X3 Mill suggestions and improvements

[Justin Beebe at Folsom Tool]

In a pocket toolpath for entry method aside from helix and ramp I would like to see an option for a chip break or peck drill cycle. This way a could peck drill to a certain depth then pocket.

[Damjan333]

cncjb, I don´t now how to quote on this forum, I only want to tell you that you have this option in circle toolpaths - drill start holes...

[mike_f]

+1 fix what doesn't work now first. let me create a 90 deg. face mill,... with corner radii. fix open pocket toolpath.

 

quote:

---

Add a double angle chamfering tool into the tool list and be able to select chamfering with the upper or lower edge.

---

ability to change feed rates "anywhere" where a finish cut is available. multipass, depth, etc. etc.

 

let me take a finish cut on the walls AND floor in contour in one process.......

[andrewgore]

1.+18000 on fixing things that don't work as they should.

 

A.Verify that is actually a good picture of what my part will look like....And in a timely manner (even 10 minutes is unacceptable IMO. UG, WorkNC, solidcam have these figured out)

 

B.Verify that can use "true solids" with custom defined tools.

 

C.No more corrupt files due to sudden power loss in computer.

 

D.True utilization of Ram, video card, CPU/dual core/64 bit, etc.

 

E.CNC Software to stop blaming THEIR software problems on everyones computers.

 

F.Surface to surface trimming couldn't be any more of a pain that it is.

 

G.All of the above to not be "fixed in the next release"

 

I would have a list of things to add, but at this point these things hinder our daily operation so directly that they MUST be addressed first. My question is this: How is the "#1 CadCam software company" falling behind in such crucial areas and still for the past X amount of years, everyone just deals with it? Especially now that there are just as if not more powerful other packages out there?

 

Andrew

[gcode]

quote:

---

.Verify that can use "true solids" with custom defined tools.

---

I do this every day

[andrewgore]

gcode, I guess it has changed then. I had a problem in the past with that, but it could have also been to do with the tool holders. It has been a few weeks since I've used custom defined tools in verify. I'll check it out here, but most of my work is ballbull nose so I'm usually OK as far as tools go.

 

I will add this though:

When you do a HST core rough operation, and you tell it to stay X amount away from your toolholder, you can still have a collision with stock left on your part. How does Mastercam not recognize stock left on the part and avoid the collision with the bottomside of the toolholder?

 

Andrew

[Redfire427]

andrewgore:

 

Excellent points. 80000 seats installed worldwide. Where the h--- is the quality control and development. Way too slow, behind other systems, too many problems.

[DavidSV]

How about in the Std 2d Contour tool path operation have the option to enter a new RPM and feed rate for the finish pass. Kind of like the Pocket tool path.

 

Also, have an option to integrate the finish passes for the depth cuts with the finish pass for the multiple passes.

[Mcam Nut]

I still think mcam needs to have full Graphical Toolpath Control.

[Justin Beebe at Folsom Tool]

Damjan,

 

Thanks for the reply. I tried the start hole toolpath and it worked pretty good. I was hoping for a setting that would allow the same thing built into the pocket toolpath under the entry/ramp section. The start hole toolpath wants to use a drill, which you can go back and change after it creates the operation but that is just extra work. I like to peck with the same endmill I'm pocketing with. When I plunge without pecking a large chip sometimes wraps around my endmill and I have to hit feed hold to blow it off. I guess I could just as easily enter with ramp or helix. That always seem to work as well. I was just looking for one more option.

[Colin Gilchrist]

Andrew/Prosin,

 

Why don't you join the Beta test group if you are so concerned about Mastercam's short comings. Mastercam is a little weak in Verify. So get something else you like better like UG or Catia or whatever.

 

Or do the smart thing and get Vericut. Does WorkNC, SolidCAM, or UG's verify function use the actual G code file? And how much do they cost?

 

How much more would you be willing to pay for Mastercam?

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

CATIA does NOT use G-Code either.

[Redfire427]

Colin Gilchrist,

 

Many times I feel like we are all Beta testers. Would I be interested in being a Beta tester and going through all the difficulties of developing a new release ? No. To the best of my knowledge, the Beta guys still have to pay for their software just like the rest of us on maintenance. The only difference is they get to preview what we will be fighting with in the near future. What really gets me boiling is when I see the production candidate released and it contains so many basic problems that should easily have been picked up by the quality control people, or, the release still contains all of the bugs from the previous release.

 

What kills me is that all of the major releases are marketed or timed to coincide with the tool shows and such to show off their new product and try to generate new sales. In my opinion, you have a lot more to lose than you will gain with this approach. For example, lets say Mastercam X4 is released at the Toronto Manufacturing Show and lots of people stop by the booth. Ok, you might generate a handful of sales from the show. Nothing that will make or break your business. On the other hand, releasing a product full of bugs and pre-existing problems to your core legacy users by rushing it to market, you run the risk of losing these users out of sheer frustration to the competition.

 

Let me say this last thing. Mastercam sells software, however WE are the end users. Instead of development being driven by marketing and what they think might be a good idea to incorporate into the next release, why not ask your customers what they want to see or what is important to them? Collectively, we all have a lot to say with many different levels of experience. More so than the decision makers who develop our end product.

[3R!< W3NG3R]

Another thing I would like is the ability in 2D contour to create finish pass in milty pass at any number of depths, not every depth or final depth. Say every second or third depth cut, run a finish pass.

