Mastercam vs nx cam???

[CAMasochism]

huh, didnt know you could do that, neat.
however that wasnt what i was imagining when you said 3d chamfer, what you have pictured is a varying width chamfer on a planar surface, i was thinking more about chamfers going up and down a surface, which you'd have to use a ball mill and scallop toolpath in fusion.

Well, another type of feature that he and I have both fought, just search the NX forums with their NEW AND IMPROVED SEARCH!, with is using a double sided chamfer tool to deburr/chamfer the ID of a pipe. Last time I had to do that it gave me fits. Just trying to get it to properly model the tool is a blood pressure raising endeavor. I've managed to get a workable code once, gave up another time, and used one of the managers personal copy of MasterCam X4 another time.

 

[Marvel]

huh, didnt know you could do that, neat.
however that wasnt what i was imagining when you said 3d chamfer, what you have pictured is a varying width chamfer on a planar surface, i was thinking more about chamfers going up and down a surface, which you'd have to use a ball mill and scallop toolpath in fusion.

I saw the varying width chamfer too and had to take a double look, but I think Fusion has the same tool path option CAMWorks has, the ability to have a countersink tool follow a curved path to chamfer the edge of a curved profile. Like pictured.

 

[thesidetalker]

Cool. That's nice to have that ability built-in as a feature you can properly specify the distance (and cutter comp?). No 'hacks' or 'cheats' needed. and back chamfer too?

Probably not as elegant, but you can do those with the moduleworks toolpaths too.

Using along curve and one pass, if you specify a negative axial shift (which would gouge the surface), but apply gouge checking you can shift the tool to the side to accomplish this. Both 3 and 4/5 axis. Does take a little fiddling around to get the #'s right sometimes.

 

[empower]

I saw the varying width chamfer too and had to take a double look, but I think Fusion has the same tool path option CAMWorks has, the ability to have a countersink tool follow a curved path to chamfer the edge of a curved profile. Like pictured.


View attachment 348379View attachment 348380

wouldnt that toolpath with a chamfer tool gouge the model going up a slope like that?

 

[Marvel]

Cool. That's nice to have that ability built-in as a feature you can properly specify the distance (and cutter comp?). No 'hacks' or 'cheats' needed. and back chamfer too?

Probably not as elegant, but you can do those with the moduleworks toolpaths too.

Using along curve and one pass, if you specify a negative axial shift (which would gouge the surface), but apply gouge checking you can shift the tool to the side to accomplish this. Both 3 and 4/5 axis. Does take a little fiddling around to get the #'s right sometimes.

It is a nice feature to have, I've never tried it with a back chamfer, I've always used a undercut operation. That's how I used to do it with the Curve operation with a negative shift, but about 3 years ago they added the Edge Break default operation to the Curve selections.

I have two options, one is just an Edge Break for edges that don't have chamfers modeled in and than I added a default Strategy for edges that already have the chamfer modeled into the part so it can configure the correct settings for either automatically.

It also recognizes if there is a vertical wall (material) and will adjust the lead in to a perpendicular lead in and move itself over so it doesn't gouge the vertical wall feature but chamfer as much of the edge as it can.

 

[Areo Defense]

A qualified "yes". Typically a model starts in Synch where you make direct edits to faces without any history. It IS still parametric, however, and can be controlled by explicit rules and dimensions. The concept is simple but very deep. Synchronous Technology At any point you can jump to Ordered mode and add history based features; usually detailing work like fillets and corner reliefs in sheet metal. You can go back to Synch and it will show the Ordered features in a ghosted display. It's difficult to explain, but a few google searches for "Synchronous and Ordered modelling" should help.

In NX, Synchonous modeling are features in the modeling tree and can be edited/re-ordered/deleted just like any other feature. That being said there are typical dependencies that exist between features to keep in mind.

 

[Areo Defense]

Trace toolpath in Fusion recognizes you are using a chamfer mill on the 3d profile, and gives you an option to offset the tip in Z and increase/decrease the effective size of the chamfer (by compensating radially). It even recognizes flat tips on the good chamfer mills and works as you would expect.

In NX, I can do a Solid Profile or 3D Profile, but it is dumb- I need to manually input offsets and twiddle with them. To do a proper 3D chamfer, you need to create a Composit curve, 3D offset it to compensate for the tip, then shift that curve in Z, then drive the tool path with that. Total nightmare.

