WCS Discussion

[crazy^millman]

Dave you made this comment:

 

quote:

---

MC can't compare to SW with this, SW is WAY better.

---

I will make this comment Mastercam is much better at drawing things than nothing!!! What is your answer for shops where they only thing they have is Mastercam? All things relative to what you got and if you got SW then by all mean use it, but to say Mastercam can't is just saying you have not figured how to in Mastercam. Not trying to bash so please take what I am saying with a grain of salt. Blanket statements made without any thought as who made be reading them get us no where. I have my share of frustration with Mastercam just had a phone conversation today with a prominent reseller and one of their guys was poking fun at me asking my thoughts about Mastercam Mill/Turn. I think you bring a lot to this forum and look forward to your responses, but I call it like I see it.

 

I still get frustrated at the geniuses that thought saying even a 6 year old can program Mastercam was a smart idea. That to me really hurt CNC software's creditability with me at least. It showed a lack of the effort put forth by people like myself who make a living using this software day in and day out. It showed a lack of responsibility to the industry. I have yet to see anyone from CNC come in here and say you know what we screwed up. Reason being this is not their forum this is In-Houses forum and I have put way to much of my time and effort into this place roll over. I make my share of noise and have the eat of some decision makers, but I got that through my discretion and true wanting to make it a better product. It may not be our ways and we may not agree with certain ways, but we all could look at ourselves through someone else eyes and change things about ourselves. I try to help people and get help. I am humble enough to say I have learned tons from this place, but one thing I learned was to help, complain in a way to get my point across and look to those that can do things I can not.

 

Speaking for myself I am use to the WCS so maybe that makes it not so cumbersome to me. I understand the logic and the method and find it quite nice. I also have been using it for 10 years. I have tripled to almost 4 times my salary since I started using Mastercam. Sorry you are not going to see me singing the Mastercam sucks song. Does it have problem? YES!!! I will repeat that Mastercam has problems, yet it gets the job done and it allows me to make a great living so if that is not working for others, sorry I got very little sympathy for you.

 

You need help I am here this place is here and lets all try to remember that at the end of the day.

[Dave.L]

Ron,

 

How about reading my post again in the context it was meant. I was speaking about work coordinates, user coordinates, planes, etc it’s all the same just in different terms.

I would never compare MC to SW for design since SW is for design and MC is for programming - two different programs with two different focuses.

 

Now, as far as how each program is designed, easy of use and intuitiveness of each, well that's another story and I think you know where I stand.

 

I do feel MC is a good program with just a lot of low-hanging fruit that if addressed could make major differences in the quality of the product.

[cadcam]

All I can say is I could not work without WCS these days. I jumped right on when it came out in V9. this has done nothing but get better every time the software grows.With Dynmic WCS I feel we really don't need most of the other options in WCS now.

[Dave.L]

quote:

---

So what's lacking in you opinion?

---

John,

 

Let me try to explain my issues from a technical stand point: (Again, I am speaking in regard to Non-Dynamic WCS, I will explore that in detail soon).

 

As an example, in AutoCAD, they refer to the WCS as the UCS, or user coordinate system. The base coordinate system is the world coordinate system, I am sure much like MC or any other software. Now, in ACAD, I can create any number of UCS’s I want and name them whatever I want. The UCS consists of an origin point most commonly located on your geometry. At any time I can edit the origin and/or the rotation of that UCS and it’s independent of how I view the model / entities. In other words, I can manipulate the UCS any way I like.

 

In MC, as I understand it, the view manger is one of the tools, and a necessary tool, not in whole but in part. So, first I think the view manager would probably be better named the “WCS Manager”. Second, I feel a user should be able to create a WCS and THEN alter it without the creation of the forced “new view”.

 

I also feel it is lacking in the geometry selection methods and I think you concur with that. As an example, if I bring in a model that has chamfered edges, I would like to be able to select the WCS origin by an intersection of two/three planes or faces, if I use two lines for say X and Y axis, then assume the chamfer is .1, I need to move the origin .1 in Z after. And what if I want the origin at the midpoint of a line? (I think Dynamic WCS will do this).

