i converted parasolid and i cant chain it

[mezzer]

I brought in a parasolid.  i made it translucent and the geometry wont chain

they changed this so much its a bunch or heartache

 

[#Rekd™]

Create curve on all edges?

[jlw™]

Are you talking about solid chaining?

[Guest]

Are you talking about solid chaining?

Not likely....

 

Seen this dozens of times.....

 

The create curves on all edges used to be the default setting...IIRC, it was X8 where the default was changed to off.....

 

So people who never had any idea that the default setting gave them the curves, lost it in X8 and beyond and didn't know why

 

With a solid already imported use Create Curves >> All edges and pick the solid

 

To change the default to create curves on import go into the config, I'm doing this from memory

 

Converters >> Create Curves on import.....green check and out, shut down restart

[Jayson Kramer]

What happened to the questions like miil or lathe show a picture of the part on the screen.

[jlw™]

or create curve on one edge of you don't want all that extra garbage.

[Machineguy]

I find it better to put the curves on a new level. The solid gets in the way at times.

[JoshC]

I personally avoid the clutter and use solid chaining as much as possible, which is especially handy when model prep tools are needed as Mastercam can keep the associativity between the solid and the toolpath and chains get instantly updated. There are pros/cons to both solid and wireframe chaining so I think there will probably always be a place for wireframe chaining but with how easy and powerful the solid chaining is now there are very few applications where you would be required to use wireframe chaining.

If you haven't seen what I am talking about I found this youtube vid, but once you get used to solid chaining you may find yourself liking that better and not needing as much curves and wireframe to produce great toolpaths.

​

[Guest]

Solid chaining is cute

 

You however get and retain FAR more control over your paths by using wire frame chaining

[JoshC]

Solid chaining is cute

 

You however get and retain FAR more control over your paths by using wire frame chaining

Solid chaining is much more than Cute. Wireframe chaining gives you more start positions with things like contours since we can use a dynamic start point instead of endpoints only. Make a change to your model see what happens to the toolpath with Wireframe chaining compared to solid chaining. I agree with you that there is more control with wireframe chaining so if you need that great, but solid chaining is Fast for most applications and it works great.

[Guest]

No....always has been more of a novelty in Mastercam

 

FAR too many shortcomings for it to be useful beyond simplest 2D prismatic parts and I do mean simple....

 

It falls down in multi-level pockets...it falls down many times with open wall pockets.....I showed it against wireframe when I was training people....

 

It's cute

 

If you're lucky you can face your part, maybe contour it and drill some holes

 

Need to control start/stop points, extend cutting lengths, it isn't for you....

 

There's a reason why FBM is based on wireframe and not solid features  

 

If you sell it that way, you're bound to have some very unhappy customers when they realize it isn't all is was cracked up to be

[JoshC]

No....always has been more of a novelty in Mastercam

 

FAR too many shortcomings for it to be useful beyond simplest 2D prismatic parts and I do mean simple....

 

It falls down in multi-level pockets...it falls down many times with open wall pockets.....I showed it against wireframe when I was training people....

 

It's cute

 

If you're lucky you can face your part, maybe contour it and drill some holes

 

Need to control start/stop points, extend cutting lengths, it isn't for you....

 

There's a reason why FBM is based on wireframe and not solid features  

 

If you sell it that way, you're bound to have some very unhappy customers when they realize it isn't all is was cracked up to be

Hmm, I have done what I would consider some very advanced work using solid chaining and I don't feel that it is very limited. You do make a good point with Start/Stop points and I am aware of that difference between solid and wireframe but Extending toolpaths can be done using lead in and lead out settings without the need to extend the chains. FBM is a bit off topic since we are not talking about Simple parts anymore. I still feel that I can solid chain just about anything, not that wireframe chaining is bad, its absolutely great and is very powerful but creating all that geometry on every file then having to deal with clutter or levels I don't think is always necessary or the most efficient way to use the software but to each their own.

[Jayson Kramer]

Josh,

I am with you. I do most of my work based on the solid and use wire on a need to basis. John you are good at what you do but I do feel you are stuck in some of your ways. I know all of us get stuck in certain ways but there is a lot power in the system and using solids has become a lot easier then in the past.

This can easily become an argument I fell . but I hope it does not.

[Guest]

Josh,

I am with you. I do most of my work based on the solid and use wire on a need to basis. John you are good at what you do but I do feel you are stuck in some of your ways. I know all of us get stuck in certain ways but there is a lot power in the system and using solids has become a lot easier then in the past.

 

This can easily become an argument I fell . but I hope it does not.

