What you expect from X7 ?

[Rotary Ninja]

I have been using Mastercam since X. I get frustrated at times. That is why I asked to be a beta tester. I want to be able to give my feedback.

 

What I really hope they fix is if you pick a check surface, I expect Mastercam to avoid it like the plague. I can't tell you how many times a tool has gone outside the "containment" boundary just to plow into a "check" surface and scrap a part for me. Using smooth transitions, although they look nice will do this a lot.

 

If verify wasn't so slow I could take the time to see that I was going to scrap a part. But it's pretty fast paced where I work sometimes. And on real complex stuff it's actually faster to verify in the machine running the actual part than it is on the PC. Of course, if I had a $6000 PC this would not be an issue at all, and regenerating a toolpath would go much faster.

 

But I hear things are getting better. So I am looking forward to all future releases.

[Newbeeee™]

... And on real complex stuff it's actually faster to verify in the machine running the actual part than it is on the PC.

And that takes the biscuit!!! You really need to tell your boss to buy a pc that can do the job.

Companies spend hundreds of thousands on machines and don't but the tooling, whether spindle or pallets. I hear/see that all the time.

But a few K for a pc???

[Bridgeportboy]

What would you expect from X7?

 

2 Real tool path editor (like WorkNC )

 

That would be an awesome addition to the software!

I have had the opportunity to use that before and it is amazing how much time it saves,

not having to get fussy with cut boundaries, and being able to nip off anything you don't want

in your toolpath.

 

How about the ability to post post any or all of your toolpaths,

regardless of what they are named, either as 1 program or individual programs.

 

 

Steve

[Mick]

 

How about the ability to post post any or all of your toolpaths,

regardless of what they are named, either as 1 program or individual programs.

 

 

You can do that in Mastercam presently, and have been able to for quite some time.

[SledGeek]

The ability to use toolpath/surface selection to show with solids/faces. .....without converting to surfaces ! I just can't remenber every face I select for drive or check.....and God forbid I get interrupted while doing it !

[Richard Thomas - Mastercam UK]

SledGeek,

 

Seems that toolpath solid-face display is improved in X7.... If I ask a toolpath to show me check surfaces, I do not see the drive surfaces any more!

[djstedman]

Rotary Ninja..

 

Not sure if you know if this is possible or not.. but if you change the number of steps / refresh in the verify box it will really cut down on verify time .. might make it a bit harder to see a cutter plunge where it shouldn't during roughing for instance.. but should allow you to see a finished part..

 

This used to help me a lot before I got my new PC..

[SledGeek]

SledGeek,

 

Seems that toolpath solid-face display is improved in X7.... If I ask a toolpath to show me check surfaces, I do not see the drive surfaces any more!

 

[MrFish]

I want a z limiter added to the "chain feature" box so that you only get chains at a set z level selected when working with solid models, i.e. now you get both the top and bottom of the hole when selecting and I only want the top contour for chamfering .

[left coast lefty]

In 2D HST, the operation should not go dirty if I change a comment, feedrate, program name or number or sometimes even just look at the damn thing. This is especially aggravating when there are dynamic restmill operations that follow.

[David Conigliaro CNC Software Inc.]

You are all free to download the X7 preview and try it out for yourselves if your maintenance is current. Any comments you might have after trying it out can be forwarded to [email protected]

http://www.mastercam.com/Support/Downloads/MastercamX7/Default.aspx

[Darin]

(1.) Make sure that the tool # and tool height and Dia offset are always linked no matter if you change it in the parameters page or tool page. So if you change either the tool # or height or dia offset they always match each other.. For some reason this doesn't happen all of the time... I know that sometime it is very rare that you want a different dia offset from the tool # but in that case have a question pop asking are you sure. Yes I have set up my tool library but sometimes I need to change the tool # 's and if you don't double check the height offset and dia they could will be wrong..

 

(2.) Have separate finish feed and speed control like pockets in contour...

