Has anybody worked with the gear function in Ver 22? I can't figure out how to use the standard terms as in Ivan Law's book and get them to fly in BobCad 22. Ver 20 takes the terms and computes the tooth shape very well but ver 22 balks at each turn. When I look at the terms the default gear has I find no standard formula from any of my gear books that give those values, but BobCad makes a gear drawing with them.

GeneK

No idea over here. Addendums, and Dedendums, Pressure Angles, and Pitch are what I go by when working with Gears. Sorry:(

No idea over here. Addendums, and Dedendums, Pressure Angles, and Pitch are what I go by when working with Gears. Sorry:(

unfortunately machinist buy gear cutters by diametrical pitch and pressure angles and number of teeth. Model engineers and other make their drawings accordingly. I found a way to find the OD then convert that to the 'pitch' value that ver 22 wants entered using the pd given on drawings that I am converting to CNC. At least now a gear drawn in Ver 22 will over lay exactly a gear in ver 20.

GeneK

unfortunately machinist buy gear cutters by diametrical pitch and pressure angles and number of teeth. Model engineers and other make their drawings accordingly. I found a way to find the OD then convert that to the 'pitch' value that ver 22 wants entered using the pd given on drawings that I am converting to CNC. At least now a gear drawn in Ver 22 will over lay exactly a gear in ver 20.

GeneK

Your not alone. I have been reverting back to V21 for a great deal of things that do not work in V22/2007. It's a shame really. Oh well, at least there is a fighting chance since I have switched to Alibre V10 Professional for CAD Modeling. I feel bad mentioning this because there are so many that purchased V22 that doesn't work are stuck on simple things that V21 can do.

This was a very bad move on BCC's part. Chalk up another dissatisfied customer(nuts). I have grown very tired of this version and the excuses made by BCC:mad:. The only useful tools I got out of it was Predator Virtual CNC, Predator Editor and a few extra file translators;):D. Hmmmmmmmm.........

"Kick the Tires and Light the Fires.......Alibre ROCKS!!!!!!":):D

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=438300#post438300
http://www.novedge.com/MecSoft/VisualMILL-Pro-6.0/products/1572

Your not alone. I have been reverting back to V21 for a great deal of things that do not work in V22/2007. It's a shame really. Oh well, at least there is a fighting chance since I have switched to Alibre V10 Professional for CAD Modeling. I feel bad mentioning this because there are so many that purchased V22 that doesn't work are stuck on simple things that V21 can do.

This was a very bad move on BCC's part. Chalk up another dissatisfied customer(nuts). I have grown very tired of this version and the excuses made by BCC:mad:.


Maybe you just need some training for V22 Toby. Afterall you still have question about V21

Maybe you just need some training for V22 Toby. Afterall you still have question about V21

Run out and get training for broken software, that is funny. Hmmmm...., I wonder if you know what your actually saying, or you have posted just to start trouble.

Personally, when I need training for CAD/CAM software I will be going elsewhere, because this is ridiculous.

FYI, My question about V21 has been answered buy a pc expert, and good friend SWAG. He figured it out playing around with the fonts.

So what is it that you do?????

FYI: I am the only person that was able to create Kiwi's Dome with V21, LOL. But then again V21 works, and Alibre is way better.:)

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11350

Run out and get training for broken software, that is funny. Hmmmm...., I wonder if you know what your actually saying, or you have posted just to start trouble.

Personally, when I need training for CAD/CAM software I will be going elsewhere, because this is ridiculous.

FYI, My question about V21 has been answered buy a pc expert, and good friend SWAG. He figured it out playing around with the fonts.

So what is it that you do?????

FYI: I am the only person that was able to create Kiwi's Dome with V21, LOL. But then again V21 works, and Alibre is way better.:)

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11350

it was only a sudjestion had no idea that your that touchie. did not mean to get you all worked up

it was only a sudjestion had no idea that your that touchie. did not mean to get you all worked up

Worked UP????:confused: To put it in another way I would say that BCC has been outgrown.

Not to mention the need for Full 4 Axis and 5 Axis Indexing capabilities plus better tool path options. V17,V19,V20,V21 have been successfully used for the last 6 years. Now a change to fully parametric software is a must to avoid having to recreate entire Solid Models and Tool Paths when customers make revision changes. Doing three times the work is not profitable in todays market.

