Pretty easy in Unified, so I wouldn't try harder getting it with a 3d if I had 5 axis available, but I admit that I am biased These are the only two settings you need to make it work:

https://cmailco.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/hey-who-stole-my-chip-load/ I wanted to share a quick read that really sparked my full understanding of RCTF, and the formula/theory involved. I never went to learnin' school for programming or machining, so maybe it's old news to those who have training, or have been in the game for a long time. But this really did the trick for me, and I have had the formula printed out and posted on my office wall for a few months. Helped me get out of the 0.0015" per tooth mindset that was hammered in around here. My hope is that someone else who might be fuzzy on the concept, or new to it, might benefit from another/different explanation as I did.

Blend works well too. Draw a circle on the big OD of the c'sink and a point in the center. Select the conical surface as your drive surface. Then chain the circle followed by the point Use dept limits to control where it starts and finishes

Using morph can be easily extended...

Here is what I generally use.

It didn't on mine either

Our C-Axis lathe has a Siemens 840D controller on it with shop turn software. The Shop Turn software is really powerful and easy to use. We have MC lathe license but the Shop Turn software for R&D one offs is really convenient as you can "copy", "cut", "paste" from existing programs.

As long as you understand what MockSim is and is not, what Vericut is and is not, what CAMplete is and is not you can make educated decisions about what fits your need. MockSim doe NOT check G-Code. Tied to a Postability post it is a good solution for most things. Again, it's not fully simulating ALL the motion in your machine like M-Codes, etc... Vericut... they simulate the actual G-Code that will run in your machine. As good as your control file and machine stuff is determines how good your simulation is. By and large it is the gold standard for simulation. You can create your own machines if you desire to learn or you can buy them from Vericut, or you can hire someone to build them for you. YOu have choices. Vericut is NOT an integrated post processing solution so you will need a post either from your CAM vendor or from ICAM, or somewhere else. CAMplete... they simulate the G-Code created from their posted code. You cannot import and edited code. CAMplete IS an integrated Post Processing solution that will simulate the factory G and M-Codes. You have almost as much control over your machine as you would in a Vericut machine. You have limited machine editing capability and you cannot create your own machines. That is not an anticipated feature. The machines are factory configured meaning Matsuura, Okuma, Kern, Mazak, Haas, etc... has given their blessing on the accuracy of the models, motion, and functionality. Because CAMplete is an intagrated Post Processing solution, you have control over the code. The NC Formats are user customizable. Typically a basic NC Format is given to the customer that will run the machine well. I've got a decade and a half's experience developing NC Formats and I've got highly tuned NC Formats that take advantage of the majority of the features and functions of the Matsuuras (since that95% of what I spend my time on) and I'm adding new stuff all the time based on customer requests. Knowing the tools, knowing their strengths, weaknesses and capabilites os the key to getting the best solution for you. For me, nothing beats CAMplete. For you, Postability and Vericut may be best, for someone else, MockSim will do the job. Know your tools.