Autodesk MeshMixer vs. CATIA

Autodesk MeshMixer is best for repairing STL files and basic modifications toward 3D printing. It is excellent for hollowing out models and adding escape holes for SLA printing or lost-wax casting. Its CSG (Boolean) functions to combine different meshes are good too and seldom cause the program to crash. There is even an integrated algorithm to optimize the layout of multiple files on a print bed in case of small-batch production. Autodesk MeshMixer's sculpting tools are there yet limited and there are a few better alternatives. Best of all, it is completely free.

When it comes to modelling a product using multiple parts, CATIA becomes tedious. One need someone to sit with and learn with the experience from a frequent user. If switching from any other software to CATIA, it can be intimidating as learning curve is lengthy. For example, when working with complex shape in a knuckle joint, more steps are needed in part modelling. This cause part modelling lengthier and consume time more time, in comparison to SOLIDWORKS. However, CATIA is tremendously helpful in generating really complex features. Surface modelling is way easier when one know how to use it. It becomes really handy to make changes to the design later as well. The design history tree is also very well organized, which save time in later modifications

• Auto-repair function works fast, and if it does not completely cover all problem areas, manual fixes will work 99.5% of the time.
• Remeshing algorithm is fairly slow but does a wonderful job in creating meshes with homogeneous or adaptive triangulation.
• It contains a comprehensive set of tools to optimize and prepare STL files for 3D printing, such as hollowing and support generation.

• Surface modeling module is extremely developed and successful.
• 2D drafting module is doing the job effectively (AutoCAD is no more required).

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• The remeshing tool needs to be faster, as in some cases it takes up to a day of waiting time.
• The sculpting tools need the addition of a proper brush for creating sharp creases and ridges.
• The standard shape library is rather limited. It would be nice to have this connected to online repositories such as Thingiverse, MyMiniFactory, or Cults3D.

• The software is pretty heavy, even with computers designed for heavy-duty loads, resulting in long wait times to load files and make changes, reducing productivity.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

It is a good software for conception. But it is too hard sometimes to work with and understand the different options available

We got frequent updates on CATIA. There are lots of update notes. Also, there are lots of lots of videos online to solve the issues that you can stumble upon. It also has a built-in help manual, which helps occasionally. I have gotten my education through a physical class on CATIA, so there are opportunities like that as well.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Using Blender for STL file preparation is like swatting a mosquito with a wrecking ball, plus its boolean functionalities can be glitchy. ZBrushCoreMini proved too limiting as a sculpting tool, but so did Autodesk MeshMixer, so I am sticking to Sculptris. Materialise Magics and Netfabb are somewhat better at STL file repair and offer more advanced functionalities. But Magics does not remesh as well and Autodesk MeshMixer is far more compact and faster than Netfabb, so remains my weapon of choice.

You can create solid or 3D figures more easily and efficiently using Catia than in other programs or in specific AutoCAD. You can also create different pieces to later assemble them and thus create figures even more complex or in greater detail. In the same way, you can make 2D drawings without much complication.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• It speeds up projects by streamlining the CAD-to-3D-printing workflow
• As an advanced user, I have written a few tutorials about it as well

• If designing large assemblies or very complex ones, especially in the aerospace industry, CATIA is the way to go.
• The graphics are really good, and the software offers many possibilities to view a design: 2D, 3D, bird's eye view...
• Controls pan zoom rotate are easy.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info