 

I have noticed Ron Branch post about Verisurf’s fee WCS add on and obviously WCS in MC is lacking or they would not have created this tool. I do need to try this add on and maybe all will be fine thereafter. I have not yet because I am not overly excited about add-ons for what I feel should be core functionality since as little as it may be, it’s more to maintain upon updates, etc.

 

Like all of us, I work with WCS every day and I get the job done. I just think it needs some work.

 

For the record, this post was a technical explanation of what I view as lacking and not a bash.

[gcode]

draw 2 line at a right angle an use them

to define a WCS or View..

select the X line first, the Y second

You can manipulate the resulting WCS by mainipulating the 2 lines.

This will not create a new view, it will

move the original because it is associative

to the two lines

The same is true of points..

Make a copy of Top, draw a point somewhere in space and use that point to define the origin

of Copy of Top

Move the point and Copy of Top goes with it

without creating a new view.

I use this to program 3+2 5 axis work, when the operator can't tell me where center of rotation is yet.

I make a point, use it to define a Copy of Top

and use C of T as my WCS .

When the operator figures out his center of rotation, I move the point, regen and post.

[Dave.L]

Tom you have explained this approach many times and I understand it. I just can't understand why this would be required when there is already lots of geometry on the part. I know what you describe works I just think it should not be that way.

[BenK]

Dave,

I think you should try the Varisurf add-on. I use it and yes it does give you more options like "create wcs by 3 planes".

 

Ron,

Why was the reseller poking fun at you about mill/turn? Was it beacuse of the conversation on here about it?

[Joe788]

Dave, something you may or may not have noticed when selecting a WCS by geometry:

 

The X and Y legs are only for the orientation. You can click anywhere you want for the actual origin. When doing 5 axis, or 4 axis work with the origin at the center of rotation, I never have to create any geometry for TPlanes at various angles, because I just have to click two entities that will make the rotary go to the right angle. The origin is still 0,0,0 (or whatever I want it to be). In contrast, with Solidworks, you'd need to create a sketch and a point so you could create a reference coordinate system.

[crazy^millman]

Benk it was all in good fun. Nothing was meant by it I was just pointing out how we can come across not meaning too and in my case my un-happiness with Mill/Turns is somewhat known among the dealers from the ones I have talked to.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

The "two line" method like gcode mentions is what I use exclusively for WCS creation. I do agree with Dave that it's "not the way it should be". but it is simple, fast, and the ONLY way you can rotate an existing WCS. Dynamic along with my "2 line" WCS and I can quickly and easily position and orient any existing WCS however I please.

 

This is the only way I teach others to create WCS, simply because it is the most versatile.

[crazy^millman]

Dave in all fairness it has been 6 years since I messed around with Autocad, but Mastercam IMHO is light years ahead of that with regards to making WCS. What a PIA it was when I used it to make solids. I could do it, but no where as easy in Mastercam. Like I said I think you make some valid point and I respect them. Let make it better and easier for all I am all for that!!

 

See you around.

[crazy^millman]

quote:

---

and the ONLY way you can rotate an existing WCS.

---

Sorry Leigh but IMHO you are wrong here. It easily done just by activating the WCS and saying Rotate WCS. Very quickly done without using any Geometry.

 

HTH

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

quote:

---

Rotate WCS

---

I could be mistaken, but I remember when I last tried this, it still resulted in a new WCS. I will be sure to check again first thing tomorrow! In any case, the 2-line + Dynamic Xform still handles the task much more efficiently.

[BenK]

Ron,

I was just wondering if it was from talk around here. I didn't think it was anything serious.

[Kyle Waters]

When I started learning the WCS, I had some huge gripes. All the work I do is 3+2 with some simultaneous 4th for fun. For me, when I thought of Mastercam as only a tool for machining, the WCS makes perfect sense. In a machine set-up, you would never eliminate the basic axis combinations, but you can establish new part orientations based on the work you are doing. To me this is what the goal is. But I am not in the same league with many of the guys here that have years of experience with the software, so I may be completely off base.

