Latest Version Of CAMWorks

Looks to me like development on CAMWorks has slowed way down.

Anyone using CAMWorks who likes it have anything to say about
development on CAMWorks latest release ?

Does the new 3 axis toolpath surfacing module still gouge like the
old one did ? It looks very basic in it's functionality.

jon

 

Take a look at SolidCAM.

Brian

 

Not sure what you mean by "new" and "old" versions of the surfacing
module but we've been using CAMWorks for the past 1 1/2 years (currently
running 2003) and we haven't experienced much in the way of unexpected
gouging. And we have done a number of fairly advanced 3D parts. Any
tools moves that would have caused gouging if we didn't catch them were
explainable by the operation's setup/settings/whatever or by the
underlying surface's quality.

That's not to say we're satisfied with CAMWorks. It has plenty of other
problems and frankly I don't think it was worth the $10,000 we spent.
But gouging hasn't been a major concern for us.

Joel Moore

 

Exactly that. Teksoft is replacing the 3 axis simultaneous
surfacing toolpath in CAMWorks with an entirely new module.
I believe they even describe doing so on their website.
Perhaps you might want to check out what Teksoft has to say
about this or call them about it ?

I have used CAMWorks in the past to do some surfacing
toolpath and it gouged ! IMO, CAMWorks has been
exceptionally weak at 3 axis surfacing toolpath.

I believe Teksoft has licensed this new module from someone
else this time ! Even Bruce W. once told me that 3 axis
simultaneous surfacing toolpath was not Teksoft's forte !

jon

 

I've been using TekSoft products for ten years now in fab. I would not
ever consider their software if given the choice. Here is a post I
placed in their user forum. Note that it was posted in December and
has not received one single reply. I am truly as disgusted as one
person can be. Perhaps my experience with TekSoft has made me a bit
soft on SoiledWorks corp......




Posted: Thu Dec 18, 2003 4:10 pm Post subject: a couple of old
items....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, I'd like to say that the support I have received from my
VAR(Cimtronics) and specificly EJ and Jorge have been superb. I feel
that they are doing a fine job in supporting a product that is
inferior to anything I have ever seen in terms of development.

Having said that, I post a few issues off the top of my head. These
are not new, nor are they news. I have submitted them to Teksoft in
various ways and at various times over the last 8 years. These are
simple to fix problems for the most part, yet have been ignored for
some reason. Most are just time wasters, yet some have caused scrap.

Given the time I have been using this product, the development has
progressed at a snails pace. It would seem that it has been abandoned
for the most part and that there is no real interest in making it a
program that would really be worth endorsing. Were it not for the
investment already made and the support I have received from
Cimtronics, I would have dropped it long ago.

It is my hope that this post might warrant some response from Teksoft,
but given my past experience and communications with the company, I
seriously doubt it will.

These are but a fraction of the issues I am aware of. I am running
2003 sp1.2. I will monitor this thread and update the list as I become
aware of other confirmed issues. At least as long as I am permitted to
and this thread is not deleted. I would welcome input from other users
and hope that this can lead to some actual improvemnets to the
program.


1) Click G01 Icon/Save/... green light icon disappears.....Pretty
consistent, but second time around it seems to work fine.
2) Random deletion of cad/cam entities when panning or zooming. Seems
related to time between saves.
3) Options greyed out that should be active. Ex.: selecting Linear
tool path, micro joint parameters are greed out. Resolved by saving
file.
4) Edit tool allows selection of boundary.
5) Picking is still years behind any program I have ever seen.
Requires excessive zooming to select the proper entity.
6) Program still needs the ability to save defaults. Ex.: I have never
used 1.0" lead ins, yet this is the default. I always use .100
lead-ins and should be able to establish this as a default.
7) Default snap related to certain functions should be user defined.
Ex.: Trim tool: default snap modifier is the digitize icon. This is of
absolutely no use and must be changed each and every time the trim
tool is used.
Program is still not Windows Compliant. Ex.: Ctrl-Z should be undo,
program should have the capability to be used w/o a mouse. I could go
on, but this is obvious a kludged DOS app ported to Windows and that
the Win Compliant sticker is clearly in violation of M$ policy.
9) Many text boxes are modal. The ability to use the limited hot keys
in the program are disabled after entering info into a text box.ex:
Select a different color and then attempt to ZOOM ALL (CTL-A).
10) Boundaries can not be reversed.
11) Macro sequencing is next to impossible without placing each macro
on its own layer and then filtering the layers. A simple list box
listing the macro calls that would allow drag and drop reordering
would be invaluable.
12) Click dimension, click endpoint snap and then click an end point.
If you grab the wrong end point and undo or click mid mouse button,
you lose the end point snap and it reverts back to entity select.
13) Dimension snapping should remember which sap modifier is last
used.
14) Undo should span functions.
15) Default text size is .180" Needs a user defined default.
16) Posted files are left open after posting and require that ProCAM
be closed before deleting/moving. Again, this is simply sloppy
programming.
17) De-Select individual selected entities is needed
1 Database corruption is the norm when inserting parts with CAM into
parts with CAM. CTD is usual result. This has become worse as releases
roll on.
19) In order to tab in the slugs on large holes, a .025 gap has to be
created in the circle. This frequently results in the hole
disappearing when you zoom out. It returns if you zoom back in, but as
soon as you zoom out, it goes away. I think it is OK if you rotate the
arc off quadrant.
20) Dead zone and material display are on whenever a file is opened.
New 'feature' I guess, but kind of annoying to turn it off every time.
21) Rotating CAM entities (Punch): Rotate a part that uses rectangular
punches in non AI stations and then adjust orientation in turret
set-up. Select the modified tool paths and then entire path is not
hi-lighted. Post this and you'll get scrap. Entire path has to be
erased and re-applied. Pretty basic math functions to fix this. TS
solution: Post a warning message when you rotate parts. How lame.
22) Create boundary: Given the high probability that the program will
snap to an unintended end point when creating a start point, it would
save a lot of wasted time if MMB would remove the start point if it is
the only defined component of a boundary. This would save moving from
the boundary to undo and back again.
23) Edit Macro, create new layer, exit edit macro, where's the
layer?????
24) Keystrokes should be handled w/o having to set focus on text box
when in certain modes. ex: Fillet tool: When I type a numeric, it
should know I am changing a radius.
25) In virtually every instance, selecting a new command will clear
the snap modifier. EXCEPT when choosing to insert a part. Snap
modifiers need to remain static across commands at least. At best,
they should remember the last snap modifier used with that command.
26) A toggle for swapping M.J. values from left to right would be
handy
27) Product should ship with a bag of some sort that the user could
scream into. This would not help the software, but would at least be
as helpful as this forum. Truly disgusting customer service.
To be continued...

 

Procam is the stand-alone version of CAMWorks yes?

What do people think are the merits of integrated CAM packages vs
standalone packages that use SWKS native files?

 

This is Nuts! TekSoft has had Procam for years! But people on this
NG will mostly be interested in Camworks - which is an add-in for
Solidworks. Teksoft came out with a totaly new 3-axis package and many
changes in January (called Camworks 2004). CDs haven't even shipped
yet. From my viewpoint, this doesn't describe Teksoft stopping work on
Camworks!

I like Camworks and all the people I know that use it do also (about 5
different shops).

Sincerely,
Jerry Forcier

 

Dear d,

I have used Camworks for years and what you describe must not be
Camworks, but maybe is Procam, another Teksoft product that is NOT an
add-in for SWX.

I like Camworks and agree with you that Cimtronics is a great VAR.

Maybe you can switch over to their other product, Camworks.

Your NG message could well be valid, but it shouldn't have been under
the subject of Camworks - it is misleading to many.

Sincerely,
Jerry Forcier

 

In a word: ASSOCIATIVITY. If there is no associativity between
features and CAM, there is no advantage. There is also the issue of
resources and expense of running/maintaining/learning two different
applications. If I change a feature in SWX, I'd rather not have to
start CAM from scratch or even have to modify it. As is, I modify the
model, export the dxf and then apply/modify the CAM. This process is
prone to errors in the form of missing modified features when applying
CAM, but is preferable to erasing all CAM and starting over. Perhaps
if my CAM software was better, starting from scratch would not be that
bad.

 

(d) wrote in

The problem is that CAMWorks really doesn't know anything about SW
features (from what I can tell). It simply looks at the set of surfaces
that make up a SW part and then extracts its own features from that. It
doesn't use any of the intelligence that's built into the SW model to its
advantage.

So really the only advantage of having CW integrated directly into SW is
that it saves a few steps. I think a standalone CAM package that could
read SW files directly would be just as capable.

 

(Cliff Huprich) wrote in

Could you be more specific? I realize I didn't offer anything to back up
my hunch and I could very well be wrong but I haven't seen anything to
convince me that CW is actually looking at SW features during its feature
recognition stage. Do you know for certain that I'm wrong?

I'm not completely sure what to make of this. Are those real questions
or is that just some sort of dig at jb?

Joel Moore