NX also sucks at form tools, and apparently in the 9727 years NX has been around, nobody using it has ever had to use a radius mill on an edge? Because NX has no specific tools for a Radius mill - you need to go through the most atrocious form tool creation process in the history of computing.

I give the NX people shit all the time, including a couple of Zoom meetings where I screen share Fusion and ask them why their software that costs as much as a certified pre owned BMW 5 series gets it's ass beat in a lot of 3 axis stuff by Fusion. To their credit, they take it in a very good natured manner and if you look at their roadmap, everything I cunt at them about is getting fixed sooner or later (tool library, 3d chamfering, form tools, radius tools... all have massive improvements inbound).

Solid Profile or 3D Profile? Hmm, I would not think either of those two op's would be suited for a varying chamfer. If the top is flat you could use Z-level Profile path no problem, even a 2D Planar path would do it. If the top were 3D as well, you could use a Fixed Contour path w/boundary, no problem.

 

[Marvel]

wouldnt that toolpath with a chamfer tool gouge the model going up a slope like that?

Depending on the slope or angle and which edge you grab, top or bottom, it does slightly over or undercut, you can see it in the picture, the top line was grabbed for the curve. So I typically try and grab the top line, I'm sure if you were to throw it in a optical comparator you would see a slight measurement difference. I don't know that I've ever had a part that calls out a "tight tolerance" chamfer along a curved surface that it would make a difference on though.

 

[Areo Defense]

Also to add...

NX 3D paths are spectacular but their prismatic paths are just as powerful. Out of the box, you really need to do some sort of basic customization to use it decently and if you spend some time on your customizations you can fly through your programming with ease. I wish I could sit down with you and show you how I use it.

NX's cam and cad are very powerful indeed but you do have to pay to play as others have said. If you need only cam, I would look into just NX cam. Not sure exactly but NX cad may double or almost double the entry point.

NX's tool path containment/extension is super easy and powerful. I rarely need to create geometry to get a desired tool path result. If you want to use Boundaries you can select face edges or simply pick on the screen; no extra geometry required. When you want cutter tangency on a face, it does it. When you want tool path extensions, it does it. When you want tool roll over, it does it. When you want tool roll over and specify the angle of roll over, it does it.

There is so much discuss in this thread, we could easily write a research paper about it lol.

 

[Marvel]

Also to add...

NX 3D paths are spectacular but their prismatic paths are just as powerful. Out of the box, you really need to do some sort of basic customization to use it decently and if you spend some time on your customizations you can fly through your programming with ease. I wish I could sit down with you and show you how I use it.

NX's cam and cad are very powerful indeed but you do have to pay to play as others have said. If you need only cam, I would look into just NX cam. Not sure exactly but NX cad may double or almost double the entry point.

NX's tool path containment/extension is super easy and powerful. I rarely need to create geometry to get a desired tool path result. If you want to use Boundaries you can select face edges or simply pick on the screen; no extra geometry required. When you want cutter tangency on a face, it does it. When you want tool path extensions, it does it. When you want tool roll over, it does it. When you want tool roll over and specify the angle of roll over, it does it.

There is so much discuss in this thread, we could easily write a research paper about it lol.

Not to try and say NX isn't great cause it is, it has a lot of great features that outshine other CAM software, but most of what you stated is basic ModuleWorks toolpaths options that a majority of CAM software has for options, some are just terribly implemented.

I can do all that in CAMWorks. I can trim/extend and control how the links between cuts are done, vertically, tangent, radius, parallel etc. I can select a face for an avoid/contain boundary and if need be I can "extend" them faces to be slightly larger or smaller. Gouge check options for holder, tool shank, non cutting portion of the tool, the flute with multiple selection options for faces and other features of a part all without ever creating geometry.

 

[GiroDyno]

A little feature I remember from NX that I still miss 7 years later was that it required fewer keystrokes to do the same work.
I remember there were repeat last command, apply and accept shortcuts (maybe it was middle mouse button which is way better than a hotkey, IMO that counts as like 1/4 keystroke) which were real time savers in modeling, a bit less noticeable but still useful in CAM.
Switching to Fusion I hated having to accept, right click, repeat last command if I needed to add something like multiple sized fillets to different features.
In NX the process was command, pick geometry, set dimension, apply, new geometry, new dimension, accept.
In Fusion its command, pick geometry, set dimension, accept, right-click, repeat last command, new geometry, new dimension, accept. Doesn't seem like much but when you know it doesn't have to be that way you miss it.
We just bought a few new seats of MasterCAM 2022 for millturn that I was asked to get trained on... I feel like I might as well be using an abacus and slide-rule . (No offense to old-school engineers who designed a lot of complicated and awesome things using slide-rules!)

