We're considering investing in machine simulators to train entry-level machinists coming out of technical school. We've looked at Vericut and FANUC so far. We're trying to determine if a simulator can actually take someone out of tech school, or someone with machine operator experience, and train them to be a true CNC setup-level machinist (someone who can setup, operate, edit and inspect). Any insights would be greatly appreciated.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Largest Manufacturing Technology Community on the Web
Stay Connected:
Machine Simulators - Are they good for training?
- Thread starter stayj02
- Start date
- Replies 14
- Views 2,639
DouglasJRizzo
Titanium
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2011
- Location
- Ramsey, NJ.
Simulators are great for finding obvious blunders like bad z axis moves, etc. The big stuff will show easily. Don't be lulled into a false sense of security as they are not a replacement for Single Block/Rapid Down/Hand on the switch prove outs. Other than that, a great way to train.
Gobo
Titanium
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Location
- Oregon, USA
Simulators are great for collision avoidance and such, but for training? Dubious value at best.
jrmach
Titanium
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2012
- Location
- Boise,Idaho USA
One thing to consider,if you go with a good one,,there will be a considerable amount of training time to learn all the stuff the simulation has to offer.
I use Module Works and yes it is pretty good
But you have to be pretty good also to get the most out of it
Nothing,but nothing will substitute for real life experiences though
Pick your employees wisely,then train them,,schooling only goes so far
I use Module Works and yes it is pretty good
But you have to be pretty good also to get the most out of it
Nothing,but nothing will substitute for real life experiences though
Pick your employees wisely,then train them,,schooling only goes so far
implmex
Diamond
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2002
- Location
- Vancouver BC Canada
Hi stayj02:
I concur with the other posters who have described a simulation as having limited training value.
A particular reason that has not been broached yet, is that the simulation will provide no feedback at all as to how the cutter will perform...pretty much anything you care to program will LOOK like it could work but the operator will never know until an actual cutter contacts an actual workpiece.
For example; I can get away with truly ridiculous cuts if I have a well fixtured lump of Delrin that I could never get away with if the lump was steel.
The simulation will never tell you that unless they have become far more sophisticated than the last versions I ever ran (Vericut, less than 10 years ago).
There's nothing quite like the bang of a breaking cutter to tell you it's not gonna work out, and I am unaware of a simulator that can mimic that in all it's sphincter puckering glory.
Certainly the simulations for the software I'm currently using for CAM (HSMWorks) can tell me quite a bit; but when I'm pushing it and KNOW I'm pushing it, there's nothing quite like the sounds and sights of impending failure on the actual machine to smarten me up again and make me back off.
That judgement in the programming to me is experience driven...no amount of simulation can get you to that last crucial step, and I do believe it is crucial before you turn the kid loose on the super expensive toy.
Now to be clear, the kinds of guys you are proposing to train this way have been around real machines and have at least some knowledge of how it's supposed to sound and look, but the judgement to decide what DOC and stepover you're going to get away with using a wimpy setup in a challenging material with sub-optimal equipment...not so easy.
We haven't even touched yet, on the best most sensible order of operations, the proper fixturing and etc etc.
Problem is, as a programmer you have to commit to those things and the machine, as you know is profoundly stupid and will attempt to do exactly what you told it to do.
So will stand-alone verification give your trainees something useful...undoubtedly.
Will it turn an operator into a competent or even workable programmer all on it's own...never!
Cheers
Marcus
Implant Mechanix • Design & Innovation > HOME
Vancouver Wire EDM -- Wire EDM Machining
I concur with the other posters who have described a simulation as having limited training value.
A particular reason that has not been broached yet, is that the simulation will provide no feedback at all as to how the cutter will perform...pretty much anything you care to program will LOOK like it could work but the operator will never know until an actual cutter contacts an actual workpiece.
For example; I can get away with truly ridiculous cuts if I have a well fixtured lump of Delrin that I could never get away with if the lump was steel.
The simulation will never tell you that unless they have become far more sophisticated than the last versions I ever ran (Vericut, less than 10 years ago).
There's nothing quite like the bang of a breaking cutter to tell you it's not gonna work out, and I am unaware of a simulator that can mimic that in all it's sphincter puckering glory.
