What's new
What's new

Help! Shop trying to bring cad/cam inhouse

mawgs

Plastic
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
I was recently hired by a CNC shop to bring Cad/Cam in house. For my background I'm an mechanical engineering student with 3d modeling/printing experience. So far the shop has tried bobcad but no other program. The owner of the company wants to use the software for 2.5 and 3 axis A-00 brother machines. We have several brother 321n machines and a few of the speedios. The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code. Is this feasible? So far i've used bobcad to write one program and it was a hassle. I'm used to fusion 360 and autodesk products which might be why bobcad is giving me such a hard time. Any advice for a noobie like me is much appreciated.
 
The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code. Is this feasible?

PDF files can be comprised of vector, bitmap and ASCII elements. Anything in the pdf that is vector based can be made into a cad (dxf,dwg) file which can then be used in a cam program to create your g-code. Naturally this only applies to 2.5D.

I'd used pdf2cad for years and recommend it. Fast and easy to use.
 
I was recently hired by a CNC shop to bring Cad/Cam in house. For my background I'm an mechanical engineering student with 3d modeling/printing experience. So far the shop has tried bobcad but no other program. The owner of the company wants to use the software for 2.5 and 3 axis A-00 brother machines. We have several brother 321n machines and a few of the speedios. The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code. Is this feasible? So far i've used bobcad to write one program and it was a hassle. I'm used to fusion 360 and autodesk products which might be why bobcad is giving me such a hard time. Any advice for a noobie like me is much appreciated.

Bwahahahaha!

Sorry, but no. What you need is an experienced CADCAM guy and/or serious training. Being a CNC programmer isn't something you just pick up overnight, and it won't be automated any time soon. I've been doing it since '95 and I'm still learning.

The customer should be supplying complete and toleranced prints, along with 3D part models that are accurately modeled at the midpoint of the tolerance zone. If they don't, you have to do the customers work for them and make that model from the print, hoping you didn't miss or misinterpret anything, and for anything more complicated than a rectangular plate with four 1/4-20 holes in the corners this should add an engineering charge to the job.

In rare cases of families of very similar 2.5 axis parts you could have automatic toolpathing work from accurate DXF files with a little manual massaging, but it takes a lot of setup and trial and error even in those cases, and the moment it sees something new it blows up.
 
There is a little more to that game

Read above post again

If tolerances don't matter,than ignore

But then again,I rarely get a real print,usually something on a napkin over a beer in the bar,,but at least I have a meeting of the minds

Real World,get real prints or you are bound to take in the ....... sooner or later,,probably sooner
 
The only feasible way to do something like you're thinking of is to leverage feature based programming and programming families of parts based on their features and regenerating with new models as required but you will still be programming the parts at least manually once. Edgecam and others have the ability to fill in a toolcrib and assign rules and speeds and feeds to the crib allowing you to leverage "automatic" programming but it is hard to beat an experienced CADCAM guy.

You said that you programmed one part with BobCAM and it was a hassle but that is not a very fair review of any CAM programs and I'd hazard a guess that everyone has their own quirks and unintuitive UI elements. Most CAM systems are using the exact same backend (literally it's one company) and the rest is all window dressing.
 
I think you're getting a lot of pushback because folks are indexing on your line "straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code." What they think you are asking for is a magical machine that takes in PDFs and spits out ready to run G-code for your machines. This would be a tremendous technical challenge that needs kinda expert CAD/CAM levels of judo.

From what I gather, this shop primarily uses FingerCAM to process relatively simple parts (2.5D, the kinda stuff folks send over prints for in PDFs). What you're looking for is a workflow to make this process more efficient than 1982 levels manual hand coding... This is easy.

1- Use a PDF to DWG/DXF converter, and import it into Fusion as a sketch.
2- Clean up the geometry and extrude 2D profiles into solids you can program off of.
3- Throw down tool path, which is crazy easy in Fusion, especially if we're talking 2.5D and simple 3D work.
4- Post it and run. You shouldn't need a lick of hand code to do any of this.

The only complicating factor here is that PDFs of geometry are often complete shit. You get a crappily formed sketch where circles are busted into arcs (and won't make proper holes), end points don't match up, so you don't get profiles to extrude, etc etc. If you do a LOT of this kind of work, NX has a boatload of quite amazing Synchronous 2D tools that can do simply bonkers stuff to files like this.

