Why does this happen?

[BILL HUNTER]

Why is it that when you update a machine definition/control definition posts and setup sheets in 2020 and you call up a file it never calls up the newest MD/CD?!? Is there some sort of id10t setting for this? Man it is aggravating! Why would Mastercam want to store the original instead of auto updating to the newest?

[Guest]

21 hours ago, BILL HUNTER said:

Why is it that when you update a machine definition/control definition posts and setup sheets in 2020 and you call up a file it never calls up the newest MD/CD?!? Is there some sort of id10t setting for this? Man it is aggravating! Why would Mastercam want to store the original instead of auto updating to the newest?

The Machine Def is tied to the file, a workaround would be a small add-in to replace the current machine definition and control definition upon opening a file, providing you always use the same one.

If it could be done with a nethook, I will make it easily, and it would work across all your versions.

[BILL HUNTER]

1 hour ago, byte said:

The Machine Def is tied to the file, a workaround would be a small add-in to replace the current machine definition and control definition upon opening a file, providing you always use the same one.

If it could be done with a nethook, I will make it easily, and it would work across all your versions.

I see how they are tied to the file. The question is why would you ever want that? It makes no sense. We repaired the Mastercam supplied post and now every time we post a file linked to that post we must always go back and reselect the MD. WOW, that is bad. Very very bad. There should be a check box in config to bypass that.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, BILL HUNTER said:

I see how they are tied to the file. The question is why would you ever want that? It makes no sense. We repaired the Mastercam supplied post and now every time we post a file linked to that post we must always go back and reselect the MD. WOW, that is bad. Very very bad. There should be a check box in config to bypass that.

If you share your idea on the main mastercam.com forums, they can create a request ticket and add the functionality you suggested into future versions, I would be happy to +1.

[Chally72]

The inverse of your problem is why this is done. You cannot lock down or control a process if every time a programmer goes into the machine def and hits a checkbox, it is unilaterally applied across all of your programs from the beginning of time- which would be very bad in a production environment.

 

I think a chook to do this, if one does not already exist, would be a good tool.

[dougm]

yes Please

 

[Guest]

I'll look into this.

[Aaron Eberhard]

I can't remember if I've ever tried it, but I think "Apply last machine definition" is the option you want here?
 

[crazy^millman]

10 minutes ago, Aaron Eberhard - CNC Software said:

I can't remember if I've ever tried it, but I think "Apply last machine definition" is the option you want here?
 

I was told to never help him again so I was wondering when someone was going to chime in with that answer. Thank you Aaron.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

I was told to never help him again so I was wondering when someone was going to chime in with that answer. Thank you Aaron.

Load machine definition from path, would still be more intuitive. Imo

[crazy^millman]

53 minutes ago, byte said:

Load machine definition from path, would still be more intuitive. Imo

Going to really depend. Currently I have over 120 different machines in my Machine and Control Folder. I might make programs for 5 different customers from same machine, but use different varaitaions of the post. Then I have some I tweak a MMD for one time to get something working for one file and change that MMD in just the operations manager. If it went across the board I might need 300 or 400 machines in my CNC Machines folder. What others might not use other do use? That is the extremely hard balance of making software. We are all different and we all use it is such different ways. I am left handed and approach most of my setups and process thinking in a X positive thought process. I know plenty of right handed people who think in a X negative process from setup and position the part. Neither one of are correct just different in our approaches. Prospective is being able to see things from someone else's way, method and understanding. That is the hardest for anyone to do. No matter our experience or lack there of we are always learning and can do better. Anyone that thinks they have arrived and done it all trust me that are full of it.

[Chris In-House Solutions]

This is the way it was explained to me at one point in time and it made sense to me. 

If you made a program that ran perfectly 2 years ago and in-between that point in time and now you've made minor changes to the machine/control definition.  Now that customer comes back and asks you for the same parts.  If you can just open the file and post the code and run it knowing it worked good the last time thats great your ahead of the game.  Otherwise you would have to track ever single change you made and then go and change the mmd/control definition to match what you had back 2 years ago.  

Any new file should use the new machine/control definition.  You only need to replace the machine def on files you've previously programmed where you want those changes applied.  Its a good system but I understand your frustration too.  At least it looks like there is a way to do what you want within the System configuration.  I dont think that was in the configuration a few years ago or several years ago when I got the explanation.     

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Chris In-House Solutions said:

If you made a program that ran perfectly 2 years ago and in-between that point in time and now you've made minor changes to the machine/control definition. 

Yeah, that logic, isn't bad, for me, it's just annoying, loading all those definitions.