 

And Prosin, you can always email MC with concerns and requests.

[Thee Rickster ™]

quote:

---

Or do the smart thing and get Vericut. Does WorkNC, SolidCAM, or UG's verify function use the actual G code file? And how much do they cost?

---

I think Predator does this and is fairly cheap.

 

Prosin,

ya get what ya get. If MC stopped to

get all the bugs fixed and put the many useful

things on our wish list, that we like from

other softwares, on the new releases, our

maintenance would run out.

 

Then we'd be more frustrated.

 

I agree with you on many things and I believe

the bugs are hampering the enhancements.

 

I just hope to get X3 and maybe MR1 by Dec 08.

(Although a MR2 guarantee would be nice bonus)

 

I like the quality of the re machining and left-

over tool paths enough that it looks like I am in

it for the long haul.

 

I am waiting patiently on a few enhancements.

Snapping to grid lines of a surface, when using

letters being able to see the text to place it

and see if it is what ya want...

Project Manager actually work.

At least default to last folder.

to name a few.

 

M2C's (that I had to borrow)

[Müřlıń®]

quote:

---

How about giving us what's been promised FOR 10 YEARS before giving some new stuff that few will use.

---

+1...I havent even upgraded to Mr2 yet...there is no need...still paying maintence...I haven't got a clue why...

 

I haven't got anything usable for me in the last couple years...

 

I'm sure X3 is just going to have some more stuff in it I won't ever use....prol drop maintence next time...

 

I would much rather have something like R to V and Art included for free if you have maintence...maybe even lathe ...

 

Don't get me wrong, X2 is chalked full of good stuff...just I don't need most of it...

 

Could have already bought art with the wasted maintence fees...

[Matt Tebbutt]

Having double sided chamfer tools and being able to cut on either side of the tool woud be sweet.

 

Being able to just pick a chamfer and have Mcam figure out how many cuts and where they have to be would be great instead of having to create extra geometry would be really handy.

[MIL-TFP-41]

reverse depth cuts for undercutting things would be way nice...

[Bruce Caulley]

FYI, UGNX verifies G-code.

 

Bruce

[sharles]

I've been debating whether to approach my boss about dropping maintenance. I finally made the jump to X2 MR2 SP1, but boy is it A LOT slower than plain X2: everything hesitates when I click on stuff and my IT guy even bought me a new suped up video card, but it still doesn't help. I do like a couple of new features though.

 

Wish List:

1) fix ALL the bugs before adding more bells and whistles.

2) fix the wcs so that when I make an stl in verify to use as a stock model for restmill, it's not floating out in space somewhere and then I have to manipulate it back to my part's wcs. How hard can it be to make these in sync? If they are, someone please help me out of my ignorance.

3) fix all the hesitation in mr2. I know that was a big thread when this new mr came out: my graphics screen slowly comes into view, in parts and pieces, when I first start mc. My files are getting ridiculously big, too. My iges and parasolids files don't seem much bigger, so is something in mc making all the toolpaths take up more memory in the latest versions??? I'm no computer expert. Just wondering.

[gcode]

quote:

---

If they are, someone please help me out of my ignorance.

---

File/Save As/STL/click the Options Box and choose

World or Current WCS.

 

As for the lag... there is something going on with your system.

We've got 5 machines running X2_MR2.

2 monster workstations and 3 plain janes..

no lag anywhere.

[Guest]

quote:

---

We've got 5 machines running X2_MR2.

2 monster workstations and 3 plain janes..

no lag anywhere.

---

gcode, I really hate to say this but no, there are too many things still going on for it to be all machine related. and if it is, I don't want to see any more "generic" recommendations, I want to KNOW what WILL work. All the hardware I see is "supposed" to be OK, some higher end. If some of the bigger companies can say "SPECIFICALLY" what will work, then it's time for that here.

 

I've made my feeling known about the MR2 release previously and nothing I have seen has done "much" to change my mind.

[Thee Dragracer1951]

Used to be, 4 axis and 5 axis were part of Mill 3, it was in V9. I really think at least 4 axis ought to be part of level 3. Everyone that I know has a fourth. I don't think the competition is charging for it when at the same level as mill three.

I'll add my 2 cents for the fix what don't work first.

[gcode]

We've got 2 Dell WS-690 with dual core Xeons

Quadro FX-3450's and 4 gig of ram

and 3 older machines running 3.2 P4's

and a grab bag of old 3D Labs

and GeForce gaming cards.

All are running XP Pro and Norton corperate

antivirus.

All are running X2_MR2_SP1 and none display any

symptoms of lag and all 5 machines are rock solid

stable.

All are running current .Net Framework 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0

I've often wondered if the lag could have something

to do with .Net Framework not being up to the latest

rev.????

[Guest]

yup and I don't doubt it for a minute.

 

However there are so many possible hardware combinations from BIOS, controllers, bridges, memory type. I have one with a system quite similar to what you listed with Xeon that despite EVERYTHING tried, it is quite unstable and only with Mastercam, Solidworks and others run perfectly fine with no issues.

 

Something is NOT playing nice with the code and frankly with a high end system with all the latest patches and drivers, just should not be.

 

It really makes me wonder if MCAMs instability will migrate to SW's upon the "intergration"

 

God I hope not