786 replies to this topic

[Watcher]

MES, on 16 February 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

I received answer from CNC about the X6 Macro's error, this option has been disabled, the arguments are incredible.
I think the boat "X" is sinking, the solution is not X6 MU1 or X7, the solution would be to rewrite all the code from zero, a new era "2013" "Y" "Z" but no more "X"; the big question Could CNC Software do that?

I will use an example here in the CAM industry, although there are other cases:

Missler Software started a total re-write of TopSolid about 6 years ago. The software is totally new, full .NET architecture, multi-core support from the ground up, touch screen support, Win 8, blablabla...

It took them 6 years to re-invent themselves and yet V7 is not as powerful as V6 for millturn and MTM... however, far better than it in terms of ergonomy, for production machining and multiaxis. 6 years ago they had an excellent product (V6) and decided that they could not continue with it. They had to move on in order to take advantage of the new possibilities in computer languages and hardware. They had a tough decision: Port their software or start nearly from zero. They started from zero.

If CNC decide to make a wise decision (And they won't because they can really take their head out of their a$s right now and really acknowledge they are marketing a piece of crappy software because of too much patchwork along the last decade - They can't even come to this board to apologise for a single issue reported here) they would have to start now, and you guys would only see the result within 6-8 years because they are not as fast as Missler and they don't have the QA Missler does. And Missler is just an example. Delcam, Esprit and even Siemens are great example of companies that value the maintenance money and provide rich and regular fixes as well. In TopSolid, bug fixes are available just like Windows Updates - Every other week patches are downloaded and installed automatically for you. And trust me, they also have HUGE bug lists... which are provided every other week too... the difference is that they fix them...

Now my personal experience with this problem:

We were in this situation a year ago, millions of dollars in technically outdated CAM software (Not NX BTW) deployed (Latest version though) worldwide and we had to think about this: We realized that in 5 years our competitors would be far ahead than they already were, and that would risk our own existence.

Guess what we did?

I'm not really defending TopSolid here as I don't know it well yet. My point here is that we had to re-align our strategy by having a CAM partner that shares our vision about excellence, innovation, customer support and the courage to re-invent itself when needed.

There are many CAM companies out there that can do that. Not CNC, apparently.

PS: Just for the record, Mastercam was also written in .NET, but when this technology was in its early days. It's quite different to start from zero today using the latest frameworks and with focus in the UI and usability. JM2C

[GoetzInd]

Question, does everyone have a problem with the functionality/interface, or is it just the reliability? Personally, I like the way the software works and how you go about doing things. I think it is superior to others as far as the amount of control it gives you (accept how ridiculously behind it is in verification). What drives me absolutely insane is how it is so predictably unpredictable. A lot of examples have been listed in this thread, but if all the bugs and quirks were magically fixed tomorrow, would it be your choice for programming?

Mike

[Rickster™]

Quote

but if all the bugs and quirks were magically fixed tomorrow, would it be your choice for programming?

gee wally, a software we bought and also paid maintenance for?   absolutely!

[andate caga]

I think that I have finally opened the exit door to MCX where I work. It just can't do the two turrets, two spindle and 5 axis simultaneous in a R&D environment.

[Aeroguy]

Keith A-1™, on 16 February 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

No Dry Run?

Even if you dry run a program your not always going to "see" all the problems, such as fasle cuts or overcuts or things like that.
Plus, dry running a long program just isnt feasible for most things.

[Aeroguy]

GoetzInd, on 16 February 2012 - 09:50 PM, said:

but if all the bugs and quirks were magically fixed tomorrow, would it be your choice for programming?

Mike

If all the bugs and issues were magically fixed, I still wouldn't pay $0.01 for this program.

[robk]

In regards to dry running your programs... People, have your company invest in Vericut (or other simulation/verification software) regardless of what programming software you use!!!!. We have customer supplied forgings/castings in here at $100K+ . We run the jobs unattended without issues. Dry running will not catch what Vericut will.

[johan1johan1]

We dont have all of this bugs
and we are doing 5-axis 3-axis higspeed and we are also using this software to
program a lathe with Y-axis 2 turrents and a subspindle
so maybe i depends also what hardware that you are using?
we are using custom builds pc with intel a good workstation motherboard
alot of memory and win7-64

[GoetzInd]

Quote

They can't even come to this board to apologise for a single issue reported here

+1. You can see they are watching pretty closely too.


Mike

[Aeroguy]

johan1johan1, on 17 February 2012 - 07:27 AM, said:

We dont have all of this bugs
and we are doing 5-axis 3-axis higspeed and we are also using this software to
program a lathe with Y-axis 2 turrents and a subspindle
so maybe i depends also what hardware that you are using?
we are using custom builds pc with intel a good workstation motherboard
alot of memory and win7-64

I am not so sure about that. We have 4 guys here, all using different hardware set-ups and we all seem to have the same problems to some extent.

[gcode]

We're running 4 workstations here, all Win 7 x64 SolidBox 6 core Xeons with Quadro 4000 and Quadro FX-4800 video cards  and have very few problems.

My personal opinion is that many of the problems with defaults not sticking, or copied operations changing back to default settings

etc  are related to Windows users permissions and whether the defaults are set to the public or user profiles.

I have experienced the particularly annoying  bug where copied high speed ops refuse to regen.. but have never been able

to construction a decent file that replicates it for a bug report.

