How happy are you with MadCam?

[ftec]

Would like to know your opinions, specially those who can compare MC with RhinoCam2 Pro.

Been using RC2 now for some time and there is an update coming but I just don't feel much pumping under the shirt to invest, looking around for perhaps something else.

Thanks,

RAP

[Dan B]

I never owned Mecsoft's products, but I did spend significant amounts of time doing the demos in version 5 and 6. So I'm not super qualified to make a comparison, but I did get enough exposure to form an opinion.

I found that the Mecsoft products worked well enough, especially Visual Mill. RhinoCAM on the other hand would lock up and crash a lot. I also found that RhinoCAM was too intrusive. Using RhinoCAM meant that I gave up valuable graphical real estate for the MOP pane (I'm going by memory here, but I think that's what it was called). madCAM on the other hand is no more intrusive then a toolbar, and seems to be better integrated in Rhino. In other words, RhinoCAM felt like it was riding on top of Rhino, while madCAM felt like it was part of Rhino.

That's my opinion, for whatever that's worth,

Dan

[ftec]

Thanks Dan, you are right, RC occupies some screen area, but with a 27" monitor that problem is not too overwhelming. However, less can be more, as you say.

I installed MC demo and tried some simple 2.5D profiling stuff. Compared the G-code output with Rhinocam posting. MC seemed to prefer linear segments instead of using G2/G3 for arcs. Is there a setting for this?

How about programmable 3D bridges to keep small workpieces in place? Is this feature well supported, couldn't find settings for that yet? RC2 has some settings but not enough, some improvements should be in the new release though.

Thanks,

RAP

PS. With 3D bridges I mean bridges that can have individual location on the circumference + individual Z height value.

[Dan B]

You make a good point. My testing with RhinoCAM was back in the days of the square displays. With a nice big wide screen it might not be an issue at all.

As for G2 and G3 arcs, I don't believe that is possible in madCAM 4.3. However, keep in mind that madCAM 5 is coming soon, so that may change. I maybe wrong, it may be available in 4.3, I just haven't seen how to do it.

As for bridges (or tabs, if I understand correctly) search YouTube for a video on how to do this. It's from a couple of years ago if I remember correctly.

Hope this helps,

Dan

[fieldwork]

We have used Madcam in a college environment now for 4 years and I think it has an easy learning curve along with enough depth for the 3 and 4 axis machines we have.
I also have mastercam which has a lot of depth but hard to use and only accessible for 1 student at a time? For Madcam we have a site lic.
FW

[wdaehn]

I would not call myself an expert neither in the CNC space nor MadCAM, just the opposite in fact.

But as a hobby user I do not fine tune one CAM model for hours, my requirement is to draw something in Rhino, set the minimum required options for CAM like the cutter, stock and... let it run. Then design the next object.

Although I am not 100% happy with the outcome of the Madcam toolpath - it does many approaches instead of one smooth toolpath occasionally and things like that - it gives me exactly what I need: Almost no settings, acceptable result. And the option to optimize things.

Overall, I rate it a 9 out of 10. With a better tool path optimization (3d only, 2.5d you tell it when to do what already - so the outcome is perfect anyhow and the creation is fast as well) I would give it a 10.

[svenakela]

Originally Posted by wdaehn I would not call myself an expert neither in the CNC space nor MadCAM, just the opposite in fact. But as a hobby user I do not fine tune one CAM model for hours, my requirement is to draw something in Rhino, set the minimum required options for CAM like the cutter, stock and... let it run. Then design the next object. Although I am not 100% happy with the outcome of the Madcam toolpath - it does many approaches instead of one smooth toolpath occasionally and things like that - it gives me exactly what I need: Almost no settings, acceptable result. And the option to optimize things. Overall, I rate it a 9 out of 10. With a better tool path optimization (3d only, 2.5d you tell it when to do what already - so the outcome is perfect anyhow and the creation is fast as well) I would give it a 10.

Have in mind that the toolpath is very very very often optimized for steel cutting and approaches are really important to save the tool and to avoid burr on the surface. It's actually important to the level that Sandviken (one of the largest tool producers) have people doing PhD's on approaches.
I've been using CAM programs far more expensive that totally failed to be cutting safe...

BUT, I think it's a 9 out of 10 for me too. The reason for me is on the user level. Some GUI behaviours aren't logical but I've learned to live with them.

@ftec, there's no automatic function for tabs but if you add them yourself it's super easy to include them in the toolpath

I use cylinders as tabs in this clip. Fast forward and you'll see them.
Thomas crazy car - rear wing.mp4 - YouTube!