YouTube

NX sells these tools in their NX CAM Foundation package for about $1k. If your shop is doing a lot of this kind of work, it might be totally worth it to get that purely for cleaning up geometry very quickly.
 
OPs expectation.....

source.gif
 
... The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code.


Some good ideas kicked out by all the people here, but seriously??....

- Learn how to model parts

- Learn how to machine parts (since it's near impossible to create good/solid G-code for a machine if actual machining is not understood)

- Learn how to use the CAM side of whatever program ends up getting used to create the code to run the parts


Your best bet might be to either go to class, or hire someone experienced at the above to come in for a week and demonstrate the process. No software is magically going to do what is being asked.

PM
 
I don't understand why everybody needs a solid to program stuff? Doesn't anybody use simple geometry anymore? (its soo easy!)
Somebody gives me a sketch, or PDF, there isn't, and never will be a solid. For 2.5D its just not necessary.
If you get supplied a solid great! It can streamline the workflow immensely, no doubt.
But, if you get handed a print (PDF), it is an unnecessary step, and waste of time.

Maybe they need the cartoon to understand what they are making? IDFGI?
 
I don't understand why everybody needs a solid to program stuff? Doesn't anybody use simple geometry anymore? (its soo easy!)
Somebody gives me a sketch, or PDF, there isn't, and never will be a solid. For 2.5D its just not necessary.
If you get supplied a solid great! It can streamline the workflow immensely, no doubt.
But, if you get handed a print (PDF), it is an unnecessary step, and waste of time.

Maybe they need the cartoon to understand what they are making? IDFGI?

If a customer models something incorrectly and I make it to their model/drawing it's their mistake and they pay for it. If I model or draw something incorrectly to their drawing it's my problem and I hate paying for mistakes.
 
If a customer models something incorrectly and I make it to their model/drawing it's their mistake and they pay for it. If I model or draw something incorrectly to their drawing it's my problem and I hate paying for mistakes.

That is what I am saying! That is what prints and tolerances are for. There is absolutely no need for solids doing 2.5D work, other than a visual.
The print rules ALL!
 
If they provide a drawing where is the geometry coming from? Assuming you aren't using finger CAM. I will draw a part based on a drawing to get the PO rolling but will always check my work against theirs. You'd be surprised how often either I missed a small detail or the print is rounded etc.
 
If they provide a drawing where is the geometry coming from? Assuming you aren't using finger CAM. I will draw a part based on a drawing to get the PO rolling but will always check my work against theirs. You'd be surprised how often either I missed a small detail or the print is rounded etc.

The geometry is coming from the paper I print the PDF of the drawing on, DUH

I have hundreds, maybe thousands, or CAM part files that never ever saw CAD software.

The OP stated he has a CAD (3D printing) background. The answer to his question is very simple: go take some CAM classes.
 
Again, you guys are totally misinterpreting what the OP is trying to do.

He isn't looking for magic software to reliably convert a PDF into G-code; he is looking for a more efficient (and in-house) process to go from PDF to CAD to CAM to code. The current process seems to be 100% hand written G-code off of PDF prints. I'm guessing this is pretty inefficient (totally cutting edge in 1989!) and they are starting to run low on dudes who are comfortable/good using FingerCAM.

What he is trying to do is easy, and totally in the wheel-house of basic 3D CAD/CAM. Why the hell do machinists always need to make what they do sound like super hard bullshit? Stop inflating your own bullshit egos and realize that the work here is easy; it is the hustle that's hard.
 
Again, you guys are totally misinterpreting what the OP is trying to do.

He isn't looking for magic software to reliably convert a PDF into G-code; he is looking for a more efficient (and in-house) process to go from PDF to CAD to CAM to code. The current process seems to be 100% hand written G-code off of PDF prints. I'm guessing this is pretty inefficient (totally cutting edge in 1989!) and they are starting to run low on dudes who are comfortable/good using FingerCAM.

What he is trying to do is easy, and totally in the wheel-house of basic 3D CAD/CAM. Why the hell do machinists always need to make what they do sound like super hard bullshit? Stop inflating your own bullshit egos and realize that the work here is easy; it is the hustle that's hard.

... The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry and then into the post with very little hand writing of code.

You sure about that dude? Either something is getting lost in translation or Goose had the right idea.
 
Again, you guys are totally misinterpreting what the OP is trying to do.

