WCS Redux - X4

[Mjölnir]

From another thread:

 

quote:

---

BTW you ever get a handle on how WCS works?

---

CNC Apps Guy, you jinxed the system!

 

I'm not superstitious about anything so not really, it is merely a coincidence.

 

I kid you not, 10-15 minutes after I, heh, replied to your question above I tried to write a revolved toolpath using an active WCS and it failed. I got the 180 degree revolved path I was looking for but at the end of each pass there was a linear feed move to approx the Z-level of the system origin from the current t-plane well below the skewed in space mold cavity.

 

Not wanting take the time to burrow down through the table to make clearance for that toolpath and scrap the mold on the VMC I was using I was forced to transform the geometry to the top plane after which I copied the original failed toolpath, re-selected the geometry, reset the plane in toolpath parms, regenerated and got what I should have the first time, a usable toolpath.

 

That has always been my gripe with the WCS ever since it was first added to Mastercam in, IIRC v9. It never did and much to my surprise (not!) since this is the first time it happened to me in X4, STILL doesn't work right.

 

They're forever too busy adding bells and whistles for n0obz and salesdroids to get core system functions working correctly I see.

 

File was sent to qc@ Friday afternoon. Maybe the WCS will eventually get fixed in X9. 10 full releases should be enough time to get it right, eh?

[mayday]

quote:

---

I tried to write a revolved toolpath using an active WCS and it failed.

---

ah yes mcam fails quite a lot

dont worry there will be a broken fix in a year or 2

[Jayson Kramer]

( I tried to write a revolved toolpath) Are we talking the old style wire frame revolved tool path?

I wonder how many people these days still use the old Wire paths.

[Mjölnir]

Wireframe toolpaths, yes.

 

quote:

---

I wonder how many people these days still use the old Wire paths

---

At the very least, one.

 

I recall when the wireframe toolpaths were stuffed under a menu named "Old Toolpaths" in v7 or v8. I always thought that was patently stupid and wasted no time renaming the menu "Wireframe".

[Guest]

"At the very least, one."

 

I use em. Only reason is that they were covered in video training I purchased from Mike Mattera. That would be the same person who now does Mastercam University training. They do very well on the simple surface stuff I often have to cut. Used Ruled last week.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

On RARE occasion I will use Ruled and 2D Swept. If and ONLY if I can't get a particular toolpath to keep the tool down, that's when I use them.

 

For Mill Level 1 users, the wireframe toolpaths are VERY helpful.

 

JM2C

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

quote:

---

old Wire paths

---

I use em, since it's all I have! I also use them in addition to 3D contour and LOTS of translated geometry, to get more advanced toolpaths. If they ever get rid of the 2D wire frame toolpaths, I will cry

 

Oh, and i didn't need a video to figure out how to use them

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

old Wire paths

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

I use em, since it's all I have! I also use them in addition to 3D contour and LOTS of translated geometry, to get more advanced toolpaths. If they ever get rid of the 2D wire frame toolpaths, I will cry

 

Oh, and i didn't need a video to figure out how to use them

---

That's because you HAVE a clue Leigh. Some people don't :cough: Jon Banquer :cough:

[Thad]

quote:

---

For Mill Level 1 users, the wireframe toolpaths are VERY helpful.

---

+1

 

I use 2D Swept quite frequently.

 

Thad

[Mjölnir]

Here are a few sound reasons to use them.

 

a) Having a mathematically correct toolpath vs a filtered surface approximation within a specified tolerance.

 

shorter programs.

 

c) the ability to easily use CRC in some situations vs taking risks doing the same with surface paths.

 

In any case whether they're considered popular, old school, redundant, or even obsolete, they're there and should always work regardless of whether or not a WCS is active.

[Jayson Kramer]

(they're there and should always work regardless of whether or not a WCS is active.) Agreed. I was not saying other wise.

I used to use the all the time in the earlier days when this all we had. They are Great paths.

 

(On RARE occasion I will use Ruled and 2D Swept.) Same here. but I agree a must for Level one users.

[cunder]

I use the coons wire toolpath often. It seem to be My best soluting for cutting large profile broaches. Using a lollipop cutter, the toolpath follows well along undercuts.

[Mjölnir]

I use all the toolpath types available in Mill III except advanced multi axis, most of the multi axis, engraving, and FBM mill and drill. I haven't done a 3D swept or coons wireframe toolpath in ages but knowing they're there and how to use them will certainly come in handy again sometime.

 

Edit:

 

Not so fast. I just recalled using 3D swept after not being able to get flowline to behave like I wanted (couldn't get tool to stay down) several months ago.

 

Happiness is a big pile of chips, everything else is a blur.

[Mjölnir]

FYI:

 

quote:

---

File was sent to qc@ Friday afternoon.

---

"logged this as bug number cnc00064484"