7 away from 90.... Or adding 7 to 90. Not sure you may be overthinking that a bit... So then why, I wonder, when I select tangent circle I select left vertex, horizontal then right vertex sorts it out. Are you using the current version 1.4.18??
Hey! You're right in that it's simple addition/subtraction. My goal was to do a comparison between plasticity and traditional CAD software, and outline places where it's a little trickier to do in plasticity. In the video I was running 1.4.10. I've since updated to 1.4.18 after seeing your comment, but somehow the tangent circle tool still isn't working as per your description. There is a possibility that I'm doing something wrong though.
@@davinchewk I'll take a look in the morning (UK time) but it's a 3 point tangent circle. Might be worth taking a look at options in the command list. I used CATIA v5 for my day time job but find Plasticity just gets the job done quickly and without fuss for all the work I now do which is mainly 3d printing.
Ok... I understand the issue now. You've created your cropped triangle, the tangent circle picks up your say left hand curve, picks up the top horizontal curved. Now you have a circle that expands and contracts in the top LH corner according to mouse position. When you complete the circle by clicking on the right hand curve it doesn't pick up the tangent. It picks up the curve and you will get something that is very close to a tangent if you zoom in but strictly speaking, it's not. Now maybe as a 60 year old engineer brought up on a drawing board, my instinctive reaction is to draw a circle with centre point top right to the Centreline and use it's intersection with the RH curve to finish the tangent circle. I can agree that it's not an ideal way to do this but it's not a huge amount of metal gymnastics to sort it out.
@@colinhare4722That's actually a nice workaround. I might just do that moving forward as well. I think @nickkallen1 said that the beta right now includes some enhancements to the tangent circle tool (a general solver for apollonius problems perhaps?), so we might not need workarounds soon. I do love that the software is already good and is getting better and better. In any case, I agree it's not a "huge" problem, but from the "speed CAD vs CAD" perspective I'm showing how plasticity users are disadvantage. My background is not in engineering, so if I make any mistakes in the video, please do continue to comment and point them out! Cheers.
For out and out speed, what is your 'go to' CAD package then? I have experience with several CAD packages and found Plasticity to be by far the quickest and most enjoyable (read less frustrating).
I don't know what version of Plasticity you're using but it doesn't seem to be up to date. Your knowledge of the program seems to be pretty lacking though it looks like your intention is really to bag the program. There is dimensioning in Plasticity and if you can't work out that dividing 14 by 2 = 7 then you have a serious math problem and perhaps should choose a different career - it's hardly university level mathematics. What is missing from the diagram you're showing is the outer radius of the top circle, which would greatly simplify creating the object and I am sure this was available in the challenge. This mechanical part is extremely simple to make in Plasticity and a full 3D model can be done in a couple of minutes without all the drama you've introduced.
I'll admit that my knowledge of the program is lacking, but excuse me I think we're still missing some context here. First of all, this video is to address things from the CAD vs CAD perspective - specifically a match between Plasticity and OnShape that went on. A fairly proficient plasticity user "struggled" (under pressure) with some angles and fumbled in the match. Second, I am sure I repeatedly said "this is not hard math, just something additional you have to think about" compared to other CAD programs. So please, lower the forks since there's no need for personal attacks. Thirdly, I am not here to "bag the program". I like the software and is an owner of the studio license myself even though I'm using it as a hobbyist. Lastly - no the dimension of the radius isn't given in the challenge. I'm showing you exactly what was given to illustrate that in other CAD tools, the availability of constraints would make quick work of the model, but the lack of it in plasticity means additional steps - which is a disadvantage in speed modeling. I'm also not sure what "drama" you're referring to. If you go through the comments (specifically the one I pinned), the creator of plasticity acknowledges some of the disadvantages demonstrated in this video (again from a CAD vs CAD perspective). I love that the owner is engaging with the community and that the software continues to get better. So please, no need to get defensive about the software. I'm creating content with the intention to share knowledge and to teach. Yes I am new to the software and my knowledge is almost certainly lacking. If there is anything I did incorrectly, please do point them out.
@@davinchewkPlasticity is really a very young CAD like program aimed at artists and it's primary aim is not that of a mechanical engineering program although it does a reasonable job at creating them. Comparing it to programs that have been on the market for many years is not really a fair comparison as Plasticity has only been available for around twelve months and shows a lot of promise. I'm a long term CAD/3ds max/Rhino user and Plasticity is so much easier to learn and use though it still lacks the bells and whistles possessed by these programs, but given time who knows where it will go..
Maybe this is not your regular CAD tool. Don't expect too much from it. Go back to your AutoDesk expensive software. I think your type of modeller should stay away from Plasticity.
A bunch of suggested improvements has already made it to the latest version of plasticity. Not sure why you’re gatekeeping instead of wanting the software to continue to get better?
