Jump to content

Welcome to eMastercam

Register now to participate in the forums, access the download area, buy Mastercam training materials, post processors and more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Use your display name or email address to sign in:

NCSimul vs Vericut


Metallic
 Share

Recommended Posts

I know this topic has been asked before, but I wanted the 2019 take on the matter. I am in the process of potentially changing verification softwares. Anyone have preferences for either NCSimul or Vericut? I know Vericut v9 is going to be released "soon", but I like the fact that NCSimul is written with OpenGL instead of Java.

 

Does anyone have experience with both and can compare the differences?

 

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just went to french Vericut VUE and I heard that Vericut is not really written in Java but mainly in C. Java would be used for GUI.

I could looked at V9 deeper and graphical improvements are outstanding (sections, appearances, transparency, same quality in machine view and part view, ability to dynamically change view during animation,... ). A cgtech engineer told it's now OpenGL 4.5 vs OpenGL 1 in V8.

Should be released at the end of the year. I can't wait^^   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, David Colin said:

I just went to french Vericut VUE and I heard that Vericut is not really written in Java but mainly in C. Java would be used for GUI.

I could looked at V9 deeper and graphical improvements are outstanding (sections, appearances, transparency, same quality in machine view and part view, ability to dynamically change view during animation,... ). A cgtech engineer told it's now OpenGL 4.5 vs OpenGL 1 in V8.

Should be released at the end of the year. I can't wait^^   

So, it looks like your question has been answered :)

There have been some major improvements in V9, and yes, it is looking good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own a copy of both and both have their plus and minus. Vericut V9 will hopefully bring the Graphics up the level NCSIMUL has been at. Both have their own process for using the interface to import tools into them. Vericut has been adding features to it that NCSIMUL already has, but the biggest feature I like in NCSIMUL you don't have in Vericut is the ability to change NC code in the middle of a Verification and get an instant result. IP files in Vericut can become huge and unstable on very large and complex files. NCSIMUL is now owned by Hexagon Manufacturing Group so they have a Multi-Billion dollar backing where as Vericut is still a privately held company like CNC software is. Both are very good, but neither of them offer posting from Mastercam that I am ware of. I also have a seat of CAMPlete and it doesn't offer the same type of checking that either of these offer, but it is also a good software that has it's place and does what most shops need from it and does psot code from Mastercam and other CAM software. Really going to come down to what you need from it and I have had world class service from 3 of the 4 mentioned above. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2019 at 7:51 PM, 5th Axis CGI said:

I own a copy of both and both have their plus and minus. Vericut V9 will hopefully bring the Graphics up the level NCSIMUL has been at. Both have their own process for using the interface to import tools into them. Vericut has been adding features to it that NCSIMUL already has, but the biggest feature I like in NCSIMUL you don't have in Vericut is the ability to change NC code in the middle of a Verification and get an instant result. IP files in Vericut can become huge and unstable on very large and complex files. NCSIMUL is now owned by Hexagon Manufacturing Group so they have a Multi-Billion dollar backing where as Vericut is still a privately held company like CNC software is. Both are very good, but neither of them offer posting from Mastercam that I am ware of. I also have a seat of CAMPlete and it doesn't offer the same type of checking that either of these offer, but it is also a good software that has it's place and does what most shops need from it and does psot code from Mastercam and other CAM software. Really going to come down to what you need from it and I have had world class service from 3 of the 4 mentioned above. 

I have hosted a VUE and plan to host another, and Vericut v9 was demo'ed to us back in April. Looks like most of the upgrades/updates they are offering is the exact reason why I was considering switching to NCSimul. However, NCSimul in my context is approximately 10 times more expensive, even with a discount. CGTech offers a much more attractive pricing structure for us, including maintenance. CGTech also told users in that VUE that V9 would be released by September, so.....

I think I will wait to see what V9 has to offer before reconsidering the alternatives.

As I primarily use it for simultaneous 5-axis, I am not sold on CAMplete and other softwares that may or may not simulate and emulate machines accurately with the actual g-code. I really don't mind having to post from Mastercam and loading into the verification software. WYSIWYG

 

Thanks all for the input!

