Hi Christi, I just came across this video. There are several misrepresentations here that I think you should correct, if you want to be seen as credible. 1. the red "Rapid" lines you discuss in the video are not "Rapids" and they do not cause a crash!!! They are high feed rate G1 Re Position moves that are defaulted to 0.003" (0.1mm)above the floor. G1 high feed, means they are smooth, not jerky like the VoluMill re position moves. When you edited them and moved them up to 5mm Z, you insinuated a failure where none exists. This is actually a very effective function of the iMachining tool path, and they should not be moved up to 5mm Z) 2. You are suggesting that the "Default settings" are similar for both systems, and then showing a time study of each tool path. In your actual test you are not testing with the same or equivalent settings for feeds and speeds and cutting angles. iMachining defaults to very conservative values, but raising the slider to level 6 or even to 8 will produce a much more efficient tool path without any damage to the tool. iMachining also provides a "Turbo" mode that moves the gradient of the scale towards the aggressive side of the slider. This gives the user much more control The default settings are designed for long stick-out or weak fixture setup. Showing one system running at 2.5 times faster spindle and feed than the other would of course result in a major difference in cycle time. 3. As mentioned by DaMaJa85 you fail to mention the constant chip thickness function of iMachining. This ensures that the tool is seeing a very consistent force and therefore protects the tool from damage due to excessive linear (tensile) forces. with iMachining you can run at extreme cutting parameters and still get great tool life. If you are going to compare the two tool paths, it would be helpful to mention all the positive and negative characteristics of each tool path. Please try again and if you need assistance understanding iMachining, I would gladly assist you.
SolidCAM Development Thank you for your comment. Please send another part and let's establish some points and test again if you want. As I told.on video, I just install Solidcam and use the default settings to generate toolpaths. I have a question: do you test on any machine volumill?
Hi Christi, I have run some Volumil cuts on machines. I prefer to talk about iMachining cuts since I have much more experience with them. Here is a link to a video of the cut we were doing at SolidWorks World 2018 last week on our desktop CNC machine with a 2.8 HP wood router spindle. ua-cam.com/video/eYsPCRqvotY/v-deo.html Please let me know what you think, and I would be happy to get you the solid model if you would like to run a comparison cut with Volumil.
You didn't show the half of that what iMachining differs from VoluMill! What about constant chip thickness? What about variable feeds? In Volumill all these parameters are trail and error...
Salutare! Ba da, dar am rezervele mele. Stiu ca e mai ieftin dar conteaza si cat de mult butonezi. Doar ca info, gasesti aici o comparatie intre cele doua (fusion si camworks) aici pe canal.
I suggest you explore more when you compare two technologies. Imachining calculates based on the machine, material and tool parameters and you forgot that imachining have a separate tab on the tool tab.
Antony Jose Please watch the video carefully, because I start with this. But every solution like imachining, volumill, vortex, etc does what you saying. If you consider imachining is the best that is fine. Thank you for your comment.
you have made a comparison at the end of the video about the machining time which sounded like you want to promote volumill. the real difference is when you tweak both the software to the same cutting condition and check the tool path pattern. The one gives you the constant and smooth material engagement should be a better choice
Hi Christi,
I just came across this video. There are several misrepresentations here that I think you should correct, if you want to be seen as credible.
1. the red "Rapid" lines you discuss in the video are not "Rapids" and they do not cause a crash!!!
They are high feed rate G1 Re Position moves that are defaulted to 0.003" (0.1mm)above the floor. G1 high feed, means they are smooth, not jerky like the VoluMill re position moves.
When you edited them and moved them up to 5mm Z, you insinuated a failure where none exists. This is actually a very effective function of the iMachining tool path, and they should not be moved up to 5mm Z)
2. You are suggesting that the "Default settings" are similar for both systems, and then showing a time study of each tool path. In your actual test you are not testing with the same or equivalent settings for feeds and speeds and cutting angles. iMachining defaults to very conservative values, but raising the slider to level 6 or even to 8 will produce a much more efficient tool path without any damage to the tool. iMachining also provides a "Turbo" mode that moves the gradient of the scale towards the aggressive side of the slider. This gives the user much more control
The default settings are designed for long stick-out or weak fixture setup.
Showing one system running at 2.5 times faster spindle and feed than the other would of course result in a major difference in cycle time.
3. As mentioned by DaMaJa85 you fail to mention the constant chip thickness function of iMachining. This ensures that the tool is seeing a very consistent force and therefore protects the tool from damage due to excessive linear (tensile) forces. with iMachining you can run at extreme cutting parameters and still get great tool life.
If you are going to compare the two tool paths, it would be helpful to mention all the positive and negative characteristics of each tool path.
Please try again and if you need assistance understanding iMachining, I would gladly assist you.
SolidCAM Development Thank you for your comment. Please send another part and let's establish some points and test again if you want. As I told.on video, I just install Solidcam and use the default settings to generate toolpaths. I have a question: do you test on any machine volumill?
Hi Christi, I have run some Volumil cuts on machines. I prefer to talk about iMachining cuts since I have much more experience with them.
Here is a link to a video of the cut we were doing at SolidWorks World 2018 last week on our desktop CNC machine with a 2.8 HP wood router spindle. ua-cam.com/video/eYsPCRqvotY/v-deo.html
Please let me know what you think, and I would be happy to get you the solid model if you would like to run a comparison cut with Volumil.
SolidCAM Development Looks good. Yeah, of course I want but also the file.in Solidcam in order to have all the settings. Thank you.
You didn't show the half of that what iMachining differs from VoluMill! What about constant chip thickness? What about variable feeds? In Volumill all these parameters are trail and error...
DaMaJa85 Thank you for your opinnion. Please, you are welcome to do the test with the other half.
ok this is a better explanation and I feel that is important to know what the main differences are thank you
Salut, nu ai incercat sa te joci cu Fusion360 ? Am vazut ca in SUA este destul de popular si este si super ieftin comparativ cu celelalte.
Salutare! Ba da, dar am rezervele mele. Stiu ca e mai ieftin dar conteaza si cat de mult butonezi. Doar ca info, gasesti aici o comparatie intre cele doua (fusion si camworks) aici pe canal.
I suggest you explore more when you compare two technologies. Imachining calculates based on the machine, material and tool parameters and you forgot that imachining have a separate tab on the tool tab.
Antony Jose Please watch the video carefully, because I start with this. But every solution like imachining, volumill, vortex, etc does what you saying. If you consider imachining is the best that is fine. Thank you for your comment.
you have made a comparison at the end of the video about the machining time which sounded like you want to promote volumill. the real difference is when you tweak both the software to the same cutting condition and check the tool path pattern. The one gives you the constant and smooth material engagement should be a better choice
'Estimated machining time'? No, it is exact, if your tool change time is entred in correctly and it knows your machines acceleration capabilities.