Certainly the simulations for the software I'm currently using for CAM (HSMWorks) can tell me quite a bit; but when I'm pushing it and KNOW I'm pushing it, there's nothing quite like the sounds and sights of impending failure on the actual machine to smarten me up again and make me back off.
That judgement in the programming to me is experience driven...no amount of simulation can get you to that last crucial step, and I do believe it is crucial before you turn the kid loose on the super expensive toy.
Now to be clear, the kinds of guys you are proposing to train this way have been around real machines and have at least some knowledge of how it's supposed to sound and look, but the judgement to decide what DOC and stepover you're going to get away with using a wimpy setup in a challenging material with sub-optimal equipment...not so easy.
We haven't even touched yet, on the best most sensible order of operations, the proper fixturing and etc etc.
Problem is, as a programmer you have to commit to those things and the machine, as you know is profoundly stupid and will attempt to do exactly what you told it to do.
So will stand-alone verification give your trainees something useful...undoubtedly.
Will it turn an operator into a competent or even workable programmer all on it's own...never!
Cheers
Marcus
Implant Mechanix • Design & Innovation > HOME
Vancouver Wire EDM -- Wire EDM Machining
Gobo
Titanium
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2013
- Location
- Oregon, USA
Once again, they are great for proving machine code, but how can they help teach an operator to properly mount a tool, operate a machine, choose the proper insert or insert grade, or any of the thousand other things it takes to become a good set up tech? A simulator would certainly help to train a programmer, but maybe not so much a set up person.
DMF_TomB
Diamond
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2008
- Location
- Rochester, NY, USA
machine simulator
many shops use gage length programming where tool comp is really wear comp. unless simulator knows the length of tools the simulation is confusing cause its showing spindle face movement not tool tip movement.
.
hard to describe unless you use gage length or wear comp everyday. its done that way so if tool comp is not on or active it wont crash a long tool into part or table
many shops use gage length programming where tool comp is really wear comp. unless simulator knows the length of tools the simulation is confusing cause its showing spindle face movement not tool tip movement.
.
hard to describe unless you use gage length or wear comp everyday. its done that way so if tool comp is not on or active it wont crash a long tool into part or table
Casady Machine
Aluminum
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2013
- Location
- California, USA
It all depends on the accuracy of the sim. Most sims do a great job on the basics and theory but lack most of the nuance. That said, using them in combination with real word training can be invaluable. Sims are a huge help in many fields mostly because of the money they can save you but you still need hands on training if you want the best results, most of the time.
bhigdog
Stainless
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2005
- Location
- Eastern PA
Back when I was a pilot and we would train to be licensed to fly a new type of plane we would train on a sim. It was a great way to learn where all the switches and controls were and how the plane reacted to whatever you did. After the sim training was complete we would get in the airplane, with an instructor pilot in the right seat, and go flying. The transition was seamless. It was like we were flying the actual airplane all along.
That said..........The sim did not teach us to be pilots along with all the skills and nuances of the craft. All that stuff is only learned the hard way.
I'm thinking a machine simulator to train an operator already skilled on another type/make of machine would be very worth while. Using one to train a newby, unless he is simply there to press the green button would not be so good......Bob
That said..........The sim did not teach us to be pilots along with all the skills and nuances of the craft. All that stuff is only learned the hard way.
I'm thinking a machine simulator to train an operator already skilled on another type/make of machine would be very worth while. Using one to train a newby, unless he is simply there to press the green button would not be so good......Bob
Mike1974
Diamond
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2014
- Location
- Tampa area
I like that!
A bit OT, but related, I can program something to "the T", but nothing substitutes inspecting the part and having a good setup guy! I can use stock compare*, and such ( Mastercam* I am sure most software have a similar function?), but it won't tell me if the setup guy grabbed a 3mm endmill instead of an 1/8", or if he misread the ext length as 1.06" instead of 1.60"
Plane Parts
Aluminum
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2019
The best training I can imagine is making newbies buy their own cutters. They'll be VERY cautious when it's their money in the tool holder.
LOL on this.
so true.
and best of all, let them engrave their names on it... their precious babies!
5 axis Fidia guy
Stainless
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2006
- Location
- Wisconsin
Vericut would be a fantastic thing to have students train on. But keep in mind it's very involved software and machine specific, so there is another entire new learning curve setting it all up and learning the software. However this can only be a good thing because allot of shops use the software and it can only help being at least a little knowledgeable on it.