Sorry to Offend but there is a lot of competition out there and I plan to stay competitive.

Anything can be done with BCC, but it can be very time consuming. Hence time is money.

GeneK, I apologize for taking this thread off topic. If you would like I will move it to a better location.(wrong)

Worked UP????:confused: To put it in another way I would say that BCC has been outgrown.

Not to mention the need for Full 4 Axis and 5 Axis Indexing capabilities plus better tool path options. V17,V19,V20,V21 have been successfully used for the last 6 years. Now a change to fully parametric software is a must to avoid having to recreate entire Solid Models and Tool Paths when customers make revision changes. Doing three times the work is not profitable in todays market.

Sorry to Offend but there is a lot of competition out there and I plan to stay competitive.

Anything can be done with BCC, but it can be very time consuming. Hence time is money.

GeneK, I apologize for taking this thread off topic. If you would like I will move it to a better location.(wrong)

No problem, apology accepted. I have always respected how clearly you have helped others on this and other boards. Fortunately/unfortunately for me I am not in a comercial endeavor. I'm a retired EE and certified watchmaker. Retired means very little money to try various programs. I need to make what I have got work at least as long as I can keep doing my hobbies. I was hoping for a migration to ver 22, but it looks like I'll also have to run both for quite a while.

GeneK

Hey,
Sounds like you folks think Bobcad V-22 and Microsoft's Vista go hand in hand. Both new and great.<grin>

Calm Down

When I was an automotive mechanic, a very wise older fellow told me something; "New means new. New does not mean good." He was speaking of car parts, but I do believe that it pertains to just about everything.

However, with a lot of work on my post processor and figuring out what I need to do to get around certain issues, I can use v22. I have not found a way to do this with Vista. :)

When I was an automotive mechanic, a very wise older fellow told me something; "New means new. New does not mean good." He was speaking of car parts, but I do believe that it pertains to just about everything.

However, with a lot of work on my post processor and figuring out what I need to do to get around certain issues, I can use v22. I have not found a way to do this with Vista. :)

I have been using V22 since last year for tons of stuff. The only problem has been having to revert to V21 and Previous Versions of V22 to keep things going.

It has out worn its welcome on my PC's and for my business. Better software is needed at this point.:drowning:

Hey,
Sounds like you folks think Bobcad V-22 and Microsoft's Vista go hand in hand. Both new and great.<grin>

Calm Down
No, just some workmen discussing tools.
GeneK

Hey,
Sounds like you folks think Bobcad V-22 and Microsoft's Vista go hand in hand. Both new and great.<grin>

Calm Down

Is there really any point to this post? Lets try to be a little more compassionate and helpful.

Anyone can knock something, but can they actually help?

tobyaxis,

I didn't think there was a negative remark in my post. I did say that V22 and vista was new and great! Maybe you should go back and read your posts about V22, those were the only negative remarks that I read about Bobcad V22.

Since you're slightly touchy on this subject I'll apologize for saying that "V22 and Vista are new and great", and "calm down". Maybe I should of said "slightly tarnished". At least it could then be said that "I wasn't being compassionate". Buttttttttttttt I really did want to say that "V22 and Vista are new and great" Soooooooooo I guess you're opinion that I'm not compassionate stands.<grin>

GeneK,

I know that this thread has digressed from the original question, but I would like to make sure that you are getting an answer and not just rhetoric.

You will have to forgive me, but I do not have a copy of Ivan's Law, so I am going to have to ask: What values do you have to work with?

If you can tell me what values you have, I can give you a solution to input the values that are required and get the proper output from the system.

Regards

GeneK,

I know that this thread has digressed from the original question, but I would like to make sure that you are getting an answer and not just rhetoric.

You will have to forgive me, but I do not have a copy of Ivan's Law, so I am going to have to ask: What values do you have to work with?

If you can tell me what values you have, I can give you a solution to input the values that are required and get the proper output from the system.

Regards


The One, I'm sure that Ivan Law who wrote Gears and Gear Cutting for the Workshop Practice Series(ISBN 1-85242-911-8) is flattered that you have promoted him to having it proclaimed a LAW!(;-).

