• This forum is the machine-generated translation of www.cad3d.it/forum1 - the Italian design community. Several terms are not translated correctly.

create the 3d model of a plant

  • Thread starter Thread starter pengucad
  • Start date Start date

pengucad

Guest
Can someone recommend a tutorial to create the 3d model of a plant using exclusively autocad?
exist 3d block libraries of equipment such as tanks, pumps and exchangers?
Thank you.
 
oh yes pengu is possible, but not recommended.
once he had to do so.... now not with thousand thousand dedicated sw.

Anyway if you want/you have to do it with autocad.... good wishes.
give yourself a discipilna at the beginning and act accordingly, model on area or on plant e.g. and things so.
uses a lot of layers etc.

when it comes to 2d blocks you find a tide, for the 3d is very + difficult.
once there were, but then with the use of these famous sw dedicated .... .

In any case now as then if you have 3d block, it must be that.
I'll explain better, you have a 3d pump from the brand pippo from which you start the 2 lines of inlet and outlet.
but in the meantime the commercial has decided that it will buy pluto pumps.
If you're lucky you're okay, and you need to change a little bit, maybe it's just the bubble diam.
heights....... :( think a little if they have the mouths put in a different position, and you are put in the strait, what are you doing?

and every change then must be made for n pumps of the plant.
It's viable, like, with ultra-dynamic blocks, but it's really crazy.

even worse if to change position were the nozzles of the tanks.... fear

I'm not telling you to discourage you, but because you realize the difficulties you're going to encounter.
If you feel it.... good luck
 
We assume that you do not model a whole plant if you do not know the modeling, it would be like wanting to compete to a grand prize without ever getting on a car: it is crazy!
 
Hi.
What kind of plant is it?? ? ?
to make a plant with autocad......I share what he said lattu.... but nothing is impossible......it is only a little complex.......cmq looks a little these links:
-http://www.archweb.it/dwg/dwg.htm
- for the 3d look at traceparts if I don't err... but I don't know if there are for autocad.

Have a good day.
 
pengucad said:
Can someone recommend a tutorial to create the 3d model of a plant using exclusively autocad?
exist 3d block libraries of equipment such as tanks, pumps and exchangers?
Thank you.
Click to expand...
the tutorial you need is the one for modeling.
on the net you find something 3d but I prefer to model the specific component.
with some attention you have no particular problems even with autocad "pure".
the point is to know what you need model 3d, because with a model made in autocad you will make us renderings, you will be able to use it for a table mesaa, but surely not to extract isometrics and what else.
Anyway, yeah. as Lattu says, you must know how to shape. . .
 
MarcoBi said:
the point is to know what you need model 3d, because with a model made in autocad you will make us renderings, you will be able to use it for a table mesaa, but surely not to extract isometrics and what else.
Click to expand...
...and as it says number1 (I want to reiterate!) to the slightest variation to make are blasphemies flying!
 
numero1 said:
oh yes pengu is possible, but not recommended.
once he had to do so.... now not with thousand thousand dedicated sw.

Anyway if you want/you have to do it with autocad.... good wishes.
give yourself a discipilna at the beginning and act accordingly, model on area or on plant e.g. and things so.
uses a lot of layers etc.

when it comes to 2d blocks you find a tide, for the 3d is very + difficult.
once there were, but then with the use of these famous sw dedicated .... .

In any case now as then if you have 3d block, it must be that.
I'll explain better, you have a 3d pump from the brand pippo from which you start the 2 lines of inlet and outlet.
but in the meantime the commercial has decided that it will buy pluto pumps.
If you're lucky you're okay, and you need to change a little bit, maybe it's just the bubble diam.
heights....... :( think a little if they have the mouths put in a different position, and you are put in the strait, what are you doing?

and every change then must be made for n pumps of the plant.
It's viable, like, with ultra-dynamic blocks, but it's really crazy.

even worse if to change position were the nozzles of the tanks.... fear

I'm not telling you to discourage you, but because you realize the difficulties you're going to encounter.
If you feel it.... good luck
Click to expand...
If with autocad you beat me, then what's the best software for you?
 