 

Edit: As a side note, is there a Mastercam 2020 C-Hook for vericut yet?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Metallic said:

As I primarily use it for simultaneous 5-axis, I am not sold on CAMplete and other softwares that may or may not simulate and emulate machines accurately with the actual g-code. I really don't mind having to post from Mastercam and loading into the verification software. WYSIWYG

 

Thanks all for the input!

 

Edit: As a side note, is there a Mastercam 2020 C-Hook for vericut yet?

 

CAMPlete, has never let me done on any thing I have run through it for the machines I have used it with. 

Yes the 2020 Interface for Vericut is released. Just send support an email and they will send you a download link. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Metallic said:

I have hosted a VUE and plan to host another, and Vericut v9 was demo'ed to us back in April. Looks like most of the upgrades/updates they are offering is the exact reason why I was considering switching to NCSimul. However, NCSimul in my context is approximately 10 times more expensive, even with a discount. CGTech offers a much more attractive pricing structure for us, including maintenance. CGTech also told users in that VUE that V9 would be released by September, so.....

I think I will wait to see what V9 has to offer before reconsidering the alternatives.

As I primarily use it for simultaneous 5-axis, I am not sold on CAMplete and other softwares that may or may not simulate and emulate machines accurately with the actual g-code. I really don't mind having to post from Mastercam and loading into the verification software. WYSIWYG

 

Thanks all for the input!

 

Edit: As a side note, is there a Mastercam 2020 C-Hook for vericut yet?

 

I'm currently beta testing Vericut V9, and all I can say, is that the graphics are definitely improvement. As I type this I am currently running a hefty simulation, and the difference is plain to see.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2019 at 12:21 PM, 5th Axis CGI said:

CAMPlete, has never let me done on any thing I have run through it for the machines I have used it with. 

Yes the 2020 Interface for Vericut is released. Just send support an email and they will send you a download link. 

Same here. Best code I ever got was from Complete. Never let me down.

Also have and use both Vericut and NCSimul. 

Not sure where the earlier comment came from someone's post that NCSimul is a lot more expensive. It's THE opposite.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
4 hours ago, Shiva.aero said:

Hello everyone!

How valid are these discussions at present (2021)?

NCsimul & Camplete offers both Post processor & machine simulation.

Vericut offers only machine simulation but offers Force optimization modules.

So how is the comparison NCsimul vs Vericut vs Camplete now?

I am the OP...I never did switch to NCSimul. There was a commenter asking aobut how I thought that NCSimul was more expensive than Vericut....we are an educational institution and the Vericut edu package was much cheaper than what NC could offer us.

 

Anyways, Vericut is still great. I still like using it and I still trust the output in that I can feel confident my machine won't get damaged if the simulation is good.

 

It would be nice to have a world where the post was linked to the simulation, but as it stands CAMplete is the only one who does it fully integrated. Sounds like Chipmaker says NCsimul does do post work? Would love to hear more about that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The landscape has drastically changed since this conversation. Now CNC software and Vericut are under the same roof so to speak. We really have nothing left at the private level anymore in the world of CAM/CAV from what I can see in the game anymore. Now it will be race to see who can secure their customer bases and the future of development will be minimal moving past this point. Whoever buys Moduleworks wins the Market Share for 5 Axis since all the majors now use it. Buy it start locking out the competitors as all Large Corporations do and become the most power in the world in that arena. It will carry on this way for the next 10-20 years and then people will get tired of it and new startups will reign them back in.

Still feel the same way about the 3 companies that offer CAV with one being my last choice on the list as it was originally listed. Yes I have worked with and used all 4 CAV on the list mentioned.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2021 at 9:23 PM, crazy^millman said:

The landscape has drastically changed since this conversation. Now CNC software and Vericut are under the same roof so to speak. We really have nothing left at the private level anymore in the world of CAM/CAV from what I can see in the game anymore. Now it will be race to see who can secure their customer bases and the future of development will be minimal moving past this point. Whoever buys Moduleworks wins the Market Share for 5 Axis since all the majors now use it. Buy it start locking out the competitors as all Large Corporations do and become the most power in the world in that arena. It will carry on this way for the next 10-20 years and then people will get tired of it and new startups will reign them back in.

