Please add support for parametric FreeCAD models on MakerWorld, just like the customization already available for OpenSCAD and Fusion models.
Creators could upload a FreeCAD project and expose selected named parameters (FreeCAD has both Variable Sets and Spreadsheets) - such as dimensions, hole spacing or number of hooks - so users can customize the model directly on MakerWorld before downloading or printing it.
For a first version, supporting a single FreeCAD Body on a single build plate would be a great start. Multiple bodies and plates could come later.
One customizable model could replace dozens of separate variants! FreeCAD is free and open source, and supporting it would bring MakerWorld’s customization tools to even more creators.
I’m not even sure whether it’s possible - mostly because I just don’t know enough of this topic - but OpenSCAD is essentially a programming language, while FreeCAD is built around a sequence of design steps. They follow two completely different philosophies.
OpenSCAD describes geometry using code.
FreeCAD describes geometry using design steps.
That’s why the workflows differ so drastically: While one involves actual programming and math, the other is more like a complex CAD & spreadsheet step list. To put it simply.
Most people either go all-in on CAD or all-in on parametric programming; it’s rare to see FreeCAD used as a middle ground. I’m not referring to the use of FreeCAD itself, but rather the combination you describe - using both worlds.
That said, I agree with you that, of course, as many file formats as possible should be supported.
Yeah, but bare in mind that they already support this for Fusion files. Fusion is also built around design steps. If there is a will, there is a way!
Technically, I assume there is a way to perform an export headlessly, where you input a Fusion file and a list of parameters, and it outputs a STEP file based on the design + parameter values. A similar mechanism should be possible to achieve with FreeCAD. Make sure to upvote my request!
I think FreeCAD is low hanging fruit for them. It’s open source, so this should probably be quite simple. They had money, time and effort to build support for OpenSCAD and Fusion, so… upvote my request if you would like to see it, that’s the only way for Bambulab to see that people would want this.
Well I mean if they want to keep growing makerworld to draw in more customers, meeting the customer where they are in terms of the software they use is usually worth the time. So yeah hit em all up all the way back to Rhino 4.
However, to put things into perspective, it’s worth noting that FreeCAD is already supported - just not to the extent you might prefer. It does provide options for exporting to widely used, industry‑standard file formats.
I know you’re interested in parametric functionality, but FreeCAD does work well with Bambu in general. From 3mf, to stl, to step.
Perhaps the more interesting question would be why FreeCAD doesn’t support export OpenCAD - which is actually the root of the problem: csg files work, but not scad. However, FreeCAD simply cannot generate or export SCAD code.
Instead, you have to download plugins from the community to be able to do so.
To be precise, you have to install this bridge.
Strictly speaking, the problem lies with FreeCAD, because the FreeCAD forum community has already expressed this request several times on their forum. Unfortunately, this is one of those cases where two independent projects aren’t collaborating and each is going its own way - which is, of course, perfectly justified.
…and just so you don’t get the wrong idea: You probably should also post your request in the FreeCAD forum, where it’s much more likely to be successful. That’s really all I want to say.
Its a good thought. But it will take a long time if they do implement it.
Fusion took forever and it still isnt perfect.
Then it is a question on how many users are using FreeCAD. What is the customer and how many customers are there? I would guess a relatively small amount.
Those tables don’t establish that hardly anyone uses FreeCAD. The figures match 6sense’s CAD Software database, which tracks companies and domains—not individual users or hobbyist 3D-printing enthusiasts.
There are several problems with drawing that conclusion:
• Wrong population. Business adoption figures cannot tell us which CAD tools people use at home for 3D printing. A hobbyist running FreeCAD on their PC is not necessarily represented by a company domain.
• Mixed categories. The list includes architectural tools such as Revit and Archicad, alongside Altium for electronics design. It even treats “Autodesk” as a competitor to Autodesk’s own products. This is a broad business software classification, not a clean comparison of CAD tools used by makers.
• Missing from a table does not mean unused. “Percentage likely too low” is your interpretation, not something demonstrated by the screenshots. In fact, 6sense still has a dedicated FreeCAD market-share page:
For comparison, CNCCookbook’s 2024 survey of nearly 400 respondents placed FreeCAD third, behind Fusion 360 and SolidWorks:
That survey covers CNC users, so I wouldn’t claim it proves FreeCAD’s ranking among hobbyist 3D printers either. But it does provide a concrete counterexample to the idea that nobody uses it.
FreeCAD may well have a smaller user base than Fusion. These tables simply don’t establish its popularity among hobbyist 3D-printing users.
