Freesteel Blog » Gibbs buys in Volumill with excitement

Gibbs buys in Volumill with excitement

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm Written by:

Things are moving fast over in America-land, with the now litigation-free Celeritive Volumill being licensed into Gibbscam:

“VoluMill is the first third-party product that my resellers are talking about and asking for,” says Bill Gibbs, founder of Gibbs and Associates. “Early Gibbs users are raving about the impact VoluMill is having on their operating costs. The VoluMill option will become part of Gibbs’ standard offering and will be promoted, shown and demonstrated at trade shows and in webinars.”

Everyone is excited about this new thing. As they explain in their video exhibiting their new three-axis rest roughing capability:

“Volumill begins by roughing the core using the maximum depth of cut of 0.5. It then reduces these steps to the final step height of 0.1. Volumill is unique in that it doesn’t simply machine the entire part in 0.1 increments.”

Well, they can call it unique if they like, but it’s a lie, because we’ve had it since 2005.

Details, details.

I find this traditional corporate style literature astoundingly irritating, the way everyone has to pretend theirs is the only product in the world. No other thing exists.

It makes it difficult to compete and improve by competition. How are customers supposed to assemble the information and compare their options, when the only stuff that’s ever published is this nonsense?

I’m still searching in vain for the alleged volumill patent filing. Any tip-offs? Like an application number?

Meanwhile, we’ve got some toolpath examples from Mastercam’s Dynamic Milling. I’ll be examining them in techno-geometric detail at some point soon when I’ve got the inclination. When I get some Volumill toolpath samples, I’ll be able to study and report on them as well.


  • 1. Neel replies at 30th September 2009, 6:08 pm :

    Yes, it would be good idea to compare all three on same sample part and also analyze the tool load & tool load variations. Actually it could be more useful if someone cuts the parts on same machine and material and check the tool life. Machining times.

  • 2. anders replies at 1st October 2009, 8:30 am :

    could some sort of initial comparison be done simply with a cutting-simulator. just export G-code for the same part from all algorithms, and have the cutting simulator figure out tool-load (average, spikes, etc), machining time and so on.
    I’ve been thinking about an octree-based cutting simulation but my leisure time allotted for c++ coding is very limited…

  • 3. Daniel replies at 2nd October 2009, 2:30 am :

    I totally agree…

    Hey Julian, I thought you would like to see this:


Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <strong>