Since 2D drawings can be of complex assemblies and remodeling in 3D would take a considerable time and effort, it may be deemed more expedient to edit the 2D CAD for the few times that changes are needed.įor those who have evaluated their needs and concluded that 2D CAD is the right solution, there are many products to choose from. In some cases, 2D drawings of designs are rarely referenced or changed. A company that has been around for a while has likely accumulated a large amount of 2D CAD drawings, which will provide reason enough to keep 2D CAD. A hybrid 2D/3D environment may be the best solution. Smart companies also realize that when there is little advantage to 3D CAD, like the small machine shop with simple prismatic parts, the costs of purchasing 3D CAD will be hard to justify-not to mention the costs of retraining employees and the learning curve of mastering 3D design.Ĭareful evaluation of the return on investment (ROI) in migrating to 3D can also keep 2D CAD around. They know that the intrinsic efficiencies of 3D CAD far outweigh the additional costs. That being said, smart companies know that the cost of software and hardware is far less than the costs of the greatest assets-their employees. For many companies, such as a small machine shop that just needs to sketch up a prismatic shape every once in a while, an inexpensive 2D CAD program running on an inexpensive PC is sufficient. Generally, 2D CAD costs less than 3D CAD, and the hardware required for 2D CAD is generally less expensive. They often have experience with other design packages, so hesitancy to change is not a problem.Ĭost is one factor in 2D CAD’s lingering popularity. The people who are currently using 2D CAD today are younger and computer savvy. That could have been an indication that 2D CAD would stay around because of the reluctance to change in what might be called mid- to late adopters-except that most of them have aged out of the workforce.
One student told me over lunch on the first day of 3D CAD training that he would leave design rather than learn a new CAD program. Windows was a mystery to them, and I often found myself teaching both SOLIDWORKS and Windows.
Many students in the early days (1998 to around 2005) only interacted with a computer to use ACAD or to play a game of Tetris or Solitaire. By around 2005, most of my students were still 2D CAD users. Why does 2D CAD persist? Early on, from the mid-1990s to the early 2000s when 3D CAD was still new to people, many viewed it with skepticism, perhaps as a passing phase.
0 kommentar(er)
