Wildfire 2.0 to 3.0 Performance Speed

[Mr Ray]

Has anybody noticed a significant slow down regenerating tool paths between Wildfire 2.0 & 3.0?


I have a pretty large file and in 2.0 the regen may take 20 seconds, but in 3.0 believe it or not over 13 minutes for the same exact file!

Thanks!

 

[leow_john]

... hi

.. may be a bug in your release..?
becuase PTC policy is to cut down the regen time..

regards

leow

 

[Jotry]

Hi Ray,


What is the datecode of your WF3 release?


In theory, this shouldn't happened as it is supposed to boost regeneration times in WF3 compared to the previous version. It is probably a bug.


rgds
Jotry

 

[lcyvincent]

hi everyone, im beginner of Pro E user,i looking fortutorial n video tutorialmaterial about this so that i can learn it


thanks


rgds,


vincent

 

[marker4x4]

Has anybody noticed a significant slow down regenerating tool paths between Wildfire 2.0 & 3.0?






I have a pretty large file and in 2.0 the regen may take 20 seconds, but in 3.0 believe it or not over 13 minutes for the same exact file!

Thanks

Same here; it does take time to regenerate. We're on build M020. Does anyone run M040? If so, what's the regen time on that one?

 

[Jotry]

Hi Vincent,


Check out this webpage for more information on tutorials:


http://www.ptc.com/products/tutorials/index.htm

 

[jeff toff]

Hi Guys,


I am wondering if you found out what your regeneration problem was? I have the same problem here with W3.0 Date Code M070.


Jeff Toff

 

[Mr Ray]

TheM110 buildseems to be performing a little better.


But when I have more than 10 tools in one .mfg file it takes longer then it should.


I also have found purging the files seems to help some as well.

 

[ToolDude]

I have found the new finish routines in wildfire to be a joke. If you set the tolerances and step overor cusp height to real world numbers (.0001 to .0002) of an inch for fine finishes you might as well go have lunch while waiting for it to process tool path. If it doesn't crash the pc or lock up first.If I set the tolerances any larger the finish in Vericut looks like waves on the ocean and totally un acceptable for finishing mold components.


I am running wildfire3M100.I was wondering if I am doing something wrong or if it was the software. I have not had any training on wildfire Manufacturing since R2001. So it could be me. The tutorials always show these finish routines with huge step overs and tolerances.


I would like to hear from other users experiences on this subject.

 

[marker4x4]

I have found the new finish routines in wildfire to be a joke. If you set the tolerances and step overor cusp height to real world numbers (.0001 to .0002) of an inch for fine finishes you might as well go have lunch while waiting for it to process tool path....

It's not that bad in here... I never set the cusp higher than .0001", often we use .00005" or .00002" to get a really nice finish. It does take some time, but (even on my slow-poke computer) the processing time is reasonable. Perhaps you're trying to machine a really large and complex area in one sequence? If so, try to break it down (if possible) to few sequences.

 

[sjohnson]

I constantly use cusp hights of ,0002 or less for our airfoil surfaces. What are you using for check surfaces? If you only use the surfaces you need to check against and not the complete part it can significantly speed up toolpath computations.

 

[ToolDude]

Thank you Marker4X4 and SJohnson that's what I need to know. I will try your sugestions to see if the proccessing time improves.