[bpmufx]

Hi guy's

I'm curious about a few things with regard to MadCAM:

1- Is there 4th axis support expected in the future?

2- Does it have pencil tracing?

3- Can I machine directly off of an OBJ file?

4- How are toolpaths organized? Is there a manager?
I saw that they were singled out and placed on layers,
but can they be recalled & modified, etc?

5- How is Post processor support?

Thanks in advance, hope to hear from you all.

[turmite]

Hi guy's

I'm curious about a few things with regard to MadCAM:

1- Is there 4th axis support expected in the future?

2- Does it have pencil tracing?

3- Can I machine directly off of an OBJ file?

4- How are toolpaths organized? Is there a manager?

I saw that they were singled out and placed on layers,
but can they be recalled & modified, etc?

5- How is Post processor support?

Thanks in advance, hope to hear from you all.

I am a happy Madcam user and I will answer to the best of my ability:

1.Yes, 4th axis is coming

2. Yes it has pencil tracing

3.I haven't looked to see if Rhino can import obj, but Madcam will
machine anything Rhino will open (I think)

4.The toolpaths can be recalled but I have yet to be able to edit the
paths themselves which are created as a "group" within Rhino.

5.Joakim is a great person for support of any kind. If he doesn't
already have a post for your machine he will help you create one.
You can also edit and creat your own post once you learn how.

Mike

[bpmufx]

Hey Mike,
Thanks for the heads up. BTW Are you coming at this from any past CAM background to compare with?

Also, did you compare with MeshCAM? Any thoughts to share if you did?

Rhino definately can import OBJ files but as I'm sure you aware, its a mesh model, and there's not much that can be done with meshes. So I'm really curious whether it would need be turned into a surface model first.

I have MasterCAM, SurfCAM, & BobCAM experience, and I'm curious how MadCAM holds up. I can certainly allow for a lot considering the $$.

[turmite]

Hi Evan,

I have used bobcad/cam for years. I tried Meshcam, and quite honestly for what it is, Robert has done an excellent job with it. My needs dictated what I had to have in a cam. I have demo-ed VisualMill, RamsGold and a couple of others I can't remember the names. For my needs Madcam did what I needed at a much better price than the others. In addition, it is not very often you will have the guy who wrote the software call you on his dime from Sweden to make sure you understand how to use the package.
Joakim is about as good as you can get for support. There are times he cannot get right back to you because he runs a full time mold and die shop in addition to writing software.

I am still very much in the learning part with madcam and each time I use it I find something else it will do that I didn't know about.

My suggestion is that you set up a skype account and email Joakim your skype info. I think you will be pleasently surprised. I have just set my skype account up but not bought the headset that is needed for the free account.

I will tell you this in a comparison between Madcam and Mastercam. Cutting the same parts it seems the files are smaller with Madcam than with Mastercam. I don't know that for a fact and I don't know that it would make a difference but I have tested the same part with toolpaths from both cam systems.

Mike

[bpmufx]

Mike,
Thanks a bunch for your feedback. I'm definately leaning toward MadCAM.
I'm wondering if you could do a test for me to see if MadCAM can run a path over an OBJ file. If not, I can always try the eval version.

Do you know whether the eval version allows a full posting of code?

Thanks again

Evan

[turmite]

Yes the evaluation version is full version for how ever many days he sets it up for. Post your ogj file here and I'll be glad to take a shot at it.

Mike

[corrie]

Hello gentlemen, Last night I downloaded madcam to see how it worked and I found it to a lot less work than VisualMill.After a few tries I was simulating my cut paths just as I imagined and wanted .I have yet to cut anything out but it looks like the code for one of my guitar surfaces was a lot less,how is this posible compared to V.M...Does the software have some kind of look ahead feature built in for optimizing how the part needs to be cut.Mind you I,m still at a learning stage but I found this product to be very user friendly.I,m definately considering buying it,my two cents,cheers.

[turmite]

Hi Corrie,

I have spoken to Joakim several times on the ph and one of our last conversations was about the size of the toolpaths I was getting compared to gcode I had gotton from mastercam. I told him the paths were considerably smaller in size using the same machining paramaters in both software packages. So yes, they are smaller, and no.....I can't tell you why!

Corrie, you will also find the support to be great as well. I simply cannot express how satisfied I am with the software and the support Joakim offers.
Mike

[Tony the Ferret]

Dont't understand why the files are different sizes, do you mean number of lines or file size in Kb., also are you in 3D or just plain old 2D
If it is number of program lines, then the smaller file can not be following the surface to the sam tollerance, and therefore the quality will not be the same. On the other hand if it is file size, it may be that the smaller one is not outputting duplicate positions, ie it the X position is repeated over several lines, it will not be sent from the PP. The other option is circular interpolation, some programs use them, others break them down into lots of small linear movements. for a realy small file both in length ang line number a SPLINE utput may be needed

[turmite]

Dont't understand why the files are different sizes, do you mean number of lines or file size in Kb., also are you in 3D or just plain old 2D
If it is number of program lines, then the smaller file can not be following the surface to the sam tollerance, and therefore the quality will not be the same. On the other hand if it is file size, it may be that the smaller one is not outputting duplicate positions, ie it the X position is repeated over several lines, it will not be sent from the PP. The other option is circular interpolation, some programs use them, others break them down into lots of small linear movements. for a realy small file both in length ang line number a SPLINE utput may be needed

Hi Tony,

# of lines, and run time. All the parameters were the same as far as stepover and it is full 3d. I can't explain it other than maybe Madcam does not have as many extra rapids and or z axis moves as I saw from the M/C files. I use a .500" ballnose with a
.040" step over and that is what I have used in all my files including Bobcad/cam. I carve wood so the .040" is good enough for me since I still have to sand it anyway!

Mike

[Tony the Ferret]

perhaps you could use smoother sandpaper with more lines of code, cut out some manual operations. with reduced number of lines there must be some compromise to the surface data, sharp corners that have been cut off, internal radii that are not the same size,,,,, you get what i mean. It is all down to your application and need. Metal engineers are generaly looking at 0.001"
I know some engineers (cutting metal & modelboard) that do not have a hand operation in the plans anymore. They achieve a mirror finish with a little longer on the Milling

[turmite]

Hi Tony,

Well yes I could spend the time on the machine to reduce the step over scallop to nearly nothing, but at the current machine time of 2 hrs I then get to the point of being able to carve one quicker with a manual duplication machine. In addition I use special air tools for sanding most of the surface and can sand from the current program finish in about 45 minutes. If I increase the machine time it will not significantly reduce the sand times so basically I am hit with a diminishing returns problem.

Here is what I produce.

Mike