Thad, Strenuous day, re-read today and find I was indeed reading too much into the post. Are you in agreement with the rest of the posts though?? Confirmation that Contour will not do what you are asking. [ 08-27-2002, 08:09 AM: Message edited by: MfgEng ]

Highlight Dave's code and then use WordPAD and the formatting will be correct. NotePAD will give everything on one continuous line.

Looking at it from a top plane perspective - here is what I found. The axial cutcomp that you are looking for is not a countour option. I would offer the solution as a surface-pocket routine to give what you need. These are the toolpaths that I am using with the bull_mills and the axial compensation that you describe is clearly coming out in my part. However the latest FKIA (Fu--ing Know It All) post tone of your two previous posts has Pi$$ed me off and so I say Good Day!

What machine and what control?? I am limited with the mazak to 18 rpm C Axis.

Peter, The control algorythms for Rigid Tapping may have been around for some time but I would suggest that there are some mechanical problems that kept it off some machines since its "Standardization" Date back in the 80's. If I may add some value to this thread... Emuge Full Speed Tapping! Coolant thru taps, TiAlN Coating, Radiused Cutting action at the tip of the Tap, Spiral Flute Bottoming or Spiral Point Thru - These may cost a fortune but they will tap holes faster and longer that you ever though possible. James - Ever do this on the Makinos or Mories?

Thad, When "2"D pocketing the machine can only see the contour that you are moving around and then to apply an axial compensation for any tool radius. By saying that you want the "Edge" open, then I suggest to use "Open Pocket". Also see in my file how I offset the contour to give teh .08 depth of cut, and used the corners of the intersecting lines as the stock definition. I have not tried with a solid but I think it would give the same result.

Jack, i have to wear a helmet when I take a shower to prevent a concussion as the water in Paris is that Hard (We are downstream from Cambridge so watch the illegal dumping...)

It actually is a technique from Glenn, I am massaging it and making it elegant for my own use.

Nice Work Jack. Guess you do have some usefullness and are not here just to incite a roit with everyone else. I have never used the filter arc for anything. As for the 3d arc filter problem, the arcs will only exist in the G17,G18 and G19 planes - live and breathe with the huge files and let the control do its job...

Use the cross section of the groove, and break the spline into many pieces. Use finish toolpath and disable arcfitting. If you can write a custom post macro for this then great but if all else fails, manually insert between each end point, moves to generate the thread (ie G32). Watch the pitch though as the acceleration distance is going to give something wonky at the start.

Then it is an open pocket! We will resume Monday. Andrew

I have to create some probe points and I need to find the contact point of the stylus. How do I create point at intersection of Solid and Line?? CADCAM's FTP Sphere_Line.mc9

Thad, Check Revised file (MFGENG) and then use verify. You will see that there is a radius to the outer contour and that the cutter is leaving the step that you want along the edge. I redefined the verify settings for the stock that you will see. Also look at the part in isometric, easier to visualize.

Thad, Funny you should think this as I extensivly use Bull mills (Sandvik Coromill 300 program) and I find that Mastercam does account for all the radius values at various depth of cuts. Let me see the file and then get back.

Fred, I have had a similar experience with the Integrex. Any motion with a rotary axis designated will have to be in degrees per min. If there is not a rotary axis move then the feedrates will be in Inches per minute. If you do not continue to output a feedrate when the move types change then this is the problem you will find. Dave Thompson the "Post Master General" has this logic solved for us and I am sure that he would help you with this issue.

Surfaces - Solids Mathematically, a solid is a set of trimmed surfaces and a parameter indicating Material Side. With the material side know, a set of datapoints can be analysed to see if they interfere or are unique in space. With surfaces, there is no property to tell if the surfaces interfere or the model that they represent actually interfere. But from the standpoint of Machining, we only drive surfaces and contours. Sure we may use a solid to generate the model geometry but we only use the surfaces of that solid for machining. If we violate the surfaces then we inturn violate the solid making it scrap... If the design guys are using Pro/E, Solid Works, Solid Edge, UG, Catia, Whatever - with trimmed surfaces you can still make the parts you require. If the model is wrong, thats not your problem... See Bryan Davis' posts with respect to solids, he has nailed this one before.

