If I was programming on the TLs all day every day. Then I would probably use the TL post exclusively. But since i jump around from TLs to SL's its just easier to program them all exactly the same.

Just pulled data from our tracking software. This is in cycle for our three lathes (Okuma Multus B300, B250, LT3000) since Jan 1, based on 24/7 production. Not too bad considering we do multiple setups in each machine everyday. We try to hold no more than 2-4 weeks inventory. We have about 300 part numbers that go through these three machines in monthly quantities ranging from 10 pcs to 500 pcs. Also, we only run one shift a day and minimal weekend times. We run a few different short 10-20 piece runs during the day and switch to longer running parts for overnight unattended. We also have a new Okuma U3000 that we are building the robot cell now. The auto door option for the machine is not scheduled to be delivered until mid next month. Once that is installed that machine will go into full production as well. That should give us a break on weekend demand from the machines, at least until we develop more products to sell.

The issue with a LMD, is it will probably have logic in the "Machine Definition" database inside Mastercam, to check and be sure the MD is linked to a "Lathe Post". I still attempt to link something "easy to edit", like MPFAN, and see if you can just "get away with it". The goal is being able to swap "Integrex Lathe MD" with a "Integrex 3-Axis Mill MD". In this case, that would be a "copied Lathe MD/CD, linked to a modified Post". If MPFAN won't work (due to Mastercam "seeing" that the Post isn't correct), it might be possible to "trick" Mastercam. To do this, I would edit the "Post Version" Line, to try and trick Mastercam into "seeing" the Post as a Mill-Turn Post (MP-Based). I would swap the Post Version from MPFAN: [POST_VERSION] #DO NOT MOVE OR ALTER THIS LINE# V22.00 P0 E1 W22.00 T1550094727 M22.00 I0 O1 With the Post Version from MPLFAN: [POST_VERSION] #DO NOT MOVE OR ALTER THIS LINE# V22.00 P4 E1 W22.00 T1550094751 M22.00 I0 O10 Note that the "T-Code" is just a time-stamp. It doesn't have any bearing on the "File Properties". The only thing that is different in this case is "P0" vs. "P4". I'm fairly certain "P0" designates a "Mill" Post. I believe "P1" is Lathe (turning only), "P2" is likely for Router Posts, and "P3" is likely for EDM Posts. P4 should designate a "Mill-Turn style MP-Based Post". For most "P4" style Posts, you must have both "Lathe and Mill" sections. (Tool Change for Mill, and Tool Change for Lathe, SOF for Mill and SOF for Lathe, EOF for Mill, and EOF for Lathe, Etc.) ------------------- Honestly, it might be the least amount of work to simply take MPFAN (Mill Default 3X MD, Mill Default CD, and MPFAN), and just use those (with remapped XZ values). You could load your Lathe MD for any turning work. (and/or Mill-Turn). Then you could load a 2nd Machine Definition into the same Mastercam File (without having to change the part orientation). Don't make it more complicated by trying to link a Lathe Machine Definition, to a remapped Mill Post. Since he is running an Integrex already, it is likely he already has a "Mill License" on his Hasp, so simply loading a 3-Axis Mill Machine Definition in the same file, would likely be the least amount of work.

That is how rough the grooves. The finish requirements force us to finish turn the grooves.

Yes, this is possible, since both 2018 and 2020 versions of Mastercam use the XML "Post Text" option. Have you reached out to your Reseller for help with this? I can tell you how to fix the issue (roll-back the Post version), but I'd have to know you are a legitimate (legal) software user first...

Make a note on a level and use that and do away with that process. There might be a way to change that, but not one I am aware of.

Seems like he may be getting hung up on the semantics of "growing" vs. "shrinking" as it relates to this conversation. I.E., the outside of the block will get bigger so the perimeter of the bore would get bigger. In reality with thermal expansion what we have is not "growth" or "shrinkage", but an increased separation of the particles that make up the block. Thinking of it in terms of all the particles that make up the block, they are all further apart from each other than prior to heat-treatment. Maybe that would make it clearer to see that internal faces will be closer together, and external faces will be further apart.

despite this video here being an old one its the most informative mastercam Art video that i know of. all of what is shown in the video still applies with the new versions but buttons are now in different locations since the interface has changed since this video was made.

" Hasps are no longer supported" Completely untrue. We are moving toward a world where most or all MC users will have software licenses, including using license 'borrowing' to allow users to work away from the license server without having to use a dongle.

Conventional mill cut with a deep enough radial cut to get under the scale. Climb will go through a lot of tools

I'm running Postability posts for Mazaks with upper, lower and sub. The only editing required is to suit my taste in output.

are you using a post specific to the machine? Typically getting a post from a post company like Postability or Inhouse solutions or your local reseller should get you a nice post that is specific to the machine and on top of that if you got the post through any one of those companies they will likely fully support the post for edits if it is not working properly. I would email whomever you purchased the post through and let them know what is not working properly and they likely will address the issues and send you back a correction. what may be a proven post for one machine could need edits to be used with the same machine at another facility depending on the controller and parameters in the controller and how the machine is specifically setup, some brands of machines like HAAS for example remain pretty consistent across the board as far as what posts can be used and how the controller handles information but other brands of machines can have less consistency from the way one machine is setup to the next. and if you don't have a specific post for the machine, i would reach out to the reseller or one of those post companies i recommended above and they will be able to assist with quoting a machine specific post and like i said earlier if its a purchased post then it typically is fully supported by the post developer so if you have not reached out to them i would suggest doing so and they will likely be able to make the edits to get the post dialed in for your specific machine. if there are some minor problems with the post some of us here may be able to help also, so if you can describe some of the problems you are experiencing we may be able to offer some ideas and suggestions. i hope this helps

We are in the process of bringing a 2008 Mori NT 6600 online. Its a long story, but it belonged to a sister company and has 200 hours in it, It's basically a 12 year old new machine. We purchased a Postability post for it and to date it's output is post and go. The Mori tech who trained our operators said it was the best Mastercam code he had ever seen. Our machine does not have a lower turret or sub spindle so I can't speak to dual stream code and such. Mastercam supports the Mori NT line in their mill turn environment but I have no experience with that either Mastercam Mori NT Mill/Turn Mori will not supply models though they were happy to quote selling them to us. If you didn't demand models with your purchase, you will have to buy them as well if you want to go the NT route.

Check with Postability & IHS.... That really maybe a Mill-Turn solution though

Make the robot a shovel and let it spread the chips when it's just reading a magazine.

You replace that spindle