12 minutes ago, Chris In-House Solutions said:

  I dont think that was in the configuration a few years ago or several years ago when I got the explanation

I've never seen it, but I have overlooked loads of features in mastercam, there is just so much, always seeing crazymillman and gcode do all this cool stuff I never knew after ten years of mastercam.. I had training too, but I didn't pay enough attention in class, I clearly missed things.....

[Colin Gilchrist]

17 minutes ago, byte said:

Yeah, that logic, isn't bad, for me, it's just annoying, loading all those definitions.

I've never seen it, but I have overlooked loads of features in mastercam, there is just so much, always seeing crazymillman and gcode do all this cool stuff I never knew after ten years of mastercam.. I had training too, but I didn't pay enough attention in class, I clearly missed things.....

Don't sell yourself short. No class, book, or set of videos could ever hope to cover the scope of this software package. The complexity allows flexibility for creating programs which can cut just about any material, on any machine. 

Having taught many classes professionally, I always made it a point to teach to a class outline, and not a "script". That allowed me the flexibility to ask questions about the material to my students, as I taught them, to gauge if they were really "getting it", or if I needed to cover the material in a different way.

One of the most important and successful aspects of my classes was the portion I planned for "Office Hours". That was an "open question and answer period", where any Mastercam question was fair game. Often, than meant having to figure out a particular Toolpath on-the-fly, or in many cases being introduced to a type of operation (at the machine), which was new to me. This not only provided incredible value for the students, it was an excellent opportunity for me to diversify my knowledge of manufacturing. 

[crazy^millman]

14 hours ago, Colin Gilchrist said:

Don't sell yourself short. No class, book, or set of videos could ever hope to cover the scope of this software package. The complexity allows flexibility for creating programs which can cut just about any material, on any machine. 

Having taught many classes professionally, I always made it a point to teach to a class outline, and not a "script". That allowed me the flexibility to ask questions about the material to my students, as I taught them, to gauge if they were really "getting it", or if I needed to cover the material in a different way.

One of the most important and successful aspects of my classes was the portion I planned for "Office Hours". That was an "open question and answer period", where any Mastercam question was fair game. Often, than meant having to figure out a particular Toolpath on-the-fly, or in many cases being introduced to a type of operation (at the machine), which was new to me. This not only provided incredible value for the students, it was an excellent opportunity for me to diversify my knowledge of manufacturing. 

How I have taught many classes as well. I am normally brought in and I like to teach using their parts on their equipment. Anyone can do canned demos, but being able to go into any shop and program any machine they have shows them Mastercam is the real deal. Funny when you start doing that all the other things never addressed you seem to find. 
 

Mr Hunter I apologize for any comments or remarks that have upset you in the past. I do care that anyone using Mastercam can do so and hopefully you’re getting your issued addressed and are able to use Mastercam to it’s fullest. Have a good night. 

Edited September 2, 2020 by crazy^millman
Wrong Last name.

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, crazy^millman said:

Mr Cravem 

Wrong Bill? Or am I confused :/.

[Colin Gilchrist]

On 8/31/2020 at 9:21 AM, BILL HUNTER said:

Why is it that when you update a machine definition/control definition posts and setup sheets in 2020 and you call up a file it never calls up the newest MD/CD?!? Is there some sort of id10t setting for this? Man it is aggravating! Why would Mastercam want to store the original instead of auto updating to the newest?

Hi Bill,

The technical reason is that a copy of the Machine Definition File, and Control Definition File, are written and stored to the Mastercam Database for each file you create.

This is confusing to many people, but the reason for this behavior, is it allows you to store "file specific settings" in an individual Mastercam file. For example, you might have one very large file, where you want to compress the file size as much as possible. You could open the local copy of the CD, and disable line numbers (sequence numbers), remove space characters between the blocks of code, and even change the Arc Format from IJK to Radius or Signed Radius, to shrink the program as much as possible.

Another example is Right-Angle Head attachments and tools. These are typically built on a file-by-file basis, so you build your tool stations and offsets in the MD.

The point being, you generally don't want these changes being made to your 'library copy' of the Machine Definition.

The drawback to this mechanism of course, is that it has required that you open the Machine Group Properties dialog, and perform a 'Replace' on the Machine Definition File, which reloads the MD/CD/Post files (updated to the current Mastercam version, of course).

There is a shortcut that may help, if you are a user where the 'MD/CD Settings' remain the same, version-to-version.

When you open an old version Mastercam file, in 2021, select all the Ops you want to Post, and press the G1 button.

This brings up the Posting dialog box. By default, this will be trying to call the 'stored MD/CD/Post settings', which come from the old Mastercam version.

