Do many companies rely solely on 3D models direct to CAM and NOT use drawings?? - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,091
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    462
    Likes (Received)
    1146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Ohh, wait ... ISO now has fits and limits designated not by color, rather a simple letter to do the same!
    Us young dumb kids never really learned how letters work, and this method reminds me of coloring books.

    Or, you know, we're dealing with parts so queer with spline driven curves and features that mucking up a drawing with more fucking labels than a school girl's notebook becomes unintelligible, and shooting me a solid model with everything I need to know easily embedded in the faces of that model (and across any CAD/CAM system) is crazy efficient?

  2. Likes Pattnmaker liked this post
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    7,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    234
    Likes (Received)
    1484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    never really learned how letters work, and this method reminds me of coloring books.
    Exactly!
    (or did I miss your entire point???)

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Jupiter, Florida
    Posts
    229
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    72
    Likes (Received)
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug View Post
    My customers were the only people who sent me money, I figured I'd work with them however they wanted.
    That should end the discussion. Lol. Nice.

  5. Likes conceptdevelopers liked this post
  6. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Williamsville, NY
    Posts
    577
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    6
    Likes (Received)
    8

    Default

    Does anyone have any idea how many companies are building complex products using at least ten or twelve sub assemblies and literally dozens if not a couple hundred parts? I am told I am out of date to request drawings to check. What percentage of companies actually do this going 100% without any 2D drawings?

  7. #25
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    162
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    99
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    Doing medical devices here. Every part absolutely must have a revision controlled print. Multiple signatures are required to ratify a print change and it all has to be logged in the system. For medical doing anything less is against the law and would be an existential risk for the company.

    Edit:
    For any shop the print is the contract. If a part meets the print it's good and must be paid for. Without a print how are you to know for sure what constitutes a good part?

  8. Likes Philabuster, Oldwrench, Chris59 liked this post
  9. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    Does anyone have any idea how many companies are building complex products using at least ten or twelve sub assemblies and literally dozens if not a couple hundred parts? I am told I am out of date to request drawings to check. What percentage of companies actually do this going 100% without any 2D drawings?
    We deal with a whole bunch of Companies that either supply us without drawing or Reduced Dimension Drawings (RDR). We can run either way.

    The ideal is RDR where they id Attributes, Material, Finishes, Tolerance and Critical to Function (CTF) Dimensions. This way our engineers can add only the required info for the Shop to make it after they have programmed it. Drawings are more clear, reduces FIAR if required and we can add "hold" dimensions for operations further down stream like weldments or mechanical assembly.

    Our biggest issue is the Designer at our Customer lacks the experience and designs things without clearance for tooling, improper weld construction and so on. But with a SW model we can correct all of that and shoot to Model back to them with the updates for approval. And next time we run the same part with a Revision Change all those updates are captured.

    I have been doing "Drawingless" Model Fabrication for 30 years with 1 customer. Back when they were using AutoCAD and would scale parts and we would build them at 1/4, 1/2...whatever the model showed. Without print how would you know. That didn't happen too many time after the first time. Suppressed Perf Patterns continue to catch us once and awhile.

  10. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    erie,pa
    Posts
    7,998
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    14745
    Likes (Received)
    3773

    Default

    As of late I have been making templates for welding little clips and things on big sheets.

    SOP what I have been doing, the 5'x10' sheet get's laser or waterjet cut with hundereds of little bracket outlines
    and such.

    Of course I send the vendor the .dxf file.

    I simply throw the image on a drawing form, give it a number,
    and dimension the overall sheet size, list a thickness & material.

    I don't waste time dimensioning each and every little cut-out.

    This is very low tech, I know the tolerances involved (very low,
    probably 1/8") and the laser/waterjet will easily make a good
    template, as it's done in "one setting" of the sheet.

    But it's about the only time I do it this way, 90% it is a fully
    GD&T drawing.

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    2,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    937
    Likes (Received)
    855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    Without a print how are you to know for sure what constitutes a good part?
    Like I said previously,

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Everything that can be put on a drawing can also be put on a model

  12. #29
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    162
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    99
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    Like I said previously,
    If relying on that though, you need to pay extra for your supplier to have compatible software that can read all those attributes. Typical job shop software like Mastercam will not. You also need to pay extra for someone to pour over the model and extract all of that information into a man readable format. Someone has to do the work, whether the customer or the supplier, and it will be paid for somewhere along the line. You will also get more mistakes due to the manufacturing engineer, programmer, operator, and inspection simply not noticing a tolerance or other requirement in the model that would be plain as day on a drawing. Also, are your models strictly revision controlled, or can someone just make a quick change and resave it as the same revision? You'll get parts made to the "old version" of a revision. I've seen this happen all too often.

