Help! Shop trying to bring cad/cam inhouse - Page 3
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 70
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Temecula, Ca
    Posts
    2,584
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1196
    Likes (Received)
    3411

    Default

    It's really very simple.
    If you are given a solid and a print, the print rules all and the solid is reference only.

    UNLESS- it says on the print that the solid file is the master. Most of the prints we get from Northrop and Boing say this.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    13,349
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2112
    Likes (Received)
    3312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Dickman View Post
    It's really very simple.
    If you are given a solid and a print, the print rules all and the solid is reference only.

    UNLESS- it says on the print that the solid file is the master. Most of the prints we get from Northrop and Boing say this.
    In the case of a solid only, is the solid dimensioned and toleranced? For surfaces and features that are not dimensioned, is there a callout somewhere specifying tolerances, like ±.001 on holes and ODs, squareness, flatness, etc?

    I give my programmers a solid and also a paper drawing with the critical features dimensioned, because they want a paper dwg on their desk and at the machine to look at for the important stuff, and when the solid is loaded into the CAM program the dimensions don't go with it.
    Interested in how 'real industry' does it.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    89
    Likes (Received)
    362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mud View Post
    In the case of a solid only, is the solid dimensioned and toleranced? For surfaces and features that are not dimensioned, is there a callout somewhere specifying tolerances, like ±.001 on holes and ODs, squareness, flatness, etc?

    I give my programmers a solid and also a paper drawing with the critical features dimensioned, because they want a paper dwg on their desk and at the machine to look at for the important stuff, and when the solid is loaded into the CAM program the dimensions don't go with it.
    Interested in how 'real industry' does it.

    As was brought up earlier in the thread, MBD does include tolerances, datums, gdt, etc all in the model. It's still picking up steam, who knows if it will ever become 'the norm'.

    I think the main issue holding us back from MBD is just that most of us are more comfortable looking at a physical print. Some shops are moving to paperless, viewing their prints on tablets, but even myself I prefer to have a print in hand. Maybe the next generation that is growing up on ipads and smartphones will adapt quicker to a paperless shop.

  4. Likes wheelieking71 liked this post
  5. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,227
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    503
    Likes (Received)
    1347

    Default

    Making a solid with a 2d view is much faster in rhino 3d than in any 2d cad I have ever tried.
    And i have tried a lot, and been excellent with many, and professional with several, back from 1990s catia and 3d studio.

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    679

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hanermo View Post
    Making a solid with a 2d view is much faster in rhino 3d than in any 2d cad I have ever tried.
    Depending on your part, I don't think so. Not that I don't think solids are better most of the time, but they aren't generally faster.

    DOS Cadkey, for example, was blazingly fast for a lot of things. 3d wireframe but same idea. And I have a real 2d parametric cad from Computervision that is almost instant. Even DOS Bobcad is very very fast.

    But pulling geometry out of a PostScript file, I'd say that's a no-no.

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arizona
    Posts
    469
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    31
    Likes (Received)
    164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    Well, times they are a changing then. I was always taught to always go off the print, never the solid.
    I am a few years removed from "real" work now. So, I guess I don't know WTF I am talking about anymore.

    But, that doesn't change my stance on the subject of this thread.
    aside from being lazy , what changed it(became so popular) was the many pirated versions of MC along with everyone and there wannabe cnc machinist brother buying cnc machines to make firearms out of there garage.
    i've seen this on the Z board in the quote section .guy posts up a pdf print will all the numbers and people insist on a solid file on the simplest stuff.

  8. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    7,320
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    356
    Likes (Received)
    6139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    .....

    But pulling geometry out of a PostScript file, I'd say that's a no-no.
    Why do you keep saying PostScript which is a printer language and differnt than PDF?
    The op's "The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry" is confusing.
    A 3d model in such would most likely be PRC which can do any accuracy desired.

    A 2d print was likely made by the print to PDF button. In which case the software used will have to be smart enough to read the print numbers while building the in-between model as the lines are in fact sitting in printer resolution position.
    So yes Postscript or other print conversion gets in the way and kills any accuracy.
    That "prying out the real numbers" presents challenges but I'm surprised we are not there yet.

    A medium machinist can look at a three view drawing and construct a 3D model with ease.
    We have smart computers that can beat the world's best at chess, why can't they do this task for us?

    Why can't I scan in the admittedly very large and long hand drawn print for a 283 Chevy engine block and come back in the morning to a clean solid within microns?
    This is all doable and not Star-Trek fantasy.
    Bob

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    89
    Likes (Received)
    362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    Why can't I scan in the admittedly very large and long hand drawn print for a 283 Chevy engine block and come back in the morning to a clean solid within microns?
    This is all doable and not Star-Trek fantasy.
    Bob
    Because computers are not as smart as you think they are. You have to tell a computer how to handle every possible scenario for the creation of the solid, otherwise computer learning or AI needs to be involved.