He isn't looking for magic software to reliably convert a PDF into G-code; he is looking for a more efficient (and in-house) process to go from PDF to CAD to CAM to code. The current process seems to be 100% hand written G-code off of PDF prints. I'm guessing this is pretty inefficient (totally cutting edge in 1989!) and they are starting to run low on dudes who are comfortable/good using FingerCAM.

What he is trying to do is easy, and totally in the wheel-house of basic 3D CAD/CAM. Why the hell do machinists always need to make what they do sound like super hard bullshit? Stop inflating your own bullshit egos and realize that the work here is easy; it is the hustle that's hard.

I hope that wasn't directed at me. Because, in essence, it is exactly what I was saying!
 
I don't understand why everybody needs a solid to program stuff? Doesn't anybody use simple geometry anymore? (its soo easy!)
Somebody gives me a sketch, or PDF, there isn't, and never will be a solid. For 2.5D its just not necessary.
If you get supplied a solid great! It can streamline the workflow immensely, no doubt.
But, if you get handed a print (PDF), it is an unnecessary step, and waste of time.

Maybe they need the cartoon to understand what they are making? IDFGI?

Depends on how fast you are!? :D

I like having a solid, and I can model simple/medium things pretty damn fast, even if I don't "need" it. It's great for a visual reference, great for checking fits, I can use stock model verify when I have a solid, I can import it into solidworks (and lots of other systems using a step or parasolid file), which in turn lets other people (engineers etc) have the opportunity to check it and/or look at it....
 
Again, you guys are totally misinterpreting what the OP is trying to do.

He isn't looking for magic software to reliably convert a PDF into G-code; he is looking for a more efficient (and in-house) process to go from PDF to CAD to CAM to code. The current process seems to be 100% hand written G-code off of PDF prints. I'm guessing this is pretty inefficient (totally cutting edge in 1989!) and they are starting to run low on dudes who are comfortable/good using FingerCAM.

What he is trying to do is easy, and totally in the wheel-house of basic 3D CAD/CAM. Why the hell do machinists always need to make what they do sound like super hard bullshit? Stop inflating your own bullshit egos and realize that the work here is easy; it is the hustle that's hard.


Ya? That is why we have a weekly thread about not finding qualified people, or retaining people, or horror stories of people loading parts wrong and scrapping hundreds/thousands in parts and materials... :rolleyes5:

I agree from my perspective it is easy. But I hate when some shit that doesn't know machining thinks it's "easy". :angry:
If it was easy everyone would be a programmer/designer/setup guy/moldmaker and/or run his own shop.
 
What he is trying to do is easy, and totally in the wheel-house of basic 3D CAD/CAM. Why the hell do machinists always need to make what they do sound like super hard bullshit? Stop inflating your own bullshit egos and realize that the work here is easy; it is the hustle that's hard.

Making a 2.5D cam program IS easy. Making one that cuts correctly and efficiently is where the tricky part comes in. I've seen first hand an experiment that was taking an engineering student and having him program parts because...well, machining is easy and engineers as soooo smart. It ended exactly the way you would expect :willy_nilly:

I would still be slightly weary of the pdf conversion as well. If, for whatever reason, the pdf contains an image of the part drawing and you try to vector that you will get massive inaccuracies in those lines, to the point where your lines will probably vary by more than your machining tolerance. Unlikely, sure, but possible. And who wants to run 10k worth of parts and then find out their pdf wasn't clean enough.
 
Making a 2.5D cam program IS easy. Making one that cuts correctly and efficiently is where the tricky part comes in. I've seen first hand an experiment that was taking an engineering student and having him program parts because...well, machining is easy and engineers as soooo smart. It ended exactly the way you would expect :willy_nilly:

I would still be slightly weary of the pdf conversion as well. If, for whatever reason, the pdf contains an image of the part drawing and you try to vector that you will get massive inaccuracies in those lines, to the point where your lines will probably vary by more than your machining tolerance. Unlikely, sure, but possible. And who wants to run 10k worth of parts and then find out their pdf wasn't clean enough.

That's grreat! I was just telling someone this the other day!!. IMO, it is fairly easy to get code from Mastercam, pick some lines/arcs, select a tool and BAM! G-code!. Whether it cuts for shit, or slams into the vise, or cuts at 1ipm is another thing. :D
 








 
Back
Top