[ikke]

Our company is in the market for a CAM solution integrated in SolidWorks.
My boss was about to sign a deal with HSMWorks when we got the news that it became an AutoDesk product.
Our second choice was SolidCam. At the time of choosing it looked a very good CAM package. (very good demo with our parts)
The reason why we put HSM at number one is largely because the technical man from HSMWorks used to work for SolidCam and had some remarks about SolidCam:
- SolidCam has more bugs (not as stable as HSM)
- it is more difficult to get correct post-processors for SolidCam (and need to be adjusted with releasechanges)
- SolidCam uses modules that are bought from other companies (vs developed in house)
(- the price)

Are these problems a thing of the past or are they still valid?

[pinguS]

Probably in the past, never had issues with Solidcam from 2010 onwards, you get the odd shutdowns, like any software where it crashes, but unlike microsoft software, I would say this has happened only about 2 or 3 times to me in the year.

When the guys says bugs, its nonsense, everything will have bugs, but I have not found one.

Solidcam service, personally in the UK, has been pretty quick, they even helped me with programming a part, with regards to post processors, yes you have to pay them to custom build one, but I'm sure they will get as close to how you program, I have not had one built yet, as I programmed my posts myself, pretty easy once you get your head round it, However if/when we get a 5 axis, then I will have them write one. Every CAM system will do posts and then need customising, I use to have Edgecam, and I didn't like that software at all, even with creating posts, personal opinion.

You have to buy modules according to what you need, I didn't even know everything by Solidcam was developed externally, but this doesn't affect me the slightest, its still a good software. Regards to modules, they pratically refused to sell me HSR (High Speed Roughing module) because they said I dont need it or can get away with using the HSS module I have. But then again, this is relative to the parts we produce.

It does work pratically flawlessly with Solidworks, so if I was to say anything bad about Solidcam, it would be:
1. Price is high, but aren't they all, and its virtually one off
2. Nice if they had a better verification software provided, maybe this is the external module the HSM works guy was talking about, not sure what other people use but I still use the standard one that comes with Solidcam
3. The UK guys all have a yorkshire accent.

pinguS

[Brakeman Bob]

Many, many CAM systems use modules developed by other people. Check out the 'Partners' page on the MachineWorks website - it's like a "who's who" of the CAM world.

I have come across the post-processors needing to be updated when a new release is produced but it is mainly on the Mill-Turn side of things and I haven't been inconvenienced directly.

I cannot speak highly of the support we have had from SolidCAM UK, they are quick to respond, knowledgable and have good links with the developers in Israel.

As for stability, SolidCAM itself is reasonably stable but I have had issues with using SolidCAM over a network but these are mor to d with SolidWorks timing out because the network speed is slow We hold our license key, tool libraries and other key files in a common network location - if you are working on a standalone workstation with local storage things are much more reliable and faster.

[glovebox20]

Our company is in the market for a CAM solution integrated in SolidWorks.

The reason why we put HSM at number one is largely because the technical man from HSMWorks used to work for SolidCam and had some remarks about SolidCam:
- SolidCam has more bugs (not as stable as HSM)
- it is more difficult to get correct post-processors for SolidCam (and need to be adjusted with releasechanges)
- SolidCam uses modules that are bought from other companies (vs developed in house)
(- the price)

Are these problems a thing of the past or are they still valid?

1. I will not dissagree with the more bugs thing. It's not unusual for Solidcam2012 crashes on me several times a day. Moslty happens when I Solidverify the Part. The most anoying thing is have to reselect all or geometery and Levels again because it lost the "assovitive". But at least all your operations are there when you open it back up. It might be because I'm running it with Inventor2013. They're other bugs I don't like as well, mostly when using 'Machining Process' or 'templates' when your programing your part. Other than that, I can't complain.

2. The post-processors thing, I don't think it is a big deal. Tec. support has been very helpful keeping my 3-axis milling post up to date, and you can modify them yourself if you choose, as long as sit down and do it. I can see where this would be a real pain though, if you have many post to update. In Solidcam defense, they are adding new features to the software which will require an update to your post to take full advantage of.

3. I never like it when modules are out sourced, I would like to think this is way it crashes on me alot. When I talk to Solidcam about this there remark is 'Solidcam is flawless, it's the other sofware that's messing it up' (Inventor, Windows,ect.). I think it a poor excuess that there programers are to lazy to make the software more flawless.

I do like being able to model fixtures inside of Solidcam using your native Cad tools though. But any cam sofware that 'plugs into' your cad sofware can probaly offer this as well. There 'imachining' is pretty slick, and they do offer that even in there basic mill package. Never done any turing, mill turn, or wire with Solidcam, so I can't comment on that.

There's my 2 cents

glovebox20

[Brakeman Bob]

SolidVerify is one of the modules that SolidCAM license from another software house. Are you on Windows 7 x64? I used to have trouble with SolidVerify before I moved over to x64 but now it's fine.

The last big annoyance I had was moving over to SolidCAM 2011 and all my Machine Processes (which I had so patiently built up over the years and found very useful) 'lost' their drilling technology e.g. every single drilling cycle was set to plain drilling - no pecking, no tapping, no sweet f*** all! I reported this but the response from Israel was non commital (reading between the lines MP's are a 'dead' technology and support for them is minimal). I tracked it down in the end - it was related to the changes to the MAC file part of the post-processor and the drill cycles, so for the future I will know what to do, but my, I was really pissed off. As I have said before on this forum, I think Machine Processes are really useful but all the 'new' technologies (HSM, HSR, HSS, 5X etc.) will not work with Machine Processes and 'Templates' (which will) are a poor substitute.

But let's not get this out of proportion. SolidCAM is good as CAM packages go and for what I do has been (and remains) a good choice. If it is the right CAM package for what you do, only you can answer that after carefully analysing what you want / need / demand. It's horses for courses.

[glovebox20]

But let's not get this out of proportion. SolidCAM is good as CAM packages go and for what I do has been (and remains) a good choice. If it is the right CAM package for what you do, only you can answer that after carefully analysing what you want / need / demand. It's horses for courses.

Agreed.

[JohnWLMT]

I was close to pulling the trigger on Solidcam. The deal breaker was the file system. The cam doesn't reside in the SolidWorks file. It creates a separate assembly file just for the cad.

John

[T D]

I was close to pulling the trigger on Solidcam. The deal breaker was the file system. The cam doesn't reside in the SolidWorks file. It creates a separate assembly file just for the cad.

John

I found this to be a plus. The .prz file still "sees" any updates to original file. I like it because it will allow the programmer to add 3D stock bodies, work area sketches, models of a vise or fixture. Too many people opening and adding to an original file can cause confusion. I have goten "prints" that had been "updated" with what looked like work area sketches and odd bodies.
SolidCAM also has a backup temp file to help in the event of a crash.

"It creates a separate assembly file just for the cad." I assume you mean...
It creates a separate assembly file just for the CAM.

[offsets]

SOLIDWORKS & SOLIDCAM !....FOREVER! the best package CAD/CAM!...FROM THE WORLD!!! PROFESSIONAL PACKAGE!
EXPENSIVE.....BUT BUT VERY VERY GOOD PACKAGE!