CAD software discussion forum > 3D CAD/CAM > Verify never completes, inconsistent results in CAM plans

Verify never completes, inconsistent results in CAM plans

Rank: 1

cutter

Newbie

posts: 55

Registered: 2011-11-23

Message 1 of 10

 Verify never completes, inconsistent results in CAM plans
26-08-2012 06:34 . am | View his/her posts only
Post Last Edit by cutter at 2012-8-26 06:41

I don't post much anymore because I will be moving on just as soon as Geometric finishes integrating a CAM program for Solid Edge later this year and here is a fine example of why. This is a complicated little part with over 1800 faces. Now ZW does fine on the import and creating cam plans but I have yet to ever finish verify on this. It just does the disappear crash thing on one of my workstations and says free up memory on the other two which you can't do and it hangs with no solution but to just quit. All of these workstations have been bought in the last year with good specs so it only leaves one thing to be the problem.

Another part I had recently has a number of holes with two draft angles and then a cylinder at the bottom. Eventually I came up with a good cam plan but I have to tell you that it is try this and that to get there as there is no predictability. Now my toolpath of preference here is Z Level with spiral down because when it works it gives a nice surface finish and this one had to be smooth as it was for a capsule go no-go guage. For example, I change the step size in Z on this part and rather than having uniform results across all the holes some complete correctly some don't and have starts and stops and hop around from hole to hole with inconsistent finishes. This varies in results until you finally stumble upon the right combination of cutter and parameters. It should not matter what step size in Z I use and it should not matter what size radius I use on either a ball end or bull nose cutter. But it does and so now you fiddle with it for hours to find the secret way. I don't think the geometry is to blame here as different holes act in different ways depending upon what I plug in for cut path parameters,

Of all the things that have driven me away from using ZW in the future this inconsistency is perhaps the most irritating followed with the severe memory limitations of 32bit.

I am telling you guys about this and I don't care if you reply. I am not sure why I even bothered to post this except I guess I still care enough about product quality to bring this to your attention even though I will soon be gone.

No I am not interested in sending the files.



part verify never completes.jpg
2012-8-26 06:05

Rank: 1

Factorytuned

Newbie

posts: 44

Registered: 2011-12-29

Message 2 of 10

27-08-2012 01:20 . am | View his/her posts only
Post Last Edit by Factorytuned at 2012-8-27 01:33

Hi Cutter:

(All my posts regarding this issue ALL relate to Solid Verify functional system. ) (But NOT - CAM Document OUTPUT)

I would be interested in knowing what video boards are in the three machines you referenced and what driver version.

I have found odd behaviors with ZW3D and Nvidia video boards and driver versions. I don't think this software works all that well with the Nvidia Engineering cards - FX and Quadro Fermi. But I think the gaming boards work okay. I do not know this as I do not use those nor do my customers. Ref GFORCE game boards. But I know Mike Lynch used to use a G-Force gaming board not an FX or Fermi.

Again I do not know this for certain. I have never used nor sold anything but 3DLabs(now defunct) and Nvidia Quadro boards to my customers.

Read in my thread on Visual C++ Runtime. Rather than type all that again. But I found, what I can only say is some sort of memory leak when used with the latest drivers on a new install of 2012SP1. With solid verify I get immediate memory error, ZW3D runs to 1.4x gig shouts mem allocation error, wanting issue $$free command then - see ya! Boom.. Crash!

I retrograded the video driver changing nothing else, and have had no issues with over usage of memory, BUT it does not release the memory from the previous toolpath all the time either. ?????

Sometimes I will look at the resources during tool path playback and they're around 1gig then, 600meg.. -when Solid Verify is still running. Head scratcher... Same part with maybe a subtle tool path tweak.. Or whatsmore, maybe I did not change a thing and just played the path back again when testing the video driver change.

Dunnknow! Do think ZWSoft is really clear on it either.. Good luck with Solid Edge, as I will likely be the only one having issues with the software or that posts them anyway.

Jeff

Rank: 1

cutter

Newbie

posts: 55

Registered: 2011-11-23

Message 3 of 10

27-08-2012 02:47 . am | View his/her posts only
Reply 2# Factorytuned


Jeff, I will have to dig a bit deeper for the driver versions if you really want to know. Off the top of my head though here are some specs. Dell precision T3500 3690 xeon cpu quadro 580 12 gig ram 256 gig SSD. Dell T1600 forget the cpu but it's an E-3 xeon quadro 2000 12 gig ram 256 gig ssd. Dell precision M6600 with 2860 CPU 16 gig ram and quadro 3000m. Every one of these have problems with this mold part and none can finish verify. I generally show only around 980 meg ram in use before ZW craps out.

I have been using Solid Edge for four years now for CAD so no luck required. ZW just thinks they have direct editing but I know better. What will be new is the integrated CAM for Solid Edge and believe me I can hardly wait.

Am I to take it you have inconsistent results with ZW CAM to?

If I were to be staying with ZW I think considering all the rough edges everywhere I would be more than a bit nervous about the migration to 64 bit here. While it has to happen I have to wonder how well they are going to implement it. I have to say that when I ran this part on all three of my workstations and it failed and I am watching ZW use only 980meg ram and perhaps 19% cpu I just shake my head.

Rank: 5Rank: 5

Tony_ZWSOFT

posts: 44

Registered: 2011-8-22

Message 4 of 10

27-08-2012 02:34 . pm | View his/her posts only
Hi Cutter,

Thank you for your attention and suggestions.
We will enhance those of the problems on ZW3D 2012SP2 vrsion.
You know we have the big improvement version by version. We also have realized the gaps in your expectation.
Please keep paying attettion on the product and any feedback is welcome..