JM2C

[crazy^millman]

Yeah from talk around here and some ear fulls of talks over the phone and some private emails.

 

All of the dealers I know are good down to earth people and it is cool talking to them and having a good working relationship with them.

[crazy^millman]

Leigh I misunderstood your comment. I was thinking New WCS and not changing an existing WCS. I may have a 100 names in one file so one or two more never bother me. The extra work creating lines is not worth IMHO. Just click on Rotate WCS and done and naming a new one has never bother me, but that is me. Sorry I did not think about what you were saying before I typed my response.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

I think the "extra work" of creating 2 lines (?) is worth not having the aggravation of having those hundreds of WCS in the manager, haha!

[Bruce Caulley]

quote:

---

Mastercam certainly has issues with Multi-axis path and not rotating around a "system" axis.

---

 

I don't think I have ever had any dramas using 5ax on different ops of the same job using WCS.

 

What sort of issues do you mean?

 

Bruce

[Guest]

quote:

---

I don't think I have ever had any dramas using 5ax on different ops of the same job using WCS.

 

What sort of issues do you mean?

---

Bruce,

 

I have long has issues when trying to do any simultaneous rotational cutting paths when they are not rotating about a system axis.

 

If my part comes in in some weird twisted angle, I can easily put a new WCS on it instead of moving the part, but if I have to 4 or 5 axis cut it, I have all kinds of issue with good tool generation. I can move the same part to rotate about the system X axis lets say, change the plane in the tool path and regenerate and get a good path.

 

However, recently with the Advanced 5 axis paths I have been successful on "non" system origins.

[Mike S @ S4A]

OK. I posted this almost EXACTLY a year ago:

 

http://www.emastercam.com/cgi-bin/ultimate...t=033694#000000

 

before anyone gets their panties any more bunched up GO BACK AND READ IT.

 

90% of the conflict in this particular thread is just due to (IMO) xxxx-poor communication -

Dave UCS in autocad is NOT equal to WCS in mastercam. WCS is GLOBAL orientation. Tplane and Cplane are localized user coordinate systems.

and I will IMMEDIATELY acknowledge and apologize for any offense you may take to my rather abrasive tone here. It speaks volumes to the amount of time and energy guys like John and I expend on a daily basis trying to help people understand this system. One can work with or against any system (like, the wind for example )

.....any one care to comment on their success with urinating against a positive air pressure stream?

 

OK rant over

[Mike S @ S4A]

OK rant not over. remember that wonderful paradigm:

 

Those ignorant of history are forever doomed to repeat it

[Dave.L]

Mike,

 

I don't take offense to your opinion or the opinion of others and I only ask the same.

 

My Acad example was to illustrate the ability to manipulate a coordinate system, no more - no less.

 

My issues are with the geometry selection (again this may not be an issue with dynamic WCS) and the in-ability to manipulate an existing WCS. It’s been proven in this tread that rotating an existing WCS is an issue or Tom would have never suggested creating two lines and rotation those lines. So, I think I have made my point. And yes, as others have, I have learned to work with it.

[Hardmill]

quote:

---

It’s been proven in this tread that rotating an existing WCS is an issue or Tom would have never suggested creating two lines and rotation those lines.

---

Ive even said this was my prefered method also (creature of habit).

But where are you having troubles moving or rotating

a WCS ?? It doesnt have to be tied to geometry.

 

Ive just become comfortable doing like that.

 

I guess its time to start using it another way,

I can quit the 2 lines, How about u "G" ??

Shall we jump into the 90's ??

 

 

PEACE

[gcode]

quote:

---

It’s been proven in this tread that rotating an existing WCS is an issue or Tom would have never suggested creating two lines and rotation those lines.

---

its not an "issue" for me.. its just a way of dealing with something that is bothering you.

I personally don't have a problem with "new views"

If I'm going to use one, I rename it to something descriptive, if I don't need them, they get deleted.. what new view???