 

(3.) Better printing functions with tool lists so I can print only the tools I want not all for the job..

 

(4.) Be able to save the verify in a .igs or .step file instead of just stl...

 

 

Thanks

[GoetzInd]

(4.) Be able to save the verify in a .igs or .step file instead of just stl...

 

That would not be easy. I currently don't know of of any CAM software that can do this. Not to say it isn't possible though. Space claim can do it but it is not as simple as "Save as"

 

Mike

[Mick]

Vericut can save the cut stock as IGES. I've never tried it.

 

Expensive way to get that feature though

[gcode]

Vericut can save the cut stock as IGES. I've never tried it.

 

 

 

true but the resulting files are massive and require hours/days to generate and a Cray supercomputer to open

[Mick]

true but the resulting files are massive and require hours/days to generate and a Cray supercomputer to open

 

Ah, well... Like I said, I've never tried it. Sounds like it a logistical pain in the a**

[Watcher]

That would not be easy. I currently don't know of of any CAM software that can do this. Not to say it isn't possible though. Space claim can do it but it is not as simple as "Save as"

 

Mike

 

TopSolid V6 do it well... TopSolid V7 do it even better (Both can save a B-Rep stock if it's just 2 1/2+2 machining) and ProNC can do it very well for every possible toolpath.

 

JM2C

 

Correction:

 

TopSolid V7 can do it for all toolpaths too as it now allows the user to model the cut himself, as ProNC. You can export it to IGS, STEP, ACIS, Parasolid, etc... After writing about this on my blog the guys from Missler approached me some weeks ago to say V7 got this new possibility.

[Smrk]

Please, can you add option save mask option to viewsheet.

[neurosis]

Wouldnt it be nice if when you changed your tool path z depths from "Absolute" to "Incremental", it adjusted the z values according to where your current tool path depth is?

 

meaning if your tool is cutting at incremental Z0 and you want to change it to Absolute; the line used to drive the profile is sitting at Z1.0, it would automatically change the z depth to 1.0. Or the other way around.

 

When I am changing from one machine to the other, if we have a tombstone that is 11" square and we move to a 12" (easy round numbers for example), if the part was programmed using Absolute Z values, All of the Z values need to be modified to run on the new tombstone.

[Mick]

The MT product to be foc to lathe/multiaxis users? I mean, we've tolerated the sub standard handling of sub spindle MT programming, and waited for an improvement for so long, and now we'll be expected to pay for something that should have worked properly in the first place?

 

Sorry, /end /rant.

[cadman2112]

Beer

[Tyler Robertson]

Wouldnt it be nice if when you changed your tool path z depths from "Absolute" to "Incremental", it adjusted the z values according to where your current tool path depth is?

 

meaning if your tool is cutting at incremental Z0 and you want to change it to Absolute; the line used to drive the profile is sitting at Z1.0, it would automatically change the z depth to 1.0. Or the other way around.

 

When I am changing from one machine to the other, if we have a tombstone that is 11" square and we move to a 12" (easy round numbers for example), if the part was programmed using Absolute Z values, All of the Z values need to be modified to run on the new tombstone.

 

 

I would also like this!

[Mjölnir]

What would you expect from X7?

5 ......................

 

5) Nothing.

 

As a Mastercam user since version 3.21 in mid 1992, I have found the best way to avoid disappointment in new releases is by not having any expectations to begin with.

[Tyler Robertson]

MWR15 - I just hid your post because of the negativity. I get that you're disappointed but maybe you can be a bit more constructive your post? Feel free to post where you feel X6 let you down compared to X5

[left coast lefty]

Thank James,

I've tried it and loved it! (I used Smartcam free form machining for 5 yrs)....

but MC would not be able to incorporate it in their type of op manager as the tool path lines

have to be the same as a drawn line, or be able to be converted to a line and a line to a toolpath

line.

 

Back on topic.

 

I expect tool renumbering to work in X7

 

still not working in X6 MU1

 

Still not working in X6 MU3. Constant source of frustration.