Tristan said:
...and as it says number1 (I want to reiterate!) to the slightest variation to make are blasphemies flying!
Click to expand...
Regardless of the blasphemies that fly, it is likely to avoid improvements in order not to remake everything.
It's something I get. "But isn't it better to put this instead of this one? costs less and works better for the specific problem?". "yeh, yes, but now the design is done. ..you need to make a review, edit drawings, edit carts, remake the approval process. . . "

and so a good idea is cashed out by the bureaucracy. I think it is imperative to make it easier to avoid falling into vicious circles. 80% of plants can also be made in 2d. 50% of these can also be made by means of specification, without drawings. often you do the 3d "to do the cool" and you fall into these problems.

3d for plants should only be used in extremely dense areas, where actually there may be the problem of interference.

Then, maybe, I'm wrong. .
 
Fulvio Romano said:
Regardless of the blasphemies that fly, it is likely to avoid improvements in order not to remake everything.
It's something I get. "But isn't it better to put this instead of this one? costs less and works better for the specific problem?". "yeh, yes, but now the design is done. ..you need to make a review, edit drawings, edit carts, remake the approval process. . . "

and so a good idea is cashed out by the bureaucracy. I think it is imperative to make it easier to avoid falling into vicious circles. 80% of plants can also be made in 2d. 50% of these can also be made by means of specification, without drawings. often you do the 3d "to do the cool" and you fall into these problems.

3d for plants should only be used in extremely dense areas, where actually there may be the problem of interference.

Then, maybe, I'm wrong. .
Click to expand...
The first part of your speech sees me in agreement, is what I say with the example of the pump brand.

but the second part is not... when you say 80% of the plants can be done in 2d I answer: "What do you mean?"
I don't mean that. :smile:

for this pengu should specify a little + of what kind of plants we are talking about.

but the last part is that which leaves me stunned, you can not make 50% of the accommodation with a specific and without drawings. :eek:

I would be curious to know that plants are, unless they are "normalizations" you have done once and continuously readapted, changing only the data on the cart.

Hi.
 
numero1 said:
The first part of your speech sees me in agreement, is what I say with the example of the pump brand.

but the second part is not... when you say 80% of the plants can be done in 2d I answer: "What do you mean?"
I don't mean that. :smile:

for this pengu should specify a little + of what kind of plants we are talking about.

but the last part is that which leaves me stunned, you can not make 50% of the accommodation with a specific and without drawings. :eek:

I would be curious to know that plants are, unless they are "normalizations" you have done once and continuously readapted, changing only the data on the cart.

Hi.
Click to expand...
plants of a ship > the 3d is mandatory

industrial plants of medium complexity > 2d is more than enough

plants for civil housing > a specification most often is sufficient
 
Fulvio Romano said:
plants of a ship > the 3d is mandatory

industrial plants of medium complexity > 2d is more than enough

plants for civil housing > a specification most often is sufficient
Click to expand...
As pungu speaks of tanks, pumps and exchangers I strongly presume it is an industrial plant or the limit of a ship, which I personally would avoid to make to a beginner.
 
Fulvio Romano said:
plants of a ship > the 3d is mandatory

industrial plants of medium complexity > 2d is more than enough

plants for civil housing > a specification most often is sufficient
Click to expand...
agree with the first and last point.
not with the middle one, an industrial plant (an average) made in 2d seems to me a .............
bye:
 
Tristan said:
...and as it says number1 (I want to reiterate!) to the slightest variation to make are blasphemies flying!
Click to expand...
Here too we must understand what is meant by "variation". you do not have a parametric model but the variations do without problems (species for piping that in essence consists of few elements). then if by blasphemies they mean "costs" that said variations can bring. . then it is obvious that with a specific tool you work better and, in the long run, you also have an economic return.
 
MarcoBi said:
Here too we must understand what is meant by "variation". you do not have a parametric model but the variations do without problems (species for piping that in essence consists of few elements). then if by blasphemies they mean "costs" that said variations can bring. . then it is obvious that with a specific tool you work better and, in the long run, you also have an economic return.
Click to expand...
changes without problems :confused:
Of course you do, but in a very long and difficult way, and therefore with very high additional costs.
and in the end the game is not worth the candle.
I think that's what Tristan meant, as you seem to say here too.
Hi.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
44,997
Messages
339,767
Members
4
Latest member
ibt

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top