The confusion comes in the fact that for gears there are three terms that include 'pitch'.
Pitch is never refered to by itself in most books, when I'm talking gears with my friends we have already established diametrical pitch, pressure angle and number of teeth. Those three terms define any standard gear. Those three terms are what will be on the face of the drawing to tell you what is needed. I can buy or make a cutter from those terms and make a gear for some one on the other side of the world and they will mesh.

The confusion comes from the default values in BobCad not jiving when run through the standard formulas.
I took the only fixed information from that window and finally figured out what values each window needs.
It seems that who ever set up the example made a quick conversion from a module 6 gear and used rounded off values. It winds up that the 'Pitch' window needs Pitch diameter, not Circular Pitch or Diametrical Pitch.

The conversion from module makes a diametrical pitch of 4.2353, confusing in that diametrical pitch is always an integer. (module is used mostly with metric gears) Check any catalogue such as MSC for involute gear cutters and you will see only integer values for the cutters that can be bought. Next the value of pitch diameter in the example is off by 28 thousanths of an inch, in this day of the calculator that is a huge round off error and causes gears to have an extra half tooth at times.
Ideally, I should have to only enter the standard values I would give to my gear supplier to order a gear, # teeth, diamatrical pitch, and pressure angle. For those in the metric countries would require # teeth, module, and pressure angle.

GeneK

PS, the above only relates to involute gears, cycloids are another kettle of fish.

I'm afraid to try another CAD program. All I know is bobcad and I kinda like it. After months of (nuts) If I try another and like it.......

Toby are you still going to help out us diehard bobers?

I'm afraid to try another CAD program. All I know is bobcad and I kinda like it. After months of (nuts) If I try another and like it.......

Toby are you still going to help out us diehard bobers?

I have every intention of helping.

I must apologize for my personal rant do to a Troll in the Forum and he knows who he is. This individual has nothing better to do than Troll Forums and start trouble. But that is ok because if it is a continuing problem the little RED Button in the top left corner will be used again.

I must tell you though that Alibre has become the CAD program that I use now.

Help will aways be here and I will continue to try to help as much as possible.

Have a nice weekend:rainfro:

I have also asked Bobcad to update their gear module but I want the other way instead of what you want. I wish to have more control (and yes it needs to be accurate). The reason is we wire cut specials that do not get carried as standards from any known gear manufactures. We actually produce flat broaches for many automotive spines and their gages too. When they wish to have a gage within +-.00005 over pins(nearly imposible by any gage company because they can never repeat a certification) we ussually have to make several at the same cut and hope one certifies in tolerance.

We have a wire program from years back called Mecanic. It had the best gear addon involute module I have ever saw. It is based on metric Module input but the conversion is easy for inch. It even gives the formulas for converting. It also allowed to change the form based on many gear specs. Believe me when I say many but most were measurement over pins and modified diameters.

Anyhow the point is that many CAD programs out there do not create correct involute gears. Mecanic would even create an involute based on a tolerance amount. So I could tell it to give the correct form within .001" or .00001" and the geometry would be less or more complex accordingly.

It always made the gear form out of tangent arc segments and not lines like many programs do. Arc segments are the prefered (more correct) way for smooth form and ease of form creation.

Toby
I am sending out my first cylinder head today, in large part because of your help. And The One, and Huflungdung. Thanks all.
Matt

I have also asked Bobcad to update their gear module but I want the other way instead of what you want. I wish to have more control (and yes it needs to be accurate). The reason is we
....

....

I have no problem if what they ask for is clear and of a standard form. It seems that set up a table like the do for the milling tools could be thought out and implimented. But that is the problem it needs to be thought out and carried through carefully. They could probably even include cycloids for us clock makers.
I usually use the gear function to make my tool profile for my cutting tool, that is why ver 20 worked well for me. I just had to lay out two teeth and use the space in between for my tool profile.

GeneK

Toby
I am sending out my first cylinder head today, in large part because of your help. And The One, and Huflungdung. Thanks all.
Matt

Glad to see that things worked out for you. What kind of head?? Ported SBC's, Hemi, ?????:)

How about a picture or two of you achievement.:D

Off Topic.