    You also really need to consider what you are starting with. If you are using a 3D PDF then you're off to a good start. If you using a photocopy of a scanned pdf then this is next to impossible. Same goes for hand drawn documents. Was the document drawn to 2009 standards? Probably not so good luck getting a computer to figure out planes, gdt, datums etc from that.

  10. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,653
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    695
    Likes (Received)
    1895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SeymourDumore View Post
    Oh Boy! If someone 22 years ago told me that!
    I could be .. well, perhaps, even a presidential candidate! Or even more perhaps!
    Guess what? Software got better than it was 22 years ago!

    WHO WOULD HAVE IMAGINED THAT THINGS [email protected]?

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    2,851
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1344
    Likes (Received)
    1362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    Why do you keep saying PostScript which is a printer language and differnt than PDF?
    The op's "The owner wants the cad/cam software to take a pdf and vectorize it straight into a geometry" is confusing.
    A 3d model in such would most likely be PRC which can do any accuracy desired.

    A 2d print was likely made by the print to PDF button. In which case the software used will have to be smart enough to read the print numbers while building the in-between model as the lines are in fact sitting in printer resolution position.
    So yes Postscript or other print conversion gets in the way and kills any accuracy.
    That "prying out the real numbers" presents challenges but I'm surprised we are not there yet.

    A medium machinist can look at a three view drawing and construct a 3D model with ease.
    We have smart computers that can beat the world's best at chess, why can't they do this task for us?

    Why can't I scan in the admittedly very large and long hand drawn print for a 283 Chevy engine block and come back in the morning to a clean solid within microns?
    This is all doable and not Star-Trek fantasy.
    Bob

    Um, no. Maybe a "medium machinist with cad/cam skills". I know lots of good machinists that can't do much more than use google. Serious, not being a smart ass here. Last 2 cam training classes I went to had several guys that couldn't understand the difference between save and save-as, much less create a new folder and a shortcut to it!

    edit: case in point, currently work with a good lathe guy, makes all kinds of itty bitty parts, small face grooving, small threads, etc. But get him on MCX and he fumble about, knows the bare minimum to get by, doesn't understand some of the basic functions, but he does get by and in turn makes good quality parts, but if I tried to teach him to revolve some geo and make some extrude cuts, forget it!

  12. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,653
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    695
    Likes (Received)
    1895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    Serious question: why does the OP need a solid? And, how will he benefit from it in his described situation?
    Or maybe more specifically: why does he need CAD? Is it because that is his background?
    It is a fair question. I would push for solid models for the simple fact that they are easier and more intuitive to program off of. Modern CAM software is solid model based - using that data to drive automatic tool entries, stopovers, levels for cuts, entry/exits, clearance planes, etc.

    Most of what old school machinists talk about vis-a-vis complexity and skill is the tremendous cognitive workload you need to keep in your head to program 3D parts off of 2D geometry. It is entirely possible, but when our software has more data (like an entire axis's worth), it can do WAY more of the heavy lifting for you.

    A solid model in Fusion knows where the material is, it knows where the remaining stock is, it knows the tool diameter/flute/holder. Fire off a contour profile operation and click the geometry you want and it automatically fills in parameters that will work 90% of the time. You're still free to go fiddle with all that stuff. Programing this goes from 5 minutes in FingerCAM to 15 seconds in Fusion. If you make simulation a reflex for every operation, you get a visual of exactly what the machine is going to do. That decreases the bozo factor significantly.

    We aren't at the Star Trek Replicator by any means, but lots of super complex, delicate, long-run time 5 axis jobs get cranked through CAMPlete and fired off to an expensive Hermle/Grob/Mikron without so much as someone standing there to hit Cycle Start and watch it run. With enough data, modern CAD/CAM is pretty extraordinary.

  13. Likes Mike1974, mhajicek, mountie liked this post
  14. #52
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    13,349
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2112
    Likes (Received)
    3312

    Default

    How do you make an annotated solid model unable to be edited? With a PDF, if there's an argument over a detail, there's no debate about whether it was that way when it left the CAD machine. Can you do the same with dimensioned solids?

  15. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    5,657
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    6962
    Likes (Received)
    7103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    It is a fair question. I would push for solid models for the simple fact that they are easier and more intuitive to program off of. Modern CAM software is solid model based - using that data to drive automatic tool entries, stopovers, levels for cuts, entry/exits, clearance planes, etc.

    Most of what old school machinists talk about vis-a-vis complexity and skill is the tremendous cognitive workload you need to keep in your head to program 3D parts off of 2D geometry. It is entirely possible, but when our software has more data (like an entire axis's worth), it can do WAY more of the heavy lifting for you.

    A solid model in Fusion knows where the material is, it knows where the remaining stock is, it knows the tool diameter/flute/holder. Fire off a contour profile operation and click the geometry you want and it automatically fills in parameters that will work 90% of the time. You're still free to go fiddle with all that stuff. Programing this goes from 5 minutes in FingerCAM to 15 seconds in Fusion. If you make simulation a reflex for every operation, you get a visual of exactly what the machine is going to do. That decreases the bozo factor significantly.

