Might be NCI File related. Check this area first. What is the default post that you have created?

quote: Gotta run...Mazak salesman is knocking Lock the door and put out the lights - maybe he will keep on driving. The problem that you have seems like the TEXTPAD is having some issues with windows. I love the sound of a columnar edit cut and paste - perhaps PMGuy could use that function in the new ops manager.

quote: the "Keep Tool Down" function in "Depth Cuts" is not working as it should. The tool is staying down regardless of the radio buttons selection. It used to work prior to V9.1. Scope of the problem is now further understood. Please send to qc@mastercam and maybe they can offer a solution. I wonder if the logic for the Keep Tool Down is buggered in the MC source code now if it worked in previous releases...

Do you have any information on Daveedit?? I did an internet search and have not been able to find anything. I am also wondering if there are backplot funtions as well as global mathematics to allow us to change all our old legacy files just by pressing 3 buttons. I need a more robust editor to allow Custom Macro B type programs to be generated along with buffer locations that "Simulate" and return results as the progams are being generated and offline proved... This "AndrewEDIT" v3.1.2SPIV is currently in beta. Too bad the maintenance fees are a bejillion dollars each and every year.

No this isn't a post issue, the tool path simply doesn't do what you want. I changed to something valid that would give the intended result. As the holes are drilled out already, this makes it more attractive to use the pocket solution. With the material at the center of the cutter already removed, the plunge is that much less of an issue. quote: All I need is Mcam to retract between depth cuts and it's not working.This is because the function that you want is not iside of the contour tool path. Different type of a scan you see. Besides - it takes 30 minutes to talk about it and only 5 minutes to make the changes, copy the geometry into the new tool paths, post the code and cut the part. Using a Pocket Tool Path will even allow a finish pass at the final depth to size - which is desirable for the 4 place tolerances that it looks like you are trying to achieve (although I would only ever bore/ream/burninsh something that fine...) [ 07-31-2003, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]

Rick, If chip evacuation between depth cuts is the concern, then I might suggest that you use "Pocket" and then add a point chain in front of the circle chain for all of your elements. This did the trick for me on a new tool path. See the FTP on Pocket_Andrew_Retract.MC9 (in the proper folder though...)

Mayday is right, the optimal metal removla rates are always found in a Turning Operation. Iscar Tooling would be your best bet for the volume removal that you need here.

quote: Ok guys thx for the replies. Tell me would you stay away from programing shallow curved surfaces with a bull cutter?Or stick to a ball?The bull would be a much better option but now im not to sure if i should risk using a bull on these types of surfaces. Andrew----have you sent anything to QC?and do you get a reply? I have not sent anything for your specific application here but I sent a sample where this melts down in a Flow5ax path to my dealer. They didn't solve the problem, but agreed that it does happen. Shallow curved surfaces will work alright, it is when the surfaces become flat (zero slope - the tangent point on the cutter disappears and the system becomes indeterminate) that the software doesn't have the conditionals to support this. John Summers at Mastercam might have more insight into this - He and I had discussions last spring with respect to this stuff.

Create the surface at the bottom with a minimal amount of draft - .05 degrees or something. This way there shouldn't be any mathematical flip as the slope at the bottom never approaches zero and this chould keep the cutting action on the radius of the tool rather than at the tip. See what I mean about the suggestion to make the software work is to change your geometry... [ 07-30-2003, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]

Send the file to [email protected] and let them figure out why it doesn't work.

Dave, MC doesn't handle curved surfaces with bull mill mathematics very well. When you point this out to them, they will say that your geometry is wrong and that you should design you part like this....

Iscar Tool This may be a modifiable solution for you. Sandvik and Kenna also make tools like this and there are even cartridges that you can get, cut a bar to fit it and then make your own tool.

Enshu's are taking a beating for these little bugs - but here is my favorite "Machine Related" glitch story, Enshu DTL machine - small and quick with a pallet changer that would slice carrots... Anyway the Yasnac Control was nice to run and there wasn't a rapid over-ride, only a feed rate over-ride so proving out programs was a nervous excercise. When doing a setup on an expensive part and watching a manually generated program, I had the knob turned down an inched up the speed. Just one thing though, each notch was a 10 percent increment in speed and it went alright running at 40% until I came into a corner - went to slow her down and then found out that when the switch was between positions - Full Rapid Feed is Engaged... I'm still pickin bits of carbide endmill from my skull after every close haircut. I clampped so tight that I didn't have a BM for 3 days after... [ 07-28-2003, 12:19 PM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]

Chris 10 times "D" on a vertical, no coolant thru, in Nitornic 60... Wow - I would have put this thing on the gundrill for those parameters and then fixtured the hell out of it so that the positions between holes went smooth. However - you mention that you have Guring on the case so there is nothing else I can add other than a little hope and a lot of admiration. Guring will get the job done, (they are my first and last choice for drilling dificulties) their only limiting factor may be stock... Order lots of drills.