 

[Areo Defense]

Not to try and say NX isn't great cause it is, it has a lot of great features that outshine other CAM software, but most of what you stated is basic ModuleWorks toolpaths options that a majority of CAM software has for options, some are just terribly implemented.

I can do all that in CAMWorks. I can trim/extend and control how the links between cuts are done, vertically, tangent, radius, parallel etc. I can select a face for an avoid/contain boundary and if need be I can "extend" them faces to be slightly larger or smaller. Gouge check options for holder, tool shank, non cutting portion of the tool, the flute with multiple selection options for faces and other features of a part all without ever creating geometry.

Exactly. I hear ModuleWorks tossed around this forum frequently, usually for the purpose of a cam software to ride the reputation of software that is of a higher tier. The reality of real world implementation is much different, though. The ModuleWorks cam connection is as pointless as comparing various cad software who all use the ACIS modeling kernel or Parasolid kernel. Pure functionality is the key differentiating characteristic.

 

[Areo Defense]

A little feature I remember from NX that I still miss 7 years later was that it required fewer keystrokes to do the same work.
I remember there were repeat last command, apply and accept shortcuts (maybe it was middle mouse button which is way better than a hotkey, IMO that counts as like 1/4 keystroke) which were real time savers in modeling, a bit less noticeable but still useful in CAM.
Switching to Fusion I hated having to accept, right click, repeat last command if I needed to add something like multiple sized fillets to different features.
In NX the process was command, pick geometry, set dimension, apply, new geometry, new dimension, accept.
In Fusion its command, pick geometry, set dimension, accept, right-click, repeat last command, new geometry, new dimension, accept. Doesn't seem like much but when you know it doesn't have to be that way you miss it.
We just bought a few new seats of MasterCAM 2022 for millturn that I was asked to get trained on... I feel like I might as well be using an abacus and slide-rule . (No offense to old-school engineers who designed a lot of complicated and awesome things using slide-rules!)

I hear you, brother. In MC I have to create soooo many coordinate systems in a 5-axis part whereas NX has a simply vector choice in each operation. It's numerous simple things as that, that can add up to huge differences between cam software. Not to mention the numerous very big differences as well, lol.

 

[Marvel]

Exactly. I hear ModuleWorks tossed around this forum frequently, usually for the purpose of a cam software to ride the reputation of software that is of a higher tier. The reality of real world implementation is much different, though. The ModuleWorks cam connection is as pointless as comparing various cad software who all use the ACIS modeling kernel or Parasolid kernel. Pure functionality is the key differentiating characteristic.

That's what I was saying. They can all get the same toolpaths from ModuleWorks but if CAM " " doesn't add in say an option to trim/extend a tool path surface and you have to go in and create a surface extend and reselect the geometry, that's bad implementation missing a valuable function. From my experience NX has been able to "better" the tool path manipulation options that help the programmer be more efficient in real world programming.

I hear you, brother. In MC I have to create soooo many coordinate systems in a 5-axis part whereas NX has a simply vector choice in each operation. It's numerous simple things as that, that can add up to huge differences between cam software. Not to mention the numerous very big differences as well, lol.

This is one example that a CAM system does something better to help the programmer be more efficient, I can do the same in CAMWorks. I can set up, in CAMWorks, its called a Fixture Coordinate System, its essentially a "Global WC" for all set ups to follow, it makes it easier when programming a 4/5 axis program to have one WCS all set ups references back to. I can also break that WC within any individual set up if needed and select a different entity.

 

[Marvel]

A little feature I remember from NX that I still miss 7 years later was that it required fewer keystrokes to do the same work.
I remember there were repeat last command, apply and accept shortcuts (maybe it was middle mouse button which is way better than a hotkey, IMO that counts as like 1/4 keystroke) which were real time savers in modeling, a bit less noticeable but still useful in CAM.
Switching to Fusion I hated having to accept, right click, repeat last command if I needed to add something like multiple sized fillets to different features.
In NX the process was command, pick geometry, set dimension, apply, new geometry, new dimension, accept.
In Fusion its command, pick geometry, set dimension, accept, right-click, repeat last command, new geometry, new dimension, accept. Doesn't seem like much but when you know it doesn't have to be that way you miss it.
We just bought a few new seats of MasterCAM 2022 for millturn that I was asked to get trained on... I feel like I might as well be using an abacus and slide-rule . (No offense to old-school engineers who designed a lot of complicated and awesome things using slide-rules!)

