X Verify

[Harry Morse]

I've been sitting back watching the comments about X quietly waiting on comments about verify, so I do have to ask one question. Is the verify in X going to be the same crap as 9.1. I know some of you will flame but if you are serious you would need to agree it is bad. They even seem to admit that the supplier of this is giving them crap at present and seem to be content with blaming them. We had a preview of X and it sure looks like the same crap but we were only shown a sample and have not run it on our own files.

[Hardmill]

Whats with all you people asking to be flamed??

quote:

---

I know some of you will flame

---

 

PEACE

[crazy^millman]

quote:

---

Is the verify in X going to be the same crap as 9.1.

---

It is amazing they can invent the round wheel and people still think square wheels are better. Amazing how we verfiy molds, 4th axis, 5th axis, and other things using crap but get good parts.

[Fig sign]

Show must go on .... ?

[Hardmill]

quote:

---

Amazing how we verfiy molds, 4th axis, 5th axis, and other things using crap but get good parts.

---

My point exactly. I think all these youngsters are

just too lazy to set it up right.

All it take is a little patience, and with the support

on this forum, it makes life that much easier.

 

"MC crashes, my screen goes blank, I can't see

my cursos, verify sucks, wheres VerX, can I have a free post??,

boo hoo hoo , it don't work like I want it to.

If you want a flame then don't cry when some of us give

it to you. Set up your box properly, and if you don't know

how, ASK!!!

ASK, ASK, ASK!!! We know its not the best at everything

but its always changing, and for the better.

 

For all of you asking to be flamed, I suggest taking

off your sisters dress and high heels, because none

of us will strike a lady.

 

 

PEACE

[Zero]

come on now guys...we all know that MC's verify just doesnt cut it.

 

Using the WCS renders verify pretty much useless unless you turn off true solids mode, which gives less than desirable visual results and disables any dynamic rotation or zooming in on the part after its been verified..... and thats if your WCS isn't off at some strange angle relative to world top which makes your chances of getting verify, even in "dumbed down mode", pretty much 50/50. And unless your part is pretty simple verify takes almost as long to complete as it does to run the paths on the machine, even in "turbo" (no tool) mode....

 

 

We all know that MC is "the greatest" and we can accomplish pretty much anything with it...I just think that if some of you guys would wipe the little brown spot off the end of your noses and speak up like this guy (and plenty of others) did, we might just possibly get them to fix something thats been broken for a long time.

 

Its the squeaky wheel that gets fixed...

[Lumpnut]

quote:

---

For all of you asking to be flamed, I suggest taking

off your sisters dress and high heels, because none

of us will strike a lady.

---

LMFAO

[cadcam]

quote:

---

Using the WCS renders verify pretty much useless unless you turn off true solids mode, which gives less than desirable visual results and disables any dynamic rotation or zooming in on the part after its been verified..... and thats if your WCS isn't off at some strange angle relative to world top which makes your chances of getting verify, even in "dumbed down mode", pretty much 50/50. And unless your part is pretty simple verify takes almost as long to complete as it does to run the paths on the machine, even in "turbo" (no tool) mode....

---

I find that what Steve is being a little harsh but I have to say some of his statments are correct.

I use the WCS every day and program parts were some of it is in a vise for a few ops then goes to the forth axis and useing the WCS and then I am able to Varify all the ops and all the WCS at the same time as a True Solid so I can see that I am cutting the hole part and ops correct.

 

I think you need to do some home work.

Sorry but this is the truth so I am stating to say that you are mis-informing that you can not do it.

[cadcam]

On the same note, you have to say these is the best varify they have had in a long time.

It is not perfect but is not that bad.

 

M2C

[Hardmill]

quote:

---

I find that what Steve is being a little harsh but I have to say some of his statments are correct.

---

Sorry Jayson

They can leave on the dress if they like.

 

As Jayson said, multiple ops. w/ different WCSs

verify fine for most of us.

All you guys need to do is ask for help.

 

I'm going to create a file for all those non-believers.

I'll try to have it up late today or tommorrow morning.

 

 

PEACE

[MIL-TFP-41]

show me an easy way to import custom stock (not a STL file...too slow & not very accurate) and I will agree that verify does not suck.

[cadist]

quote:

---

show me an easy way to import custom stock (not a STL file...too slow & not very accurate) and I will agree that verify does not suck.

---

Where are you from man. I mean from which planet.

[Tim Johnson]

To the people not liking the verify;

Is there something that works better at the same or better price that you have now? If you don't like the verify I'm sure Vericut will be happy to provide you their software.

[cadist]

I find it very strange someone critising the verify feature of mastercam. In past I have used surfcam and right now using UGnx. Does any of you have how much time they take for dynamic verification. In ug static comparision is available but at no cost it's quality can be compared with stl.

[somename75]

I have had much trouble with verify when doing multiple ops, and many other instances where my stl's were not watertight. I do not have solidworks, so that option is out for me. I would love to know what your guys' tricks are to get better results out of verify. I have tried all the tricks, that i have found by searching this forum, but have had less than reliable results, any help would be greatly appreaciated.

 

But in reply to the other posters in this thread, I too believe that CNC software should do something to adress this issue, especially now that we are paying maintenance, That amount of cash would go a long way IMHO.

[Fig sign]

Verufy issues : speed and bugs often are graphic card/driver issues .