One more thought here - the lead angle of the tool while cutting a taper will also influence the deflection amout so look for something with a small angle to minimize side pressure.

quote: 1 1/4 carbide boring bar using a cmng-432 insert. Dan, First thing I would look at is the Insert. To do this kind of boring, I would recommend a Positive Insert with something in a D or T shape. (TCMT or DCMT). The negative insert is the first thing to eliminate. Second. How is that boring bar being held. Are you just using the set screws in the holder on the shank of the bar or have you manufactured a split holder that "Clamps" onto the bar. If you want to deep bore for a living, this holder is neccessary. Third. Setup of the bar is important. Set the insert slightly above centre. This way when the bar deflects, the hole it machines will actually be smaller than intended. If you set the bar on centre - perfect, then when deflecting down, the bar will actually cut oversize and chatter like mad trying to relieve the pressure on a regular basis - about 250-1000Hz... There are expensive antivibration boring units available from Kenna and Sandvik, if you want to bore without chatter, all day every day, buy them... We have made a pile using this tool.

I checked the manuals on my old Meldas control and couldn't find an embeded commant for single direction positioning. Sorry I couldn't be of better assistance. You could of coarse program an intermediate position for everything...

quote: bigger tap sizes 1/2-1.0. There is a limiting factor you have to consider. Horsepower and Torque. To form a thread requires more energy input than to shear off a chip and cut a thread profile. As far as material selection - grab your hammer and bang on an edge of the part. If the material deforms and mushrooms over easily, then form it. If the hammer gets a nice gash in the hardened face - buy some roll taps and throw them in the garbage as soon as they come in - save the machine time...

Chris, Thanks for cleaning the hair off of my post...

quote: but I almost fed these holder back to my dealer the hard way In all likelyhood, the dealer wouldn't have known any better - and when you did give those holders a shove - you likely would have heard them go "Bink" as they hit some other job he had go wrong...

quote: Rekd, Peter, CAMmando Jack, These guys have an FTP location that they are storing the files on so that when the thread is opened - your computer grabs it from that URL. I supose that Dave could let us place items on his server, but if he really wanted us to do that - Jay wouldn't have been the FTP location of choice... Drag and Drop - there are lots of other things I wish I could do this to other than computer stuff...

I have never seen a "Counterbore" style of a "Bayonet" tool. The common application for the tool you describe that I have seen is for back spot facing of holes (Shallow depth) rather than Counterboring (Compairitivly deep). For the ones that we use in our plant, there isn't enough tool clearance to do a c'bore - only a spot face. And for safety reasons, I only permit that these tools are used on a manual drill press machine - I am always fearful when asking for manual intervention in an automatic process. [ 07-23-2003, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]

For your enjoyment - check these ones out - they are great for SHCS counterbores Counterbore Tools Not quite sure what you mean by the bayonette type though... [ 07-23-2003, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]

As a minimum keep the interface consistant between mill and lathe. This way the Multifunction machines will be easier to work with. Until a Router is fitted with a Wire Head -multifunction doesn't apply to these so we really don't care about those products.

Ken, This is a great thing that you are doing, listening to the voice of the customer is key in today's market place. Here is my suggestions for your market survey. 1) Ability to sort tool paths, drag, drop and reorder like elements in a spreadsheet. To build on Kathy's suggestion, I would consider a column layout with the ability to sort by any of the columns. This type of a layout would reduce the number of clicks to reorder the toolpaths. Keep all the elements of the toolpath on the same line (row) instead of opening a toolpath and having the data within - run across the line like in WinExplorer and have the columns resizable so that the user can see what they need to. I don't much care to know the path of the NCI file so I would resize that column down to almost nothing. A row would also require the mobility to move anywhere in the ops manager - Drag and Drop... 2) Move the force tool change from the NCI tab onto the parameters tab or somewhere more convienient. 3) Redo the "Manual" entry tool path so that I insert Op. Stop commands indepandant of a tool path (instead of using the canned text within the tool path). Add in some User Definable fields so that control of Miscellaneous equipment can be driven from this dialogue box as well. Comments are needed inside this feature and a "GCode" Preview window would be cool as well. 4) Put Jobsetup and other parameters on the main page, again reduce the number of clicks to get where you need to go. As an option, maybe the user could choose the functions on the dialogue box button bar. (Yes, I too miss the customizability of SmartCAM). Multifunction machines are another consideration adn there should be an option there that allows some flexability. This is all the free information that I am willing to provide, like post generation - a better marketing analysis will cost you some money. Thanks again Ken, Send a TShirt and we will call it even. [ 07-21-2003, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: Andrew McRae ]