Nx + Hypermill or only Nx

[Al_Ma]

Hi, I’m Alex and a technical manager in a mold company.
At the moment we are using Cimatron for cad and cam, but we are thinking to buy a new program to have a high performance.
We are considering to choose between Nx cad Mach 3 whit Nx cam 5axis or NX cad Mach 3 whit Hypermill full 5 axis whit VMC.
I think Hypermill is better than Nx Cam but I’m going to lose integration cad/cam.
And you, what do you think about?
Thanks

 

[Areo Defense]

NX is considered top tier for cad and cam , not to mention seamlessly and completely integrated.

Hyper is none of the above.

 

[empower]

Hi, I’m Alex and a technical manager in a mold company.
At the moment we are using Cimatron for cad and cam, but we are thinking to buy a new program to have a high performance.
We are considering to choose between Nx cad Mach 3 whit Nx cam 5axis or NX cad Mach 3 whit Hypermill full 5 axis whit VMC.
I think Hypermill is better than Nx Cam but I’m going to lose integration cad/cam.
And you, what do you think about?
Thanks

hypermill is a step down from NX, zero reason to get both. NX will do everything you want it to, and then some.

 

[Al_Ma]

hypermill is a step down from NX, zero reason to get both. NX will do everything you want it to, and then some.

Thanks for your feedback.

My first choice was Hypermill for roughing 5X, recovery 5X, probing and support.
NX shouldn’t have these features and works with modulworks technology as Cimatron. Also VMC simulation is better than NX simulation.
I heard that Hypermill support is better than NX.
NX Cad is amazing!
Isn’t it?


Can i work with hybrid method in NX? Can i work with dirty surfaces for example the powershape once?

 

[empower]

Thanks for your feedback.

My first choice was Hypermill for roughing 5X, recovery 5X, probing and support.
NX shouldn’t have these features and works with modulworks technology as Cimatron. Also VMC simulation is better than NX simulation.
I heard that Hypermill support is better than NX.
NX Cad is amazing!
Isn’t it?


Can i work with hybrid method in NX? Can i work with dirty surfaces for example the powershape once?

i have no idea what you're saying.

 

[Al_Ma]

i have no idea what you're saying.

really? Don't you mill 5 axis?

 

[gkoenig]

Thanks for your feedback.

My first choice was Hypermill for roughing 5X, recovery 5X, probing and support.
NX shouldn’t have these features and works with modulworks technology as Cimatron. Also VMC simulation is better than NX simulation.
I heard that Hypermill support is better than NX.
NX Cad is amazing!
Isn’t it?


Can i work with hybrid method in NX? Can i work with dirty surfaces for example the powershape once?

NX has 5 axis adaptive roughing, and their adaptive algorithms are constantly updated and refined.

Probing in NX is getting significantly upgraded, driven by the new post architecture.

People citing ModuleWorks as a good or bad for a CAM have no idea what they are talking about- it’s like the Parasolid kernel almost every CAD system uses - yes, it is the same kernel underneath SpaceClaim and SolidWorks and NX, but the implementation quality makes all the difference. NX CAD is definitively the best- but it uses the same kernel as SolidWorks, so SolidWorks should be just as amazing- right!?!? It isn’t.

Yes, you can work with dirty surfaces in NX, but that is always a hack. The better answer is to have such high quality surfacing tools that you can rebuild crap geometry properly- and Mach 3 seats have all of the best surfacing tools in the CAD world.

 

[Al_Ma]

NX has 5 axis adaptive roughing, and their adaptive algorithms are constantly updated and refined.

Probing in NX is getting significantly upgraded, driven by the new post architecture.

People citing ModuleWorks as a good or bad for a CAM have no idea what they are talking about- it’s like the Parasolid kernel almost every CAD system uses - yes, it is the same kernel underneath SpaceClaim and SolidWorks and NX, but the implementation quality makes all the difference. NX CAD is definitively the best- but it uses the same kernel as SolidWorks, so SolidWorks should be just as amazing- right!?!? It isn’t.

Yes, you can work with dirty surfaces in NX, but that is always a hack. The better answer is to have such high quality surfacing tools that you can rebuild crap geometry properly- and Mach 3 seats have all of the best surfacing tools in the CAD world.

Thanks for your feedback, I didn't mean modulworks is good or bad but similar to Cimatron.
unfortunately in my sector I often don't have time to reconstruct what they send me.

sono in trattativa per una licenza mach 3 advanced 5 axis machining + mach 3 industrial design, the price is very close to a hypermill cam only license.....

 

[Matt_W]

NX is considered top tier for cad and cam , not to mention seamlessly and completely integrated.

Hyper is none of the above.

Don't think Hypermill is top tier? what makes you say that?

 

[CAMasochism]

NX will do everything you want it to, and then some.

Eeeeehhhh, I wouldn't go that far. I still have to draw my own tool paths for Curve and Point far too often after going back and forth with my VAR and getting nowhere with them.

 

[Areo Defense]

Don't think Hypermill is top tier? what makes you say that?

Take a look for yourself at aerospace, defense and automotive industries at the top then move down the supply chain. You simply do not see much diversity in software until you go down 2-3 tiers from the top.

 

[Areo Defense]

Yes, you can work with dirty surfaces in NX, but that is always a hack. The better answer is to have such high quality surfacing tools that you can rebuild crap geometry properly- and Mach 3 seats have all of the best surfacing tools in the CAD world.

