Benefits of Verification software - Edgecam

Tomped · Nov 27, 2018

Hello first post on this forum.

Im a CadCam programmer using Edgecam.
I program a varity of machines from basic 3 axis verticals (brother) right through to state-of-the-art full simultanious 5 axis (mazak variaxis, vtc)

Just wondering what the benefits of verification software such as Vericut, Camplete, NCSimul etc over the built in machine simulation that comes with Edgecam are?

The simulation on Edgecam is created through the post processors supplied by Vero and simulates full machine kinematics, so collision checks against a real representation of our machines and setups.

Is there any real benefit of using a third party simulator over the edgecam simulation because from what I can gather they look pretty similar?

Thanks

Mtndew · Nov 27, 2018

Tomped said:
Is there any real benefit of using a third party simulator over the edgecam simulation because from what I can gather they look pretty similar?

Thanks

Absolutely there is a benefit. But you also pay thru the nose for that benefit as well.
And IMO it's only really needed for 5 axis stuff so that you're 100% positive there will be no crash or gouging.

Mike1974 · Nov 27, 2018

Is it G code sim? I think that is the big deal there... I know I used a Mastercam verify*, BUT had a post processor and machine sim built by a 3rd party that used the G code (ya'll can check with the Emastercam crowd on that), and I never had any crashes.

edit: *5 axis sim for a Haas UMC 750. For 3 axis, most verify is ok, IMO (be sure to check out dog leg rapids if you do have an issue!)

Tomped · Nov 27, 2018

Mtndew said:
Absolutely there is a benefit. But you also pay thru the nose for that benefit as well.
And IMO it's only really needed for 5 axis stuff so that you're 100% positive there will be no crash or gouging.

Thanks for the reply.
I would say 5-axis simultanious probably accounts for less than 5% of what we do.
Touch wood we havent experianced any collisions yet, the Edgecam simulation seems pretty accurate the only discreprency sometimes seems to be the approch moves bettween different 5 axis operations, but I think thats more of a post issue. We just send everything home after each 5 axis operation and treat them all as if they are seperate tools and it seems to be okay.

Tomped · Nov 27, 2018

Mike1974 said:
Is it G code sim? I think that is the big deal there... I know I used a Mastercam verify*, BUT had a post processor and machine sim built by a 3rd party that used the G code (ya'll can check with the Emastercam crowd on that), and I never had any crashes.

edit: *5 axis sim for a Haas UMC 750. For 3 axis, most verify is ok, IMO (be sure to check out dog leg rapids if you do have an issue!)

My understanding is the Edgecam simulation is before the sequence is processed into g code, so is dependant on the post processor being set up correctly for the machine.

Mud · Nov 27, 2018

Tomped said:
My understanding is the Edgecam simulation is before the sequence is processed into g code, so is dependant on the post processor being set up correctly for the machine.

Correct. The 3rd part sims work from the g-code, Edgecam verify works from the model geometry. Verify works OK for us so far but I never really trust the code generator, that makes me nervous especially when new updates are installed..
C

Tomped · Nov 27, 2018

Mud said:
Correct. The 3rd part sims work from the g-code, Edgecam verify works from the model geometry. Verify works OK for us so far but I never really trust the code generator, that makes me nervous especially when new updates are installed..
C

Yeah good point, I suppose it gives peice of mind to know exactly how the gcode is going to affect the machine.

How much setting up is required in the 3rd party simulators?
Is it a time consuming process or are they associative with edgecam, i.e. updates automaticly with edgecam?

Mike1974 · Nov 27, 2018

Tomped said:
Yeah good point, I suppose it gives peice of mind to know exactly how the gcode is going to affect the machine.

How much setting up is required in the 3rd party simulators?
Is it a time consuming process or are they associative with edgecam, i.e. updates automaticly with edgecam?

I don't know this, but I have always heard that Vericut is a PITA (and/or a lot of work) to get set up correctly, maybe someone with exp will comment...

Tomped · Nov 27, 2018

Mike1974 said:
I don't know this, but I have always heard that Vericut is a PITA (and/or a lot of work) to get set up correctly, maybe someone with exp will comment...

Yeah we dont want to be adding unnecessary processes to our programming, since we do mostly just indexing and 3+2 im not sure if a third party simulator is really needed.
I just want to get a feel really for what other programmers are doing.

Larry Dickman · Nov 27, 2018

Mike1974 said:
I don't know this, but I have always heard that Vericut is a PITA (and/or a lot of work) to get set up correctly, maybe someone with exp will comment...

