[GeneK]

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

[tobyaxis]

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

[GeneK]

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

[tobyaxis]

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. The only useful tools I got out of it was Predator Virtual CNC, Predator Editor and a few extra file translators. Hmmmmmmmm.........

"Kick the Tires and Light the Fires.......Alibre ROCKS!!!!!!"

http://www.cnczone.com/forums/showth...300#post438300
http://www.novedge.com/MecSoft/Visua.../products/1572

[HMB3000]

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.

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

[tobyaxis]

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

[HMB3000]

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

[tobyaxis]

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

Worked UP???? 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)

[GeneK]

Worked UP???? 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

[Toolbit]

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

Calm Down

[smurph]

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.

[tobyaxis]

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:

[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

No, just some workmen discussing tools.
GeneK

[tobyaxis]

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?

[Toolbit]

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>

[The One]

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]

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.

[orizaba]

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?

[tobyaxis]

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:

[tjones]

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.