[allenp]

hello,
I'm gonna be using mirror functions alot because we mainly produce 1 "normal" and one mirrored part, but I'm just beginning to program and I wonder how do you create entire cam process from "normal" part in mirorred position?
But I don't just want to create G code for mirrored part(which by the way, changes direction of milling process which is bad and I dont know how to fix it), but also whole new process which can be changed without changing original model.

[imachining-6061]

There is an option to mirror its in the transform option . To access it select all the operations you want to mirror right click select transform. Inside the transform option you can find the mirror option . Bad that it's not keeping the cutting direction!

[arikaa]

I would recommand doing it at solidworks.

[Brakeman Bob]

Producing a mirrored (or 'handed') part in SolidCAM is very, very painful. It stems back to the use of SolidWorks as the CAD engine upon which the CAM system rests.

If you use SolidWorks to create a mirrored part be aware that every single geometry that you have picked from the model will lose its references and will have to be redefined. To get around this I use sketches in a part that I create in the CAM assembly and make sure that the references are broken before the sketch is saved. Also be aware that if your part is prismatic or multi-axis, the MAC positions are difficult to mirror and the best way I have found of doing that is manipulating the SW planes that are created when you generate a sketch from geometry. Messy, but it works! Some people at SolidCAM will tell you that Machine Process and Process Templates are useful for mirroring. This is true only if all the processes are on one MAC position and then again the geometry has to be redefined so there isn't much to be gained really.

Another problem with using SolidWorks to create the mirrored part is what happens with configurations. If the original (or seed) un-mirrored part has configurations be aware that the mirrored part will show the configuration the seed part was last saved in. So if your seed part had two configs say "HOLES" and "NO HOLES" and the seed part was saved in the NO HOLES config, the mirrored part will only show the NO HOLES config. The only way to get it back is to open the seed part and resave it in the HOLES configuration. Now that might sound simple enough but if your designers are fond of using configurations (often for very sound reasons) then mirroring the 'right' part can become tricky. In such cases, it pays to create dumb solids for the mirroring but then again you lose all associativity which brings risks of its own in a fast moving environment.

In short, SolidCAM absolutely sucks at mirroring and unless you are irrevocably wedded to SolidWorks, there are far better solutions out there.

[allenp]

Producing a mirrored (or 'handed') part in SolidCAM is very, very painful. It stems back to the use of SolidWorks as the CAD engine upon which the CAM system rests.

If you use SolidWorks to create a mirrored part be aware that every single geometry that you have picked from the model will lose its references and will have to be redefined. To get around this I use sketches in a part that I create in the CAM assembly and make sure that the references are broken before the sketch is saved. Also be aware that if your part is prismatic or multi-axis, the MAC positions are difficult to mirror and the best way I have found of doing that is manipulating the SW planes that are created when you generate a sketch from geometry. Messy, but it works! Some people at SolidCAM will tell you that Machine Process and Process Templates are useful for mirroring. This is true only if all the processes are on one MAC position and then again the geometry has to be redefined so there isn't much to be gained really.

Another problem with using SolidWorks to create the mirrored part is what happens with configurations. If the original (or seed) un-mirrored part has configurations be aware that the mirrored part will show the configuration the seed part was last saved in. So if your seed part had two configs say "HOLES" and "NO HOLES" and the seed part was saved in the NO HOLES config, the mirrored part will only show the NO HOLES config. The only way to get it back is to open the seed part and resave it in the HOLES configuration. Now that might sound simple enough but if your designers are fond of using configurations (often for very sound reasons) then mirroring the 'right' part can become tricky. In such cases, it pays to create dumb solids for the mirroring but then again you lose all associativity which brings risks of its own in a fast moving environment.

In short, SolidCAM absolutely sucks at mirroring and unless you are irrevocably wedded to SolidWorks, there are far better solutions out there.

thank you for a very useful answer!!
although it's not the one I wanted to hear as I'd have to use mirroring very often as most of our parts are one original and one mirrored, so, please, tell me what is a far better solution than solidcam?
thanks again.