[gcode]

quote:

---

I would love to know what your guys' tricks are to get better results out of verify

---

I only use use MC verify for very simple 2 1/2

axis work. For everything else I run gcode

through Predator Virtual CNC.

[P_Scott]

Harry Morse and others,

 

Tim Johnson says it best here:

quote:

---

To the people not liking the verify;

Is there something that works better at the same or better price that you have now? If you don't like the verify I'm sure Vericut will be happy to provide you their software.

---

Verify in Mastercam is FREE OF CHARGE. It's the best it has ever been. They put this function in Mcam for you, the end user. It costs them money to have it developed by another party, who has no clue about CNC manufacturing. True, the WCS can cause hiccups in this FREE software function.

 

As Tim suggested, Vericut would gladly sell you their software. For that matter, there are other software packages that have some very quick and accurate verification of G-code (Metacut Utilities for one) and work well with Mastercam. It's not FREE however. Backplot will still work with any WCS and Tplane configuration in Mcam. As long as the parameters are set up correctly, Backplot gives a pretty accurate viewing of what the toolpath should do. It doesn't show what the output does however. Only a third party software product can do that (Cimco Edit Pro comes to mind).

 

To answer the original post question about Mcam X's Verify, the software is still in Beta testing stage. It already looks better than V9.1. It's still in Beta however and the final product may not look anything like what it does today. GET OVER IT. Verify is a great tool to "see" what the part should look like while it's being "machined". It's no match for what the actual code tells the machine to do.

 

If you want more reliable toolpath verification, invest in actual code verification software. I'd much rather be satisfied that the CAM end of the software works as efficiently or better than the previous version. Verify will improve, as it has in every release since it's inclusion in the main product.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

...show me an easy way to import custom stock (not a STL file...too slow & not very accurate) and I will agree that verify does not suck...

---

Verify, COnfiguration, Stock Shape File, Stock File, Files OF Type, All FIles, pick your poison. MC8, MC9, IGES, Parasolid, or SAT.

 

:shrug:

[chip]

quote:

---

Its the squeaky wheel that gets fixed...

---

Ha! The squeeky wheel gets replacing!

[MIL-TFP-41]

more often than not, after importing in a STL file (or MC9, parasolid, ect) I get the following error

 

quote:

---

LW has found the STL file not to be closed and watertight. An approximation will be used as stock.

---

MC does convert the file into a STL, no matter what you import. when I do bring a model in and I get that error, the "approximation" is exactally that...a rough one anyway.

[chip]

I used to say that a long time ago: "Squeeky wheel gets the greese." until someone said "Ha! Squeeky wheel gets replacing!"

 

I though it was funny......

 

I still have a difficult time understanding specific problems.

[chip]

quote:

---

MC does convert the file into a STL, no matter what you import.

---

There is a process to save the verified op as an .STL. I'm not trying to be a smart a$$. Are you sure your saving it properly?

 

For being the first version for verifing multiple ops. I think its pretty good. I also like Metacut. My boss does'nt want to sign the P.O. for Metacut especially if what I have works just fine.

 

quote:

---

I just think that if some of you guys would wipe the little brown spot off the end of your noses and speak up like this guy (and plenty of others) did, we might just possibly get them to fix something thats been broken for a long time.

---

I have'nt been around as long as some of the people in here. I can say I have been around since V6.0... From Diamonds to chains filtering .NC. Even V7 to V8 regenerating surfacing. You used to not be able to change your spindle without having to dump the op. You got some balls with a general statement like that!

 

I spend a lot of time in here so some people don't have to struggle all those countless hours till midnight trying to figure out how to 3D a mold with draft from a flat drawing of a part without shrink or draft. Stick around ask questions and you might not get so frustrated with something YOU are doing wrong!

[somename75]

quote:

Verify in Mastercam is FREE OF CHARGE. It's the best it has ever been. They put this function in Mcam for you, the end user. It costs them money to have it developed by another party, who has no clue about CNC manufacturing. True, the WCS can cause hiccups in this FREE software function"

 

 

I could have sworn that I paid $$$ for the true-solids verify.

 

quote:

If you want more reliable toolpath verification, invest in actual code verification software. I'd much rather be satisfied that the CAM end of the software works as efficiently or better than the previous version. Verify will improve, as it has in every release since it's inclusion in the main product.

 

When I was sold Mastercam noone ever said the verification was free, I was sold a " CAM package that included verification" If they had said, or if any literature had hinted at verify being free, I could understand as typically you get what you pay for. I am not saying it a complete POS, just that I feel it is not up to snuff with the rest of the package and it needs work. With all the dollars we paid for it, and now with maintenance what is wrong with asking them to adress what many feel to be weak points in the software? As far as them farming out the verify side, how is that anything but a lame a$$ed excuse? I know that wouldn't fly with any of our customers. sorry it doesnt work, we farmed out a small part of the job????

 

I think its appropriate and important for people to speak up when something is not up to their standards, otherwise it will more than likely never get fixed.

jm2c

[Roger Peterson]

All I have to say is that since the advent of the WCS (which I have no problems verifying with) the applications for needing to rotate, verify, etc... stl files for setups has been nearly eliminated. The WCS takes care of the vast majority of this. Now, that said there are situations for stl files. Without knowing what each person is trying to do all I can say is that if the majority of people with stl file woes would start using the WCS there pain would be gone.

 

jm2c