We use 3d CAD to generate 2d drawings, that's the standard way 3d cad is used, to generate 2d drawings that let you make stuff.
Many people get 3d modeling like for games or computer graphics confused with CAD, which is different.
CAD is fundamentally 2d and 3d in nature both, as a function of how we use it to make parts
they're not one and the same, although some programs are capable enough to do both
Proper modern 3d CAD systems like Solidworks, Catia, Creo (was ProE), Fusion360, Inventory, etc. have super robust 2d drawing and export functionality. If they didn't we couldn't make the built world the way we have.
It's the same for 2d packages like Autocad. You can draw in 3d in Autocad, but it's not solid modeling its just drawing in 3d, totally different. But it works.
Why would you use tools that don't work?
in other cases, because the 'tools that don't work' from your point of view can do things in minutes that would take hours in those other programs, which i don't have in any case. blender, for example, is terrible at making 2-d dimensioned drawings compared to something like solidworks, but you can model things in blender nobody has ever been able to model in solidworks, and then you can 3-d print them. and, though solidworks can do everything openscad can, there are things that are easy to do in openscad which are a real pain in solidworks. but openscad is also utterly terrible at 2-d drawings
Blender is definitely the wrong tool for this kind of job. It's a graphics tool, not a CAD tool.
A drafter may use a pen, but that doesn't mean a calligraphy pen will do.
Same question, what are the products you are referring to?
If you don't want a drawing or a manufacturable thing out of your CAD program then its likely not CAD your doing but graphics design or 3d modeling, not design. This is fine, but itsba different thing.
I was trying to parse through that with you...
Maybe I'm out of date on 2D CAD knowledge, but from what I remember you'd literally have to re-sketch the entire part for the new view. Because it's drawn in 2D, you can't just "flip it on its side" like you can a 3D part. And then you have to make sure you actually sketched the part correctly and didn't forget anything.
I see it as analogous to programming with toggle switches.
You "could" generate 3D objects to use in a traditional CAD package but most of the time that would be overkill and just make your drawing, at best and un-editable and at worst a performance nightmare.
At least, that’s how I view 3d.
At the very least, the tool should be able to do additive and subtractive operations (boolean). Union, add, subtract, intersect, etc.
Parts physically exist in 3D CAD. When you're working on your blueprint, it's done more-or-less by performing the operations on the part that will be performed when it's manufactured. Every 2D view you could ever want is inherently included in a 3D part.
But 2D... it's not much better than sketching by hand on a piece of paper. Everything's disconnected. You can forget to add a feature to a view, you can make mistakes between views. With 3D if you add a new flange or a hole or whatever to a part, every drawing is instantly updated.
It would be nice to feed the LLM a set of dimensions, constraints, desired features, etc and have a few different versions generated. Quickly explore the problem space of designing house for a piece of land, or for 3d printing.
After they get comfortably seated, they are informed that the plane was built by their students.
All but one jump out of their seats and immediately run for the exits.
Later, the lone professor who remained calm was interviewed, as he clearly had more confidence in the ability of his students than any of the others.
“It's true, I know my students' ability very well, and I can tell you for a fact this plane won't move an inch.”
That or gothic cathedrals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_architecture