X7 preview random q's

[gms1]

Been zooming around this on my lunch breaks and I have some questions for X7:

 

1. I can't use the cool new mp.net post/machine stuffs unless I purchase the MT add-on? Will this new post thinger ever be translated over to regular 3/5 axis post work?

 

2. Before I go and print out all the xml tags for Active Reports and do a compare, has this been updated to support all the new stuff in the tool manager? I notice some property fields in the tool manager don't transfer over into X7 like manufacturer, catalog id, tool crib location, etc... I want this info for my setup sheets in Active Reports.

 

3. Cool manufacturer's name list in the tool manager, how do I go about putting the name of the tool manufacturers I actually use in there?

 

4. Code Expert - my eyes are bleeding, I need to change the font. I see lots of headings in the options menu for fonts and colors, I just can't change a single font. How do I do this?

 

5. I opened one of my old files and got a Tool Corruption Detection pop-up with a giant list of tools and it asked me to remove them. I clicked yes for giggles and I noticed none of my operations were dirty after it deleted the tools. Is this feature just checking for unused tools? What exactly is it removing?

 

 

That's it for now. As I get more time to play I'm sure I'll have more q's. I really like the direction you guys are going with the extensions (Tool Manager, Code Expert), and I like the layout and style like visual studio.

[gms1]

Another question

 

I read the notes about the material tab in the Tool Manager being only for reference but it would be nice to include some more properties for the materials. Like the density of the material. Any chance we can get the ability to add our own property fields to this?

[Rich Taft from CNC Software]

This is good feedback. Thank you for taking the time to give X7 a try during your breaks!

 

Cool manufacturer's name list in the tool manager, how do I go about putting the name of the tool manufacturers I actually use in there?

I read the notes about the material tab in the Tool Manager being only for reference but it would be nice to include some more properties for the materials. Like the density of the material. Any chance we can get the ability to add our own property fields to this?

 

You won't be able to add new properties but just let me know which fields you need added and I'll get them on the list.

 

 

I opened one of my old files and got a Tool Corruption Detection pop-up with a giant list of tools and it asked me to remove them. I clicked yes for giggles and I noticed none of my operations were dirty after it deleted the tools. Is this feature just checking for unused tools? What exactly is it removing?

 

The "corrupt tool" warning detects when a two or more tools share the same internal ID within Mastercam. This condition was due to a defect that has already been corrected in X7 but we still want to scan the files and do some housekeeping if necessary. Sometimes we will find invalid tools in a file that were never even used in an operation. This is the best case scenario! It means you don't have to re-select the tool and regenerate any toolpaths. Keep in mind that this test is currently being run anytime you open a file (including update folder). This behavior may change depending on how many files we find with this issue. So far, we haven't found that many. Also, you may see this warning if you use update folder to convert tools-6 files. Updating tools-6 files is one of the cases where it's safe to say "No" because there are no operations in these tool library files so nothing is actually referencing the ID.

[gms1]

This is good feedback. Thank you for taking the time to give X7 a try during your breaks!

 

[/size]

 

 

You won't be able to add new properties but just let me know which fields you need added and I'll get them on the list.

 

 

 

 

The "corrupt tool" warning detects when a two or more tools share the same internal ID within Mastercam. This condition was due to a defect that has already been corrected in X7 but we still want to scan the files and do some housekeeping if necessary. Sometimes we will find invalid tools in a file that were never even used in an operation. This is the best case scenario! It means you don't have to re-select the tool and regenerate any toolpaths. Keep in mind that this test is currently being run anytime you open a file (including update folder). This behavior may change depending on how many files we find with this issue. So far, we haven't found that many. Also, you may see this warning if you use update folder to convert tools-6 files. Updating tools-6 files is one of the cases where it's safe to say "No" because there are no operations in these tool library files so nothing is actually referencing the ID.

 

Hey Rich,

Hmm I can only think of density as an extra property for material I would want. That way I can have an easy look up reference to get material mass, volume and center of gravity inside mastercam without google searching. Maybe someone else will chime in for something.

 

Thats a bummer about not being able to make my own property fields. I can think of a number of tool manufacturers I've used in the past few days that aren't in the list: Mitsubishi, OSG, Emuge, MA Ford, Everede, Garr, Harvey Tool, Micro100... can we make the manufacturer a fill in list instead of a drop down and populate the list based on what I type in? (I think thats how it works heh)

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

This behavior may change depending on how many files we find with this issue. So far, we haven't found that many.

 

For me it's almost every file. I would very much like to go into some sort of editor from here, look at exactly what it found, and be able to fix each tool separately. If I just say yes, then I have a bunch of ops without tools, and I don't necessarily know which ops used which tools. On large files with hundreds of ops and dozens of tools this is a significant issue.

 

I can think of a number of tool manufacturers I've used in the past few days that aren't in the list:

 

I've been told that this is due to a partner program wherein they want to assign consistent ID#'s.

 

Here are a few I'd like to see added:

 

Holders:

Nikken

MariTool

 

Cutters:

Fraisa

OSG

Redline

YG-1

 

 

I do still think it would be nice to have a "user defined" option which doesn't assign an ID#, since there will always be more brands.

[gms1]

I'm getting really worried now that I've been playing with verify a little bit.

 

In X6 when I activate verify I can go in to the settings and choose an stl file from a different operation in a different file and use that as my stock model. I don't see this option in the new verify unless I am missing something? It looks like verify only pulls the stock from the machine properties stock setup and that doesn't work at all for me. I need to be able to select any stock model I want when I fire up verify. I have to be able to verify the same program on different stock models if I so choose to do so... just like X6.

