Mastercam VS Unigraphics

[GREG]

We are looking to upgrade our programming software to 5 axis .(we only have Mastercam Mill level 1 at present & Pro E ).Although

there are 3 5axis & 8 4axis machines on the shop floor.

Any thoughts , comments would be appreciated

Cheers

[Michael Reynolds]

Hi Greg! I teach both UG and Mcam, and I gotta tell ya, UG has a MUCH higher learning curve to it. + it's much more expensive.

 

Just my 2cents...

Mike R.

[cadcam]

Greg,

Let me ask you a question.

Why wouldn’t you buy a level three mastercam that can do what you want?

From 4 to 5 axis.

[Scott Bond]

Hi

I have been growing with MC for 18 years .It has been A steady climb to the software it is today.It has been compaired to many other softwares but only recently to the mature UG. I hope we continue thru V9 and V10 and close the gap on 5axe, then leed.

[ 09-05-2001: Message edited by: Scott Bond ]

[GREG]

CadCam

Good Question, thats why Ive asked the forum on there thoughts.

I think the bean counters here want one package to do everything,tool design ,modeling ,toolpaths,ect ect. Ive never used UG so I cant compare one to the other.

Cheers

[Charles Davis]

One of my best friends uses UG to program at a big aerospace co. He has also used an earlier version of Mastercam. He says:

1) UG is a lot more difficult to learn and use

2) UG is king of 5-axis

3) Mastercam far outstrips UG in the 2.5-3 axis world in both functionality and ease of use.

4) Mcam is quickly closing the gap in 5-axis.

He has not seen Mcam V8.1, so I think he'd be impressed with how far our 5-axis programming has progressed.

Eventually we will take over the world. Resistence is futile. Submit. Submit.

[cadcam]

Greg,

Question #2: What kind of parts or molds to you make?

#3: What are you desining with now?

#4: do you do every thing at this point with mastercam?

Greg dont worry i will come back with an answer when asked. at this time i am trying to help you think about why cant i use the mastercam that i all ready have a feel for to do the rest of the jobs in the shop.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Greg,

I believe you'd get much better bang for the buck going with either Inventor, Solid Edge or Solid Works and Mastercam Mill Level 3. Inventor, SE and SW are very good Mid-Range Solid Modelers that excel in assembly modeling. Though not as many featureas as UG definitely a MUCH shorter learning curve.

If you must only buy one package, get Mastercam Mill Level 3, Solids, and Moldplus.

JMHO

[tirenut]

Greg,

It depends on what you are going to be using it for. If you want THE toolpathing king in Multiaxis - one system and one system only is for you, NCCS's NCL. NCL is built for the big boys by the big boys and is used heavily in the aerospace industry. It was THE competition for CAMAX when Camax was in it's hayday. Now that CAMAX is essentially gone, NCL is pretty much the king when it comes to comlex cutting. Problem 1 though is that NCL resembles Mcam in no way shape or form. It is a language based programming system, but it is ultra powerful and gives you infinate discreet tool control over every aspect of the tool motion. It's parametric capabilities are also very nice for family of parts programming.

NCL is what we ended up going with when Mastercam ran out of gas on our parts. For what we do, our MCAM dealer and MCAM themselves said, oh, you want to do WHAT? But, I will add that we still use MCAM for 75% of all our work and nearly all of our 2,2.5, and 3 axis code though because it is so easy to use and learn and I love it for making my job so much easier.

But, and this is a big but, IF you are going to specifically do hardcore MultiAxis work on a consistent basis, Mastercam IS NOT your best choice, and I beg someone to argue. You do not have enough flexibility in the tool axis control commands. NCL not only has multiple check surface capability in Multiaxis cutting mode, but it also has nearly 20 variations of multiaxis tool axis control and a host of other top notch features like custom cutter support in multiaxis such as barrel and taper cutters. NCL is only limited by the users imagination in what they can do.

NCL does have it's downfalls though. A huge learning curve, limited design capabilities, no solid modeling capabilities, and big price tag combine to make it targeted at a very specific target market.

I will go on to say that Mastercam is my number 1 choice for most of my work. I prep the stock, rough, and semi-finish with MCAM before I apply the finish motion in NCL. If it has to be done fast and is not in the upper 5% of difficulty, then MCAM is a great choice for all of your machining. Pair it with a capable design package like James mentioned above and you have a flexible system that is hard to beat.

Sorry so long, I always have alot to say.

Brett

[Toby]

A gentleman that was my mentor in the machining industry and also who I learned M/C from has had many years in the trade as a programmer. As time moved on he more recently started to learn and use pro/e with pro/manufacturing in the medical industry. Now quite proficient at this software I asked him the question how it compares to M/C. His initial thoughts was it is a, "totally different animal, extensive learning curve, and entirely different UI." He added the words, "once you get used to it the paths on heavy 3-4 axis work smokes Mastercam." This software like NCL are indeed big boy softwares with very heafty price tags. jm2c

[Charles Davis]

I have yet to know anyone who has tried proMan who has been successful. Last week, sold another company that decided to cut their losses after loosing .25M trying to make parts with proMan.

Many have tried, many have failed. When the pain becomes unbearable, they buy Mastercam.

[kathy]

You guys just don’t get it! This is an apples n' organges thing!

Mastercam, Surfcam etc. are standalone CAM machining packages.

Solidworks, SolidEdge, Inventor, etc. are standalone solid modeling and drafting packages.

The knowledge captured in one package is not transferable to the other package. In certain design and manufacturing products, this is a perfectly acceptable situation. But there never will be the integration between engineering and manufacturing, only raw data transfer between one to the other. Who does that leave to fill in the blanks and integrate the knowledge?

