Solidworks~Mcam

[Toolfab]

Thank you all for your responses. I will keep on trying,

 

[David S]

Solidworks is a very good solid design software. I do not want to talk about its strong parts (sales people did already). It has two weaknesses:

a. Surface modeling and, b. files conversion. That is why we are using Rhino as well.

 

Solidworks + Rhino + MasterCam = Pro-E = Win win.

 

Go, learn Solidworks. You would be glad that you did later.

 

BTW, we do not use Sworks direct. We save Parasolid .X_T file and open it in MasterCam. Why? Don’t know. It is only personal habit. May be we are just tired of waiting for new Solidworks Direct every time we have a new service pack upgrade.

[2 flute]

Our engeering dept just switched to solid works office 2003 and prior to the sp1 for 9.1 I couldnt pull in the sdlprt files that sw created. Now it is awesome and I also like that you can bring the file in as a solid or a surface.

[:: TeCCim ::]

Hey All

 

New user to the forum

just got Solidworks and MasterCam

[Toolfab]

Welcome to the forum TECCIM!

 

Has everyone installed sp1 for V9.1 yet? I have not. ::lazy::

[2 flute]

Once you add sp1 it may solve your parametric problem if having surfaces rather than solids will help you out.

 

[ 07-23-2003, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: 2 flute ]

[Roger Peterson]

One very very big advantage (at this point) to x_t files is assemblies. An assembly saved out as an x_t will have a part on each layer. The other option for bringing in an assembly is to use SolidWorks join feature but then everything is on one level. It's the only way to go if you are doing assemblies or molds.

[Müřlıń®]

quote:

---

Solidworks is a very good solid design software............It has two weaknesses:

a. Surface modeling and, b. files conversion

---

Well that cinches it for me.........Mastercam rulz

 

 

Murlin

[Chris Rizzo]

quote:

---

Simply put, where Mastercam has associative

toolpaths, SolidWorks has associative dimensions....In Mastercam you'd have to go through the whole desgin, moving things by hand.

---

That's what I've seen from SW making it a very valuable tool......unless you like moving a hole or other feature, and having to completly re-draw the dam part!

[M. Anderson]

While a little off the topic of "SolidWorks" - I have been using "SolidEdge", for about 2 years.

 

Then importing a parasolid - *.x_t - file into MC for machining.

 

For me - this is and has been - the absolute best of both worlds!

 

SW and SE are almost the same - both have plug-ins for MC.

 

But I don't use the "SEdirect" plug in - as it creates some problems in my experience. MC will read parasolid data - so it just takes a extra step.

 

NOW, if it brought in a feature tree that would be a VERY different story! (HINT!)

 

Just my .02 cents - less than that now-a-days!

 

Mark

[Müřlıń®]

quote:

---

we use solidworks here and we love it but now the big wigs are looking at a program

---

Why is it that the most important decisions are always made by the least informed people?

And why are these people ALWAYS in charge??

 

LOL

 

Pretty typical......

 

 

quote:

---

That's what I've seen from SW making it a very valuable tool......unless you like moving a hole or other feature, and having to completly re-draw the dam part!

---

I just put all the solids base chains on one level.

 

Its a simple matter of modifying the base chains whenever you want to change something.

Its almost as fast as typing in a dim in a field.

 

On the more complex geometries for example, I have noticed that Pro-E's parametrics will have some wierd results and cause unwanted blends in some areas on the part. In most of these cases you will have to end up and redraw the geometry anyway.

 

 

I'm not putting down SW don't get me wrong. I know alot of people using it

Murlin_*theres always a workaround*