[kyo]

For whatever reason, when I import a profile in .dwg or .dfx it shows up very small. A part that is 26mm is showing up as 5mm

The defaults are set to use mm dimensions, and in autocad it shows up just fine.

Any ideas on how to solve this? I can scale the part up, but since as far as I can tell there is no numerical way to do it, I can only guess as to a scale factor or percentage until it's approximately right.

Kyle

[Mike Mattera]

What is the scale that the drawing was made in (i.e. you can draw in Acad @ 1:2 4:1)?

It also helps to know what version of Mastercam Your Using.

Mike Mattera

[kyo]

it's 1:1

mastercam x2

The part originated in solidworks, was exported in dwg format because I couldn't get mastercam to do what I wanted any other way.. most likely my lack of experience with it, so I figured a straight profile path was easier to work with.

[Mike Mattera]

Do you have the solidworks file?

What wont it do?

Does it come in pointing the wrong way?


As for your original problem: If you can figure out the scale difference, I would just scale it.

You might have things easier in the future, if we can find out what the problem is bringing in SWorks files.

Mike Mattera

[Mike Mattera]

To find the scale factor: Take the known dimension and divide it by the actual dimension you have. Scale by that amount.

Mike Mattera

[kyo]

The problem is I'm going to be doing a -ton- of various parts like this, I really don't want to have to figure out how to scale each one of them.. I don't see why software as powerful as mastercam couldn't import dimensions, seems like that should be a simple thing to do.

Importing from native solidworks 2008 format doesn't work at all, says it can't find any parasolid data, and importing iges models I can't seem to get it to make toolpaths at all. I don't have a lot of mastercam experience and I've yet to find any useful walk through online that deals with lathe operations from solid models in mastercam, but toying with it I can pretty much get it to do most of it with just a profile.

Kyle

[DareBee]

When you make your .sldrw you need to make the view scale on the sheet at 1:1, then save it as .dwg.
I have a blank sheet template in SW that I use for 1:1 parts (for export). It doesn't matter if you drawing view fits on the visible paper in SW, the paper doesn't show up in the .dwg

[fizzissist]

I can't tell you how many times I get an e-drawing made in ProE, SolidWorks, SolidSomething, AutoCad, AutoCrash, AmateurCad, and whatever else somebody has come up with.....and the *.dwhatever rarely is scaled, oriented, dimensioned correctly or completely.

The problem is sometimes the way it was drawn...I got an Autocad file once that had lines that didn't connect, were on different levels, and in general was a nightmare. It took a week to figure out what was going on. Looked fine on paper.......

I all too often say screw it and draw it from scratch, with the inevitable phone call to the originator for questions. All too often it's just faster and easier, and I get a drawing that has what I need on it. (the phone call will also get you tolerances....which for some reason many designers don't always see a need for)

If you can get the company or the designer to send you several version of the drawing in .iges, .dwg, .dxf you might find that one of 'em works for you. Don't assume that you're doing something wrong.........even though you're just getting started.

Mike's idea of finding a scale factor is good, but you need to make sure that however the customer is generating the file, it's ALWAYS going to be the same, or you'll go bald.

Getting the designer on the same page as you is 1/2 (or 0.500) of the battle. I'm now in the habit too of requesting a *.pdf of the print as a CYA.

[kyo]

Sorry, I should clarify, I'm the designer

My normal job is the drawings, and I typically outsource the work.. but I now have a desktop cnc system to prototype things. I've never had a complaint about the models from any machine shop out there, so I have to assume that part is right.

The models are all built as solid parts in solidworks. Because I can't seem to get mastercam to play nice with my solid files, I'm exporting out to drawings. All the dimensions are there, it just doesn't seem to care.. there is only one layer, everything connects (soildworks would never allow me to make solid parts if the lines weren't right), etc.

I think the breakdown might be occurring with the drawing portion of solidworks. Their modeling side is incredible, the 2d drawings are lacking.. there is probably some oddity in how it is scaling things maybe? It's the one thing I haven't checked yet..

Kyle

[kyo]

Ok, so I fixed it.. it was solidworks doing something weird.

However, another problem..

When I'm making toolpaths, if I go to verify them my geometry vanishes and I can't seem to get it back?

