verify alternatives?

[Ray H.]

ANyone using some sort of verify alternative? On large mold cavities it takes a real long time and we are spooling all are ram and running out of ram as well. The mastercam app. then crashes. How about vericut or possibly something cheaper.

 

I know we can add more Ram but we are all on 32bit systems and not 64bit.

[Guest]

Full blown Cimco will do this for you.

[Jayson Kramer]

Look at predators Varify or Metacut

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

Vericut is where it's at. It is quite expensive, but for verification it's unbeatable. I have heard that Predator makes verification software as well, but I really don't have any experience with it myself.

[Mike Whitten CAD/CAM Contractors]

I am using the latest(V8) Predator Virtual CNC. I have owned Predator for a few years now and I really like it. The only issue is that is does not support mill/turn yet. I believe Vericut is the best but very spendy. I am sure it would be worth it for a larger company that could afford it.

 

link

 

Thanks,

Mike

[kens1]

I have used Vericut and Predator, and Vericut is better unless you use undercut tools (lollipops, backdrafts). The last time I used Vericut, it couldn't handle these. I have also had trouble with Predator support.

[Guest]

Check with you're dealer on the cost of the Cimco upgrade and then check the rest

 

[Jaz]

Vericut handles lolipop, dovetail and other odd shapes very well now. Vericut is very good and expensive. It adds quite a few features you don't know you need yet.

[peon]

I have used predator, but you must setup all your tools and stock for every part you verify. Predator does not import your MCX toolist or stock settings. The early versions of Predator used to come with a c-hook that imported the toolist from mc9, but not with mcx. I have made several calls to Predator, but the support was horrible and I could not get an answer when or if they would develop a c-hook for mcx.

 

John, does Cimco import your current part's toolist and stock settings? I may demand a quote from our reseller for Cimco if it will. I received a quote for Vericut and the price was WAY out of our spending limit.

[Guest]

quote:

---

John, does Cimco import your current part's toolist and stock settings? I may demand a quote from our reseller for Cimco if it will. I received a quote for Vericut and the price was WAY out of our spending limit.

---

No, sadly it does not. This would be a MAJOR enhancement if it did.

 

However, the cost would be negligible, especially when you consider the cost of Vericut, which I do agree BTW is KING of this heap. Cimco won't show your machine but will show your part and how it is being cut.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

IIRC you can put text into your code that will setup the tools for Predator. You could work that into your post or tool library.

[gcode]

I have owned Predator for about 7 years

and for the money, its pretty good.

I dropped maintenance a couple of

years ago because there was absolutley zero

support. I'm stuck at Version 7, but I've heard

good things about V8 and might pony up the $$

for the upgrade if my side work starts coming in

again.

I've got a full seat of Vericut at my day job

at it totally rocks, but annual maintenance

for the Vericut is more than I paid for my

full 5axis seat of Predator.

[Colin Gilchrist]

peon,

 

If you use the MPMaster Mill post, there are sections that are in there to output the tool list and material formatted for Predator.

 

Its pretty easy really. Do some searching and if you still can't figure it out, start a new topic and we'll help you get it figured out.

 

You can also copy the code from the MPMaster post and insert it into another post if you wish...

[Colin Gilchrist]

Oh yeah, for simulation Vericut can't be beat!

 

A bunch of programmers from our group just went to the Vericut Users Exchange. They demonstrated the next release of Vericut and I can't wait!

 

Version 7 is going to rock.

[peon]

Does CNC address the root of the problem in X4? I'm sick of the defective verification!! This must be fixed!!

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

Oh yeah, for simulation Vericut can't be beat!

---

CAMplete now does cut part simulation. Only works on Micron and Matsuura's I believe.

[Colin Gilchrist]

There is nothing defective about Mastercam's Verify.

 

You are trying to crunch Trillions of numbers if you are doing a large mold cavity with any kind of decent resolution.

 

You would get the same slow processing in any Verification package if you want to verify to a tight tolerance.

 

The other thing you have to consider is that Mastercam will for the foreseeable future, only verify the NCI code, not the post-processed G-code.