Part Two - File communication and transfer Thanks to Glenn and Allan at Inhouse who have helped me in this area. When sending large files over the internet, use winzip to compress the file. With a complex part, there is a potential for some data corruption to go un-noticed until it is too late. If there is corruption in a .zip file, then the contents will not extract at all giving you the confidence that your data in complete and uncomprimized. [ 08-23-2002, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: MfgEng ]

Use the Mastercam Pro/E converter. If this is a shop that you will be doing some substantial work with then the cost is easily justified. To trial this option, contact your dealer and they may as a value added customer service, convert it for a nominal fee. I use the Pro/E converter all the time and have great success with it. There is a caution though with .asm's these files are nasty to convert and do what ever it takes to get the file as a single .prt . We have a work around for this if you require a .asm I caution though about 3rd party converters. I suggest for the reason of support to stick within the Mastercam family of products (or get your shop to use Pro/NC - Yikes!)

I have been tied up with trying to genereate a Vectorized Probing Routine for a Mazak Integrex with Renishaw (Class Act Company...) and so I see that you all have been busy here. One other thing I forgot to mention on the topic of coolant (Jack's scientific comment brought it back to life) is coolant tank foaming. This is caused from the emulsifier breaking down the surface tension of the water and so there is a higher tendency for foaming. Here is the thing, there is a relationship between water hardness and foaming propensity. Hard water gives less foam and soft water foams like crazy. If you want to check that the foaming problem is related to water hardness, preform the following experiment. 1) When in the washroom, bypass the urinal and go to the toilet bowl. 2) Lift lid and empty bladder. 3) Observe the foaming action at the boundry between air and water. 4) Count "Steamboats" until the foam disappears. Observations and conlcusions: The higher the number of steamboats observed indicates the softness of the water. Hard water will not foam for long, the Calcium molecules are "Shrap and Prickly" thereby bursting the bubbles. The second alternative is to send a water sample to a lab. Here at our plant we have a water softening unit to process the water before mixing.

Mathematically "Facing" requires a plane and that plane is defined as a closed chain. The tool path that you want (One strip milled off the end of the part) is essentially a contour operation that just happens to leave a flat "Face" after completed. What we have here is an interpretation issue of the words we use to define our operations. The word Swarf can have many meanings none of witch are "Use the swarf Luke!"

I use the Cut depths on the last page of the toolpath to leave an amount of material in the z-axis and then the stock allowance for compensation in the x-y plane. I have not tried the z-stock switch yet. Remember that there are more than 7 ways to do anything in M/C.

Greg, If this "Snowman" really purchased his seat, then the local dealer from the mighty CNC Software distribution network should be able to solve his problems, or is InHouse a local Phenomenon. Just my own doubts to the nature of Human Endeavour.

If it is an asset then the value of the asset will depreciate over time, and any upgrades to the software can and should be used as the depreciation charges (There you guys go, I have just cost justified all upgrades for those who work for bean counters!). If it is not a tangable asset and readilly converted into cash if sold (as prohibited in a licence agreemnet), then how can it be considered as such? Guess I should have worked for Enron, then I could see clearly.

I've seen many a butcher shop in my time as a cutting tool sales engineer. The best ones do not have a sign or even a company name, look for the dirtist door with a scrap bin preceeded by a greasy path encrusted with metal turnings. These are the guys that you want to make your stuff... BTW ask if they have Mastercam and then send in the crack file so that PDG and Greg can see who is eating their profits away. Back to Business, so what was the original intention of this thread anyway? It looks like it was Hi-JACK-ed...

Sizzler is a registered trademark of the Maple Leaf Brands located in Burlington Ontario. I suggest you contact them before ripping them off...