@@davinchewk Frankly, because many of these superb software babies will be taken over by big hungry companies that fill it with unuseable features, make it unaffordable for artists like myself, and end of fun. So, keep it simple
Have you looked at the prices of these big cad software companies products. I am new to CAD and everything I have read seems to point towards Fusion 360 as probably the best software. The problem is most are subscription based and over $1k in cost a year and not owning the software. Yeah they have free versions, but limited. For a hobby, this is way too expensive. FreeCAD layout is difficult to learn from reviews and Blender sound more geared toward game development and video. I am leaning toward plasticity and alibre because they each have there strengths and far cheaper than other companies products. With 3d printer sales growing, I think there will be a huge demand for inexpensive cad software that is easy and powerful to use.
I think someday we will have to add constraints. There are lots of problems that are too painful to solve with this high school geometry approach. But in the meantime we will try to make incremental improvements to the snapping system
Hey! Thanks for watching the video. I put rant in quotes because it's not really a rant. The snap system is pretty powerful, and honestly I think a lot of people (including myself) like it because it's less rigid than your traditional CAD software.
I just think there are some small things (that I pointed out in the video) that could help.
A recap of my wishlist from this video:
- Tangent circle: option to switch between specifying a radius and the ability to specify a 3rd (point, circle or line) to be tangent to
- angle bisector snaps
- easy dimensioning of angles between two lines
But I understand you guys are a small software company (a startup essentially unless I've mistaken). And the product that you have so far is lovely and a joy to use (most of the time 😊)
@@davinchewk "Tangent circle: option to switch between specifying a radius and the ability to specify a 3rd (point, circle or line) to be tangent to " I think this one is already on the beta
@@nickkallen1 awesome!
Coming from Shapr3D, your snaps are miles ahead of theirs.
I like the idea of the "option" of constraints. I love the freedoms as well of not having them.
Hi, at 4:55 you can select the Three Point Arc tool. The 1st point snapping at "Mid" of the top edge, the 2nd point snapping at "Curve" of the left or right edge, the 3rd point snapping at "Mid" or "Closest, End, Intersection" of the opposite edge. The rest is mirroring & trimming.
Hey! Thanks for the comment. I think I've tried doing that before, but was unable to determine where exactly on the left or right edge to click? The curve is a "fully rounded" curve which is why the circles and tangents are needed. But if you found a way to do this with arcs, that's great!
@@davinchewk You can do the same thing by using the tangent circle tool. 1st tangent snapping at "Intersection, Mid"" of the top edge, 2nd tangent snapping at "Curve" of the left or right edge, then drag the cursor to the opposite edge snapping at "Curve". This 3rd snapping point will also be tangent.
Finally I found a channel showing Plasticity used for CAD design! All the ones I found just focus on freeform for concepts or for assets for videogames and such which are nice, but I want to make parts for 3D printing so I need precision.
Thank you for explaining things clearly and with examples as you go, explaining everything you do as you progress.
I'm glad you like the video! The other videos I have go through practice models created by @TooTallToby.
Have a look at his channel if you're looking for CAD practice. He's also hosting the CAD vs CAD tournament that I referred to in this video.
www.youtube.com/@TooTallToby
@@D3PR3C4T0RExactly. I think a lot of us like plasticity because it's not as rigid as other CAD software.
New to cad and have been looking at which one to learn. Cost and no cloud based has been big factors in determining the program. Plasticity and Alibre are my top two finalists. Fusion 360 would be an easy choice, but cloud and cost has ruled it out. Enjoying your videos, keep up the great work.
Yeah! Plasticity and Alibre are my two choices as well. My main use for CAD is usually to quickly model something functional for 3d printing. That makes plasticity my go-to. But Alibre is definitely more "featureful" and is more comparable to your other parametric CAD software but at a fraction of the cost.
@@davinchewk Thank you for the input. Bought a 3d printer a couple of months ago and want to use it on home projects in the near future. Building a home flight simulator and other home projects in the shop. I do not like the subscription model on software and would prefer to upgrade when future features I might need are available. Really limits the choices. The simulator I plan on using extruded aluminum for the framework,similar to racing sims, to attach monitors, instruments, flight and engine controls. Any input if this software could be used in the design using extruded aluminum or other software recommendations would appreciated. Might be a good future video for your channel. Lots of uses for extruded aluminum.
You are very skilled to solve such challenges! I just started using Plasticity this week... and doing a deep dive for mostly motorcycle parts...
I do appreciate your explanation on the 7° angle thing. I never looked at it that way. In my brain, i know where it is 7° from, just because it is something I have done over and over, but I suppose my having a Technical Design degree, you get bombarded over and over in solving things like that. Stirs up a lot of old memories of school.
