Saving a useable STL file out of X7 Verify

[gcode]

You are really quite the optimistic Spin-Doctor. I guess you just don't want to see my point period. I want to be able to see my cuts in verify in progress and have them somewhat resemble a cut that an endmill would make. What was the point in even giving us verification if you don't want us to use it for model comparison. It can't be for collision checking because as chunky as the verification is how can it tell where the part is to the holder. Why even have the compare function in verify? Why don't you leave that out and tell everyone they need to use stock model for comparison from now on. And as for using the stock model in the back ground while still programming thats a good one. Most of the the time I have to wait for the stock model to gen before continuing because my PC is choking. And it has nothing to do with horsepower because I am running dual 3.07GHZ Xeons with 24 Gigs of Memory./

 

do you have multithreading turned on in System Config

[CJep]

Aaron,

Can you toggle the the X,Y,Z origin off in the Verify?

[CamMan1]

Yes I even have a thread monitoring tool that watches all 24 threads running. The problem is the size of the parts and the amount of toolpath. I just pulled in a part I programmed in X6 using the old verification method. I did a stock model on just the roughing routine and it took a minute or two before it started genning than it basically locked up for 5 minutes which in normal conditions would halt my work progress than it snapped out of it and finished. This is why I don't like using stock models.

[CamMan1]

Aaron,

Can you toggle the the X,Y,Z origin off in the Verify?

 

Yes. edit "MastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml" file in MY Mcamx7 in MY Documents. Change To this to keep it permanent default

 

<ShowOnScreenInformation>false</ShowOnScreenInformation>

[Aaron Eberhard]

You are really quite the optimistic Spin-Doctor. I guess you just don't want to see my point period. I want to be able to see my cuts in verify in progress and have them somewhat resemble a cut that an endmill would make. What was the point in even giving us verification if you don't want us to use it for model comparison. It can't be for collision checking because as chunky as the verification is how can it tell where the part is to the holder. Why even have the compare function in verify? Why don't you leave that out and tell everyone they need to use stock model for comparison from now on. And as for using the stock model in the back ground while still programming thats a good one. Most of the the time I have to wait for the stock model to gen before continuing because my PC is choking. And it has nothing to do with horsepower because I am running dual 3.07GHZ Xeons with 24 Gigs of Memory./

 

While I appreciate being called a Spin Doctor, and I can see your view from an X6 perspective, I'm just pointing out my experience as a multi-axis & dynamic toolpath programmer, and that experience is that old verify couldn't cut it, and new verify does if used correctly. I'm just trying to take time out of my day to help people with the new products

 

From a practical standpoint, when I was zoomed out looking at a part in traditional Verify, the system was slow and choppy because it had no resolution scaling. The new Simulator doesn't have has much constant resolution as the old Verify, but you can actually verify a lot of things that you simply could not before (or couldn't within a practical timeline). If I need to zoom in and see one area to see what the tool marks look like, Accurate Zoom does a good enough job that I can tell what I need to in most cases. And I've been relying on Stock Model since it was introduced, and, as mentioned, I haven't really output STLs much in quite a while..

 

As I mentioned above, though, I have also had issues where Stock Model was bulky with certain files/toolpaths, but breaking it down into a few steps per Stock Model took care of most of it. And X7 is definitely more stable/faster SM processing than X6 (thanks largely to multicore and better memory handling).

 

As always, if you have a specific problem or concern, please address them with your local dealer.

[Aaron Eberhard]

Yes. edit "MastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml" file in MY Mcamx7 in MY Documents. Change To this to keep it permanent default

 

<ShowOnScreenInformation>false</ShowOnScreenInformation>

 

Yep, or, in the short term:File > Options > "Show On-Screen Information" check off.

[Jeremy Herron@DBS Solutions™]

Speaking of .stls and verify, I started getting this error today when saving an .stl (stl error 1) and if I try and select that stl for verify I get the error in stl error 2. My tolerance is set to .001 and precision is at default level. Is there a limit on stl size for verification?

[gcode]

I've been using STL files over 100 meg with no issues.

The part is pretty big (Ø59" x 8" disc) so I have my stl resolution set to .008.

