(949) 753-7878
Schedule a Demo
Quick Links:
Go to Home

PEP Benchmark vs. Sigma

PEP Benchmark vs. Sigma

Benchmarks:

  • 1-5: compare the fully automatic results of both PEP and Sigmanest. No Clamps
  • 6-10: compare PEP’s fully automatic results against a skilled programmer changing the parameters and renesting the results. No Clamps

Fully Automatic Results No Renesting

  • 25 Free Parts: 26% material savings with PEP!
  • 1,744 INCHES ELIMINATED: 37.2% of all cutting was eliminated (common cut)!
PEP nested 120 parts vs Sigma 95 parts

25 free parts
26% better yield
  • 76 Free Parts: 39.8% material savings with PEP!
PEP nested 267 parts vs Sigma 191 parts

76 free parts
39.8% better yield
  • 16 Free Parts: 89% material saving with PEP!
PEP nested 34 parts vs Sigma 18 parts

16 free parts
26.3% better yield
  • 37 Free Parts: 35% material savings with PEP!
PEP nested 143 parts vs Sigma 106 parts

37 free parts
35% better yield
  • 31 Free Parts: 18 % material savings with PEP!
PEP nested 200 parts vs Sigma 169 parts

37 free parts
35% better yield

PEP AUTO vs. SKILLED PROGRAMMER AND RENESTING

  • 14 Free Parts: 13.9% material savings with PEP!
  • 1,684 inches eliminated: 38% of all cutting was eliminated (common cut)
PEP nested 115 parts vs Sigma 101 parts

14 free parts
13.9% better yield

NESTING WITH CLAMPS
  • 55 Free Parts: 27% material savings with PEP!
PEP nested 260 parts vs Sigma 205 parts

55 free parts
27% better yield

NESTING WITH CLAMPS
  • 5 free parts: 17.9% material savings with PEP!
PEP nested 33 parts vs Sigma 28 parts

5 free parts
17.9% better yield

NESTING WITH CLAMPS
  • 21 free parts: 17.5% material savings with PEP
PEP nested 141 parts vs Sigma 120 parts

21 free parts
17.5% better yield

NESTING WITH CLAMPS
  • 15 free parts: 9.3% material savings
PEP nested 196 parts vs Sigma 181 parts

15 free parts
9.3% better yield

NESTING WITH CLAMPS

Benchmark Summary

Average PEP Savings

  • 32% material savings: PEP vs. Sigmanest – fully automatic mode )
  • 17% material savings: PEP vs. Skilled Programmer using the manual / edit mode

Grid Index

  • Nests 1-5: no clamp zone, Amada, Bystronic, Cincinnati, Mits, Trumpf, etc.
  • Nests 6-10: with clamp zone, Amada, Bystronic, Cincinnati, Mazak, Finn, etc.
Nests 1-5, Fully automatic (Amada, Cincinnati, Mits, Trumpf, etc.) flying optic nesting no clamps
Nest # Drawing Name PEP Nested (parts) Sigma Nested (parts) Free parts with PEP % material saved (More Material Req)
1 534A 120 95 25 26.32%
2 650 267 191 76 39.79%
3 H218 34 18 16 26.3%
4 B14-A 143 106 37 34.91%
5 B9-A 200 169 31 18.34%
  TOTAL 764 579 185 29.13%
Nests 6-10, fully automatic (Cincinnati, Mazak, Finn, etc. ) with clamp zone
Nest # Drawing Name PEP Nested (parts) Sigma Nested (parts) Free parts with PEP % material saved (More Material Req)
6 534A 115 101 14 13.86%
7 650 260 205 55 26.83%
8 H218 33 28 5 17.86%
9 B14-A 141 120 19 15.50%
10 B9-A 196 181 15 8.29%
  TOTAL 745 635 110 17.32%

Contact [email protected] to save 8% on material and 15% more laser throughput!

Previous NewsPEP Technology Outperforms Bysoft in Comprehensive Benchmark: Delivers 14% Material Savings and 56% Fewer Head Raises Next NewsPEP saves 19 hours of engineering time on ONE JOB!