Vericut

[cunder]

To those Vericut users, does anyone have a measured savings, in terms of toolpath optimizing and tool life, especially in a very short run type atmosphere, that would help justify the purchase? I understand the path verification for toolpath collisions, but I was instructed to get more information but without ever using the software it is had to give that type of savings a measure. Thanks in advance for any help.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

If vericut prevents scrapping one mold plate or other expensive part, and it will eventually, it has paid for itself. It's much more difficult to quantify the savings in regards to toolpath optimization.

[cunder]

I do realize the software will indeed pay for itself. I think the need for some type of measure will help prioritise the different areas that need improvement and where to put the investment first in order.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

I don't know what sort of parts you make, but if they are regularly worth over 5 figures, then the first time you save a part from scrap with vericut, the money that would have otherwise went towards making a new part can be put toward those investments. The idea being that Vericut will protect the bottom line, making the other investments easier to attain.

 

Thats how I see it, at least.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

EDIT: WHOOPSIE, wrong thread!!

[Colin Gilchrist]

Toolpath time savings average 20-35%, and go as high as 50%. This is run time you gain back when using OptiPath.

 

With OptiPath I've seen about a 5-15% increase in tool life. Sometimes as high as 20-25%.

 

You'll find that the tool life increases won't be as dramatic as the time savings. I think this is partly because you are doing more work with the tool in the same amount of time.

 

So, besides the verification and crash prevention, OptiPath is awesome.

 

One of the advantages is that you can run OptiPath on already existing programs and realize a time savings, without having to "reprogram" the part.

 

Keep in mind that OptiPath does not change the toolpath motion. It just breaks the toolpath up into smaller segments (same physical path) and sets the feedrate for each block based on how much material the tool is actively engaging.

 

If you are looking for time savings, check out VoluMill. This is a different toolpath technology. Optipath really doesn't do anything on a VoluMill toolpath because it is already optimized...

 

VoluMill is also much better "bang for the buck". The disadvantage is that you need to reprogram older jobs using this new toolpath.

 

They are both highly effective tools.

[Tim Johnson]

We normally run small parts in low quantities. We realized a 35% gain in production within 3 months just for removing dry runs and slow first part runs. It would have been an immediate production gain but it took awhile for the operators to trust the software. Now they wouldn't even consider running a job that hasn't been verified. I can't measure the cutting time I've saved by watching the virtual machine cutting a part and making process changes on the fly. If you're into macros or heavy post editing You can instantly find errors or potential problems.

 

We figured we paid for our two seats in about 9 months WITHOUT scrap savings.

[cunder]

Thanks for all the info.

[cunder]

I often use an STL for rest machining. I generate the SLT in Mastercam verify. Some times the verify will take a while to generate. Will Vericut create an STL in a faster time that would be able to be used for the rest machining operations?

[Watcher]

Sure it will. If my memory servers correctly STL export is included in basic verification.

If you could not get your STL stock out of Vericut, perhaps you will need to order the MODEL EXPORT module...

Anyway, Vericut is faster and more accurate than Mastercam STL exporter... you also have a tool to fix the normals of STL models (Which you can use to fix bad STL models exported from Mastercam as well)

 

 

HTH