Solids vs. Surfaces

[Mic6]

Well the boss came in and asked how to explain the advantages of having solids in MC to his bosses so we can have a couple seats here in the shop. We're demo'ing it right now. It's been a couple of years since I've messed with solid modeling, which was in Solidworks. I like to use it to create stock, so far is all I've done.

So I came to the #1 resource for MC info Proceed with clarification if you will...

[ReDEyZZ]

I am trying to get solids as well, the main reason is some of our customers will supply us with a solidworks file, and as of now I draw everything by hand,(the odd time I get a DXF) solids would reduce my design time, so I do not have to re-draw everything.

 

I also want it for setting up a stock file for some Castings that we do.

 

I'll have to copy/paste some of the answers for more AMMO.

[crazy^millman]

Using Solids verse Surfaces. Funny I just did a class on Saturday and this came up. I like solids for the following reasons:

1: Solids are self healing and you do not run into watertight problems when converting them into STL files.

2: Most Cad software that makes surface files is taking a Solid model and then converting it to a iges file. Then it is converted from iges to Mastercam. You now have two translations and depending on the tolerance setting between the 2 can cause all types of problems.

3: I can make things I need in solids very fast verses surfaces. I have models for just about everything I do in the shop. I have chucks, jaws, 4th axis, 5 axis, tail stock, steady rest, and etc.

4: I can easily make a set-up sheet in Mastercam using solid layout.

5: I like to drive all my surface toolpaths from solids. I find I get better edge results and no over lapping or gaps between surfaces in solid verse what you see all the time using surfaces.

6: I like that I can use my solid in my file right to verify without having to save a surfaces out as an STL for verification purposes. Not just solid blocks, for solid of rough forgings, previous operation solids. I can attach them all together and have them show up in the Verify so I can check for crashes, clearance and other things.

7: Solids do not have to have un-blanked surfaces on separate level and most time make smaller files to deal with.

8: Can you make any surface you need from the solid.

9: Most wireframe entities I create from solids come out as lines, arcs, and circles verse spline using surfaces.

 

cons:

1: Can not have different colored faces like you can with surfaces.

2: Some very weird odd ball shapes are done easier with surfaces.

 

HTH

[JDowe]

The history tree can be used to modify some

aspects of a model after it is created

fillet sizes - length of extrudes - chamfers

- draft angles for example

[strabe]

quote:

---

so I do not have to re-draw everything.

---

+1000000

 

If it's already drawn, why have to re-draw it? Plus I have fat fingers and have been known to misplace or transpose numbers.

 

HTH

[Louis LePoris MLC-CAD]

Feature based machining - FBM mill/drill

 

create 2d/3d toolpaths off of the solid w/out creating new geometry ~ also solid chaining..

[iowajim62]

Having solids allows you to import and manipulate other CAD packages solids is a big plus.

[Jason B.]

If Mastercam is the only software you use, then I would suggest getting the solids part of it. As many have mentioned here there are many benefits. If, however, you also use another software for design and Mastercam for CNC programming, then I would say don't get it. Chances are extremely good that you get solids for free in your design software and it is probably a LOT easier to manipulate it in that software than it will be in Mastercam. Once you have it how you want it, you can then output a solid file and still call in and program a solid so the geometry accuracy is not lost but you don't have the initial cost of the solids "Add on" and the extra cost in maintanence for it.

[Rob @ Target Machine]

Mastercam + SolidWorks = Awesome CAD/CAM Setup

 

I'm just now learning to use solids, and you won't find me going back.

 

Solids from surfaces is nice too. You can do more complex shapes than MC solids allows you to with this feature.

 

I'm very fond of MC, but the two go together nice.

[#Rekd™]

Yes solids are the way to go when drawing.

 

Once you have the solid you can create surfaces as well, as Ron stated going from surfaces to solids can be a problem.

 

John

[Mike S @ S4A]

another great advantage relates to toolpath;

If you drive your cuts on solid geometry toolpath "placeholders " appear in the solid construction manager. you can reposition these at will relative to the solid construction events (extrudes, fillets, body cuts, etc.)

The toolpaths will then ignore or recognize features based on whether they fall before or after the machining event. It's easier to surface over a hole that doesn't exist yet than to cap it with a surface....

[Mic6]

Thanks guys. I think tese responses will do just fine.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

If, however, you also use another software for design and Mastercam for CNC programming, then I would say don't get it.

---

Could not disagree more. Get solids, period, no matter what. I use CATIA for a lot of CAD work I do and I still find myself using Mastercam Solids for a lot of stuff.

