come va cimatron e?

[Luca Carciofi]

hello to all, I am a designer who works in a company that produces tools with propellers and particular carvings, we have 5 axes working centers and we are looking for a new cad because the current one is not great. I was wondering how to go to the toptron, who uses it can tell me if it's okay and if it looks like a good tool. .
Hello everyone

 

[monster]

This is a question for those who model with pickles from morning to night

for the rest, for me it's a powerful software, fast and very versatile compared to the others... then you know he also has some magagna...

 

[ucciellino]

work with toptron and for 2 years and cimtron it from 4. the toptron cam is really efficient for quality and speed. the cad is painful, very slender and full of bugs. toptron it is very stable.....toptron and.... if you block risks of having to remake the job completely from head. Unusable corrupt files and hours of work lost. from my experience I recommend you to use a stable cad to draw and the only cam module of toptron and for the processing.
toptron it is the old version abandoned in development some years ago.

I hope I was useful.

Hi.

 

[Mocca]

Bye.
I also used toptron and since its birth (version 3) for mold modeling and despite everything is a good product. experience prevents those roads that lead you to corruption and data loss, which I personally never happened.
In the last 2 years I have gradually passed to competition (the most widespread on the market) and I must say that ... there is no comparison. toptron has indeed some very performing functions but overall, I repeat personally, it does not hold the comparison.
I don't know how to get judgments because I don't use it.
Good choice.

 

[stef_design]

In the last 2 years I have gradually passed to competition (the most widespread on the market) and I must say that ... there is no comparison.

You mean cat?

 

[Mocca]

That's him.

 

[monster]

experience prevents those roads that lead you to corruption and data loss, which I personally never happened.

... even to me it never happened to have these problems... file damage and loss of work... usually if you work optimally he goes and has no problems and definitely arrives before others. ..it always depends on how you are set to make design and logic work...that if I say so much to me

to the mocca and stef_dsign lords, will you show me some mold project made with catia?
It's my personal curiosity because I've never seen what I've always heard of. .

 

[Mocca]

Here's an example.
we waved

 

[monster]

:smile: ... nice work thanks for the photo

 

[Dylan]

Well, with catiav5, it's hard to get wrong.
It's the software par excellence.

I remember 10 years ago, a supplier told me, "it's the only software that can generate valid, well trimmed surfaces." .

10 years ago.

I think it's true today.

you start from the bottom with software that generate bad surfaces (rhino..) and you get to catia.

In the middle there are others, even great, but not so complete and reliable (of those I know, of course. . ).

dylan

 

[tomas]

who knows how to tell me the system requirements to get rid of toptron...I tried to install it in a notebook asus i3 but it only goes up to version 7 of toptron.
version 8 and 9 open but when I open an error captron file and closes.
Thank you.

 

[monster]

version 8 and 9 open but when I open an error captron file and closes.
Thank you.

...Sarah an installation problem then I do not see why to have the 7-8-9!! !

or maybe a license problem....:biggrin:

 

[tomas]

all regular licenses...from when I had it up to e9....in pc repentum 4 they all go...but as I need to install them in the notebook for reasons of displacement to scale from e9 the highest version that works is e7.
but should not the new i3 i5 i7 processors be more powerful?

 

[monster]

read the pdf documentation that is usually written all from the operating system and to the rest I don't think it's the processor i3 poor average i5 i7 good to give you problems

 

[stinit]

work with toptron and for 2 years and cimtron it from 4. the toptron cam is really efficient for quality and speed. the cad is painful, very slender and full of bugs. toptron it is very stable.....toptron and.... if you block risks of having to remake the job completely from head. Unusable corrupt files and hours of work lost. from my experience I recommend you to use a stable cad to draw and the only cam module of toptron and for the processing.
toptron it is the old version abandoned in development some years ago.

I hope I was useful.

Hi.

There are still people who use "it" ... ...


mma...it had a sense to use it 10 years ago (I started from v9 of it )...but today is "lightly obsolete"...:mixed:

... if you say that and it seems to you sniper in modeling I think you're still in the high sea.. .

 

[stinit]

hello to all, I am a designer who works in a company that produces tools with propellers and particular carvings, we have 5 axes working centers and we are looking for a new cad because the current one is not great. I was wondering how to go to the toptron, who uses it can tell me if it's okay and if it looks like a good tool. .
Hello everyone

toptron and v9 is a great software for "maufacturing". ..that is, for those who have to make even very complex modeling...stroke...and put on the table... let's say that a complete tool proposed at a competitive price. . .

specifically...

modeling: modelling of any fully integrated and parametric entity (cuve, superfici,solidi). . .perfectable in some points but all in all very high performance.

mold opening: the toptron mold opening module and is a great tool... once you understand the operation you really do good work

assembly: the assembly module is very good...certain that of catia is indisputably on another level ... like the price of the software...:tongue:

cam:cimatron and has a cam of all respect...in the years it has always been implemented in functions and in the calculation speed of the same...certo is perfect but we are still at a good level...the module 5 axes know that it is developed in collaboration with other software house... let's say that menu functions etc. you should find them identical in other software. . .

table setting: very good and intuitive.. .


Now what to say...it is clear (almost banal) to remember that the more you use a software and the more you know it and you manage to understand better as reason and how it wants to be used...and anyway there is no software that does "everything"...

However, the advice that I allow myself to give you is to test these software with mathematical "you"... then you ask to do a test and to work on mathematical "you". . .

...I tell you this because these software houses when placing themselves at the fair show show the possible customers the "mirabolants" functions of their cad on mathematicians who have in their database... who lookcasus are morphologically perfect for "make scene" with the functions.. .

I once brought my math... seeing that the guy from the stand told me that his cad made the "automatic" mold opening Then I put him the "my" math (surfaces sculpted and 3 carts...)...
Turns out the guy in question still thinks he's there opening that math. . .

 

[cimaguy]

If I can say my, I believe that all summed up the analysis of "stinit" is quite correct and, therefore, it is always the rule of "depends on what you have to do": if you make molds and paths cam, go quiet, is a good product that goes
used, though, following his logic: many, according to me, plant and spit
blood because they can't use tools or use them badly.
instead it is essential to follow a correct iter because,otherwise, risks of
and waste time.however,in my opinion,the part falls
should be developed more especially for the menu of the
curves that, according to me, it's really low on controls.

 

[Dylan]

Bye to all,
I add to the choir.

I don't think I'm gonna say big news. .
I think it's too optimistic anyway. .

stating that putting in the table of tops is so good. .

I fully agree with the fact that we need to know the tools well in order to be able to use them at best. I still realize the functionality of a command that helps me avoid unnecessary passages I've always done. .

One thing about modeling. As you know, I'm not a great modeling expert, and I don't even know the logic and concepts behind surface/solid modeling.
I do cq some pretty complex things but often encountering inconvenience in doing so. I think many of them are due to my unintentioned knowledge.

the fillets. I can never create a fillet at the first stroke (almost always not at the 2nd, 3rd, 4th stroke). surface offsets as above.
Do you support me in something?
When the blessed problem of a fillet occurs to me, I will post the file. who will be so kind will try "the best method" to get what I want to do. by reviewing the file I can see in the tree the commands used from my native.

One more thing. the new command "close gap open" according to you works? I am 90 %of the times I use it I lose only time.. works on the fly if the "gap" is on 2 maximum 3 surfaces (obvious unit) of geometric type (cylinder plates etc). to try the command a gap between maybe 4 nurbs... Never mind. and therefore return, to have a perfect tangency, to use the old "modification in sketch" , taking a long time but obtaining a perfect result. this in case it cannot/want to use the classic polished region that we know what it combines.

I expect your considerations.
dylan
the new command "close gap open" not

 

[cimaguy]

....you mean solid fillet or surfaces?

 

[Dylan]

Of course the fittings to say it in native speakers.

dylan