James - thanks for the confirmation. We finally found the install disk for V6.13 and that's just what we saw - so on Friday I reported that to the reseller who got this ball rolling. Thanks again - to all of you who commented! Pete

@Pete Rimkus from CNC Software Inc. Toolpath data is NOT stored in the ge3. The ONLY way he's got any toolpath data is if he's got the NCI file. There [i]may[/i] be a link from the ge3 to NCI but that's a developer question IMHO. There was no integration of toolpath and Mastercam file until V7. HTH

I'll just add a dummy op to remove the unwanted stock, and post-ghost it after updating the following stock model. Just remember to un-ghost it if you need to regen the stock model for any reason, and then re-ghost it before posting.

When flowline was first released, it only handled a single surface. Then was added the ability to handle multiple drive surfaces by flowing along a row of surfaces (crossing over one shared edge between two consecutive surfaces). Later, was added the ability to handle a wider set of connected drive surfaces such as multiple rows or a grid or a quilt. The "single row only" allows you to revert back to the first algorithm, should that do a better job (on a single row) than the latest quilt or grid approach. The top toolpath is a single row (using the single row option). The bottom toolpath is a grid or quilt with "single row" unchecked.

Yikes! I can't think of a single thing that would be worth saving anyway, efficiency-wise! Any of the tooling or data should be chucked out and re-done with modern materials/work-holding/feeds/speeds/etc...

Hopefully the convergence of the 14 Sandvik Teams at Tolland can drive model scanning methods into the 3D tools process. Too much of it is still manual by its very nature and error prone. With all the AI advancements we keep hearing about I would have thought by now processes like this would be more automated and streamlined. Still have one basic method for defining 3D lathe tools and not the machine driven process it should be. No Vertical or Horizontal process and nothing telling the end user all tools need to be defined in tool change position. Mastercam stick tools are not intuitive and still too many users trying to use both in a Mastercam file. Stick with one method 3D Tools or Stick. I don't blame them at all just from a training stand point fixing years of we had to do it this way to now we have to do it this way can be difficult for some people to wrap their brains around.