Still feel the same way about the 3 companies that offer CAV with one being my last choice on the list as it was originally listed. Yes I have worked with and used all 4 CAV on the list mentioned.

Now with every CAM software offering Machine simulation with accurate collision verification, there is no need of seperate CAV software. As we understand, CAM simulates NCI data and CAV simulates G-code just like controller. But I have not faced any situation, where CAM simulation missed a collision, even in a complicated 5 axis machining with close clearance for collision. May be the post processor became robust over the years and that's why I feel a seperate CAV is no more required.

However, now CAV softwares are moving to next level of toolpath optimization for optimising force, power and tool deflection. This will definitely help especially in hard metal machining. Along with this feature, a tailor made post processor to take advantage all the features of controller like subprograms/macros, tool life mangement, etc., will make the CAV more relevant in today's scenario.

Additional note: It also seems that NCsimul also supports Force optimization, like vericut, as you can see in the following link:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Shiva.aero said:

Now with every CAM software offering Machine simulation with accurate collision verification, there is no need of seperate CAV software. As we understand, CAM simulates NCI data and CAV simulates G-code just like controller. But I have not faced any situation, where CAM simulation missed a collision, even in a complicated 5 axis machining with close clearance for collision. May be the post processor became robust over the years and that's why I feel a seperate CAV is no more required

I couldn’t disagree more. The internal verification has no idea how your post processor is going to interpret the NCI. Then it has no idea how the control will process that code.

If I am programming a 2 million dollar multi-axis machine cutting a 1/2 million dollar Waspaloy forging I want to make sure through proven verification software that my process has been verified with the gcode. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, #Rekd™ said:

I couldn’t disagree more. The internal verification has no idea how your post processor is going to interpret the NCI. Then it has no idea how the control will process that code.

If I am programming a 2 million dollar multi-axis machine cutting a 1/2 million dollar Waspaloy forging I want to make sure through proven verification software that my process has been verified with the gcode. 

I agree. But have you ever found something different on machine/CAV software compared to the simulation in CAM software?

I faced problem only when I do some manual edits for loops/repetitions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quote

If I am programming a 2 million dollar multi-axis machine cutting a 1/2 million dollar Waspaloy forging I want to make sure through proven verification software that my process has been verified with the gcode. 

Na, you're just a wimp. 😆

In all seriousness, I would never work anywhere that was attempting to do challenging work and wasn't using a solid CAV software. Making some aluminum trinkets on a Haas? Sure. Some full 5  with a custom shrink fit extension reaching through a window on a $30K part? Probably not haha. 

Mike

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2021 at 1:33 AM, Shiva.aero said:

But have you ever found something different on machine/CAV software compared to the simulation in CAM software?

Hell yes. The post processor was putting out 5 decimal place code and the control couldn't process this so it made a huge gouge in a part with 40 hours into it. This was on a 3 Axis VMC.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...
On 11/7/2021 at 6:33 PM, Shiva.aero said:

I agree. But have you ever found something different on machine/CAV software compared to the simulation in CAM software?

I faced problem only when I do some manual edits for loops/repetitions.

 

yes, had it yesterday with a 5 axis linking path and the post didn't put out the required G00 in the pre-positoning code. So simulated fine in mastercam and then alarmed at the machine. I had to change my linking strategy while I await a post modification. 

whoops old thread !!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Matthew Hajicek - Singularity said:

Still valuable, thanks for mentioning it.  I'm making this decision now myself.

The difference in cost is about 5X-10X!

My recommendation: try the Post-Integrated Machine Simulation. For the money, you're investment is fairly low, and you can decide if that level of Simulation & Support is enough. The issue will be: if it isn't enough, that could be an expensive lesson, however from what I know about the work you're doing, and the machines you're running, it seems like a worth investment/test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...