Holes in parasolid solids

[MrFish]

Does anyone have any tricks for getting clean hole free solids into MC.

 

Often when we bring in .xt parasolid files we find small holes in the surfaces and breaks in the edge curves. This is only on free formed surfaces in moulds generally and most often come from solidworks cad package.

Is there any thing we can do at our end to minimize this  as it can cause a real head ache when programming mould cavities and cores. 

 

 

 

[#Rekd™]

A lot of people are using SpaceClaim to repair their solid models.

[Guest]

It sounds to me like you're getting parasolids that have been output as an iges first and then saved as a parasolid.

 

typically, parasolids don't have the issues that you're describing

[absolute technologies]

We've always had the best results with a .stp file coming from the native CAD system

 

Len Dye

[Guest]

stp files are good but if you're using a Parasolid based system to design and then import into Mastercam, the best translation is parasolid

[CJep]

I have seen that with ProE files that were heavily manipulated, we used SWorks to repair the missing faces then brought them into Mcam as native SWorks.

[#Rekd™]

We've always had the best results with a .stp file coming from the native CAD system

 

Len Dye

Same here.

 

JP are there any issues with the new versions of Solid Works using the Catia solids Kernel?

[Guest]

Same here.

 

JP are there any issues with the new versions of Solid Works using the Catia solids Kernel?

 

Latest version, I don;t know

 

I am not as involved in testing things as I used to be

[crazy^millman]

Does anyone have any tricks for getting clean hole free solids into MC.

 

Often when we bring in .xt parasolid files we find small holes in the surfaces and breaks in the edge curves. This is only on free formed surfaces in moulds generally and most often come from solidworks cad package.

Is there any thing we can do at our end to minimize this  as it can cause a real head ache when programming mould cavities and cores. 

 

Have you tried getting the native and see if you can read the file with the history tree and then turn off the parts of the model you don't need? The new Mastercam solids stuff if pretty amazing. Sometimes you just have to old school it. Make a surface from the mold then use hole axis to make circle you Boolean add. Then trim the solid back to the surface and now you have a perfect solid like you need.

 

 

We've always had the best results with a .stp file coming from the native CAD system

 

Len Dye

 

NX stp files are the worst to work with in my experience. They do a better job outputting parasolid. Same goes for Solidworks as it is also a Parasolid Kernel based modeling software. Catia and Pro-eE I agree stp is the best format from those. Sorry I know you have tons of experience, but this has been what I have seen for years and still today. Just got a NX10 stp file I couldn't even with Spaceclaim or Solidworks. Once it was saved as an x_t I could read it with no problem.

[#Rekd™]

Ron within NX10 there are two separate options for the type of step file, Step 203 and Step 214. I wonder if that makes a difference in the results?

 

Good to know that the X_T file was a better translation for futures!! Thanks!

[BenK]

Ron within NX10 there are two separate options for the type of step file, Step 203 and Step 214. I wonder if that makes a difference in the results?

 

Good to know that the X_T file was a better translation for futures!! Thanks!

 

Honestly if your going from NX to Mastercam I would use parasolid. That way you are keeping the overall file format/modeling kernel the same. With Step NX would have to convert it to Step at export than Mastercam converts it back on import. The more converting you do the more you're asking for trouble. 

 

I didn't hear Solidworks was switching away from parasolid in the new version. I might have to look into that.

[absolute technologies]

 

NX stp files are the worst to work with in my experience. They do a better job outputting parasolid. Same goes for Solidworks as it is also a Parasolid Kernel based modeling software. Catia and Pro-eE I agree stp is the best format from those. Sorry I know you have tons of experience, but this has been what I have seen for years and still today. Just got a NX10 stp file I couldn't even with Spaceclaim or Solidworks. Once it was saved as an x_t I could read it with no problem.

Ron

this would explain why we don't have much problem with importing .stp files, most our customers are on Catia. Internally our engineering dept makes TPS sketch sheets for each operation in Solidworks. I have them manipulate models for me all the time. Would it be best to get the Solidworks for MCX extension? or should I be importing Parasolids from Solidworks would suffice??

 

Thnaks!

Len Dye

[crazy^millman]

Ron

this would explain why we don't have much problem with importing .stp files, most our customers are on Catia. Internally our engineering dept makes TPS sketch sheets for each operation in Solidworks. I have them manipulate models for me all the time. Would it be best to get the Solidworks for MCX extension? or should I be importing Parasolids from Solidworks would suffice??

 

Thnaks!

Len Dye

 

Mastercam can read Solidworks files with nothing extra right now and I don't think you need to have Solidworks installed on the same system, but someone else will have to confirm that. Parasolid from Solidworks has been what I have pretty used since every using Mastercam.

[MrFish]

Thanks for all the suggestions. A number of things to try.

[Pete Rimkus from CNC Software Inc.]

MrFish,

I'm getting in here a little late but would it be possible for you to send me (pete,[email protected]) one or two of the .X_T files that are giving you problems when opened in Mastercam?

Since the import process is pretty straightforward (we're a Parasolid kernel modeler, they're a Parasolid kernel modeler...no messy conversions) I'm curious to find out what's going on.

Thanks.

[Pete Rimkus from CNC Software Inc.]

I got the files and have been spending sometime looking at them.

I'm going to have to run them by a couple people here and after I do I'll probably have to log it here for further investigation.

I'll post the defect/request number on this thread when its been logged so that you could potentially asked about it later.

Thanks for sending it in ...