Just remember at times we all get frustrated. Even Toby. I have used Bobcad to produce many 3D parts in the machining industry. However I do not use it for everything we do. I would like to see the day that I do though.

Bobcad is trying to do this by changing their software completely from what they ran before. The older versions were limited by the programming they had and this had to be changed. It has been difficult for many who made the switch. I created my own post for V22 and got what I needed out of it.

I think that many things work correct now and there is still room for improvement. Bobcad is continuously adding and changing features and this makes it difficult for them not to have an error. I do testing for a grinding company and this is the norm. When adding features it will many times conflict with existing operations and must be fixed. It is not possible to test every feature of a program in all the combinations that it is capable of before release. If it is then it is too simple for production anyhow. It also isn't always possible for a one time error to be found in millions of programming lines.

Since I have done this type of testing for years I can be very forgiving to a company like Bobcad when they have a new release. Especially when they are adding the many new features as Bobcad is.

Off Topic.

Just remember at times we all get frustrated. Even Toby. I have used Bobcad to produce many 3D parts in the machining industry. However I do not use it for everything we do. I would like to see the day that I do though.

Bobcad is trying to do this by changing their software completely from what they ran before. The older versions were limited by the programming they had and this had to be changed. It has been difficult for many who made the switch. I created my own post for V22 and got what I needed out of it.

I think that many things work correct now and there is still room for improvement. Bobcad is continuously adding and changing features and this makes it difficult for them not to have an error. I do testing for a grinding company and this is the norm. When adding features it will many times conflict with existing operations and must be fixed. It is not possible to test every feature of a program in all the combinations that it is capable of before release. If it is then it is too simple for production anyhow. It also isn't always possible for a one time error to be found in millions of programming lines.

Since I have done this type of testing for years I can be very forgiving to a company like Bobcad when they have a new release. Especially when they are adding the many new features as Bobcad is.

(wrong):withstupi:)

Very well said Tjones. These additions have improved the software but due to the Add-Ons it is difficult to pin point errors. BCC is trying to improve the functionality, and bugs are to be expected.

My only problem is when under the gun to produce these bugs pop up and create frustration. Employers that do not know what we go through do not understand, but they want to see results in a timely manor. Uggg!!!!:confused:

I gets very frustrating with this New Version and sometimes even I lose patients.

...
We have a wire program from years back called Mecanic. It had the best gear addon involute module I have ever saw. ...

Tjones,

I used Mecanic for about 15 years to program an Agie wire. Boy do I miss that gear function as well.

Many a time we (or I) needed a special gear and there was never any problems generating accurate geometry.

I recall the package cost over $20k back around 1988. After I left the company, they THREW IT OUT, software license and all.

moldmker

Tjones,

I used Mecanic for about 15 years to program an Agie wire. Boy do I miss that gear function as well.

Many a time we (or I) needed a special gear and there was never any problems generating accurate geometry.

I recall the package cost over $20k back around 1988. After I left the company, they THREW IT OUT, software license and all.

moldmker

It's too bad you couldn't get the license transfered to you. Why is it we find out after the fact??? Once a company I worked for tossed 3 Dell Precision Workstations that were only 2 years old. Man I wish that was known before the waste management service showed. Isn't it Illegal to toss PC's in the trash anyway??

Nothing that big. These are for Unlimited Allstars (Kart engines). Billit raised port heads for the Briggs 305 and tecumshe star. My client ownes the world speed record for Karts,(140 + mph) I hope we try to set a new record soon. I have built three 4 valve heads for the Briggs Animal engine, but they still have a few bugs to work out. Mainly the test engines keep exploding under them.
Thanks again
Matt

Nothing that big. These are for Unlimited Allstars (Kart engines). Billit raised port heads for the Briggs 305 and tecumshe star. My client ownes the world speed record for Karts,(140 + mph) I hope we try to set a new record soon. I have built three 4 valve heads for the Briggs Animal engine, but they still have a few bugs to work out. Mainly the test engines keep exploding under them.
Thanks again
Matt

Have you checked the Compression Ratio? Maybe your creating too much. What formulas are you using to calculate Intake/Exaust, Maximum CFM, and Compression??? Tecumshe's and Briggs are better than those Handa junkers. Are you modifying the Pistons, Connecting Rods, and Wrist Pins at all??

