zlacker

[return to "Text-to-CAD: Risks and Opportunities"]
1. onthec+eo[view] [source] 2023-10-20 01:06:43
>>danboa+(OP)
I'm not that optimistic about an algorithm producing useful results from a text-based description given the solution space is any possible combination of any number of shapes. The data structure for 3D objects also depends on your software. Where CAD matters professionally, there usually are strict requirements or business rules that would rule out an "average .OBJ files that had these tags"

Now, I AM optimistic about algorithms solving for useful relationships between pre-defined objects, like routing conduit through a building without collisions or optimizing a lumber cut-list. Finch and Hypar are interesting small companies in this space.

◧◩
2. techdr+HF[view] [source] 2023-10-20 03:28:09
>>onthec+eo
Having an expert (or other more specialised software) optimise an otherwise satisfactory 3d model is going to be vastly more simple a process than what can be a painstaking process of getting the “original vision” for a shape into a digital form.

I’m better with CAD style workflows than I am with Freeform modelling, but I’m also not an experienced enough user of any particular CAD program that I don’t spend ages frustratingly trying to understand where to go to edit the correct part of the chain of operations that built up a particular fillet, chamfer, or sweep, every program is a little different… just different enough to throw me off since I don’t use them often enough to really get over that learning threshold, for instance I’ve used Onshape one time in the last 12 months… spent an hour trying to work something out… and then 5 minutes actually making my edit…

If I could have opened up the design in 2d blueprints form, and put in some kind of multi modal query to the effect of “these are my blueprints, can you convert them to (CAD program of choice), and while you are converting them, increase cross section CS1 vertically to from 8mm to 10mm keeping everything else fixed” … would save me a lot of time making adjustments to peoples 3d models for printing. It can be really annoying to fuck around as much as is sometimes necessary due to individual cad workflow preferences just to make conceptually simple edits like “this hanging pot, but stretched 50% taller, and with all the holes/cutouts kept the same size please”

The ML models might not be able to do a perfect curve for a gorgeous arcing buttress or a complex bolt hole pattern for attaching multiple elements to a primary support structure… but it should be able to do a lot of the sorts of work that people use OpenSCAD for.

[go to top]