Many people do not release the difference between Automatic and Automated nesting functionality.
Before we start with nesting software comparison you can read good article on this blog:
Full text: Automatic Nesting and Automated Nesting – Smart Shoppers Know the Difference
Whenever user have to manual manipulate with nested parts (after algorithm computation) to
optimize nesting layout to maximum, we can say that it is about Automated process of nesting.
Maybe someone think that he will do easy job of manual optimization after Automated nesting,
but it is not so simple as expect.
A lot of people do not understand why good algorithm consume more time when struggling
to save every inch of material. The time required for algorithm calculation to increase
usable area (decrease scrap) growing exponential for every inch.
When some nesting software do nesting operation and perform nesting layout in a few seconds, that
indicate that implemented nesting algorithm does not consider all possible parts placement
scenarios.
Take a look on some nesting software comparisons at the same sheet sizes and parts (you can download these software from many
‘software download’ sites and try by yourself). We named these software as ‘X’ software.
…
In this case of X1 software we can see that fast nesting in few seconds produce array of parts as result :
Unlike nesting from the first X1 software, DG Nest Pro produce true shape nesting (nesting time 18 seconds) and approx. 15% better result in saving material:
Good automatic nesting software produce usable empty space on the right side of the sheet which is not the case with first image. User expect that nesting alignment have to be on the left side of the sheet. Again parts are not coherent and there is a lot of nesting gaps. This example shows less efficient (automated) nesting produced by X1 software:
On the other side DG Nest Pro produce coherent nesting layout with approx. 25% better result:
DG Nest Pro produce coherent nesting layout with minimal gaps. We try to nest more examples with X1 software, but it often breaks down. Software stability and price are also went in favor to DG Nest Pro.
Let’s see how works another nesting software named X2:
X2 software produce fast and solid nesting layout, but it does not produce strait nesting area margin – comparing with DG Nest Pro nesting layout. X2 software has a problem with reading non closed dxf part contours so few parts was not nested.
In this case DG Nest Pro nesting area width is 160 mm smaller than X2 software nesting area with few parts more than X2 software. Real true shape nesting software produce minimal scrap material and produce rectangular ‘waste’ sheet suitable for stock storage.
Advice:
Many of X software shows excellent performance when work with part duplicates, they behaves as array/rectangular nesting software. The power of true shape automatic software can be felt only with many
different shaped parts without duplicates. When you test nesting software, test it with many different shaped parts (irregular polygons), but without duplicates, also do test with enough number of parts
to fill out full sheet area and half sheet area to test nesting area right margin.
Many people do not release the difference between Automatic and Automated nesting functionality.
Before we start with nesting software comparison you can read good article on this blog:
Full text: Automatic Nesting and Automated Nesting – Smart Shoppers Know the Difference
Whenever user have to manual manipulate with nested parts (after algorithm computation) to
optimize nesting layout to maximum, we can say that it is about Automated process of nesting.
Maybe someone think that he will do easy job of manual optimization after Automated nesting,
but it is not so simple as expect.
A lot of people do not understand why good algorithm consume more time when struggling
to save every inch of material. The time required for algorithm calculation to increase
usable area (decrease scrap) growing exponential for every inch.
When some nesting software do nesting operation and perform nesting layout in a few seconds, that
indicate that implemented nesting algorithm does not consider all possible parts placement
scenarios.
Take a look on some nesting software comparisons at the same sheet sizes and parts (you can download these software from many
‘software download’ sites and try by yourself). We named these software as ‘X’ software.
…
In this case of X1 software we can see that fast nesting in few seconds produce array of parts as result :
Unlike nesting from the first X1 software, DG Nest Pro produce true shape nesting (nesting time 18 seconds) and approx. 15% better result in saving material:
Good automatic nesting software produce usable empty space on the right side of the sheet which is not the case with first image. User expect that nesting alignment have to be on the left side of the sheet. Again parts are not coherent and there is a lot of nesting gaps. This example shows less efficient (automated) nesting produced by X1 software:
On the other side DG Nest Pro produce coherent nesting layout with approx. 25% better result:
DG Nest Pro produce coherent nesting layout with minimal gaps. We try to nest more examples with X1 software, but it often breaks down. Software stability and price are also went in favor to DG Nest Pro.
Let’s see how works another nesting software named X2:
X2 software produce fast and solid nesting layout, but it does not produce strait nesting area margin – comparing with DG Nest Pro nesting layout. X2 software has a problem with reading non closed dxf part contours so few parts was not nested.
In this case DG Nest Pro nesting area width is 160 mm smaller than X2 software nesting area with few parts more than X2 software. Real true shape nesting software produce minimal scrap material and produce rectangular ‘waste’ sheet suitable for stock storage.
Advice:
Many of X software shows excellent performance when work with part duplicates, they behaves as array/rectangular nesting software. The power of true shape automatic software can be felt only with many
different shaped parts without duplicates. When you test nesting software, test it with many different shaped parts (irregular polygons), but without duplicates, also do test with enough number of parts
to fill out full sheet area and half sheet area to test nesting area right margin.
admin