Kyle

[neilw20]

Export the 3D solid from Solidworks as ACIS (version 6 is best).
This can be imported/exported by ACAD or Mastercam.
Have a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACIS
You can reorient the model before export to get consistent UCS.
Make up, up and X Y the same all the time and you will have less grief.
Solidworks is good at repairing solids. It is important to understand that all of the flat surfaces may never exactly touch mathematically. When a program reads the ACIS, IGES or STL (not ACAD for those 2) a tolerance is applied to the model, and if a dimension is less than the tolerance the parts are deemed to be touching, else they are not. Various programs allow adjustment of this tolerance. As soon as you have anything that is irregular shaped this becomes more important. Different packages work better with certain filetypes. Don't work at all with others. If you have an ACIS 3D model that has tolerances outside ACAD's limits, ACAD can crash, ignore the file or make weird see through solids, or end up just as wire frames.
The test in ADAD to see if model is OK is to be able to slice it in a number of planes, without it b1tchinging. Mastercam usually accepts most things, but not always. Read about ACIS and IGES on wiki to get a better understanding of the data structures and then you well get better at it.
There are 2 blonds, 1 on each side of the river, and one yells out to the other how do you get to the other side? The response was YOU ARE ALREADY THERE!. It's just a matter of the tolerance or lack thereof.

[Mike Mattera]

You cant see geometry in Verify mode. When you switch out of Verify, your back in the Cad/Cam side of the system and all of your geometry should be available.

Mike Mattera

[JROM]

OR............................EXPORT THE SOLIDWORKS MODEL AS A .IGS FILE INTO MASTERCAM AND YOU CAN WORK FROM A 3D MODEL JUST LIKE THE BIG BOYS!

[Mike Mattera]

Working with IGES is just one step above using DXF/DWF. You should always try to use the file closest to the native format of the Cad system. Especially if he's the designer. He has control over the process. It's just a question of developing the right process.

Mike Mattera

[kyo]

You cant see geometry in Verify mode. When you switch out of Verify, your back in the Cad/Cam side of the system and all of your geometry should be available.

Mike Mattera

Yea but 90% of the time when I switch out of verify mode, the profile I had is gone. Occasionally it seems to do just fine, but at random points it vanishes.. It's not a huge problem since I save a lot and can go back to the save before I ran verify, but it's irritating.

a huge thanks to all of you for the help so far

Kyle

[kyo]

Working with IGES is just one step above using DXF/DWF. You should always try to use the file closest to the native format of the Cad system. Especially if he's the designer. He has control over the process. It's just a question of developing the right process.

Mike Mattera

Any suggestions on getting it to import .sldprt files correctly? It's saying it can't find parasolid data in the file, which doesn't make any sense since I know it's there.

Kyle

[neilw20]

Kyle.
It maybe there but if the surfaces do not meet within the tolerance recognized by the reading program, then it sees a some surfaces and not a solid. Solidworks is very forgiving in this area as far as what you see, but get it to analyze and check the model and you will usually finds something does not join, has pieces without parents,etc.
When you get Master(disaster)cam to read the ACIS or IGES file you can adjust the tolerance settings before you read it in. Fiddle with a few of the settings to see what works best (for that model!). Curved surfaces intersecting other curved surfaces give the most problems.
If you use Solidworks, and you want to use CAM, then use SolidCam. At least it understands it's own language. A lot of these problems are caused by to much random input. Read that as random input device - AKA mouse.
Try to make models perfect by not just doing visual stuff on the screen.
Create reference lines and ensure geometries join up properly.

[kyo]

I've run the analyze tools within solidworks and can't find any problems. I've made sure all the lines mate properly, etc. I do a lot of testing via cosmos with the models, and it is crazy picky about things being just right so that it can create meshes and such and do stress testing.

I'll keep working with it and see if I can figure it out, obviously there is a solution somewhere here, and of course it's going to probably be something simple once I figure out what it is

I appreciate all the replies and suggestions, there is quite a learning curve here jumping between the cad work I've done for so long, and the cam side that I'm relatively unfamiliar with. Luckily I at least have a lot of manual machine experience so I know what the goal is

Kyle

[cnc-king]

question out of the blue.
Why not design in MC and then you would have no problems since you are the originator?
I use MC to draw every part i cut if the customer does not provide a model.

[kyo]

question out of the blue.
Why not design in MC and then you would have no problems since you are the originator?
I use MC to draw every part i cut if the customer does not provide a model.

That'd be nice, but it doesn't have the capabilities that solidworks does. All my parts are built up in assemblies, stress tested, performance simulations are done, and they are saved into hundreds of various configurations within an assembly.

Kyle