cad

Attention over time

7-day rolling share of analyzed posts/comments mentioning this entity · 90 daily points ending 2026-09-01

Final complete day: 2026-09-01. Attention was 0.6% — this entity appeared in 101 of 17,943 analyzed posts/comments in the seven days ending that day (131 mentions).

Each point is a seven-day rolling window of complete UTC days; a point is comparable only when at least 100 analyzed posts or comments fall inside it. A day with no analyzed records counts as zero; missing coverage is marked and never shown as zero. The series ends at the latest complete analyzed day — it never extends into the current incomplete day. How attention is measured.

Recent mentions

1. 2026-09-01 22:48 UTCComment

   Getting access to the standards to read them is controlled. But that doesn't preclude you from creating a FOSS design that complies with their standards. At worst, it would be another expense for teams like Voron and RepRap - like a CAD license. But, frankly, unless the criminalize non-compliance, only the major FOSS printers will even bother considering to comply with any ASTM standards, and only to keep their kit partners (like LDO and Fystec) happy, since I would bet that you couldn't sell kits that didn't comply. But if a FOSS printer basically just provides the CAD data, parts lists, and software, they aren't selling anything; the law would be toothless unless they make *possession* of non-compliant printer illegal.

2. 2026-09-01 21:49 UTCComment

   I would look at some of slant 3ds videos on part design for fdm on youtube. Great learning resource about this type of thing. Honestly doing anything like that is kind of a pita in tinkercad, I started in tinker also, but wish I had moved on sooner, it was worth learning a real cad package, I would have saved myself a ton of time long term. Onshape is web based and free (if you are ok with your models being available online), fusion 360 is free for personal use both are much better for part design once you get over a bit of learning curvem even newer versions of freecad are worth looking at compared to tinker. (I prefer onshape's interface it was just more intuitive for me than fusions). With onshape for example you would just add mate connectors where you want and then do a transform on one part to move it to the mate connector. As far as the actual connectors dovetails work well, other wood working style connectors also work well. Depends on how you plan to print and join them. There are also different connector designs that lock and unlock for 3d printing, just depends on what you are trying to do.

3. 2026-09-01 21:16 UTCComment

   if you've never used any cad or 3d modeling software and just want to get this done, go with tinkercad if you have plans on doing some way more elaborate designs in the near future, you could invest into learning other, more complicated software, like fusion360 but this design you'll be able to bang out in a couple minutes without watching hours of tutorials

4. 2026-09-01 19:52 UTCComment

   You may not have used CAD, but you definitely used Computer Aided Design software lmaoooo

5. 2026-09-01 18:48 UTCPost

   Testing a no-CAD cutter workflow: picked an icon, sliced in Bambu Studio, and printed a razor-sharp clay/cookie cutter. - Getting clean, sharp edges on custom cookie and clay cutters usually takes annoying prep work—either fixing non-manifold lines in CAD or tracing vectors by hand. Tested out a direct icon-to-cutter generation workflow for this print: * **Icon selection:** Picked an open-source outline directly from a built-in library instead of drawing an SVG from scratch. * **Blade geometry:** Automatically lofted a stepped blade profile (tapering down to a thin cutting edge) with a reinforced base flange for hand grip. * **Slicing & Print settings (Bambu Studio / OrcaSlicer):** * **Wall generator:** Arachne (or **Detect Thin Walls: ON** — mandatory for the tapered cutting tip so the slicer doesn't skip the sharpest top layers) * **Walls:** 3 perimeters for strength on the flange * **Layer height:** 0.16 mm (Optimal for sharp top slopes) * **Nozzle:** 0.4 mm Stainless / Hardened * **Material:** Basic PLA / Tough PLA The exported mesh sliced cleanly with zero internal gap artifacts, and the test press in clay came out with crisp, separated lines.