Doesn't MasterCAM do something like this when creating geometry? It's been years since I've used it but I recall creating tool paths and every new tool path would follow the previous tool paths settings automatically. It may have just been something in the settings where I was at, or probably lack of experience, but I remember it would drive me nuts. I felt like it forced me to have to change every single setting.

In CAMWorks I have a drop down to save default settings for any type of operation. Image attached, I do so many variations of this particular part but everyone has this same wrapped slot feature, I created a default so after I select the geometry I just grab the default setting and it automatically throws in the correct tool and every parameter.

 

[GiroDyno]

MasterCAM will retain a lot of information from the last operation (such as chains) but to even get to the point of selecting chains feels like it takes half a dozen more mouse "events" than necessary.
In NX you could accomplish a surprising amount of work using the 3 mousse buttons without ever even having to move the cursor. Couple that with the programmable buttons on a spacemouse and you can accomplish practically everything without your hands ever leaving the mice or the cursor ever crossing the screen. Again these are small things but they can really add up. I had shoulder surgery recently and with an arm in a sling I had very limited mobility, in circumstances like that you really need to make every motion count.

On that note... I wish the spacemouse didn't have labels on the buttons, I like to reconfigure them but my brain has a hard time seeing ESC but commanding CTRL. Even with a finger over the button I know its there.

 

[Marvel]

MasterCAM will retain a lot of information from the last operation (such as chains) but to even get to the point of selecting chains feels like it takes half a dozen more mouse "events" than necessary.
In NX you could accomplish a surprising amount of work using the 3 mousse buttons without ever even having to move the cursor. Couple that with the programmable buttons on a spacemouse and you can accomplish practically everything without your hands ever leaving the mice or the cursor ever crossing the screen. Again these are small things but they can really add up. I had shoulder surgery recently and with an arm in a sling I had very limited mobility, in circumstances like that you really need to make every motion count.

On that note... I wish the spacemouse didn't have labels on the buttons, I like to reconfigure them but my brain has a hard time seeing ESC but commanding CTRL. Even with a finger over the button I know its there.

I have the 3Dconnexion CadMouse with the true 3rd button, it took some time getting used to but now its so nice, like you said, not having to move the cursor across the screen as much to make selections, it works great in CAMWorks. I also have the 3Dconnexion Keyboard with Numpad you can move to the left or right, I have it on the left, that was another one that was hard to get used to, even though I still use my left hand, but having it straight on improving my posture, it was like my fingers couldn't process it right for a couple weeks.

 

[Mtndew]

MasterCAM will retain a lot of information from the last operation (such as chains) but to even get to the point of selecting chains feels like it takes half a dozen more mouse "events" than necessary.

Got an example?
Selecting geometry in Mastercam is usually the first thing that pops up for most toolpaths. And literally is the 1st thing for most if not all 2D/3D paths that pops up. For multiaxis toolpaths it opens up to the main tool page and all you have to do is click the page where you pick your chains.

I can't compare to NX because I've never used it. I'm sure it's great but I feel people are exaggerating a tad bit when expressing their disdain for Mastercam.

 

[empower]

Got an example?
Selecting geometry in Mastercam is usually the first thing that pops up for most toolpaths. And literally is the 1st thing for most if not all 2D/3D paths that pops up. For multiaxis toolpaths it opens up to the main tool page and all you have to do is click the page where you pick your chains.

I can't compare to NX because I've never used it. I'm sure it's great but I feel people are exaggerating a tad bit when expressing their disdain for Mastercam.

NX brings up the toolpath menu first, from which you select geometry etc.

me personally, i'm not exaggerating a bit in how much i hate mastercam, as well as hypermill and similar CAM programs that dont have parametric modeling/sketching. they can all lick my balls!

 

[Mtndew]

me personally, i'm not exaggerating a bit in how much i hate mastercam, as well as hypermill and similar CAM programs that dont have parametric modeling/sketching. they can all lick my balls!

I meant exaggerating as to WHY they hate Mastercam. Not everyone is going to like the same thing, that's a given. I don't like Apple products, and yet they are extremely popular.