Machine Simulation

[cincy k]

Who is using MC machine sim. and what advantages are you finding? Is it clumpsy and difficult to use or fairly straight forward? Just from using the verification, that takes forever and a month of sundays, doesn't seem like the machine sim. would be any faster on surfacing work. Are you able to properly define tools and toolholders to get good simulation? As is now in backplot and verification I can not properly define tools.

 

Is it more worth while using vericut instead?

[Colin Gilchrist]

You simpily cannot beat Vericut for Simulation. That being said, MC Machine Sim seems fairly promising.

[Ralph@Faustson]

How does Camplete compare with Vericut?

[Colin Gilchrist]

I've never run Camplete, but from what I've heard, it is a nice piece of software. From what I heard, it is only available for certain machines though.

 

From my experience, nothing will touch Vericut for accuracy and the ability to simulate any process on the machine you are using. It has so much capability if you know how to use it. It is also fairly expensive as softwares go.

[Greg Williams]

Vericut here

[Mike-T]

Here too !

[HEED]

I was using the Machsim.dll with mastercam and honestly I am not all that impressed with it. I never could get it quite right. The axes would constantly reverse on me and the 5 axis reposition I could never figure out. If you are doing simple stuff it may be cool. Vericut is the bomb though. I love that it is running off the gcode, not a post processed NCI file. Really helps with debugging and setting up posts. Good luck

[HEED]

And the optipath is way cool too. Especially that you can take existing code and optimize it too. Could potentially pay for itself with a few optimized programs and one crash on a multi axis machine.

[Colin Gilchrist]

It does pay for itself. Over and over and over...

[Bob W.]

To me, machine sim is just a pretty animation. I have tried it with 5-axis simulation but so much happens in the post it didn't produce anything meaningful. There are two ways to get to any location with a trunnion and that is where most of the discrepancies were.

 

Machine sim would show a part machining with A at a positive value but when posted it would be machining with A at a negative value. There is no substitute for an NC verification package.

[Colin Gilchrist]

Exactly. Vericut shows you what your actual Gcode program will do on the actual machine.

[maestro]

Vericut here as well. Wouldn't do any 5 axis programming without it.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

CAMplete is only available for certain machines, and Mori Seiki is NOT one of them contrary to what some sales schmucks have said... boldface liars! Anyway... it DOES do cut part simulation like Vericut but is not as configurable as Vericut with regard to create your own machines, your own M-Codes, etc.... It's a very nice package though. But it does something that Vericut does not, CAMplete is also a Post Processor. So if you've got Robodrills, Matsuura HMC's, Matsuura 5-Ax machines, Matsuura CUBLEX Machines, Hermele, and Mikron it's available for you.

 

BTW, I would not EEEEEEEEEEEEVEN seriously consider running 5-Ax machines without a tool like Vericut or CAMplete.

 

HTH

[SydwazShawn]

quote:

---

BTW, I would not EEEEEEEEEEEEVEN seriously consider running 5-Ax machines without a tool like Vericut or

Icam

---

Fissed! Man I crack myself up!

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Just for curiosity's sake Shawn. What's the ICAM running price-wise these days? I'm too lazy to call them up. I have a customer with a Heinz-57 shop (and I'm not even doing it justice) and he's looking for a single solution. He's got 5 or 6 different software packages he uses depending on the machine he's posting to... yeah I know, but it is what it is.

[SydwazShawn]

quote:

---

What's the ICAM running price-wise these days?

---

Well list is about 27k. Since Mastercam and Icam have partnered up recently, they will give out a big discount to Mcam users. Puts it around 15k. You get custom post by them, Virtual Machine, Material removal, Collision detection and Machine Kinematics verification.

 

I don’t know how CAMplete works, but if you want to do multiple machines with Kinematic simulation you have to by a whole new package. You can’t just own the simulation then throw in a machine and post. They will give a discount if you want to do multiple machines, but it needs to be ordered at the same time. So basically you will have a seat for each machine.

 

S.B.

[Verndog]

quote:

---

It does pay for itself. Over and over and over...

---

That is very debateable and subject to the part value you are programming. For small comercial type parts that has low value material cost and quick program times its not even close to worth it. For med sized parts of higher cost its often worth it, over a longer peiod of time. For high $$ parts it's imperative.

 

With import STL as a mesh in Mastercam, you can cut the part, import the STL and check to model for gouge that will greatly reduce part gouge error.

[SydwazShawn]

quote:

---

That is very debateable and subject to the part value you are programming.

---

I think he meant also crashing the machine tool and blowing out a spindle.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

quote:

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

It does pay for itself. Over and over and over...

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

 

That is very debateable...

---

Hardly. It only takes one trashed spindle for it to have paid for itself about 2x over because not only do you have to account for the cost of the spindle, cost to install it, but you have to consider the cost of down time. What if it's not only the spindle but you jack the rotary axes up? And, I'm not even considering the cost of loosing a part which could be the ONLY debatable part of the discussion IMNSHO.

 

 

Thanks Shawn. Seems like they all pretty much work the same (and cost as well for that matter) when they are partnered.

[Verndog]

quote:

---

Hardly. It only takes one trashed spindle for it to have paid for

---

Really? Since I started programming in 1986, and over that course of time using Vericut for only 7 years..my programs have destroyed zero spindles, and have programmed up to 20,000 RPM high speed 5 ax Fidia machines. So...aparently it is debatable.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

..my programs have destroyed zero spindles...

---

Neither have I but not all programmers are created equal and I've seen the aftermath enough times to believe having and using a tool like Vericut, etc... is a worthwhile weapon to have in the arsenal IMNSHO.

[Zoober]

Verndog, try spending some time with a few service engineers (I was a service mgr for 8 yrs) and see how many programs cause spindle, linear guide, rotary, toolholders, ad infinitem, repair problems.... Then you'll see just how debatable it is.....

[Greg Williams]

quote:

---

That is very debateable and subject to the part value you are programming. For small comercial type parts that has low value material cost and quick program times its not even close to worth it. For med sized parts of higher cost its often worth it, over a longer peiod of time. For high $$ parts it's imperative.

---

I have seen a threadmill program destroy a spindle when pitching from one hole to the next.

 

A new piece of material is generally a lot cheaper than 30-100K for new spindle cartridge and 1 weeks downtime.

 

I would never run a program on a machine without checking it with something.

 

Sure for simple programs maybe CIMCOedit backplot is enough. personally I use Vericut and I would never run a program without checking it.

[Verndog]

quote:

---

A new piece of material is generally a lot cheaper than 30-100K for new spindle cartridge and 1 weeks downtime.

---

Exactly my point. In that case it is not debateable, Vericut should be mandatory. My statement was based on the blanket comment that without question it would pay for itself xx times over without knowing the situation. There are many Ma and Pa shops that purchase used CNC equipment that make cheap competitive parts with skilled few employees, that rarely if at all crash. Spending 15K on software for a used 20K machine or even 2 (making $50.00 parts) would be a bit silly...so it really would be debateable...DEPENDING on the situation.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

Apparently it is debatable, since it's being debated...