Here is the trick: hold down CTRL + ALT + SHIFT, and while holding them down, press the letter 'P' on the keyboard. This will activate the Select Post button. You can now browse directly to your 2021 version Post. Select it, and just ignore the warning about CD settings stuff.

Using that shortcut also means you don't have to repost all your Operations, which is advantageous. 

 

[crazy^millman]

9 hours ago, byte said:

Wrong Bill? Or am I confused :/.

I was wrong again.

[BILL HUNTER]

On 9/1/2020 at 9:23 PM, Colin Gilchrist said:

Hi Bill,

The technical reason is that a copy of the Machine Definition File, and Control Definition File, are written and stored to the Mastercam Database for each file you create.

This is confusing to many people, but the reason for this behavior, is it allows you to store "file specific settings" in an individual Mastercam file. For example, you might have one very large file, where you want to compress the file size as much as possible. You could open the local copy of the CD, and disable line numbers (sequence numbers), remove space characters between the blocks of code, and even change the Arc Format from IJK to Radius or Signed Radius, to shrink the program as much as possible.

Another example is Right-Angle Head attachments and tools. These are typically built on a file-by-file basis, so you build your tool stations and offsets in the MD.

The point being, you generally don't want these changes being made to your 'library copy' of the Machine Definition.

The drawback to this mechanism of course, is that it has required that you open the Machine Group Properties dialog, and perform a 'Replace' on the Machine Definition File, which reloads the MD/CD/Post files (updated to the current Mastercam version, of course).

There is a shortcut that may help, if you are a user where the 'MD/CD Settings' remain the same, version-to-version.

When you open an old version Mastercam file, in 2021, select all the Ops you want to Post, and press the G1 button.

This brings up the Posting dialog box. By default, this will be trying to call the 'stored MD/CD/Post settings', which come from the old Mastercam version.

Here is the trick: hold down CTRL + ALT + SHIFT, and while holding them down, press the letter 'P' on the keyboard. This will activate the Select Post button. You can now browse directly to your 2021 version Post. Select it, and just ignore the warning about CD settings stuff.

Using that shortcut also means you don't have to repost all your Operations, which is advantageous. 

 

Thanks for the help. I will give it a try.

[BILL HUNTER]

On 9/1/2020 at 7:47 AM, Chally72 said:

The inverse of your problem is why this is done. You cannot lock down or control a process if every time a programmer goes into the machine def and hits a checkbox, it is unilaterally applied across all of your programs from the beginning of time- which would be very bad in a production environment.

 

I think a chook to do this, if one does not already exist, would be a good tool.

I understand your thoughts. However, I see no difference between having a checkbox or a chook for that matter. They would both accomplish the same. A check box would do it for you automatically. A chook would be no different than having to reselect the machine definition.

[Chally72]

Just now, BILL HUNTER said:

I understand your thoughts. However, I see no difference between having a checkbox or a chook for that matter. They would both accomplish the same. A check box would do it for you automatically. A chook would be no different than having to reselect the machine definition.

I was actually unaware of the checkbox until Aaron brought it up! I've never had a need to do this- usually my work requires the exact opposite- carefully controlling and replicating individual file behavior from customers, and never, ever swapping out their MD/CD for something of mine.

[BILL HUNTER]

Just now, Chally72 said:

I was actually unaware of the checkbox until Aaron brought it up! I've never had a need to do this- usually my work requires the exact opposite- carefully controlling and replicating individual file behavior from customers, and never, ever swapping out their MD/CD for something of mine.

Well, the MD/CD is really not the issue. The post, which is controlled by the MD/CD is. When we need to update the post, we want it worldwide. Not just for 1 program. We need to make sure all programs utilize a good post. If I open a file to modify something and it is using an outdated post I could end up with the same problem if I do not call up the MD/CD again.

[Chally72]

Right- and those control what post you're pointing to....

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aside from that, if you're introducing a new post to solve an issue with an older post, are you not replacing the old post directly with an identically named file? In that scenario, there's no reason not to do this, and you don't have to re-point anything.

[crazy^millman]

7 minutes ago, BILL HUNTER said:

Well, the MD/CD is really not the issue. The post, which is controlled by the MD/CD is. When we need to update the post, we want it worldwide. Not just for 1 program. We need to make sure all programs utilize a good post. If I open a file to modify something and it is using an outdated post I could end up with the same problem if I do not call up the MD/CD again.

Bill if the post name never changed then you should be able to open old files and just repost the programs with no MD/CD change needed. 

[BILL HUNTER]

Just now, crazy^millman said:

Bill if the post name never changed then you should be able to open old files and just repost the programs with no MD/CD change needed. 

YESSSSSSS! You would think so. That is not what is happening. I am writing over the same post, same name, same location. I am also having the same issue with the setup sheets.