What sets SolidCAM apart?

[neilhnz]

Hi all,

I have been looking through the SolidCAM posts and there is a wealth of knowledge here that I am hoping to lean upon.

The company that I am working for is currently going through the process of selecting and implementing a new CAM solution for its existing CNC machines.

One lathe, one 3 axis mill and one 4 axis mill.

Is it possible please that I can get some feedback on what in your opinion sets SolidCAM apart for others on the market. Is it ease of use, special features, integration with SolidWorks or Support and training?

There is such an array of CAM solutions out there it is very difficult to know which to go with.

Looking forward to your response.

Regards,

Neil...

[Brakeman Bob]

Neil,

What sets SolidCAM apart for the company I work for is (in no particular order)

(1) Associativity within SolidWorks. We design & make our own product and very often I am programming before the design is finalised. When the Design model changes SolidCAM picks that up and lets me know. Sometimes, in the case of minor changes, it is a simple matter of synchronising the CAM to the Design and recalculating but often there is a little more work than that. What matters is we don't have an unwieldy change control system to bog us down in our quest to reduce lead time.

(2) Access to post-processors and ability to edit. This is a biggie with me as as over the years I have made my posts 'bomb-proof' so that code goes onto the machine with no manual editing at all and I have set the posts up to generate production / prove-out paperwork like tool set-up lists, program sequence, fixture lists etc. We had a very bad experience with our previous CAM system in that it took 3 years to get a post we had confidence in and even then manual edits were needed before the code went out to the machine. The other CAM companies we looked at before we selected SolidCAM locked the user out of the post processor and some even charged for changes to their post to bring the code into line with customer requirements.

(3) Cost. Here in the UK the SolidCAM / SolidWorks bundle is a very good deal and I have found using SolidWorks for fixture design a joy. I think it must have cut my design time by about 60~70%

(4)Support here in the UK is excellent (mind you we are on maintenance). We've had issues but they have been sorted, most of them within 4 hours. SolidCAM UK were very supportive when we went into five axis machining a couple of years ago and their advice in what to look for in a machine control was invaluable. Recently we took on a couple of Turn-Mill centres and the programming / post processor are ther least of our worries.

Most mid-range CAM systems will do what you want and a critical factor in my opinion is what sort of CAD will you be dealing with - a huge variety of formats or just one or two. If it is the former then I personally would look harder at some of the other CAM systems as using SolidWorks as a translator is a slege hammer to crack a nut.

Bob

[JimV]

Neil

I have used both Camworks and Solidacam software.
Currently using Soildcam for the last 6 months. 1 year using Camworks.
I would go with Solidcam over Camworks.
Solidcam Software is easier to use and has better customer support.
Jim V

[neilhnz]

Bob,

Many thanks for the detailed reply. The fact that SolidCAM is incorporated onto SolidWorks means for us that we do not have to learn a whole new interface.

The issue you raised in Point 2 of being able to edit the post I thought was standard with all CAM packages, from your post it seems that it is not the case. So I appreciate that you have pointed this out.

In point 4 of your post you mention Support. One thing that has impressed me so far is that the support that SolidCAM seems to have here in the South Island of New Zealand. They have a specialist that will ensure the best compatability between the postprocessor and the machine. Technical support will be an essential part of making the final choice.

Your final point about of what file format we will be throwing into the system is quite relevant. As most of the files will be our own (Native SolidWorks) files.

Thank you for your time Bob. It makes my job a lot easier getting feedback from people who are out there already using these tools in their everyday work.

Regards,

Neil...

Neil,

What sets SolidCAM apart for the company I work for is (in no particular order)

(1) Associativity within SolidWorks. We design & make our own product and very often I am programming before the design is finalised. When the Design model changes SolidCAM picks that up and lets me know. Sometimes, in the case of minor changes, it is a simple matter of synchronising the CAM to the Design and recalculating but often there is a little more work than that. What matters is we don't have an unwieldy change control system to bog us down in our quest to reduce lead time.

(2) Access to post-processors and ability to edit. This is a biggie with me as as over the years I have made my posts 'bomb-proof' so that code goes onto the machine with no manual editing at all and I have set the posts up to generate production / prove-out paperwork like tool set-up lists, program sequence, fixture lists etc. We had a very bad experience with our previous CAM system in that it took 3 years to get a post we had confidence in and even then manual edits were needed before the code went out to the machine. The other CAM companies we looked at before we selected SolidCAM locked the user out of the post processor and some even charged for changes to their post to bring the code into line with customer requirements.

(3) Cost. Here in the UK the SolidCAM / SolidWorks bundle is a very good deal and I have found using SolidWorks for fixture design a joy. I think it must have cut my design time by about 60~70%

(4)Support here in the UK is excellent (mind you we are on maintenance). We've had issues but they have been sorted, most of them within 4 hours. SolidCAM UK were very supportive when we went into five axis machining a couple of years ago and their advice in what to look for in a machine control was invaluable. Recently we took on a couple of Turn-Mill centres and the programming / post processor are ther least of our worries.

Most mid-range CAM systems will do what you want and a critical factor in my opinion is what sort of CAD will you be dealing with - a huge variety of formats or just one or two. If it is the former then I personally would look harder at some of the other CAM systems as using SolidWorks as a translator is a slege hammer to crack a nut.

Bob

[neilhnz]

Hi Jim,

Thank you for the input.

It is good to know that you are getting the results you need from SolidCAM. Again I see that customer support is a major factor for you as well.

One thing I have noticed in my very limited use of the packages I have been playing with is that SolidCAM seems to better user interface.

The help files are a little better and there is a lot of supporting information on the Internet to assist in learning the package.

So far I have been impressed with the program.

Regards,

Neil...