Have you checked the Compression Ratio? Maybe your creating too much. What formulas are you using to calculate Intake/Exaust, Maximum CFM, and Compression??? Tecumshe's and Briggs are better than those Handa junkers. Are you modifying the Pistons, Connecting Rods, and Wrist Pins at all??

The block is about all that is stock, although they get modified. I increase the stroke, the bore, use a weisco drag piston, the rod is from ARC, ceramic rod bearings roller bearings on the crank and cam shaft. The cam is a COMP cam along with the springs and keepers. Stainless BIG valves and roller rockers.The side cover is billit too.
I think it figures out to about 9.75:1. The animals come from Briggs rated at 6.5HP @3500 rpm's. You have to turn them about 8500 and make 28-30 hp to keep up. Not to bad for an engine that dosent have an oil pump.

I know there is a way to design and build the ports that considers flow coefficients and total CFM, but I'm not to that point yet.

Matt

The block is about all that is stock, although they get modified. I increase the stroke, the bore, use a weisco drag piston, the rod is from ARC, ceramic rod bearings roller bearings on the crank and cam shaft. The cam is a COMP cam along with the springs and keepers. Stainless BIG valves and roller rockers.The side cover is billit too.
I think it figures out to about 9.75:1. The animals come from Briggs rated at 6.5HP @3500 rpm's. You have to turn them about 8500 and make 28-30 hp to keep up. Not to bad for an engine that dosent have an oil pump.

I know there is a way to design and build the ports that considers flow coefficients and total CFM, but I'm not to that point yet.

Matt

NICE!!!!!!!! Port the intake to match the runners on the heads, then put a slight helical cut in the base of the Carb spacer. This will decrease turbulence and increase CFM through out the induction system. I did this to my truck along with adding a little extra to what the stock Throttle Body spacer had. Major improvements across the torque table at lower rpms.

What is the crank in those nodular or forged?? What ever it might be look into TiN coatings fo rthe Crank, Cylinder Walls, Pistons and Rings. NICE!!!!!

I used to be a MotorHead but it got too expensive and received too much attention from Johnny Law. So programming CNC's at feed rates of 350IPM at 8,000 rpm will have to do for now.

I must apologize for my personal rant do to a Troll in the Forum and he knows who he is. .....because if it is a continuing problem the little RED Button in the top left corner will be used again./QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Toolbit;440444]
Since you're slightly touchy on this subject I'll apologize for saying that "V22 and Vista are new and great", and "calm down". Maybe I should of said "slightly tarnished".

Betta becareful Toolbit Toby knows where the red button is and he is not afraid to use it. I heard he used it so much in another they thru him out.

[quote=tobyaxis;441081]I must apologize for my personal rant do to a Troll in the Forum and he knows who he is. .....because if it is a continuing problem the little RED Button in the top left corner will be used again./QUOTE]



Betta becareful Toolbit Toby knows where the red button is and he is not afraid to use it. I heard he used it so much in another they thru him out.

If this was true or any of your business why are you still here Trolling for trouble:D????

FYI: I left Sorin's Forum for my own reasons and none other than that. It would be best if you mind your own business Mike M..:nono:

[quote=HMB3000;442301]

It would be best if you mind your own business Mike M..:nono:

[I] am not that peson and only pointing out a fact that you seem to think your some kind of internet cop./I]

[quote=tobyaxis;442365]

[I] am not that peson and only pointing out a fact that you seem to think your some kind of internet cop./I]


Any farther posts off the thread topic will be deleted, you have been warned.:nono:

tobyaxis,

I've been a member here for 4 years and have only posted less than 20 times. My posts were only trying to help when I could. You were going off the deep end. Everyone knows when any new program, I.E. version 22 and vista, there will be bugs that have to be addressed. I was only trying to get you to step back and count to 10. But you elected to attack a fellow member and click your nice little red button. Falsely accussing me of being a troll. The way you crawfish blaming me for your ranting maybe you could be a troll in sheep's clothing. I'm sorry for not being very tactful but then neither were you.