Yep! I think similar with most things, a lot of these small details can be overcome with experience.
Very well explained. Once you know the tricks, you can draw anything with Plasticity. That’s also what makes it appealing to me. However, it needs to be right on the first try. Under time pressure, 30 degrees can quickly become 15 degrees because you often have to do it that way 🤦🏻♂️. Thanks again for your mental support. Good video, keep it up.
Yeah! I can relate simply from doing the practice models. It's why I wanted to make this video - to share a couple of tips and also a "rule of thumb" I've developed to make sense of some of the quirks in plasticity.
Nice video and discussion, that first model was based on one that I got in the tournament. That was a struggle in build123d as well, but thankfully build123d now has a full round feature for this scenario (introduced in response to that model, haha).
That's awesome. Nice to see software developing more and more features. I never heard of build123d until I watched your match. Seems really cool, and as a software developer I definitely approve 😂. Are you a contributor to the project as well or just a user?
@@davinchewkI am a contributor yes, and also probably one of the first users when the project started less than 2 years ago.
awesome... hopefully plasticity gets these features
Yeah! It's already a fantastic piece of software. It's just that it's missing some features from other CAD software - which is to be expected since this software has always been sortof a hybrid between blender and traditional CAD.
Thanks for the video. It's issues like these that stops plasticity from being my main cad software. When you are trying to bang out a lot of dimensions to get through some parts you need to make, the extra steps just yanks you out of your flow state. It's easy and fast to design something that looks like an actual part but much harder to design something that will be an actual part. I also find it too counterproductive to import and export files between cad programs to use the features plasticity is lacking.
The software is actually improving at an incredible rate and I've heard that the current beta includes a ton of quality of life enhancements.
But yeah, without constraints these workarounds will sometimes be necessary.
In contrast to your experience, I've found that designing something that will be an actual part actually pretty enjoyable in plasticity. I'm mainly learning CAD for 3D printing purposes, and the direct editing in plasticity has allowed me to quickly iterate on 3d printed parts.
So depending on the CAD design do you rotate off plasticity and alibre? Although these examples are just a slightly different mental approach.
I'm only learning CAD for 3D printing purposes. Now that I've used a couple of different CAD software, I would say for 99% of my use cases I would probably just do in plasticity.
But things that require mathematical functions (eg: modeling iso metric threads), I don't think you can do (at least not easily) in plasticity due to the lack of mathematical functions. In those situations I would fallback to "traditional" CAD like Alibre or F360.
@@davinchewk solid I am as well! Mainly focusing on engineering grade parts. Sounds like my workflow can be a mix of both. I’ll check out some of your videos on albre. Appreciate it!
Great video, thanks!
Btw is there a way to align/level a line’s endpoint to another line endpoint by axis?
In blender we can just scale them along an axis to 0, and they’ll be aligned.
Thanks for the comment. I'm not sure exactly what outcome you want, but if you want to "flatten" a curve along an axis, you can select the curve (using edge selection) then "s" to scale. Press the key corresponding to the axis you want to scale by, then enter 0.
Can you make a outline of a circle at the top first then do the rest of the lines for the shape
Hey! Thanks for the comment. You might be able to, but for me I found it a bit difficult because of the constraints. You're not given the width of the circle, so you would have to come up with a way to calculate that.
The 2.625inch base and the 14 degree lines seems to be the elements that define the width of the circle for me, hence why I went and did those first. But let me know if you can come up with an easier way to build outline! The way I demonstrated in the video is quite tedious.
@davinchewk I didn't think of that before,but you make a good point.Just want to let you know your video's are very informative
@@rcguy2175Thank you! I'm glad you find them useful. Please continue to leave me feedback so I can learn how to communicate better / make better videos.
Cheers.
Trig??? Taking 7 away from 90.... Or adding 7 to 90. Not sure you may be overthinking that a bit...
So then why, I wonder, when I select tangent circle I select left vertex, horizontal then right vertex sorts it out. Are you using the current version 1.4.18??
Hey! You're right in that it's simple addition/subtraction. My goal was to do a comparison between plasticity and traditional CAD software, and outline places where it's a little trickier to do in plasticity.
In the video I was running 1.4.10. I've since updated to 1.4.18 after seeing your comment, but somehow the tangent circle tool still isn't working as per your description. There is a possibility that I'm doing something wrong though.
@@davinchewk I'll take a look in the morning (UK time) but it's a 3 point tangent circle. Might be worth taking a look at options in the command list.
I used CATIA v5 for my day time job but find Plasticity just gets the job done quickly and without fuss for all the work I now do which is mainly 3d printing.