[imachining-6061]

As long as you have two parts I will give you a less pain full suggestion. First save the two parts in two different folders then complete the program for one part and make a copy of the cam part save it in the mirror part folder . Now open the cam part and change the model reference to the mirrored part . Advantages are you can keep your tool table and operations and the disadvantage is you have to redefine your part just like the other one and reselect all your geometries .
Note : do not use the solidworks save as option it will create trouble. Use the solidcam save as or just copy paste the . PRZ file
Again it's my personal opinion and I found it less painful.

[Brakeman Bob]

That is pretty much what I do but I use the "Save As" facility from within SolidCAM.

I find the pain comes from (a) having to define a lot of MAC positions again (b) having to redefine and geometries that were linked to the original model such as profiles, holes, faces etc. and (c) having to completely redefine and manipulated face geometry generated off the model and then altered to facilitate five axis work (I think this one is probably the worst).

Another pain is the interminable amount of time SolidWorks/CAM takes to recalculate and rebuild the job. I make use of the multiple set-up facility in SolidCAM and getting down towards the end of the job tree (say 150 jobs plus) it can take 20 minutes or more between pressing 'Calculate' and getting a toolpath to look at, even longer if you have the temerity to want to use rest machining in order to cut down on air cutting.

[imachining-6061]

Agree it's not a real option for mirroring it's just a workaround. If the mirror option in the solidcam worked right then life would be more easier

[allenp]

i dont have two parts only one part "left" or original part.
making two separate processes for milling mirrored and unmirrored part is not an option, too much time consuming and very much senseless work.
I just need some kind of a "shortcut" to make mirrored parts in normal millling direction, not one part in climb, other in conventional direction of milling, because that messes up the smoothness of parts finishing and also the measures since one direction takes more material than the other

[Brakeman Bob]

In another life I was part of a business that built very big machine tools for machining of aircraft wing components and the machine in question had two spindles on the gantry (this machine was big - 60m x 15m bed) and in the control kiosk they had a 3 position switch. Position A linked the spindles in tandem so that it machined two identical parts, position B machined one LH part and one RH part and position C machined two identical mirrored parts and all the machining was driven by on CNC program. TO get around the direction of cut problem, they two sets of milling tools, one normal (or right hand cutting) that was rotated clockwise with M3 and the other LH cutting that need the spindle to be rotated in reverse with M4. I have often wondered why they went to such expense - surely the cost of reprogramming the part would have been outweighed by the expense of the tooling. Or perhaps not taking into account that everything thing the machined was required to be LH & RH and the tools were used on every single job.

If you have the money and, probably more importantly, the space in the machine tool magazine it might be an approach worth considering.

[imachining-6061]

Seems like you don't have to make that investment . The mirror issue has been fixed in solidcam2016 . Now when you mirror a operation it maintains the cutting direction . A big thanks to solidcam team .

[imachining-6061]

Hi guys the mirroring issue has fixed in solidcam2016 . Now when you mirror a operation it keeps the cutting direction . A big thank you to solidcam team

[imachining-6061]

Producing a mirrored (or 'handed') part in SolidCAM is very, very painful. It stems back to the use of SolidWorks as the CAD engine upon which the CAM system rests.

Good news Bob ! The mirroring option in solidcam2016 now keeps the cutting direction . A big thanks to solidcam team

[imachining-6061]

Producing a mirrored (or 'handed') part in SolidCAM is very, very painful. It stems back to the use of SolidWorks as the CAD engine upon which the CAM system rests.

Good news bob ! .The mirror option in solidcam2016 keeps the cutting direction .A big time saver for all of us . thanks solidcam team

[Brakeman Bob]

I know and I hoping to test it on one of my parts very soon. If mirroring works with 3 + 2 drilling and five axis machining then I shall break out the champagne! :cheers::banana:

In all seriousness, this is a really, really good thing. I second your vote of thanks to the SolidCAM team. :wave: