- Marcar como nuevo
- Favorito
- Suscribir
- Silenciar
- Suscribirse a un feed RSS
- Resaltar
- Imprimir
- Denunciar
Poll: Partmaker Enhancement
I am a relatively new user to Partmaker. I have been using it for less than a year now and have found many things that I like about it, and many that leave something to be desired. For users that still use Partmaker despite the FeatureCAM merger, I was thinking we could start posting enhancement requests here and have the community weigh in on their usefulness, in hopes that Autodesk will implement them sooner rather than later. We are, after all, the community that drives their revenue stream for this product. Eventually it would be nice to have a dedicated Partmaker forum and a sub-forum for enhancements where we can post actual polls with voting options. The same could be done for FeatureCAM and all other software forums to really emphasize the community enhancements we want and need, not just what the parent company thinks is important.
I have about a dozen of these to post if this catches on. So here goes...
I would like to see an enhancement in Partmaker Mill to allow the combination of rough and finish toolpaths into a "group" in the process table which would allow the output of code to follow a rough-finish-rough-finish strategy instead of a rough-rough-finish-finish strategy. This would only apply when the same tool is doing the roughing and finishing, but seems like it would apply to a lot of shops in my opinion. We manufacture a number of parts with extensive hole patterns and pocket patterns which are roughed and finished with the same tool and, currently, the only way to get the desired output I speak of here is to program each feature independently and organize the process table accordingly. If this is not done then the machine spends a significant amount of time in rapid mode moving from hole to hole multiple times. The same is true for pockets that are patterned. This type of enhancement could save 20 minutes or more each time it is used on complex parts. It would be quicker than programming every feature independently even if there were only a few, so it would save time every time it is used. As an added benefit, it would greatly simplify the process table by eliminating all of the erroneous processes, making feed and speed changes much quicker if necessary. Even more time saved!
What do you guys think?