All in all though I like X6 and will continue to use it, and will continue to pay maintenance on my personal seat.

I fully recognize that people are having problems, but we're not seeing them here.

[K2csq7]

I also like X6 (No James did not steal my keyboard...)
The lathe finish tool inspection is a feature I have been waiting for for a long time.
The variable depth roughing is a decent start to something that will flourish in the future IMO.
I also like the 64 bit support, X6 opens in about 1/10th the time of earlier versions, also less "hang ups".
The dynamic chaining in mill is much better/easier to use than before.

The tool # / offset # issue is the only thing keeping me at X5.
Though I altered my post to stop the issue from making it to the floor, the time I need to spend going back & fixing it is what kills me (even when I "fix" it, it still won't stick sometimes)... surprised more people haven't seen/talked about this one.

[GoetzInd]

Wow. X6 lathe. Change a comment in op one and reverts the tool back to default tool angle for all the sub ops. Need to go back and set each on back individual to regen. What I would really like to do is sit down with someone from CNC and program a part in lathe with them and see what they have to say.

Mike

[Watcher]

Aeroguy, on 17 February 2012 - 06:10 AM, said:

If all the bugs and issues were magically fixed, I still wouldn't pay $0.01 for this program.

Sorry for my sincerity, but I think that everyone under maintenance would be more than happy if 75% of these bugs were solved. With 100% solved, in their shoes I'd be absolutely pleased.

If one is not happy with a functional CAM software (That is, if Mastercam was really doing what they advert it does), then I'd say he's just another Mark Summers hater... and we know that there are some out there...

IMHO CAM should not be choosen or judged from a personal choice perspective but rather as a tool that a programmer has at his disposal. The more quality tools you have in your toolbox, the better it is I guess.

JM2C - I didn't mean to step on any toes.

Best,

Daniel

[Watcher]

Wes@M.A.D., on 16 February 2012 - 08:25 PM, said:

you said We? wanna give me a qoute and demo our part files? No smoke up the xxxx here. We got work that needs getting done. 2 new Integrex I series with subs showing up in the next 2 weeks. Got posts for them?

Siemens turnkey posts for MillTurn are not good IMHO. Janus Engineering is good though... as well as lot of their VARs...

However, for NX, my first bet would be Austin NC to write them for me. The service and cost is great and they have off-the-shelf Integrex posts... We got a Pro/NC post for a Integrex 1060 8V for about ____. The same post provided by Siemens or their VARs wouldn't be less than _______ in my experience...

They do support Mastercam AFAIK...

HTH



*******

Mod edit:  We discourage forums talks about pricing, esp. competition but feel free to PM a board member if you wish to continue the discussion

[Teh Bear without Brains kinda idiot]

2 many options.
And worst of it  half of them  not working
I am geting an impression that no one cares cause I am tired to talk about it
for a starter
IMHO  take off the job parameters things that do not work at all
like subroutines and entrance point placement for HSM
I put on my flamesuite and say that FBM not work at all
If you call this work don`t be funny
Who needs such a work ?
And how much time I need to waste to get a code close to acceptable ?
Why I can not breake assosiation of FBM and it operations ?

[JParis]

Quote

Why I can not breake assosiation of FBM and it operations ?

You can, delete the actual FBM op, that will orphan all of the ops

[Brandon Renwick]

Scrapped a 160$ part (my fault i didnt verify the damn thing!!) ,, we ran out of 5/8 mills with a .06 corner, so i decided that a .03 corner would be just fine with a program change,, i edited the corner radius of the tool on the first op everything was great, verified and looking sweet no problems!! so i kinda got in a rush and just changed the corner radius on the second op as well but no verification,, SOMEHOW my tool #2 got deleted from the tool list and yet it still shows on the toolpath op!! so how did i scrap a part?? i changed the corner radius value from a .06 to a .03 on tool #2 from the toolpath tree (without opening the toolpath itself) ,, the op went dirty (as it should) i regened it,, posted the program and it still calculated the tool to a .06 corner radius thus making all my roughed chamfers on the part .03 too deep!!

Attached Files

•  New Bitmap Image.jpg   362.22K   50 downloads

[GoetzInd]

Quote

Scrapped a 160$ part (my fault i didnt verify the damn thing!!) ,, we ran out of 5/8 mills with a .06 corner, so i decided that a .03 corner would be just fine with a program change,, i edited the corner radius of the tool on the first op everything was great, verified and looking sweet no problems!! so i kinda got in a rush and just changed the corner radius on the second op as well but no verification,, SOMEHOW my tool #2 got deleted from the tool list and yet it still shows on the toolpath op!! so how did i scrap a part?? i changed the corner radius value from a .06 to a .03 on tool #2 from the toolpath tree (without opening the toolpath itself) ,, the op went dirty (as it should) i regened it,, posted the program and it still calculated the tool to a .06 corner radius thus making all my roughed chamfers on the part .03 too deep!!

Tools have a mind of there own in X6. Holders are a complete joke. I'd really like to do a gotomypc conference while I program a part just to see their response.

Mike

[Brandon Renwick]

heres one that befuddles me!! why isnt there any cutter comp available in the 2d dynamic paths?? am i the only one who gets endmills reground?? it really sux changing toolpaths to compensate for a reground endmill,