Neil

I have used both Camworks and Solidacam software.
Currently using Soildcam for the last 6 months. 1 year using Camworks.
I would go with Solidcam over Camworks.
Solidcam Software is easier to use and has better customer support.
Jim V

[mattpatt]

Solidcam has been great for me. Easy to learn.

It's integration with SW is most useful. So updates to the part are recognised and (hopefully) easy to update the toolpaths etc.

For me it's given a few headaches, but I enjoy trying to mess with the various strategies to get the tool paths I want. HSM is particularly fun!

The post processor files are reasonably easy to edit (just read the manual), and with the help of guys on this forum I now don't have to touch my posts (except for 3D drilling.....BAH!) before loading them in the machine.

I'm not sure of one thing though. SC copies the original SLDPRT and uses that for the design model. If changes are made to the (referenced) original part it is recognised, but I have had occasions where my lad has made a mod to the copied design model and not the original. The toolpaths are correct, but the original part and the SC design model are no longer the same. Confused me a couplee of time with this one. I'll give his knuckles a crack with a steel rule next time he does it! :-)

Other than that......no complaints.

[Brakeman Bob]

(except for 3D drilling.....BAH!)

Matt, whats the problem with 3D drilling? I have used this as a roughing strategy with a Sandvik U-Drill with great effect but I will admit that it took a fair bit of work in the post to get the drilling cycles just how I wanted them. It has been a while now but I seem to remember it involved the creation of a number of logical variables used as status flags i.e. "first_drill", "3D-complete" etc.

I'll did out my old FANUC 16MA post and see what I did.

All the best

Bob

[mattpatt]

Hi Bob,

I can't seem to get the G80 to post after the drilling is done.

When I look at the "trace all" I am not getting the "@end_drill" command, so no G80.

Also, with normal drilling I get as follows (real code I'm using):

@drill ==> drill_depth:58.509 down_step:20.000 num_down_steps:3
..> xpos:44.000T ypos:-33.999T zpos:50.500T feed:484.000T feed_teeth:0.220T
..> drill_clearance_z:50.500 drill_upper_z:50.500 drill_lower_z:-8.009
..> drill_type:2 d_drill_type: D_Peck spin:1100.000 spin_teeth:69.115
..> cpos:0.000T
>
> N126 X44. Y-33.999 Z50.5
> N128 G98 G83 Z-8.009 R50.5 Q20. F484
@drill_point ==> xpos:44.000T ypos:-33.999T zpos:50.500F first_drill:true
>
@drill_point ==> xpos:146.000T ypos:-69.499T zpos:50.500F first_drill:false
>
> N130 X146. Y-69.499
@drill_point ==> xpos:248.000T ypos:-33.999T zpos:50.500F first_drill:false
>
> N132 X248. Y-33.999
@end_drill ==> no parameters
>
> N134 G80
@end_of_job ==> no parameters

Whereas, for the 3D drilling (different job, but real code) I get:

@drill ==> drill_depth:33.700 down_step:20.000 num_down_steps:2
..> xpos:168.036T ypos:-39.622T zpos:50.500T feed:484.000T feed_teeth:0.220T
..> drill_clearance_z:50.500 drill_upper_z:50.500 drill_lower_z:16.800
..> drill_type:2 d_drill_type: D_Peck spin:1100.000 spin_teeth:69.115
..> cpos:0.000T
>
> N134 G0 X168.036 Y-39.622 Z50.5
> N136 G98 G83 Z16.8 R50.5 Q20. F484
@drill_point ==> xpos:168.036T ypos:-39.622T zpos:50.500F first_drill:true
>
@drill ==> drill_depth:33.700 down_step:20.000 num_down_steps:2
..> xpos:206.390T ypos:-50.909T zpos:50.500T feed:484.000T feed_teeth:0.220T
..> drill_clearance_z:50.500 drill_upper_z:50.500 drill_lower_z:16.800
..> drill_type:2 d_drill_type: D_Peck spin:1100.000 spin_teeth:69.115
..> cpos:0.000T
>
> N138 G0 X206.39 Y-50.909 Z50.5
> N140 G98 G83 Z16.8 R50.5 Q20. F484
@drill_point ==> xpos:206.390T ypos:-50.909T zpos:50.500F first_drill:true
>
@end_of_job ==> no parameters

Notice that each drilling position is "first_drill:true" in the "@drill-point" command, but this isn't so for the normal drilling. It is noted at "first_drill:false" from the second drill onwards. Not sure if that has anything to do with it.

Anyway, there's more, but that's enough for starters.

Not sure how and where to try to fire the "@end_drill" command

Regards,

Matt.

[kujirasan]

Go for solidcam and you wont regret it, it is easy to learn , easy to teach and easy to use, well documented and no guess work, I guess being integrated with solidworks, gives it such an appeal, I played key role where I worked to replace SOLIDEDGE with SLODIWORKS, and teaching new staff became a breeze , money for value is the best!

[Brakeman Bob]

Hi Matt,

I know what you mean with end_drill and 3D drilling. to overcome this I reconfigured my post to cough the G80 command when end_of_job is output from the CAM. This menas that the code in end_of_job becomes conditional sucah as

if job_type eq drill
code here
endif
if job_type eq profile
code here
endif

and so on. How I wish that the people who wrote the GPP language had put in a CASE SELECT statement.

Hope this helps

Bob

[mattpatt]

Hi Bob,

Not sure if we should continue this particular conversation in this thread, but I will just say that your plan there sounds like it'll work. I'll give it a try. Everything else seems tickety boo so far, so maybe I'll just try the G80 output for the 3D drilling first and see what happens.

I'll start a new thread with the answer so that I don't get in trouble with the hijacking police!