Tony Tan

Rank: 1

cutter

Newbie

posts: 55

Registered: 2011-11-23

Message 5 of 10

27-08-2012 03:57 . pm | View his/her posts only
Reply 4# tony


Tony,
What exactly of the things I have commented on are you guys fixing for SP2 and when is the tentative release date? I thought 64 bit was going to be the next version and not in this version.

Rank: 1

Factorytuned

Newbie

posts: 44

Registered: 2011-12-29

Message 6 of 10

28-08-2012 01:02 . am | View his/her posts only
Cutter, the 580 is not a really great card for this app anyway. However, the 2000 and 3000M are fantastic engineering boards. You back the driver down to 275.36, and unless there is something wrong with your part model, you should be able to get it to run and when you reach the 1 gig memory window it will release some resources to disk.. Or at least this is the very issue I was having and what occurs with a 2000 card, FX 3700 and 3450 I have tested. The driver version can easily be found in the Nvidia control panel. You will likely see the memory usage go down as fare as ZW3D is concerned as well.

As noted by Tony, there are several issues to get the 2012 to work right out of the box with cerntain configurations, memory issues at least, and what would appear to be video library issues as well. 2013 is 64bit from what I understand. One shoudl probably wait to buy until 2014 release.. Porting to 64 bit is a recompile of the source code if it is done correctly for the added register set. Hopefully there will be some coding for the Vector Cores that are intgrated into the new E5 and E7 Xeons. That could be used to further handle geometric math rather than just integer and floating point.. This could greatly improve some of the graphics math operations. But I think it will largely go un-addressed as a capability. Oh and I also updated to SP1 for VC++ 2008 and 2010 for visual studio.. That would be a good idea if you have not, but be advised the 2010 version you cannot easily remove if you have a certain version of 2010 VC++ redist already installed. Read the KB should you do the update.

If I had to make a living using this software I would have great concern. As my machine shop only augments my income at present. Look to the future for better code from ZWSoft or bust! Let us know before you leave the fold.

Jeff
AKA - Factorytuned.

Rank: 1

cutter

Newbie

posts: 55

Registered: 2011-11-23

Message 7 of 10

28-08-2012 03:24 . am | View his/her posts only
Reply 6# Factorytuned


Yes the 580 is not a good card and it is my intent to replace it. That having been said though in this case with this part all three fail for the same reason and what my problem really is is 32 bit.

I have allready left ZW for cad, well actually I did that four years ago. I only use ZW cad now to bring in parts for cam. I might try the driver you recommend on one of my pc's but since I have absolutely no trouble with SE and my current driver set I will probably just leave it alone. I get some minor quirky behavior with graphics and ZW but not enough to worry about.

Rank: 1

Factorytuned

Newbie

posts: 44

Registered: 2011-12-29

Message 8 of 10

28-08-2012 04:27 . am | View his/her posts only
Post Last Edit by Factorytuned at 2012-8-28 04:37

Cutter,

Not to beat the topic to death, but.. 32 bit applications written for it, should be good all the way to 4gig LESS overhead... CimatronE MaterCAM, DelCAM and others I've seen, etc.. Then they swap to disk. So your looking at three gig if "said app" is the only one running. CimatronE used to have a 2gig limit, but has since become very well prepared with little limitation with regard to processing and ram.

ZW3D CAM uses all available cores when crunching the CL data or generating tool paths(not solid verify). But nowhere is that stated as general information OR otherwise.

But the GUI, Drafting side only uses one core, and limited threading. This is what frustrates me with complex parts in a solid verify session when I rotate the part. I get video clipping. OR what is, the model lags the pointer when rotating the model, and is blocky. Clipping. This is likely video libraries or lack of some sort of proper handling of the display lists.

What ZWSoft should do is list a best practices and configs, and hardware software TA's stating erratum with certain system hardware, drivers, and video hardware. Along with the softwares capabilities and limitations..

That said we ask for a 2012SP1 White Paper and ZWSoft did oblige in a very nice and complete way. Verimetrix was a mature company(before defunct), I don't know how long ZWSoft have been in business in China, but they should get on board with some of this stuff as the industry will force it.

The updates just can't come fast enough unfortunately. Again, I've personally had little issue with 2012sp1 outside solid verify, but that has always been where I have had issues with this product.

Good luck, I'm out on this one..

Jeff

Rank: 1

rus

Newbie

posts: 11

Registered: 2011-7-14

Message 9 of 10

11-09-2012 05:58 . pm | View his/her posts only
Post Last Edit by cutter at 2012-8-26 06:41

I don't post much anymore because I will be moving on ...
cutter Post at 2012-8-26 06:34


HI cutter!
in your screenshot smoothflow parameters: PATH TOL "0.0004" (0.4micron??)
XY step size "0.002"
Analysis Accuracy "FINE"

how fast calculation with these parameters in Solid Edge ?

Rank: 1

cutter

Newbie

posts: 55

Registered: 2011-11-23

Message 10 of 10

11-09-2012 09:39 . pm | View his/her posts only
Reply 9# Heckfy


Solid Edge is a CAD package not CAM. Around the begining of next year I hope there will be an integrated cam package with it. Now if ZW does something really remarkable and gets their act together maybe I wont go as I really am not crazy about the idea of dropping another ten grand on software and having to learn it all over once again.

In ZW on a Dell 3500 with a 3690 xeon cpu, 8gig ram and a Samsung SSD this part took 111 seconds with the tolerance set to .0003 and when regened at .0004 took 85 seconds with the quickmill caches cleaned out. Chances have been one out of five I will get through verify however.
See also