  13. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Whitehall, MI
    Posts
    474
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    103
    Likes (Received)
    115

    Default

    I always like having a print. Going over to the computer to get a dimesnion constantly is kind of annoying to me. I like to have a piece of paper with the pertinent sizes and tolerances for easy reference while working at the machine.

    I have done a decent amount of work for companies that only like to send solid models. I use Mastercam, and it has a "layout" function, to take a solid model and layout the views as needed for a print. So I just make my own print for parts. One shop we had a customer that only sent models, so we just added a charge to make a print. Especially because at that time the shops inspection dept didn't really have a way to use models, so they needed prints anyways. I find that taking the time to make prints saves a lot of time and questions as the parts go thru their various courses.

    Most commonly get print and model. Print has sizes and GD&T info. Notes that model +/- whatever from the model applies to all non dimesnioned surfaces. Step one of a job is always verify every dimension on a print to the model before you do anything else. Having to adjust the model for unilateral tolerances on a print is one common thing that needs to be done, so the programming for everything is in the middle of the tolerance zone.

    It was kind of funny, but kind of annoying, another shop I worked in before, a number of customers would send these nice prints, but you couldn't get a model. But looking at the print, it sure looked like it was made fom a model. I think their thinking was they only maintained the prints and not the models, so they didn't want to send models. I would remake the model fom the print. Which I thought was worth the time. Programming from a solid model is so much easier and more accurate/able to be verified in the cam.

    I think manufacturing should be provided with prints and models. Some things are much easier to convey in a digital model, and some things are much easier to communicate with a print. So a combination for whatever the individual sitution is, is going to work best.

  14. Likes mhajicek, Chris59 liked this post
  15. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Williamsville, NY
    Posts
    577
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    6
    Likes (Received)
    8

    Default

    I think what really turned me off is a company we are dealing with that claims they use NO drawings. I have a hard time believing it. I KNOW from experience it can be faster to make a part from a model...but what about tolerances, exactly? And if somebody has to take the time to go looking for them in the model wouldn't it make sense to have those tolerances expressed in a 2d document that is easy to read and clear with graphics....oh, gee, that would be a DRAWING, wouldn't it?

  16. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    2,645
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    937
    Likes (Received)
    855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    If relying on that though, you need to pay extra for your supplier to have compatible software that can read all those attributes. Typical job shop software like Mastercam will not.
    It's WIP perhaps, but all major cam softwares are on board with this. I'm not a MC user but I believe it can import and display PMI data to some degree in recent releases.

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    You also need to pay extra for someone to pour over the model and extract all of that information into a man readable format
    PMI/MBD is man readable. It's displayed right there on the model, just like on a drawing. No extraction required.

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    You will also get more mistakes due to the manufacturing engineer, programmer, operator, and inspection simply not noticing a tolerance or other requirement in the model that would be plain as day on a drawing
    How? The information is shown exactly like it is on a drawing.

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    Also, are your models strictly revision controlled, or can someone just make a quick change and resave it as the same revision? You'll get parts made to the "old version" of a revision.
    Exactly the same thing can happen just as easily with prints. Zero distinction there.

  17. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    New York
    Posts
    7,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2061

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    It's WIP perhaps, but all major cam softwares are on board with this. I'm not a MC user but I believe it can import and display PMI data to some degree in recent releases.



    PMI/MBD is man readable. It's displayed right there on the model, just like on a drawing. No extraction required.



    How? The information is shown exactly like it is on a drawing.



    Exactly the same thing can happen just as easily with prints. Zero distinction there.
    .
    drawing is more simple and fool proof for us simple folk who read drawing and GD&T tolerances. most CAD software can create drawing from 3D model in 5 seconds and you just pick spots to pull dimensions adding the tolerance data
    .
    sure CAD software can do a lot and i have seen a lot of metadata not filled out so CAD data was suspect and full of hard to detect error. i have seen CAD software so expensive and hard to learn literally nobody was doing it 100% correct.