[Aaron Eberhard]

GMS - Check out your Backplot/Verify Options... You can load different STLs or Stock Models from there. After you load a new model, just choose which toolpath you want to see and hit backplot or verify again, and it'll update.

 

It's a little disorienting because the models aren't managed inside of verify like they used to be, but once you know about it, it's quite nice..

[gms1]

gawd I figured I was missing something lol!

[gms1]

 

I've been told that this is due to a partner program wherein they want to assign consistent ID#'s.

 

Here are a few I'd like to see added:

 

Holders:

Nikken

MariTool

 

Cutters:

Fraisa

OSG

Redline

YG-1

 

 

I do still think it would be nice to have a "user defined" option which doesn't assign an ID#, since there will always be more brands.

 

One big thing for me is yeah it's great we can have a somewhat detailed tool database but I need to be able to get this information to the tool setup folks on different shifts here in the quickest way possible. If all this new stuff isn't included in output options like Active Reports or X+ its just dead info and I will have to jump through hoops (type it by hand) to get this info out there. I guess my next step is checking out Active Reports in this version to see whats been changed... I hope a lot of stuff has.

[gms1]

I'm trying out the new compare in verify and I'm a bit confused. How do I set the different amounts with colors to check to? For instance Im comparing a toolpath to the finish model and one of the color ranges is -.0072 to .171. Thats a weee bit to much range for one color. Id like to be able to set it to +/-.01" with a different color for each, can I do that?

[gms1]

Why is X7 telling me I have undercuts and to switch to 5 axis verify/backplot when my flue length and shoulder length are the same? I am not going to have to change hundreds of programs am I? The vast majority of my tools are defined with shoulder and flute length the same and verify just fine in any other version of X.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

Why is X7 telling me I have undercuts and to switch to 5 axis verify/backplot when my flue length and shoulder length are the same? I am not going to have to change hundreds of programs am I? The vast majority of my tools are defined with shoulder and flute length the same and verify just fine in any other version of X.

 

Just change it to the 5-axis engine and it should work fine. look under the file tab in verify, then select options.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

I'm trying out the new compare in verify and I'm a bit confused. How do I set the different amounts with colors to check to? For instance Im comparing a toolpath to the finish model and one of the color ranges is -.0072 to .171. Thats a weee bit to much range for one color. Id like to be able to set it to +/-.01" with a different color for each, can I do that?

 

As far as I am aware, this is a bug in this release, and should be fixed for the final release.

[gms1]

I wont have anything crazy happen if i switch to 5 axis?

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

I wont have anything crazy happen if i switch to 5 axis?

 

What could happen? It's how I have been running it here, and it's A-OK

[gms1]

If there is one thing I've learned over the years of using mcam its that you can always expect something... different I never expected to have to turn on 5 axis to verify/backplot a 3axis motion toolpath.

[Deb Rossing CNC Software]

I'm trying out the new compare in verify and I'm a bit confused. How do I set the different amounts with colors to check to? For instance Im comparing a toolpath to the finish model and one of the color ranges is -.0072 to .171. Thats a weee bit to much range for one color. Id like to be able to set it to +/-.01" with a different color for each, can I do that?

At the top of the Mastercam Simulation window, there are three tabs - File, Home, and Verify. When you start Verify, you 'land' in the Home tab. If you click on the Verify tab, then click on Compare, there will be a pane on the right where you can set the different color ranges.

[Aaron Eberhard]

There's not a results difference between the 3 axis and 5 axis backplot and verify engines, just the 3 axis engine is a lot quicker (because there's less to computer), so that's the preferred default. There's no harm in playing with the 5 axis backplot other than decreased performance.

 

GMS - Would you send a sample over to the x7 team to make sure they've seen what you're experiencing with your backplot?

[gms1]

Sure can Aaron, send to qc at mastercam.com?

[Aaron Eberhard]

GMS - Send it over to [email protected], please. They're monitoring it specifically for the X7 line. Thanks for all the help!

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

At the top of the Mastercam Simulation window, there are three tabs - File, Home, and Verify. When you start Verify, you 'land' in the Home tab. If you click on the Verify tab, then click on Compare, there will be a pane on the right where you can set the different color ranges.

 

These values are not changeable, unless I am missing a special trick. It certainly isn't as simple as clicking on the value and typing in a new number.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

There's not a results difference between the 3 axis and 5 axis backplot and verify engines, just the 3 axis engine is a lot quicker (because there's less to computer), so that's the preferred default. There's no harm in playing with the 5 axis backplot other than decreased performance.

 

GMS - Would you send a sample over to the x7 team to make sure they've seen what you're experiencing with your backplot?

 

3 axis never works properly. I can't even get a simple facing path to verify with it. 5-axis engine works fantastic though..

[gms1]

When I am creating a new tool in the tool manager I use the tab key to navigate between the fields. The default action is to not highlight the text in the text box. I would rather have this highlight the text for editing so I don't have to click on each individual field to highlight the text.

[CamMan1]

Does anyone know how to save your toolpath as geometry? I couldn't find any way to do it. Also is there a way to toggle shading in backplot? I do both of theses frequently in X6.

[Leigh @ Kodiak]

Does anyone know how to save your toolpath as geometry? I couldn't find any way to do it. Also is there a way to toggle shading in backplot? I do both of theses frequently in X6.

 

From the windows start menu, look for the Mastercam X7 Advanced configuration. From there you can enable the traditional backplot. New backplot will still be available if you want it by starting verify, then clicking the backplot button.