Mastercam Simulator vs Vericut

[HMI1953]

The company I work for is looking at investing in Vericut software, what are the pros and cons of using Vericut vs. mastercams built in simulator?

 

[CJep]

The "Free" machine sim in Mcam is preprocessed NCI information.

 

If you go with the Vericut post you will be running G/M code in the Vericut simulation.

[Josh Kinney -Elite Engineering]

We use Machsim for our horizontal and 5axis machines. Works great and has been a huge time saver.

 

If we could afford Vericut we would buy it though...

[Mick]

I've just got back from a week at Vericut in Irvine. I spent some time learning about some of the advanced capabilities of the software. There is a lot it can do, and the support from CGTech is the best I have ever experienced. There is a ton of knowledge there.

 

Dang, I want to head back. Irvine is a nice place, too...

[BenK]

The "Free" machine sim in Mcam is preprocessed NCI information.

 

If you go with the Vericut post you will be running G/M code in the Vericut simulation.

 

They both have their place. Machsim is a great tool when your programming to check your progress as your working. Vericut or any other g-code simulation is the final check when your ready to send the code to the machine. 

[CJep]

They both have their place. Machsim is a great tool when your programming to check your progress as your working. Vericut or any other g-code simulation is the final check when your ready to send the code to the machine. 

 

Ben I'm not arguing that, some folks go barking mad when you tell them that machine sim doesn't use G/M code.

I've used machine sim on a number of occasions to sort out singularity issues.

In the same note folks get a bit freaked out about the cost of Vericut, when that's the argument I ask "How much did you pay for that machine and what's it gonna cost you when it gets crashed?"

[BenK]

CJep, I was just adding to what you had to say. You are spot on with both your posts in my opinion.

[YoDoug®]

I just recently got to use a Mastercam 5X simulation/post combo that had the post tied to the machine sim. When you run the machine sim it actually posts the code first. It was pretty darn accurate if you ask me. I made small post edits to retracts, rotary clearances, etc and it showed up in the simulation. I know it is not all that Vericut can do but for a lot less money it was very impressive. 

[Newbeeee™]

I just recently got to use a Mastercam 5X simulation/post combo that had the post tied to the machine sim. When you run the machine sim it actually posts the code first. It was pretty darn accurate if you ask me. I made small post edits to retracts, rotary clearances, etc and it showed up in the simulation. I know it is not all that Vericut can do but for a lot less money it was very impressive. 

Doug, was this a CNC or Re-seller written combo?

I can see this being very handy for a 4th axis set-up as well.

[?Mark]

Don't even compare those two. Mach sim is quite a bit more then a regular backplot/verification, but nowhere near vericut's capabilities.

On multiaxis machines even placing a part on a "table" is critical. Vericut will tell you really fast if you're out of travel and need to tweak things a little...and that's on top of the "regular" crash warning and simulation duties

[YoDoug®]

Doug, was this a CNC or Re-seller written combo?

I can see this being very handy for a 4th axis set-up as w

 

It was a reseller post from MP postability.

[YoDoug®]

Don't even compare those two. Mach sim is quite a bit more then a regular backplot/verification, but nowhere near vericut's capabilities.

On multiaxis machines even placing a part on a "table" is critical. Vericut will tell you really fast if you're out of travel and need to tweak things a little...and that's on top of the "regular" crash warning and simulation duties

 

The machine sim/post combo I used had you specify where the part is in the machine before you post because of the TCPC calcs in the post. If you put the part in a bad position that runs out of travel you get a warning when running the simulation. I know it's not all that Vericut is but I was very impressed by how much they are accomplishing.

[Mick]

For the OP, some things to consider:

 

As far as I know, Machsim only supports Mills. If you want Mill/Turn or Turning Simulation, your SOL unless you purchase the Mill/Turn addon. Sure, machine simulation for lathe is a low demand requirement, but for Mill/Turns, especially B axis Mill Turns, it is needed.

 

Vericut is more advanced in processing G-code. From the simulation, it can do a cut part/design comparison, create reports, calculate minimum cutter extension, check for collisions, and check for over travel. It can even generate probing routines (with some Vericut post customisation). It is also capable of syntax checking the g-code.

 

In fairness, there can be a lot of work in customising or creating Vericut machine/control models, but they do have a lot of machines already created. And you can have the definitions as simplistic or as complex as you want. And their support is second to none.

 

For us, Vericut reduces prove out times at the machine, it minimises setup times (the minimum cutter lengths are calculated, and the correct holders are proven at the programming stage), and it also allows us to test improved tooling/cut methods offline, without holding up production time at the machine. You can simulate multiple setups in one Vericut session. Eg. Lathe to mill back to Lathe and then back to Mill.

[mikenaturalice]

I just recently got to use a Mastercam 5X simulation/post combo that had the post tied to the machine sim. When you run the machine sim it actually posts the code first. It was pretty darn accurate if you ask me. I made small post edits to retracts, rotary clearances, etc and it showed up in the simulation. I know it is not all that Vericut can do but for a lot less money it was very impressive. 

 

I just noticed that mine too runs the post processor first, at least I get the box in the upper left corner saying "initiate opening post processor files". It does not actually post the gcode, but it has to complete the post processing before the machine sim starts up. Do you think mine is reading the gcode too?

It was a reseller post from MP postability.

 

Same people/company. Is it for a Haas UMC-750 by chance? Mine is a little buggy. I heard via my reseller that the metric version ran fine but the inch version had a few issues.

The machine sim/post combo I used had you specify where the part is in the machine before you post because of the TCPC calcs in the post. If you put the part in a bad position that runs out of travel you get a warning when running the simulation. I know it's not all that Vericut is but I was very impressed by how much they are accomplishing.

I have not tried the translation in x or y on a real part, but I do use the Z translate. I will try putting numbers in x and y and see how that affects the simulation. I can get all of these numbers easy enough by doing the math from the machine absolute coordinates. I know the Z is pretty important, did not think to check x and y (on the machine I mean), but they are close because I have a 3/8 pin on the bottom of my fixture and the table has a 50mm bore at center so I can't be too far off center. I purposely took out my centering plug before I ran the last part to see how the dynamic work offset worked, and to make sure it did indeed work. 

[Bob W.]

Ben I'm not arguing that, some folks go barking mad when you tell them that machine sim doesn't use G/M code.

I've used machine sim on a number of occasions to sort out singularity issues.

In the same note folks get a bit freaked out about the cost of Vericut, when that's the argument I ask "How much did you pay for that machine and what's it gonna cost you when it gets crashed?"

Funny thing about the cost...  we're a four man shop and somehow we could afford it, although it is expensive.  What it allows me to do is fire up the machine on an unproven multi-axis part, go off to bed and let it run all night making $200 per hour and that is a very tangible return on the investment, not to mention the number of times it prevented me from sending bad code to the machine (syntax, over travel, crashes, etc...)  No way would I even consider that without Vericut.  It also allows us to prove out programs 3X as fast.  Check the setup twice, check the tools twice, cycle start, check first move @5% rapid, then 100% rapid and go get a coffee.  It is one of the best and most profitable investments I have made in my shop.

 

I initially bought it for crash prevention but that turned out to be secondary in value to the productivity increase it has given us.  Especially when it comes to running lights out.

[Mick]

That is what I have said all along in regards to Vericut. It isn't just a crash prevention tool, it is a prove out time reduction tool, and ultimately a productivity tool as well.

 

That being said, like any software, it is only as good as the prep work that goes into it, and the support. CGTech support is amongst the best I have ever experienced.

[HMI1953]

how long does setup take? and is it mostly used on multi axis machines?