Ok... I understand the issue now. You've created your cropped triangle, the tangent circle picks up your say left hand curve, picks up the top horizontal curved. Now you have a circle that expands and contracts in the top LH corner according to mouse position. When you complete the circle by clicking on the right hand curve it doesn't pick up the tangent. It picks up the curve and you will get something that is very close to a tangent if you zoom in but strictly speaking, it's not. Now maybe as a 60 year old engineer brought up on a drawing board, my instinctive reaction is to draw a circle with centre point top right to the Centreline and use it's intersection with the RH curve to finish the tangent circle.
I can agree that it's not an ideal way to do this but it's not a huge amount of metal gymnastics to sort it out.
@@colinhare4722That's actually a nice workaround. I might just do that moving forward as well. I think @nickkallen1 said that the beta right now includes some enhancements to the tangent circle tool (a general solver for apollonius problems perhaps?), so we might not need workarounds soon. I do love that the software is already good and is getting better and better.
In any case, I agree it's not a "huge" problem, but from the "speed CAD vs CAD" perspective I'm showing how plasticity users are disadvantage. My background is not in engineering, so if I make any mistakes in the video, please do continue to comment and point them out!
Cheers.
For out and out speed, what is your 'go to' CAD package then? I have experience with several CAD packages and found Plasticity to be by far the quickest and most enjoyable (read less frustrating).
If you look at it from the opposite direction does it work?
What are you referring to? Drawing a line "relative to horizonal"? If so, yes it works.
TLDW: You must have a strong grasp of basic trig to create some of these models 😂
CTRL + =?
@@xrok1 measure? 😅
I don't know what version of Plasticity you're using but it doesn't seem to be up to date. Your knowledge of the program seems to be pretty lacking though it looks like your intention is really to bag the program. There is dimensioning in Plasticity and if you can't work out that dividing 14 by 2 = 7 then you have a serious math problem and perhaps should choose a different career - it's hardly university level mathematics. What is missing from the diagram you're showing is the outer radius of the top circle, which would greatly simplify creating the object and I am sure this was available in the challenge. This mechanical part is extremely simple to make in Plasticity and a full 3D model can be done in a couple of minutes without all the drama you've introduced.
I'll admit that my knowledge of the program is lacking, but excuse me I think we're still missing some context here. First of all, this video is to address things from the CAD vs CAD perspective - specifically a match between Plasticity and OnShape that went on. A fairly proficient plasticity user "struggled" (under pressure) with some angles and fumbled in the match. Second, I am sure I repeatedly said "this is not hard math, just something additional you have to think about" compared to other CAD programs. So please, lower the forks since there's no need for personal attacks. Thirdly, I am not here to "bag the program". I like the software and is an owner of the studio license myself even though I'm using it as a hobbyist. Lastly - no the dimension of the radius isn't given in the challenge. I'm showing you exactly what was given to illustrate that in other CAD tools, the availability of constraints would make quick work of the model, but the lack of it in plasticity means additional steps - which is a disadvantage in speed modeling.
I'm also not sure what "drama" you're referring to. If you go through the comments (specifically the one I pinned), the creator of plasticity acknowledges some of the disadvantages demonstrated in this video (again from a CAD vs CAD perspective). I love that the owner is engaging with the community and that the software continues to get better.
So please, no need to get defensive about the software. I'm creating content with the intention to share knowledge and to teach. Yes I am new to the software and my knowledge is almost certainly lacking. If there is anything I did incorrectly, please do point them out.
@@davinchewkPlasticity is really a very young CAD like program aimed at artists and it's primary aim is not that of a mechanical engineering program although it does a reasonable job at creating them. Comparing it to programs that have been on the market for many years is not really a fair comparison as Plasticity has only been available for around twelve months and shows a lot of promise. I'm a long term CAD/3ds max/Rhino user and Plasticity is so much easier to learn and use though it still lacks the bells and whistles possessed by these programs, but given time who knows where it will go..
Maybe this is not your regular CAD tool. Don't expect too much from it. Go back to your AutoDesk expensive software. I think your type of modeller should stay away from Plasticity.
A bunch of suggested improvements has already made it to the latest version of plasticity. Not sure why you’re gatekeeping instead of wanting the software to continue to get better?
@@davinchewk Frankly, because many of these superb software babies will be taken over by big hungry companies that fill it with unuseable features, make it unaffordable for artists like myself, and end of fun. So, keep it simple
Have you looked at the prices of these big cad software companies products. I am new to CAD and everything I have read seems to point towards Fusion 360 as probably the best software. The problem is most are subscription based and over $1k in cost a year and not owning the software. Yeah they have free versions, but limited. For a hobby, this is way too expensive. FreeCAD layout is difficult to learn from reviews and Blender sound more geared toward game development and video. I am leaning toward plasticity and alibre because they each have there strengths and far cheaper than other companies products. With 3d printer sales growing, I think there will be a huge demand for inexpensive cad software that is easy and powerful to use.