 

If you want to improve your productivity, Buy Vericut or Predator, get a 64 Bit System (Hardware and O/S), get 8 GB of RAM, and you can run the verification while you are working in Mastercam. Don't want to spend $5000 on a computer? Check the Benchmark Sticky Thread at the top of the forum. The current leader built his system for about $1500. I think there are several people who could build you a comparable system for a good deal if you don't want to build your own (or if you can't because of your company policy, I know how that goes).

[Colin Gilchrist]

I've seen Camplete but wasn't all that impressed. As I understand it you feed it NCI from Mastercam and it does posting and verification.

 

Does it verify the actual G-code?

 

Someone was showing me the program on a Matsurra. They were having a problem with rotations matching up because the machine model did not match the real world. The centerline of the axes was off by about .002.

 

The guy who showed me was trying to work with the Camplete guys to fix the model so it would be accurate.

 

James, could you elaborate a bit on what kind of configuration capabilities you have and if Camplete will simulate the actual G code program?

 

I've heard people rave about it, but I'd put Camplete up to the Pepsi challenge with Vericut any day. I've seen some machines that are setup here in Vericut that are super impressive. Dozens of axes, crazy supports and pneumatic tooling that is M code activated, Moving the stock between fixtures and machines, driving and simulation of the actual physical kinematic motion of the machine.

 

If you have a condition at the machine or in your code that will cause a problem, you can configure Vericut to detect it. Anything. The sky is basically the limit. Of course, if you don't setup Vericut to catch the errors you are looking for, you won't see the problem until it is too late.

[peon]

But.... It is defective! Bottom line, I verify my part and it crashes!!! I have not had problems like this with other cam packages. I'm also not interested in verifying posted code. I have never had any issues with code after I have posted my toolpaths.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

I've seen Camplete but wasn't all that impressed.

---

V4.5 is more impressive than previous versions. They added some key features like cut part simulation and the ability to have custom tool shapes.

 

quote:

---

As I understand it you feed it NCI from Mastercam and it does posting and verification.

---

Yes. You read in the NCI. ONce it completes that phase, it generates G-Code. The G-Code is what drives the simulation. If you've modified the post peocessor to include things like Tool Breakage detection, you get a message about "unknown function" or something of that nature.

 

quote:

---

Does it verify the actual G-code?

---

Yes. As the simulation runsyou are watching the machien move, as the g-code runs by. If there is a collision, you select the colision message and it goes right to the line of code that generated that collision.

 

quote:

---

The guy who showed me was trying to work with the Camplete guys to fix the model so it would be accurate.

---

The system comes with default information. Once the machine is on the floor, you can either leave it default or you can make it match real world. Depending on the type of work you do you may not be able to accept the default. If you ALWAYS start from billet and machien a complete part in 1 setup, defaualt is fine. You'll never see that .002 anywhere because every feature on the part is still relative to the other features that were machined in the same setup but that's a discussion for another day. But in a nutshell it is very simple to make the model match up with the machine.

 

quote:

---

I've heard people rave about it, but I'd put Camplete up to the Pepsi challenge with Vericut any day.

---

Apples to Oranges comparison at this point. Vericut is not a Post, Vericut does not do some of the things that CAMplete does, and consequently CAMplete does not do some of the things that Vericut does. There is not "Optipath" type utility in CAMplete at this point. As far as the simulation goes... that's apples to apples comparison. I don't have to build my machine. It's already built. As far as setting up fixtures, clamping, other points of possible interference... peice of cake. From a pure simulation/collision detection standpoint, I believe it would stand up to the Pepsi Challenge.

 

quote:

---

...driving and simulation of the actual physical kinematic motion of the machine.

---

It does this. If I have say a MAM72-35V and a MAM72-42V, I can move a program from one machine to another with a few mouse clicks WITHOUT having to go back into Mastercam for any reason whatsoever. Can Vericut take a program written for a B/C machine and verify it in an A/C machine? I can take that program written for the 35V and figure out how tall my fixture stack up needs to be on the 42V BEFORE I commit any physical resources to the project, and vise verse. AFAIK CAMPlete is the only product that can do something like that.

 

quote:

---

If you have a condition at the machine or in your code that will cause a problem, you can configure Vericut to detect it. Anything.

The sky is basically the limit.