    We aren't at the Star Trek Replicator by any means, but lots of super complex, delicate, long-run time 5 axis jobs get cranked through CAMPlete and fired off to an expensive Hermle/Grob/Mikron without so much as someone standing there to hit Cycle Start and watch it run. With enough data, modern CAD/CAM is pretty extraordinary.
    That is all well and good. But, this guy doesn't have Fusion..............See what i am getting at?
    He has PDF's, and Bob-CAM. And wanted to know the easiest way to get code.
    The answer is: learn how to draw in Bob-CAM. Then stone-up, and tell your boss: "yea, that is not really how this all works".
    At that point, it is up to his boss if he wants to get different software.

    Gooose's post#7 is the only one so far that makes any sense in this thread.
    Everybody else is (including myself to a point) is just arguing about workflow.

  16. #54
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    679

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    Why do you keep saying PostScript which is a printer language and differnt than PDF?
    It's not different. PDF is an emasculated version of PostScript. The underlying algorithms are the same. Its not meant to be accurate. It's meant to do printer layouts.

  17. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,653
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    695
    Likes (Received)
    1895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    That is all well and good. But, this guy doesn't have Fusion..............See what i am getting at?
    If the dude he is working for is so cheap that getting a copy of Fusion is an issue, he should walk in on Monday just so he can walk out the door.

    The answer is: learn how to draw in Bob-CAM. Then stone-up, and tell your boss: "yea, that is not really how this all works".
    I mean, he's gonna have to learn how to draw in whatever. I suspect he is going to suck in these PDFs as a DXF and have some cleanup work to do to get them to match the print. For a simple square plate with 4 holes, just draw the fucking thing...

    If it is a simple part with *many* features, doing the PDF import is probably going to save a lot of time in sketching. He'll just need to clean up the model and start throwing some dimensions on to match.

  18. #56
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    13,349
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2112
    Likes (Received)
    3312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    I suspect he is going to suck in these PDFs as a DXF and have some cleanup work to do to get them to match the print. For a simple square plate with 4 holes, just draw the fucking thing...

    If it is a simple part with *many* features, doing the PDF import is probably going to save a lot of time in sketching. He'll just need to clean up the model and start throwing some dimensions on to match.
    How do you import vector geometry from a PDF of a drawing?

  19. #57
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,653
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    695
    Likes (Received)
    1895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mud View Post
    How do you import vector geometry from a PDF of a drawing?
    PDFs contain both bitmap and vector elements. That is the whole trickery of PDF.

    If the PDF came from a CAD program (or even Illustrator), you’ll be able to import it back into a CAD system and use it as a sketch. The problem is that it is often a super shitty sketch with disconnected segments and arcs/splines broken up into micro steps- but there are tools for cleaning all that up during/after import.

    For all the bellyaching on here about PDFs/solid models/prints, LOTS of precision 2D work gets sent around and machines programmed directly off of PDFs. Fabric cutters, water jets, steel rule dies, lasers, plasma cutters, etc etc.

  20. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UTAH
    Posts
    510
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    45
    Likes (Received)
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wheelieking71 View Post
    Well, times they are a changing then. I was always taught to always go off the print, never the solid.
    I am a few years removed from "real" work now. So, I guess I don't know WTF I am talking about anymore.

    But, that doesn't change my stance on the subject of this thread.
    Weellieking71, nothing wrong with what you said. I think it's always best to have a print and better if you have a model too. I quote 90% of the molds I make from Solid models, rarely see prints. However did get a job a few months back that I quoted from a solid and later was sent a print with the P.O. that didn't match the solid because of the crazy tolerances on the print. Had to send it back for a new model. It turned out that the print was updated to match existing parts from another supplier but the model was never updated to match the new print. Eventually I was paid to make a new model. I know making a mold is different than final machining a part and agree that prints are needed for that purpose. For me 3D models are easy to make from prints, I've been doing it since the late 80's. Would never make one directly from a PDF file. Besides molds I make fixtures for machining and inspection. Having the model of the part is essential when designing fixtures. Programming even 2.5D is much easier done from a model than guessing where clearances may be needed. The print gives the designers their true intent such as tolerances and true positions, etc. that a model can't always convey.

  21. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    89
    Likes (Received)
    362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gkoenig View Post
    If the PDF came from a CAD program (or even Illustrator), you’ll be able to import it back into a CAD system and use it as a sketch.
    What cad or cam system will allow import of a pdf?

  22. #60
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    South Central PA
    Posts
    13,349
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2112
    Likes (Received)
    3312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goooose View Post
    What cad or cam system will allow import of a pdf?
    I'm curious too. Mine will load just about every solid file format, and the usual 2D files, and will even allow me to import a jpg to use as a background to trace over, but not a pdf, and T've never seen or heard of a converter. Having one would REALLY be handy, where can I get one?


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •