Move from UG to Catia programming?

Calzone · Jul 11, 2006

With all our data being native Catia V5 and the waterjet/laser/inspection departments already using it I'm feeling the pressure to make the move.

Is there a software package that is similar to UG that works with Catia? UG has it's downfalls, but I can manipulate it to get the job done fast enough.

G43K98K · Jul 19, 2006

If I am not mistaken Catia has their own maufacturing bundle like the other high end cad\cam packages.I know from getting translations in stp214 from native Catia things can get dicey in UG and vice versa.Blends etc. tend to blow up.My opinion is if you have high end cad use their cam as well.You will get full associativity as a bonus.From reading the forums for a bit this does'nt seem to get the importance I think it should.

failsafe7 · Jul 19, 2006

If I am not mistaken Catia has their own maufacturing bundle like the other high end cad\cam packages.

And a very good one, at that. Maybe one of the best...

You will get full associativity as a bonus.From reading the forums for a bit this does'nt seem to get the importance I think it should.

That's very true, G43K98K. Especially if the majority of your business is built around one customer.

I know from getting translations in stp214 from native Catia things can get dicey in UG and vice versa.

Why do you get translations in STEP AP214? I know they use it almost exclusively in Europe, but I've always found it to be a problematic format. Maybe there's just something that I don't understand, but AP203 almost never fails...

Between UG and Catia, the major problem here is the difference in modelling kernels. (ACIS for Catia, and Parasolids for UG) It can be a real bitch. I've actually had pretty good luck with IGES for most UG to Catia stuff. Not so good luck the other way. Funny, too - because IGES is fast becoming an almost worthless format.

G43K98K · Jul 19, 2006

We have used both of the stp formats but usually end up identifying the problem areas and getting the vendor to try a different kind of blend in the bad geometry.Believe me this is a lot easier at the design end than having toolroom users deal with bad geo.All of our designs end up in UG(other than some solidworks stuff) as we are a UG cam house as well as design.For the price of a two system operation you could probably buy a high ender. The real battle may be toolroom people willing to switch to another system unless all programming is done offline.Even then the code will sometimes be a little different with the new post.This can be a very painfull transition for everyone involved so best of luck to you.

Calzone · Jul 19, 2006

I thought there might be a common add-on type CAM package used for milling in Catia. Our inspection uses Delmia and waterjet/laser uses Sinet all within Catia.

Thanks for the explanation of the 2 step formats. I never knew what the difference was. The only downfall to iges files is that it's a bunch of sheets vs a solid model. As long as the edges are close enough and all the surfaces come through it can be sewn together to create a solid body.

The transition sounds painful especially since I really don't like the tree format in Catia vs layers in UG. I guess I'll get used to it after a while, but for now I'm still clumsy with it. I haven't had a chance to do any modeling in Catia yet, but UG requires a good bit of modeling knowledge to get the desired cutter paths on contoured surfaces.

failsafe7 · Jul 19, 2006

The only downfall to iges files is that it's a bunch of sheets vs a solid model

That's not true. It all has to do with how the IGES is output. There are various options.

Exporting Solids:

IGES Manifold Solid B-Rep Objects (IGES Type 186)
IGES Surfaces (IGES Type 144 or IGES Type 143)
IGES Wireframe Entities (Various Types)

Exporting Surfaces:

Parametric Trimmed Surfaces (Type 144)
Bounded Surface Entity (Type 143)

Exporting Analytical Surfaces:

NURB Surfaces with NURB Trimming Curves (IGES Type 128)
IGES Analytic Surfaces (Various Types)

There are also various IGES write flavors, some of which include:

Jama
AutoCAD
SolidWorks

Calzone · Jul 19, 2006

I forgot an option in the iges options to sew sheets on import. If everything is connected UG will automatically make a solid body.

I'll have to look through the export options tomorrow. We have a machine shop that I send data to that uses Mastercam I think. I like my files to include bolts and pins so the intent of holes is a given, but they always end up with a million sheet bodies. They can't work with step or parasolid so I strip it down and put the bodies on seperate layers so they can seperate them easier. I'll also have to check what Rhino can export as far as iges. They have really good translators for most anything.

failsafe7 · Jul 20, 2006

I'm not a big fan of UG's "sew" function. I've found that for the customers that I work with, it's not really that good. And I'm not one to bad mouth UG...

Simple fact, though - UG and Catia don't play very well together. UG's .model file output (Catia V4 format) leaves a lot to be desired, IMO.

I work with UG files quite a bit, and do native work in Catia.

G43K98K · Jul 20, 2006

If I can figure out how to get it to you I do have a best practices word document UG put out just for Catia UG data exchange.It's 27 pages long and deals with whatever type data you want to exchange between systems and the supported formats.

failsafe7 · Jul 20, 2006

That's great... I'd love to see it.

My email is available through profile. (click my name at the left over there <--

Search

Largest Manufacturing Technology Community on the Web

Search

Move from UG to Catia programming?

Calzone

Hot Rolled

G43K98K

Plastic

failsafe7

Stainless

G43K98K

Plastic

Calzone

Hot Rolled

failsafe7

Stainless

Calzone

Hot Rolled

failsafe7

Stainless

G43K98K

Plastic

failsafe7

Stainless

Similar threads