I had found Vericut to be insane to set up. However, once I got a set up jobs set up, setting up a new job is just replacing the models from one with the other. Then it's easy. For 3x work, it's probably not worth the effort, but for 5x it's invaluable.

Dan B · Nov 28, 2018

We used to resist the idea of verification too. For a long time. I had a demo of Vericut, and that just reinforced the resistance as it was too much effort. But flash forward to today, and we are doing verification for all toolpaths going to our automated cells (we have 3) and to our stand alone Hermles. What made the difference was the product that we use. I apologize in advance for this sounding like a commercial, but we're using Eureka from Roboris, but more importantly, using the Lemoine Technologies interface that pretty much automates the verification process. We run lights out now with full confidence. It's much cheaper than Vericut and verifies within minutes. The support is phenomenal as well. I can recommend it enough. FWIW... we don't use it for 3-axis, only 3+2 and 5 axis.

Hope this is helpful,

Dan

Tomped · Nov 28, 2018

Dan B said:
We used to resist the idea of verification too. For a long time. I had a demo of Vericut, and that just reinforced the resistance as it was too much effort. But flash forward to today, and we are doing verification for all toolpaths going to our automated cells (we have 3) and to our stand alone Hermles. What made the difference was the product that we use. I apologize in advance for this sounding like a commercial, but we're using Eureka from Roboris, but more importantly, using the Lemoine Technologies interface that pretty much automates the verification process. We run lights out now with full confidence. It's much cheaper than Vericut and verifies within minutes. The support is phenomenal as well. I can recommend it enough. FWIW... we don't use it for 3-axis, only 3+2 and 5 axis.

Hope this is helpful,

Dan

Cheers for the input Dan

Mike1974 · Nov 28, 2018

Tomped said:
Yeah we dont want to be adding unnecessary processes to our programming, since we do mostly just indexing and 3+2 im not sure if a third party simulator is really needed.
I just want to get a feel really for what other programmers are doing.

I think (just my opinion) if you are only doing 3+2 it is probably not necessary. Just be smart with programming as much as possible, if you use G99 alot when drilling, maybe try G98 and compare cycle times and see if there is enough difference to use it. Use 'force tool change' (or equivalent with edgecam, I am not familiar with it) when moving from one work plane to another, etc...

Matt@RFR · Nov 28, 2018

Are there any simpler versions for simple 3 axis stuff? I do a lot of hand editing, and a lot of it is in existing tweaked programs with many sub program calls and macros, so a simple repost from Mastercam is not going to cut it.

TRussell · Nov 29, 2018

Matt@RFR said:
Are there any simpler versions for simple 3 axis stuff? I do a lot of hand editing, and a lot of it is in existing tweaked programs with many sub program calls and macros, so a simple repost from Mastercam is not going to cut it.

You could look at NCPlot, or Cimco. NCPlot is only like $300.

ds3427756 · Dec 13, 2018

Yes..This is really very beneficial ..Edgecam is a leading CAM system for NC part programming..
This software provides unparalleled ease of use and sophisticated toolpath generation, it’s the only CAM system you’ll need for milling, turning, mill-turn machining and Wire EDM.
For more details you can refer edgecam.com

metalmadness · Dec 17, 2018

When I got my new 5 axis machine awhile back, I learned that, unless youre simulating the posted G-code, you are really not seeing what will happen. My engineer at Vericut setup my machines with the CAD files, set the kinematics and tweaked the virtual controller to align with my controller. THat was uh...very expensive to say the least. Plus the seat of it was very expensive, but a single crash on a 5 axis machine could easily cost $30K+! and lost productivity

I have different setup templates that I use, so when I am done programming in Mastercam, i run the add-in for vericut and it imports it all into the session of vericut in likle 5 clicks. All i usually have to do is set my offsets and maybe move the stock around. The one pain was modelling all of my tools and holders and putting then in a database.

The UI is a little cumbersome at first but it doesn't take long to get it down, especially if you take a day of training. I also dont always use it on 3 axis (rarely) but even 3+2 I want to double make sure everything is good. Obviously simultaneous 5 axis, no question.

Search

Largest Manufacturing Technology Community on the Web

Search

Benefits of Verification software - Edgecam

Tomped

Plastic

Mtndew

Diamond

Mike1974

Diamond

Tomped

Plastic

Tomped

Plastic

Mud

Diamond

Tomped

Plastic

Mike1974

Diamond

Tomped

Plastic

Larry Dickman

Titanium

Dan B

Hot Rolled

Tomped

Plastic

Mike1974

Diamond

Matt@RFR

Titanium

TRussell

Aluminum

ds3427756

Plastic

metalmadness

Hot Rolled

Similar threads