As for the Big Dogs, there are only three left. The integrated solutions for Engineering, Manufacturing (not limited to machining), product configuration control and all the rest – are only obtainable by implementing Unigraphics, ProEnginnering or Catia. (Lets face it, I-deas is history). There are more? Who?

So the question is, where does your company and product line fit into the picture?

Kathy

[gcode]

There is one small dog that enables design

and CAM all in the same package.

CamWorks from TekSoft interfaces directly

with SolidWorks. It is supposed to have

feature recognition and the ability to capture knowledge and apply it to new projects.

I don't know anyone who has tried it.

Personally I gave up on TekSoft (ProCam) a couple of years ago. There was zero customer

support and a very small userbase.

I felt that being a TekSoft progammer was like being fluent in Latin. There is not much demmand for Latin speakers or TK

programmers.

Edit: I don't know whether CamWorks does

4X stuff, but I'm real sure it can't do 5X

[ 09-06-2001: Message edited by: gcode ]

[kathy]

sorry, gcode - putting a two-bit package like tek-soft (one manufacture) into another manufacture's Cam package in not integration - only translation.

I have a 30 day eval of solidworks on my machine right now. Guess what? the var/rep didn't know a thing about tek-soft's camworks!! Even though we told them that is a major concern of ours!

Kathy

[gcode]

I'm taking a SolidWorks class at the local

community college. My instructor uses

MasterCam/SolidWorks as a consultant in the mold industry.

He said CamWorks is very impressive,and

will be giving Mastercam are run for its money in a couple of years.

TekSoft was bought out recently so maybe

their customer service is better than it use

to be. My dealer was great, but bugs took

9-12 months to get fixed.

MasterCam is the hands down winner in the

customer service dept. No contest!Challengers need not even show up!

[Charles Davis]

As far as the "integrated solution" that is certainly a holy grail.

Having been in this biz for 15 years, that seems to be the buzz word every 4 years or so. Lots of promises are made, then people get tired of not getting their parts made, and the new buzzword becomes "best of class".

The problem with "integrated" packages is the CAD company's put all their development effort on the CAD side, where all the money is. CAM ends up being a "me too" product.

That said, I am a tremendous advocate of better integration. I just doubt that will ever come from one company. The key is standardization of software interfaces (windows) and improving knowledge transfer between systems.

Maybe that will be STEP, maybe the CAD vendors will open their systems and begin seriously providing the info the CAM vendors need to link back to their model.

But that's just my opinion. To quote Blazing Saddles: "Me just pawn in game of life"

[Allan Brown]

quote:

---

He said CamWorks is very impressive, and will be giving Mastercam are run for its money in a couple of years.

---

Usually the assumption behind these statements is that Mastercam will be stagnant during that time, which of course is not the case. It's difficult to aim at a moving target...

[gcode]

Dave,

He was grading my final project when he

said it. I though it best to keep my opinions to myself.

I've used TekSoft, I spent my own money on

Mastercam! 'Nuff said!

[Michael Reynolds]

Does anyone know if the mcam pdg's are gonna devote more time to the cad side? It seems to me that with a cam package as good as mcam is, they could. Don't get me wrong. I think that simple geometry creation in mcam is great, and easy to learn, but if we had more options in the creation -n- updating of models, we'd all be much closer to finding the "holy grail". How about incorporating real parametrics (expressions) into the cad side of mcam? How's about a gd & t option? (I know about easy draw, but it doesn't work in v8).

Just another 2 cents from me.

Thanks fer list'n

Mike R.

[Charles Davis]

MasterCAD?

MasterCADCAM?

While Mastercam's drawing and design ability is very strong, Mechanical CAD is a world of its own (like CAM is a world of its own).

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

[ 09-06-2001: Message edited by: Charles Davis ]

[Toby]

Hey Charles,

I could reel off a few names of people using proman very successfully. You should see some of the trick stuff they're accomplishing! As Kathy said this is apples and oranges. The place of business I referred to earlier has all engineers making models in pro-e. These in turn are fired off to the in-house machine shop using pro-man. In this case it works out well within the bounds of their situation. All companies need to consider what software best suits their needs.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

One needs only to look back a few Versions to see that Mastercam goes through development cycles. They focus on CAD for a while, them they focus on CAM for a while. But no matter what they are focusing on at anyone particular time, they NEVER forget their core focus, MasterCAM is their name, not MasterCAD. They will never (perhaps I should not say never but I'm about 99.9999% sure) that they will never compete with CAD companies. They give you enough tools to do your job and a few motr to make it fun.

[Kenneth Potter]

Funtionality in mastercam for machining (Cam) is very good. The cad side of mastercam -------> Tooooo many mouse clicks

I know ! Hot keys ,yada yada

When Ver 10 comes out with a new GUI Thats true windows Man I cant wait !

[Charles Davis]

Toby,

I have a friend with a mold shop that uses mcam and solidworks. All the parts are a similar product line. He doesn't program anything anymore.

Just imports the new file, imports a list of ops from the library, adds geometry (15 secs max) and hits Regen.

Now, is that truly, "associative", no. Is it just as fast (or faster) than a those systems that promote associativity, yes. And he still has the integrity and flexibility of Mastercam toolpaths.

I know what you are saying, and I'm not arguing. I just think it's important not to get trapped by symantics and choose a big, expensive, complex system, that only works in a few very specific instances, when you COULD buy Mastercam. From me.

[ 09-07-2001: Message edited by: Charles Davis ]

[cadcam]

quote:

---

when you COULD buy Mastercam. From me.

---

Amen Charles.

[ 09-07-2001: Message edited by: cadcam ]