No problems so far

[Jeremy Herron@DBS Solutions™]

I opened my tolerance up to .008 and still get the same error. I have no idea what the error message is trying to tell me. I did figure out the second error message was from the stl not actually saving though.

[gcode]

Try closing X7 and deleting the machine sim ini files out of your my mcamx7 files.

X7 will generate a fresh copy when you launch.

[TK-32™]

what's the path for those .ini files?

[Jeremy Herron@DBS Solutions™]

C:\Users\jeremy herron\Documents\my mcamx7

 

I still get the same error. I made a stock model and used it for verify and it will let me save the stl, but if I use the stl it still won't save.

[mig]

Try closing X7 and deleting the machine sim ini files out of your my mcamx7 files.

X7 will generate a fresh copy when you launch.

After each time I use machine simulation I have to delete this .ini files .

Is it OK?

[gcode]

It shouldn't hurt anything, Mastercam will generate new ones the next time you laumch.

It's odd that you have to delete them each time.

I had to do this after installing the public release but only once

[CamMan1]

If anyone wants a little better quality ou of X7's Verification there are some settings that you can adjust in the "MastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml" file.

 

These are the settings I adjusted

 

Under <VerifySettings>

 

<PrecisionFactor>1.0</PrecisionFactor> : is the initial "Default" accuracy factor that is scaled by the precision slider (modify at yor own risk,huge memory hog

 

dramaticly increases verification times but greatly increases initial accuracy) (rangle 1-10?) I have mine set at 2.5

 

<PrecisionIndex>5</PrecisionIndex> : is the start up "Default" setting of the precision slider (range 1-10) I have mine set at 10

 

 

<PerformanceIndexVerification>5</PerformanceIndexVerification> : is the start up "Default" setting of the speed that it verifies at (range 1-20) I have mine set at 20

 

With the way I set mine the visual quality is a lot better. Load times are increased and Accurate Zoom and Accurate Zoom Reset takes longer but is tolerable.

With the way I set mine Verification loads with Precision turned all the way up and Speed turned all the way up.

 

Like anything elses back up yor file before making any changes. Hope this helps some people.

Also when you make any changes you must restart Verify for them to take effect. I go one step further and retart Mastercam just to be sure they take.

[K2csq7]

I jacked the "precision factor" all the way up to 10...

Still looks worse than the old verify.

[K2csq7]

Is this what everyone's looks like???

I now have the precision factor jacked up to 50.... I don't think it is having any effect.... the time to verify is not increasing.

[K2csq7]

Accurate Zoom FTW!

[gcode]

Have you followed CadMan1's suggestions on this thread

http://www.emastercam.com/board/index.php?showtopic=72935

 

he's got some pretty good stuff going there

[K2csq7]

I did, I have my precision factor all the way up to 50...

Still running the same as it ever was....

The accurate zoom was what I was missing, now that I know what that is all about I am happy.

Although....

We are still getting different results between stock model and verify.... stock model is showing some bad gouges that are not in verify.... we are looking closer at it now...

[Newbeeee™]

G / CNC - with SP1 can the user change settings in the mcam config, or do we still have to change them in the XML file?

If not, would it not be best that the X7 download on mcam.com be changed to incorporate these settings so the verify is more usable out of the box?

[gcode]

We are still getting different results between stock model and verify

I believe X7 Verify actually supports the setting on the Rapid s page of the Control Def.

Maybe stock model is showing dogleg rapid crashes???

[K2csq7]

We are handling our retracts with point toolpaths for the rotaries to re-position....(variaxis)

I am confident that it has something to do with this.....

[Jeff Little]

hOW CAN I USE AN STL AS MY STOCK INSTEAD OF A BOX IN X7? I HAVE MY STOCK SET TO FILE AND THE RIGHT STL IN BOTH STOCK SETUP AND VERIFY OPTIONS! I CAN SEE THE STOCK UNDER INITIAL STOCK BUT THE CUTTER JUST PASSES RIGHT THROUGH. IF THIS IS AN UPGRADE IM CANCELING MY MAINTENANCE THE SOFTWARE JUST SEEMS TO BE GETTING WORSE ):

[gcode]

Michael,

try unchecking "initial stock" and checking "stock" instead.

 

and ..

 

please ditch the CAP LOCK its considered yelling Thanks