  18. #34
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    162
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    99
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gregormarwick View Post
    It's WIP perhaps, but all major cam softwares are on board with this. I'm not a MC user but I believe it can import and display PMI data to some degree in recent releases.



    PMI/MBD is man readable. It's displayed right there on the model, just like on a drawing. No extraction required.



    How? The information is shown exactly like it is on a drawing.



    Exactly the same thing can happen just as easily with prints. Zero distinction there.
    These are only true IF:

    1. The CAM software has completely implemented this in a guaranteed bug free way with guaranteed zero file format translation issues. They still don't meet this level with "dumb" solid models.

    2. Everyone who touches the project, from quoting to inspection, has a workstation with the appropriate software handy at all times.

    3. The model file is handled with strict PDM procedures.

    These conditions all cost money. Yes, please give me a solid model of the part, but there MUST be a print with the inspection dimensions, material and heat treating callouts, and other mandatory criteria. I will not be buying CADCAM workstations for everyone the print needs to go past, nor do I want one in front of every machine getting caked in oil mist and metal dust. The print goes in the job packet with the traveler and goes with the parts from stock cutting through inspection and shipping and can be quickly and easily referenced by anyone along the way.

  19. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, England
    Posts
    317
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    And if somebody has to take the time to go looking for them in the model wouldn't it make sense to have those tolerances expressed in a 2d document that is easy to read and clear with graphics....oh, gee, that would be a DRAWING, wouldn't it?
    What package are they using and how do you view their solid models?
    There are packages out there which support dimensions with tolerances in their own file format but do not export them with the solid model if someone requests it in a non-native format.

  20. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    362
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    381
    Likes (Received)
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    Does anyone have any idea how many companies are building complex products using at least ten or twelve sub assemblies and literally dozens if not a couple hundred parts? I am told I am out of date to request drawings to check. What percentage of companies actually do this going 100% without any 2D drawings?
    We run off of strictly 3D models with annotations sent with the file marking critical regions / dimensions beyond our typical color coding guide. I started at the company about 5 months ago and they did not mention at all that they run strictly off 3D models and I didn't find out until the first day on the job. I was furious at the time and I didn't even consider it a possibility. Now that I've dealt with the system long enough I'd say its great, but only for a company where everyone is on the same page and understands what each parts functionality is. I don't really see how a typical job shop could work off just 3d models without having to stop to contact customers for questions.

  21. Likes Chris59 liked this post
  22. #37
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Near Seattle, WA
    Posts
    983
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    237
    Likes (Received)
    793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    One of the smartest things I've seen was a local (large scale) knife company who's internal CAD drawings for tools were color coded by operation and standard tolerance. Red surfaces were to be ground, yellow on the wire EDM, blue holes were bored to 0.0002" or something, green holes were tapped, dark green were tapped to a tighter tolerance, purple was hard milled, etc etc.

    I would love to find a document that outlines some ideas of how to implement such a system.
    sounds great, except i'm color blind..

  23. #38
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Paradise, Ca
    Posts
    1,947
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    525
    Likes (Received)
    904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rlockwood View Post
    sounds great, except i'm color blind..
    Machinists account for 0.12% of the US population. Color blind males account for about 8%. So statistically, you represent roughly .0096% of machinists in the US. That's you and 37 other dudes in the entire country that couldn't work there. I'm betting they are ok with those odds.

  24. #39
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Near Seattle, WA
    Posts
    983
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    237
    Likes (Received)
    793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
    Machinists account for 0.12% of the US population. Color blind males account for about 8%. So statistically, you represent roughly .0096% of machinists in the US. That's you and 37 other dudes in the entire country that couldn't work there. I'm betting they are ok with those odds.
    If there are roughly 400,000 machinists in the US, and 8% of them are colorblind, what % of bad at math are you?

  25. Likes Gujustud liked this post
  26. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2804
    Likes (Received)
    1991

    Default

    I prefer a .PDF print AND a solid model that is modeled to the MEAN of all dimensions for programming purposes.
    There is only 1 customer that regularly gives us a model that is drawn at the mean and it's awesome.
    The other 50 customers either give us a shitty .dwg or no cad file at all and I have to draw myself (even if it was drawn in solidworks the week before).


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •