[Mastercam X8 For Solidworks Crack 13

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Oludare Padilla

unread,

Jun 13, 2024, 6:40:26 AM6/13/24

to tepcbeafesbi

I believe it is an addon. When I installed 2020 MC for Inventor was automatically installed since we have inventor. Models that are updated in Inventor, or SW, have the ability to auto update toolpaths as long as you are working directly from the model in mastercam and not wireframe. It is much better than giving up the functionality of MC. Especially when you just want to make quick fixturing that does not require the headache of a full blown design package.

mastercam x8 for solidworks crack 13

Download ✫✫✫ https://t.co/hNXDQ18YUA

I teach these engineering students the add-in version because they all know SW already, so I don't need to teach a new software interface from scratch. It works much better for helping them integrate machining concepts.

Yet i program 100% of my parts using standalone, simply because I hate SW and as far as CAM goes, standalone is a million light years ahead of the add-in version for what I do. I just find standalone much more customizable and functional. For example, the configuration setup for the add-in version is neutered

MCforSW does not support Mill-Turn machines like Mastercam with a Mill-Turn license does. It does not support Wire machines. It does not support the 3D Wireframe (2D Swept, 3D Swept, Loft, Ruled) toolpaths. No C-Hooks or Net-hooks.

I think that list is pretty long, but lets start with Design Tables : You can do Family of Parts work in MCforSW... carry all the parameters in an Excel spreadsheet ... every different part (SolidWorks calls them Configurations) is saved inside the single SLDPRT file ... any changes to the spreadsheet automagically mark your toolpaths dirty, requiring just a 'regen' of those dirty ops ... or ... put toolpaths on one Configuration and using that first Configuration, spawn additional ones with different design paramters but use all the same toolpaths, tools, and parameters ... open that resulting SLDPRT in MC and everything's there.

"... Would it be accurate to say that Solidworks with a Mastercam add-on is a stripped down version of Mastercam? ..." and "... standalone is a million light years ahead of the add-in ..." : Neither is accurate, at least to me. See "Everything else is in there" above.

"... the configuration setup for the add-in version is neutered ..." : Configuration is stripped of items that do not apply. For instance CAD-only, or graphics-only, functionality that is SolidWorks-specific that you control in the SolidWorks settings.

I do realize that it's not for everyone : long-time MC users might be averse to learning to model in SW, and you DO need a seat of SolidWorks ... but there are a lot of people around the world using it every day because it works for them.

I appreciate the cogent response, my main quandary was the lack of options for C-hooks and also since I run Vericut, that is a pretty important c-hook in my workflow. Again, in terms of teaching, I believe it is easier to teach MCfSW for students, however, I simply don't like the workflow as much. If I spent a lot more time using it, I would probably like it more. I am used to standalone MC and while MCfSW does have *most* features, I am just used to my setup. I will say it is a great tool to have access to, especially for smaller design firms who are already familiar with SW as a software.

I use MC4SW exclusively. I started using SolidWorks back in 1999 so I am very comfortable using it. When we bought our Mastercam license, I think it was the 2nd year that MC4SW was available, so for that reason, I do not have the option to use the standard version of Mastercam. Our facility is a product development company and we have about 75 engineers here that all use SolidWorks, so for me, it is simple to open the models and be current and have a trouble free model. And I feel very comfortable if I have to add geometry or modify the model in any way. The other 2 machinist that work here, use the regular version. As Pete mentioned, "most" of the tool paths are available to me using my seat of MC4SW.

Now having said that, I have had issues with training material from various vendors as they are almost exclusively designed for the standard Mastercam. With the Emastercam series of training material, I sometimes run into issues with some machining options just not being available. I was working on one of the multiaxis books and they wanted the user to use "roll die", that is not available to me with MC4SW. Also, quite often the models provided for study purposes simply won't work in SolidWorks, they blow up or are missing surfaces. I have tried exporting them in various formats and still can't get them to open properly in SolidWorks.

To me, the main difference between the two versions is the CAD part. If most of the students are versed in drawing with SolidWorks, then MC4SW might be the better version to use as more time can be spent on teaching the different machining methods versus time spent on the CAD part. But also keep in mind, that I believe most machine shops are using the standard version of Mastercam, so if they were taught in school MC4SW, when they go out in the real world for a job, they might get a little push back from possible employers because they know a different version of Mastercam. Yes, if machine shops are current on their maintenance, they can run either version, but realistically, how many owners would be willing to have their programmers use different versions of Mastercam in their shop?

@Pete Rimkus from CNC Software Inc. Would you mind posting a screenshot to show where to set associativity of models? I am not sure where that feature is located within the configuration, but it would be a huge boon to my workflow.

I use mcam4sw about 95% of the time now. One thing I miss from standalone is "toolpath editor" which allows you to modify feedrates on individual lines of path. I don't know why this functionality isn't there. Maybe it was missed. The main reason I use mcamfsw almost exclusively is the cad creation and modification. A lot of times I'll make solid bodies from each op, all nested in the same file. This gives me the ability to pull measurements from each body per each op. Assemblies are also nice. I'm running a 5 axis now and I like to keep various common workholding setups in an assembly that i can just mate my part in. I used to like drawing in mastercam until I started making a lot of fixtures with unknown dimensions. If i wasn't sure exactly what I needed to make, it could develop as I go in Solidworks. Modification of geometry and solid models in more cumbersome in standalone. Either way, both have their place. If you have Solidworks, and standalone mastercam, you should be able to download mcamfsw and at least try it out.

What functionality does MC4SW have using API's? I saw that c-hooks are not supported so that for us is a big obstacle. Our shop we have automated about 80% of the "normal" jobs that come thru the door using CamWorks.

Camworks got the nod over MasterCAM because of 1) The awesome API that camworks has. We can and do control every aspect of the program automagicly , and 2) MC4SW was in it's infancy when the decision was made. Since camworks has embedded it's self into our company it's would take a lot of persuasion and effort but i'd really like to kick camworks to the curb.

I just demo'd it. I thought it was gonna be the xxxx, but after a week or so said naw I will stick with importing from solidworks. The chaining is a pain for me, and stuff like making silloette boundries and bounding boxes ect. in a few clicks is to hard to give up. I think it has its place esp. on simple one off parts that change slightly from one to another. I know I only gave it a week but after using mastercam for 15yrs. I am biased I guess. With wcs and levels I can merge a changed model pretty quick anyways.