---

Hopefully your wallet has no limit because the cost of what you're describing will probably run in excess of $30k IIRC and hopefully your personel have some serious hours to configure it as well. I'm not dogging Vericut. Don't get me wrong. It's powerful stuff and VERY necessary for a lot of folks. I'm just saying there something else on the market that is powerful in it's own right.

 

--------------------------------------------------

peon says;

quote:

---

...But.... It is defective!

---

I'm going to take issue with that statement. I've verified over 50MB worth of NCI in one shot with no crashes ON MY DELL M6300 LAPTOP with 4GB RAM no less. I'm not happy with the performance necessarrily but I don not believe it is defective. On the couple of occasions it has crashed, it's been the 250MB STL models I brought in that were the problem NOT the software. Fix the file, problem goes away. On occasion I still get the waterfall effect, but it's on certain shapes of parts for the most part. Again, NOT A DEFECT. I blame my software last. Some people blame their software first. I guess that's what makes me an effective beta tester. I generally keep very good track of what I am doing, how I am doing it that way if an issue does arise I am able to report it.

 

So peon, can you elaborate a little about what kinds of parts you do. How large the files are, etc... Things like that. Perhaps there's some settings or something like that we can help you with that will minimize some of the frustrating crashes you're experiencing?

[mig]

John , do you mean Cimco editor ?

[Cannon]

Here is some problems in verify:

- When using WCS, you lose the ability to turbo verify. This has been on the "works" for years now but nothing has changed. hopefully in X4 then..

- Saving verify result as STL. This simply doesn´t work on anything little bigger files. When I click save, in a little while I get an error message and get kicked out of verify.

[peon]

John, I'm sorry, but I still beg to differ. I always check my models before I begin any surfacing toolpaths and repair them, if needed. I normally don't verify small, simple models, cuz I don't need to. I primarily use verify for two different reasons. 1) To indicate whether I missed some surfaces that needs machining. 2) To save an .stl file after roughing so I can use the rest roughing toolpath and reference the .stl model (WORKS AWESOME WITHOUT AIR CUTTING!). But as you say, once my file starts getting up to 200mb, I experienc the problems as stated earlier in the post. That is why I claim the verify is defective. If I programmed small and simple models for a living, the verify would be adequate, but I rarely program such models. I also program from two different files to keep the file size as small as possible. I rough and semi finish with one file, then use a separate file for finishing only. Again, that helps dramatically, but I still crash while verifying on occasion. All three of the workstations I have used are well within the minimum requirements as advised by CNC. With my former employer, I opted to purchase Predator, which worked well, but who wants to setup the tools and stock for every part? With my new employer, I begged for MCX and was very fortunate to get the package. I don't have the option at this time to ask for more money for an additional verification package. I would love to purchase Predator and implement the suggestions earlier in the post to automatically setup the tools and stock, but I'm really hoping that CNC would boost their verifcation utility instead.

 

Oh, by the way, we build molds for the plastic and die cast industry.

[Steve Hattori]

Peon, if you are trying to verify a 3-axis mold prog with small stepovers, the Cimco Edit Pro V5 is extremely fast and extremely accurate for surface quality. You do have to configure your tools, but thats not that much trouble. The solid model of your machined surface is very good- I use it for 3x stuff thats 200-300mb and .0002 stepovers- works WAY better than MCX verify, and I do get the same crashes you do. CNC actually gave me a bug number a long time ago...still not fixed.

 

I also have Camplete and just got the V4.5, and it works quite well for 5x on a Hermle. Its big advantage, like James says, is it posts the NCI and verifies the g-code, and simulates the machine movement. It is an invaluable tool for 5x stuff, especially if you are running a part near the axis limits of the machine. However, it is NOT especially fast doing simulations.

 

So if you have 3x stuff- use Cimco, its really good for the little it costs. If you do 5x, then you need Vericut, predator, or Camplete.

[Greg Williams]

quote:

---

CAMplete now does cut part simulation. Only works on Micron and Matsuura's I believe.

---

Are there plans for other machines makers? I am not sure about the US market but here neither of these machines have local support, so hence there sales are very low to non existant. It does seem a little odd for a software company to pigoen hole them selves to only a few small machine makers.