True and not mention NX modeling has a lot of tools for manipulating solids that others simply don't have; certainly nothing close. In a sinker electrode group I used to program in, we were a mix of MC and NX. The MC guys could make a lot of trode models, albeit crudely, and whenever they hit a modeling wall, we were always able to complete it in NX.

I definitely prefer to work with customers that provide tight models and whenever there is a dirty model we would request they fix it and send us another. If they couldn't do that, which was somewhat often because their software was crap, we would fix the model and upcharge them.

 

[Areo Defense]

Eeeeehhhh, I wouldn't go that far. I still have to draw my own tool paths for Curve and Point far too often after going back and forth with my VAR and getting nowhere with them.

I didn't know curve/point was still in the menu and the depth of NX operations usually covers everything that I've come across. Are you sure you shouldn't be using a different operation? Planar or 3d paths? We should chat, especially of you're not getting traction with a VAR.

On a side note we used to have direct support with Siemens which is a first class affair but they pushed all the small and some medium size customers to VAR's and let's just say the support is "less than stellar". Now I feel the pain of the mid-tier VAR!

 

[Matt_W]

Take a look for yourself at aerospace, defense and automotive industries at the top then move down the supply chain. You simply do not see much diversity in software until you go down 2-3 tiers from the top.

I maybe misread or misinterpreted what we were calling top tier, I agree with that but not if we describing the the functionality of the product. I would put in the top tiers of CAM systems.

 

[Areo Defense]

I maybe misread or misinterpreted what we were calling top tier, I agree with that but not if we describing the the functionality of the product. I would put in the top tiers of CAM systems.

I look at things such as roughing finishing capabilities, rest roughing accuracy and overall tool containment. Being able to easily and reliably choose where to start and stop paths on a face, extensions, tangency control, not to mention trimming and avoidance. It's quite rare that I need to create any sort of geometry to contain, trim or extend a path. I haven't used NX turning much, NX wire was never very good and I noticed recently they partnered with a 3rd party for an add-on.

I recall the first time I discussed tool vectors with a MC guy. When he told me he made a CS for every cut in his 3+2 setup I was like, wait, what?? I seem to recall he made over a dozen CS's for his part we discussed whereas NX would've used one CS for the same setup, while having much finer vector control inside of every type of operation.

 

[CAMasochism]

I didn't know curve/point was still in the menu and the depth of NX operations usually covers everything that I've come across. Are you sure you shouldn't be using a different operation? Planar or 3d paths? We should chat, especially of you're not getting traction with a VAR.

On a side note we used to have direct support with Siemens which is a first class affair but they pushed all the small and some medium size customers to VAR's and let's just say the support is "less than stellar". Now I feel the pain of the mid-tier VAR!

Oh yea, we actually use it very often for one of our most common operations, to the point that the sketch is included in the part that is to be used in the CAM. Our VAR has tried suggesting other types of tool paths, but none of them are as efficient as our current method and one of the built in methods cannot do what we want.

Hell, we still make sure to manually add back in the original Hole Making tool paths in the operation selector because the new ones are terrible at conical surfaces.

When I started here we used to deal with Siemens, it was so nice. Have a corrupted CAM? Send it into them and they would clean it up, sometimes in the same day if you sent it in early enough. Now, with our VAR, I only go to them as last resort. They are only interested in closing out your ticket as fast as possible, if that means you are left with out a working resolution, so be it.

 

[Areo Defense]

Oh yea, we actually use it very often for one of our most common operations, to the point that the sketch is included in the part that is to be used in the CAM. Our VAR has tried suggesting other types of tool paths, but none of them are as efficient as our current method and one of the built in methods cannot do what we want.

Hell, we still make sure to manually add back in the original Hole Making tool paths in the operation selector because the new ones are terrible at conical surfaces.

When I started here we used to deal with Siemens, it was so nice. Have a corrupted CAM? Send it into them and they would clean it up, sometimes in the same day if you sent it in early enough. Now, with our VAR, I only go to them as last resort. They are only interested in closing out your ticket as fast as possible, if that means you are left with out a working resolution, so be it.

Right. Assuming the VAR gets back to us in 2-3 days lol.

As for your drilling with conical faces, I found the new drilling operation to be very intuitive and model aware. Should be able to provide diameter clearance in conics as well as tip and diameter clearance when drilling through conics. I don't know your exact examples and I'd like to see them. I might be able to dig up some examples I made for our guys to look at when they migrated over a while ago.

 

[Matt_W]

I look at things such as roughing finishing capabilities, rest roughing accuracy and overall tool containment. Being able to easily and reliably choose where to start and stop paths on a face, extensions, tangency control, not to mention trimming and avoidance. It's quite rare that I need to create any sort of geometry to contain, trim or extend a path. I haven't used NX turning much, NX wire was never very good and I noticed recently they partnered with a 3rd party for an add-on.

And you had problems with this in HyperMill? cant say I ever had.

"I recall the first time I discussed tool vectors with a MC guy. When he told me he made a CS for every cut in his 3+2 setup I was like, wait, what?? I seem to recall he made over a dozen CS's for his part we discussed whereas NX would've used one CS for the same setup, while having much finer vector control inside of every type of operation."

LIkewise in Hypermill, you only need one frame. You don't need a frame for every operation.

 

[empower]

really? Don't you mill 5 axis?

i do, but its difficult to understand what you are saying

 

[empower]

Eeeeehhhh, I wouldn't go that far. I still have to draw my own tool paths for Curve and Point far too often after going back and forth with my VAR and getting nowhere with them.

that doesnt tell me much. can you show an example? and how/why NX couldnt draw the toolpath for you?