Explained? Not really. Reading through the FANUC manuals has helped me more than any single person or other resource. Reading through a FANUC manual is a little different than reading through other sorts of technical information. FANUC manuals are best consumed from start to finish because more often than not, understanding one function is very helpful in understanding subsequent functions. High speed functions can be somewhat of a tangled web and OFTEN require that functions be piggybacked in order to function properly (i.e. G05.1Q1 first, then G05.1Q3X0Y0Z0 after the G43) ... and sometimes require MTB support on top of that though not very often. The FANUC Connection manual is also very helpful. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/nxoh585ycbki24p81z402/Connection-Function-v6.pdf?rlkey=1tyso6ga2wiw4va0dhewcoga3&dl=0

Absolutely. A few weeks ago I got setup on this beast: Intel i9-14900k - liquid cooled - overclocked to 6.1GHz 96GB RAM NVIDIA RTX A4000 w/ 16GB We paid around $5600 for this from Boxx. My previous computer specs: Dell Precision 3571 laptop Intel i7-12800k 2.4GHz 32GB RAM NVIDIA T600 The biggest thing I was looking for was reducing regen times for larger 3D toolpaths and stock models. My benchmark file time went from around 3:45 to 1:55 - an almost 50% time reduction. With that said, I've seen about a 40% time reduction when I'm working on actual parts. One of the things I didn't foresee being a time savings was file open time. When I go to open one of our bigger files 600ish MB I'd have to wait 40 seconds, the same file on the new computer is 25 seconds. And that's just Mastercam, something like an excel sheet which only takes a few seconds to open now opens instantly. It's not that this is a huge time savings, but having to wait those extra few seconds for something to open would really slowdown my workflow and I didn't even realize it until I got the new computer. Why I chose what I did for hardware? Clock speed was my main concern so I went as high end as I could. RAM, I probably would've been fine with 64GB but it was only like $100 extra to jump to 96GB. The video card that I got seems like it would be overkill for what you need. We just got Vericut a few months ago which will heavily rely on the GPU. We almost went with the A2000 but decided to "future proof" a bit. For GPU performance. On the old computer, when I went to verify in Mastercam the 600MB file I mentioned above, it turned into a slideshow. I almost couldn't move around the model while verify was running. It just pegged the GPU to 100%. With the new computer, the highest I can get the GPU to spike is 80%, and that's when I'm trying to push it. When I'm not trying to push it I typically never see spikes over 50%. As for GeForce vs NVIDIA... put simply I did a lot of forum surfing before requesting the computer I did. I didn't even once see someone recommend a GeForce over an NVIDIA, just my 2 cents. At the beginning of the year management is planning to get the whole programming department (about 10 of us) one of these new computers. I have to say a HUGE thank you to @Aaron Eberhard for helping me understand how Mastercam uses each piece of hardware.

Tabs on both sides. Then chop off after the floor is done

I promise that you will save more in than the $195 lifetime price on in the first month in cycle time & tool life if you're programming every day. Every month after that is pure profit. It's awesome. It was one of the first purchases I made when heading out on my own. It lets me start from VERY good feeds and speeds in pretty much every situation. Eldar is awesome, tell him I said hi For example, let's say this part is 6061-T6, and you're trying to figure out how different roughing strategies would work on this part. Let's assume that you're cutting a .5"thick piece down to leave a .075 floor (removing .425"). Remember that we have no clue what the real sizes of the part are For a .375" 3FL Endmill w/ .625LOC and .75" Stickout, in full attack mode (100%), HSM advisor recommends 63.3% stepover (.2373) for a Dynamic path, 102.73 IPM/13409RPM (.00255 FPT, 1316SFM). It doesn't know that it's thin-floor, of course, but it says that it will be putting 66 lb of cutting force into it (using 2.6HP). Now, we know that's way too much, if you took the part out and applied 66lb of force there, you'd bend it quickly. Taking the same exact everything with a .25" Endmill recommends a 31.6% stepover (.079"), 133.5IPM/23798RPM, which = 24lb of force. Getting closer! 50% of feed & speed equals 12.1 lb of force, etc. No matter you scale it, a .25 endmill is putting a lot of force into something you can probably bend with 2 to 3 lb of pressure, right? A .125" Endmill goes to 5.4% (.0068), 559IPM/98147RPM which would equal 4.2lb. Now, my machine won't go to 98k! So if I type in my max in this scenario, let's say 10,000 RPM, which is 10% of its recommended value for this cut, that slows it down to 5.7IPM, but it's only putting .42 lb of force into the cut. That could work!

imho, small depth of cuts, small tool, don't be greedy. thin parts take time.

The issue was with a horizontal machine where I use Top as WCS and front, left, right, and back as tool planes. If you are only 3ax I don't think you will run into any issue, but I make no guarantees or warrantys

That floor should be supported and "if" it can be fixtured flat, I would attempt 2 passes with a reverse flute spiral endmill

That's one way to beat a dead horse, replying to a 14 year old comment hahah