 

No argument on my part

 

They could drop solid chaining tomorrow and I would never know it was even gone  

[Jayson Kramer]

(They could drop solid chaining tomorrow and I would never know it was even gone) How did you know that was going to happen. lol

[Guest]

(They could drop solid chaining tomorrow and I would never know it was even gone) How did you know that was going to happen. lol

 

There just "might' be some hurt feelings if they did  

[crazy^millman]

Which one allows you to use operations across different files? Solid or Wireframe? The one that carries from file to file associated to the operations that are using it to me is the most robust. The one that doesn't is the least robust. Each places has their merits, but for rev changes and such I find time and time again wireframe is easier to make changes to things than solids for Contour toolpaths. When Solid association fully closes the loop and everything we do can be carried with the operation then if becomes more of a conversation. I like wireframe a lot more than solids for certain things so guess that puts me on the stuck in my ways group. Odd you cannot do HST Finishing toolpaths without wireframe so guess everyone who uses the software is stuck by the limitations of the software when the programmer must make wireframe boundaries? Sure will be nice when the HST toolpaths treat Check surfaces as check surfaces and not drive surfaces then those who must use wireframe to keep tools off of areas will truly not be stuck. Prospective is everything and we all have unique methods and processes to get the unique things we do done.

 

End of the day as long as the parts get made and the customer is happy and the company we are programming for is making money then what is the conversation really about?

[Jayson Kramer]

There just "might' be some hurt feelings if they did  

Maybe, but you know what every time they change something there are some Butt Hurt folks. lol

[JoshC]

Which one allows you to use operations across different files? Solid or Wireframe? The one that carries from file to file associated to the operations that are using it to me is the most robust. The one that doesn't is the least robust. Each places has their merits, but for rev changes and such I find time and time again wireframe is easier to make changes to things than solids for Contour toolpaths. When Solid association fully closes the loop and everything we do can be carried with the operation then if becomes more of a conversation. I like wireframe a lot more than solids for certain things so guess that puts me on the stuck in my ways group. Odd you cannot do HST Finishing toolpaths without wireframe so guess everyone who uses the software is stuck by the limitations of the software when the programmer must make wireframe boundaries? Sure will be nice when the HST toolpaths treat Check surfaces as check surfaces and not drive surfaces then those who must use wireframe to keep tools off of areas will truly not be stuck. Prospective is everything and we all have unique methods and processes to get the unique things we do done.

 

End of the day as long as the parts get made and the customer is happy and the company we are programming for is making money then what is the conversation really about?

I don't think I have ever wanted my geometry to import with a toolpath, I always apply an imported toolpath to New geometry. And for argument sake since we are asking good questions. Which toolpathing method maintains associativity to the Model if the model changes? That is the one I want to use, if I model prep anything, my toolpaths update and your wireframe toolpaths just sit in the ops manager like "what just happened, oh nothing that I am aware about"

 

- but like you said, "End of the day as long as the parts get made and the customer is happy and the company we are programming for is making money then what is the conversation really about?" and I agree with you there.

[crazy^millman]

I don't think I have ever wanted my geometry to import with a toolpath, I always apply an imported toolpath to New geometry. And for argument sake since we are asking good questions. Which toolpathing method maintains associativity to the Model if the model changes? That is the one I want to use, if I model prep anything, my toolpaths update and your wireframe toolpaths just sit in the ops manager like "what just happened, oh nothing that I am aware about"

 

- but like you said, "End of the day as long as the parts get made and the customer is happy and the company we are programming for is making money then what is the conversation really about?" and I agree with you there.

 

Many times when the geometry is coming in a wonderful thing. You have features common to parts and just need to have that same feature machined on a different part. Import in the operation make sure it is where you want it and done. 20 or 30 operation tied to one level of geometry that is identical between families of parts is so fast and easy to add when they come in and levels control is thought about up front. Need to share methods or strategies to customers that is related to the geometry process it really becomes important.

 

The model prep I use strips everything associated to the solid out making it dumb and non associated how are you able to keep the tool paths associated to a model linked? This is a very serious question because it drive me crazy every time a solid that does have toolpaths associated to it losses that association when I want to do some model prep to it after I have put toolpaths to it.

[JoshC]

Many times when the geometry is coming in a wonderful thing. You have features common to parts and just need to have that same feature machined on a different part. Import in the operation make sure it is where you want it and done. 20 or 30 operation tied to one level of geometry that is identical between families of parts is so fast and easy to add when they come in and levels control is thought about up front. Need to share methods or strategies to customers that is related to the geometry process it really becomes important.

 

The model prep I use strips everything associated to the solid out making it dumb and non associated how are you able to keep the tool paths associated to a model linked? This is a very serious question because it drive me crazy every time a solid that does have toolpaths associated to it losses that association when I want to do some model prep to it after I have put toolpaths to it.

That is a good point and I remember that problem in detail because it frustrated me like crazy. But the good news is that was an issue in past releases that is now fixed, now, even if the solid was built in Mastercam and has a solid history, you can toolpath the model and then later remove the history and your chains are untouched and are still intact to the solid even though the history is gone. But yea that was a problem in the past but with updates to X9 or with 2017 you shouldn't run into any issues with solid chaining going away with the history

[mezzer]

thanks,

 

i just went to options and trimmed edgeds and clicked on curves.

i should have lnow better. It came in has a solid