problem with Verify

[RObert TImby]

I'm running X2 Mr2 and i'm having a prolem with the verify. did anyone else get this fatal error? As soon as i hit ok it crahes one me. Any ideas?

 

crash

 

Thanks

[crazy^millman]

I have been seeing this a lot lately. I can not for the life of me put a finger on it. might be a winblows update causing it because I am seeing it on 4 different computers with 4 different video cards all running XP PRO.

 

Here is one doing it right now.

[RObert TImby]

I'm running xp pro also, this is what i running right now twin AMD opteron processors a nvidia nForce4 video card and 2g of ram. This started a couple of ago on me.

[cobra95kev]

I have been getting this too. I only get it on real large verifies so I figured it was my puter puking out on me.

[Ocean Lacky™]

I see it, too. No particular pattern here.

[Thee Rickster ™]

I have only seen it once, on my largest file.

 

Report it to QC.

 

Rick

[Steve Hattori]

I was having a similar problem- but when I went into verify, there would be no stock showing, and on the setup page, all 0's or $$$$$ in the stock def windows. click on 'pick stock corners', and stock appears on screen, but oriented wrong, then verify runs upside down, and mostly misses stock. Then crash when exiting verify.

I still have X2MR1 installed, so I ran the file in in MR1 and no probs with verify, but Adv Multiaxis gen'd in MR2 is not compatible with MR1, so dammit, now what...???

Yesterday, I did a "repair" from the web.exe file on MR2, restarted, and since then, no problem in verify.

I don't know for sure if that is the answer, but I did several restarts, including safe and pick only apps I wanted to run, and nothing helped. Verify worked in MR1, but not in MR2. The repair seems to be working so far, but I don't know why.

Maybe someone else can try it and see if it helps.

 

This is on a E6600 core2duo, fx3400 quadro, xp64pro. 5:20 on the benchmark

[MultiAxGod]

quote:

---

Report it to QC.

---

Our dealer went to CNC with it, so they should know!

 

from 2-25-08;

Dennis,

 

We are having some severe problems with a 4th axis programs "visually" rapiding through the part in various places. However, this is not reflected in the G-Code. The program for the machine actually goes out properly to the clearance areas before rotation, but in the backplot and in the simulator the tool seems to rapid to the next 'Z' level which before the rotation, is on the other sided of the part. However, it does not always do this. Some patterns one to the next work properly and some go though the part. All settings for clearance, planes, offsets, etc. are the same. These files have so many rotations that we cannot check through all of the program to verify that it is actually clearing and not crashing as the "visual" side of the system shows. Once I send you the file, you'll understand immediately.

 

from 2-14-08

Another issue is sometimes when using a solid for stock, after selecting the solid, it will disappear and there will be no stock definition? The solid will have to be reloaded.

 

from 2-29-08;

Hi Paul,

Sorry it took so long to reply. I'm not sure if I replied to this already.

Yes Verify doesn't simulate the move from 1 cut to the next correctly when then the rotary axis is involved.

This should be fixed in X3.

Thanks,

Dennis

[Mike S @ S4A]

regarding the top of this thread, I think the issue is related to file size. I was building a training file & got the same error in December.

The response from CNC was it'll be fixed in X3.

My original file was around 12M. scaling down to

25% (roughly 4M) eliminated the problem. While this works fine in training files (read as the land of Oz) your customers might get a little tweaked if u send them 1/4 scale parts...

unless of course its a stonehenge replica

[Jim Evans from CNC Software]

All,

 

We are aware of the bug and have found the issue and have traced it to the 3rd party toolkit we use. Our Vendor has been notified and we are awaiting a fix from the vendor. At this time, we do not know when this fix will be available.

 

We are also in the process of setting up an email address to be used to solicit more parts that produce the fatal error problem and we will post this email address as soon as it is available.

 

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

[Don LePore from CNC Software]

In the event you get Verify's "Fatal error..." message:

 

 

Please send a copy of the file, a screen shot like the two above and a brief description of the Verify function you were doing at the time (saving an STL file, cutting stock in tool simulation mode, etc) to this email address:

 

[email protected]

 

It will get immediate attention.

 

Thanks,

Don

[crazy^millman]

Thanks Jim and Don for giving me a bug report on this and getting something going about this issue.

[RObert TImby]

Don or Jim,

 

I sent in the whole file in on Thursday to you guys. The person i sent the file to was Ryan in tech support. And thanks for jumping on this matter. But is it possibe to get a fix before X3 comes out cuz it is save me a ton of time instead of posting the program and trying it in predator then having to go back to MC. You will understand when you check my file out.

[Mjölnir]

Thread bumped after a search.

 

Did this ever get addressed in X3?

 

I've been having the same problem when trying to save a STL file except the error is a bit different in that it also says try again with a reduced image quality. I've tried that and the resulting STL file is often unusable because it is not a close (accurate) enough representation of the machined stock.

 

Sometimes exiting and re-lauching Mastercam helps. Other times re-booting the computer helps. But not always.

[mcpgmr]

I got it once last week with X3. The file wasn't ver big but my pc had Outlook and Excell open so I figured it was a memory conflict.

[cobra95kev]

I still get this alot too. I have gone to using more tolerance in verify to avoid it. I think the better your box is the larger STL filesize you can work with. I noticed when I changed employers I had to adjust mine.

 

Hopefully they will find away around verify being such a resource hog. I have done some big verify's on CATIA now and I have not ran in to a similar issue. I do apperciate the jump in verify speed though going from X2MR2 to X3.

[Superman]

I have had similar errors in X2 MR2 while verifing using a STL stock especially memory problems

 

My work-around was to save the STL at a coarse setting ( say 0.020" / 0.5mm or more, max 0.040")

It allowed quicker regens / backplot and verifys

plus files are a lot smaller

 

I still keep the STL for comparing to, using a fine setting