 

JM2C

[Jason B.]

Then yes. If your design software is lacking more so than the Mastercam solids and you therefore find yourself going to Mastercam, then it would be benificial to get it. But to get it "no matter what" seems a little foolish. If your existing software beats it and makes it un-needed, then the added expense is money lost to non-profitable items on a continueing basis. (Maintenence on solids is extra money)

 

I'm not saying nobody should get Mastercam solids. I'm just saying that if you already have solids design capabilities, then adding another solid package would be an extra unneeded expense since you can program a solid without the solid package. Therefore saving the money we all so desperatly need. (some more than others......me )

[#Rekd™]

I forgot to mention that after drawing your solid then creating surfaces you have more machining options as well.

 

John

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Without solids I believe you cannot machine solids. HUGE drawback IMHO.

[Jason B.]

Yes you can machine solids. You just can't move them around or manipulate them. You need to position them as you want and then export to Mastercam. Then import them and go to town. The only thing you can't do is FBM. Which, at this point, is no big loss. At least for most users. There may be more cutterpaths that are solid specific but I'm not sure. I always import the geometry as surfaces because of the greater control in programming. (drive/check surface selection, etc.)

[Chris Rizzo]

Plain and simple-

 

If you don't have solids, your at a disadvantage with your competitors that do.

[Jason B.]

quote:

---

Plain and simple-

 

If you don't have solids, your at a disadvantage with your competitors that do.

---

Absolutely. Today's world of design is so solids driven you really need some sort of solids package to stay competitive.

[fro_matt]

I've never used MC solids, but if it has boolean operations, that can be real handy

[Dave Ball]

I agree with James on this, get it no matter what. Sure you can manipulate a solid around in a CAD package and then import it, but what if that solid is part of an assembly and you go jacking around with the orientation, then the assembly is hosed. Yes I know you could make a copy of the solid but that breaks the associativity making change recoginition more tedious. I would rather leave my model as designed and manipulate ONLY IF I HAVE TO in MC, it's easy and getting easier

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

Yes you can machine solids. You just can't...

---

You've just handcuffed yourself because you said "can't" and now you loose.

 

quote:

---

greater control in programming. (drive/check surface selection, etc.)

---

You can do the same with solids by face selection. I do it all the time. Next...

[3R!< W3NG3R]

If you are working on more then one solid at a time, then get solids for sure, so you can move them around relative to each other.

 

If you only even use one solid at a time, then WCS will take care of everything. It's even easier and faster then x-forming the solid IMO. WCS also works better for change recognition too.

 

JM2C

[Jason B.]

quote:

---

You've just handcuffed yourself because you said "can't" and now you loose.

---

To be more precise.... I can't in mastercam because they want more money to do it. I can still do it.

 

quote:

---

You can do the same with solids by face selection. I do it all the time. Next...

---

I do it all the time too.... using surfaces created from importing my solid. The only difference is that I'm doing it a lot cheaper than you are.

 

quote:

---

WCS will take care of everything. It's even easier and faster then x-forming the solid IMO. WCS also works better for change recognition too.

---

That's my point. you don't need to move solids around. So if you "can't" it doesn't matter.

[Ron Branch @ Verisurf]

quote:

---

I do it all the time too.... using surfaces created from importing my solid. [big Grin] The only difference is that I'm doing it a lot cheaper than you are. [Razz]

---

I love that type of rational thinking. If you had solids and it saved you just 10 minutes a week verse not in one year you saved 500 minutes. Our shop rate is $100/hr here. So you really only save a little $$, but I see hours saved in our case a week. We make all of our set-up sheets using solids. If I had to make them using surfaces I would probably spend an extra 4 to 10 hours week doing that. Let just say I spend only 2 hours a week. That is 120 minutes. Or 6000 minutes a year. Again at our shop rate it would have cost our company $10k by not having solids. So you may not make the professional set-up sheets we do, but in our company your way of thinking would be costing us 10 to 30 times the cost of solids by not having that capability.

 

I like the guy who will not spend the extra money on the better insert. So he spends only 5 dollars on inserts and runs his parts at 200 sfm and .01 per rev. He is saving $7.50 and insert. Meanwhile the company next door is running that $12.50 insert. They are running at 750 sfm and at .024 per rev. They did the same job you are in 4 minutes verses your 32 minutes. They do the same number of part, but hey I saved money by having the cheaper inserts. not having solids in this day and age is the same thing in my book.