Verification software

[snguyen]

Good morning,
I am trying to figure out which to go with for my department. I went
to IMTS last week and was set on going with Vericut after I got back from
the show. At the show I saw the NCSimul software and was blown away at the
speed and all the neat features that was in that package. Example if there
is a collision in the program I can click on the collision in the graphics
window and the section of the program will also be highlighted. I was really
impressed with how you can rotate the model while it is still cutting and
not have to wait for it to regen like in Vericut. The presentation from the
NCSimul was really informative compared to the Vericut booth. When I went
over to the Vericut booth to ask for information on their software, all I
got out of them was that NCSimul was running another developers source code,
the verification is calculated and lack of support.

Currently we are using the embedded light version of Vericut inside of
ProMAN and I was planning to upgrade to the full version but now that I have
seen NCSimul I am more confused with which one to go with.

I am asking if anybody on this forum used both and which did they prefer?
Right now I am leaning more with NCSimul but lack of support in the states
is the only negative I see so far.

Thanks.

Son Nguyen
108 w. 2nd Street
Assaria, KS. 67416
(785) 667-7763 ext. 3477

[ptc-141857]

NcSimul hands down. In my opinion Vericut is not even in the same arena. I have used both and the dynamic abilities of NcSimul far exceed that of Vericut. Top to bottom, I could not find an area where Vericut was superior. My major issue with Vericut is the foundational architecture. They have issued several improvements but without a complete rewrite of code, it will remain built on old tech. We have been using NcSimul for 6+ years now and I really cant complain about any of its functionality.

We started out using NcSimul with Pro/NC and about 3 years ago we made the switch to Delcam Powermill. At that time NcSimul did not have an export function that worked with Delcam. Our purchase agreement with Delcam was premised on that fact that they would work with NcSimul to develop a export function that would work seamlessly. After about a month of Beta testing we ended up with a simple GUI export tool that works perfectly.

We manufacture components for the Defense and Aerospace markets and we have never had a crash due to a bad simulation file. Just remember, your simulation is only as good as the machine models and control files within NcSimul and or Vericut. Depending on the kinematics and complexity of your machines, those files can be easy or complex to create. All of our machine control files where created and edited by Spring/NcSimul.

As for support, I deal direct with the Boston office as well as the HQ in France and I have never had an issue. If you have high level support questions then ask to speak with Philippe, he is the Technical Director and really knows his stuff.

If support is your only concern, in regards to which software to purchase, I can only state my own experiences. The major support comes in the first couple of months using the software. After you get the hang of it, you probably wont even call them anymore. We had them come down and spend a week training our manufacturing department and that is something I would highly recommend. After that, we had a few changes that we wanted to make on how certain TCP machine codes, G43.1 - G43.4, were handled within NcSimul. Then we moved to Macro B coding and things of that nature. As I stated previously, it comes down to how simple or complex your machines are, 3 axis is cut and dry and it moves up from there.

Regards,

Dean

[FV]

Hi all,

Son,

We are using a full version of Vericut for the last 15 years. 3X and 5X milling, wire EDM and sinker EDM verification.Generally we had a good experience with this software. Good tech support, straightforward licensing, quite an extensive user community. The big plus at least in our experience is the open nature of their project files, tool definition, machine definition and control definition files, all of them are based on XML which makesthem very customizable. The software hasgood documentation and tutorials. Like pro/man it has a steep learning curve.

The ability to manipulatethe workpiece viewport while the simulation/verification isin progressisavailable for the6.xxx and 7.xxx versions. I don't remember about 5.xxx.The current one is7.3.1.The ability tovisually select the collision marks in the workpieceviewport andto see the corresponding g-code line or APT line was there as long as I can remember - you need to have nc-reviewmodeenabledor do it via analysis->x/caliper->feature/history.