Accurate time in sheetcam job report?

[motoguy]

I'm trying to figure out how to get an accurate cut time from the sheetcam job report. I typically only use the sq inches/cut inches/pierces aspect. However, I've had a couple of customer-supplied-material jobs, which were a straight hourly rate. I used the sheetcam job report to estimate job times and it was WAAAY off. The jobs took ~40% longer than sheetcam estimated.

I played with pierce times in the job reports but it didn't seem to change the results. I thought it would take (Pierce time x # of pierces) + (rapid distance x rapid rate) + (cut distance x cut ipm), but it doesn't seem to be calculating correctly.

Will changing cut speeds in cut rules affect the calculation? When cutting a layer (say, holes) at 60% tool speed, is that reduction/slowdown figured in?

Has anyone found a way to get accurate times from the job report?

[tnbndr]

I have noticed the same thing. I think all Sheetcam does is take into account the cut inches and cut speed to figure the cut time. It does not figure in rapids, pierce time etc.

[exapprentice]

Hi

Does anyone go over to the SheetCam web site?

I have the same problem, originally I took the job report and took the numbers as being realistic until a few files in
then realised that the times were way off in SheetCam

Is this something that Les could look at if he was asked
It would be great to have some sort of information box where you could enter real numbers that are part of the process like Pierce delay, touch off times rapid & cutting feed rates, how many touch offs etc, etc.

I think the only numbers that are not in SheetCam would be how long the IHS routine takes (touch off) on individual machines, the rest is already entered into the set up when you run the post processor (?)
Maybe it could be a way of achieving a realistic prediction of how long a cut file will take, and be useful for costings

[SeanP]

One other way is to run the Simulation and take note of the time in seconds, it's a bit closer, but even that varies when feed rate override is upped to lightning speed.

[motoguy]

It appears the simulation time is MUCH closer than the job report time. Well, it can be, anyway. For the job in question, the job report said it would take 44 minutes. Watching the clock, it took almost exactly an hour.

The simulation shows 3661 seconds (61 minutes), when running at 10,000% FRO.
Running it at 5k% FRO shows a time of 3186 (53 minutes).
1k% FRO shows 2789 (46.5 minutes).

Interesting that the slower FRO makes for a faster cut estimate. The 10k% FRO closely matches the real world cut time on this job.

[Les Newell]

SheetCam's estimations should account for rapids, pierce time etc but they do not take acceleration into account, which can make quite a difference for plasma cutting. I explained the variations in simulation in my post on the SheetCam forum.