That’s why I pointed out that surveys aren’t perfectly accurate - they only offer a rough indication. And actually, your source supports exactly what I was saying?
So yes, this survey shows around 6%, but what difference does that make other than confirming my point? I genuinely think it’s great that you looked it up - thank you for that - and I mean that sincerely, not sarcastically.
Whether it’s 1%, 2%, or 6%, what difference does that make in terms of relevance? Not from my perspective, but from that of a company like Bambu.
Ever since large companies began offering their software for free or at very low prices, most people have naturally moved toward professional tools. For example, Fusion 360 can be used completely free of charge for personal projects.
So if we take the 6% figure, that number doesn’t just represent people who work exclusively with parametric models - it includes everyone. Only a portion of them actually use the parametric features and would want to import those into MakerWorld.
As I mentioned before, it would of course be wonderful if Bambu decided to support this - absolutely no doubt about that.
But given how small the group of affected users is, and considering that Bambu already supports all of FreeCAD’s basic file types, it’s simply a straightforward business decision on their part.
You also need to understand this in this context:
That’s simply not how it works - not because we, as users, wouldn’t prefer it that way, but because the actual decision‑makers are the ones making those choices, and they’re certainly not reading this. That’s partly - but not entirely - due to the language barrier.
I really appreciate you sharing this - I’m all for open source - but the reality is that you’ll probably have better luck reaching out directly to the FreeCAD community.
…and here’s a friendly piece of advice: If you’re looking to get in touch with the Bambu developers, they’re not here - they’re on GitHub.
Only for very simple tasks, which this isn’t. Otherwise, much money is being paid to re-hire the people laid off by AI, to fix the bugs introduced by the AI.
Also, in the case of cloud CAD programs such as Onshape, any kind of software integration likely needs some kind of partnership with the vendor.
I appreciate the enthusiasm. But AI is not there just yet.
The hardest part is not the programing, but working with the vendors like auto desk or dassult systems to properly integrate. CAD softwares look similar on the surface, but underneath they are all very different.
I used FreeCAD before the major patch, when adding a feature to your model would cause existing features to be moved to a different face. it was horrible. (Imagine your model is sketches and then extrusions based on those sketches; going back to change a feature would change which sketches would be extruded as it caused the faces to be re-numbered, and your whole object broke)
I understand this is now fixed. However it is still hard to use.
I also tried onsel (?) ondsel (?) which was some kind of commercial fork of freecad, but they quit the business before they could fix it.
I think there quite a few hobbyists still using Freecad, but I believe new users will gravitate to easier to use programs, and programs with active marketing campaigns directed at new users. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with freecad but it needs a bunch of work to catch up. Unless anyone wants to put a huge amount of money into FreeCAD, if I were Bambu I would not support it.
This is the sort of thing a company might go to crowd funding (e.g. backerkit, gofundme, kickstarter) for. Crowd funding can accurately measure the demand for a feature by how much it raises, and then gives you the money to build the featuret. And if it doesn’t fund, you know not to throw money at it. I don’t think FreeCAD will do that because it runs counter to most people’s opinion of how open source operates.
I once had the displeasure of trying to implement a PDF software library. I discovered that the PDF file format is a literally insane and potentially contradictory mess of features tacked onto features and without Adobe’s help, you won’t get far without spending vast amounts of time (and therefore money). I did not get the impression that it was deliberately obfuscated, more like they got rid of the spaghetti by putting more layers of spaghetti on top, and calling it lasagne.
I would even mention the difficulty between different versions of a software. Like for Onshape, files used to be almost directly compatible with Solidworks, now it is a 3 step process to properly convert them.
You would really need a huge software team to do this right.
I have uploaded the FreeCAD file for the models I have designed and posted to MakerWorld. Anyone who has FreeCAD can download the file, modify the geometry to suit their needs and create a new STL file for Bambu Studio to slice and print. The issue with FreeCAD versus Fusion360 is that creating and modifying a parametric model is much easier and intuitive in Fusion360 than FreeCAD. (I have done both.) AutoDesk model sharing embraces parametric models. The learning curve for using a parametric model in FeeCAD is much steeper.
I think FreeCAD is a very good and solid alternative to Fusion 360 - definitely for the hobby.
The free version of Fusion also have it’s limits and not everyone who uploads 3D models does this for their living or from the commercial aspect and therefore not spend the money on commercial CAD software. Like me, I upload most of the stuff I do for myself or family and friends. I used Fusion for some years, but actually I am in the transition to FreeCAD.
