i have one library with all my tools. Maybe someday I will spend the time to detail and separate tools into different libraries, but I treat speeds and feeds like most treat a Speed limit sign on the freeway. It's just a guideline really.......

OFF THE RAILS!!! My best time I have spent in the industry was the 10K plus hours spent Machining (I.E. turning handles) prior to ever learning how to run a computer. I might have 20-30K hours in CAM, but so much of that was programming while watching chips fly. Nothing more exciting than shooting big copper chips halfway across the building. Can we have that debate about manual vs automatic??? Again............

The reality is, this toolpath is only what you make it to be. It is a "tool". There are many ways to swing a hammer or drive a nail. I would categorize it as geared towards high efficiency tool paths. There is no option other than looking in to it!! There again, no offense but, becoming Journey level was a full 5 year program that included ALL aspects of machining. With todays world and shop practices that 5 years has changed to 10 years or more or in some cases, never. You can never stop learning, I'm in over 40 years and still learn all the time.

This came up recently in a previous thread IIRC. Better lead-in control in the software might be good but not sure what applications it really would make a difference in? Step over control should accommodate any issues? There is a helix on entry option that would allow the tooth to follow the thread a little better on entry. Edumacate me...........

More often than not, Ron is the one doing the schooling Hahahaha I for one appreciate that!!

I have had issues with where lettering is cut in to the solid and the solid seems good manifold and all. Check solid finds the edges and selecting loops or faces to run a pocket on won't work because of gaps in the edges of maybe .002 or less. I usually will just make geometry and manipulate it to work but that cylinder idea from Aaron i just tried and it is very good solution!!! I just went through this exercise this morning with a part

I see a LOT of little edges there. Not surprised there's issues

Sometimes keeping it simple is best!

You have fully achieved "grumpy old man" status!!!! I aspire to be like you!!

tried to save a model chamfer operation to defaults. It erased, deleted, wiped out ALL Viewsheets!! This was posted on the MC site and already has a number, so just FYI here. "We have this in the system as R-35372. The equally annoying workaround is to save the file before saving to defaults. The viewsheets are still removed but reopening the file brings them back."

You could make a dummy operation that just feeds one turn at whatever feedrate you are looking for. The Z depth would have to match but the top of the thread would be up about 032 incrementally.

Try detailed report?

Agreed very Much Ron!!! Right now, we are trying to deal with making a good part that is steel angle and channel welded together from a drawing with multiple datums and implied tolerances projected over 36 inches from a 1-1/4 wide datum plane on an angle not in the same plane. I wish Ingineeeers had more real-world experience. Then all we'd have to do is worry about the job itself. Don't get me wrong I enjoy these challenges most of the time. The ways a job can go wrong are as varied as the specks of dust in the universe. Starting with shift change.......... Still aside from that, I would be happy to never have to machine Tantalum ever again. :Hijack off:

LOL, there is an easy button??? This is machining, it's never "easy"

Once I "fully" understood radial chip thinning, my perception of machining changed dramatically. I remember doing something that resembled HSM WAY back in the Bridgeport days, but it was just what looked and felt right. Now I understand what I was doing. The dynamic paths or HSM are really the best!!!

Oh my!!! looks like it is closer than I thought......I am not smart enough to know whether or not the numbers are close to basic alloy numbers .

Flowline is still one of the best for non complex surfacing. I have run in to this with hybrid and had ONE stepover too big at the transition and not able to get rid of it. Probably operator error though. Dedicated subscriber to K.I.S.S. here

I've said for a very long time, that when they figure out "grain structure", the world will change overnight. EDIT: Then I just saw this in an article quoted: "A team from Sandia National Laboratories and Texas A&M University was testing the resilience of the metal, using a specialized transmission electron microscope technique to pull the ends of the metal 200 times every second. They then observed the self-healing at ultra-small scales in a 40-nanometer-thick piece of platinum suspended in a vacuum."

Mo Betta

plus or minus zero

What material?

I mentioned in another thread that allowing levels to be "active" meaning visible AND selectable vs. non-active meaning visible but NOT selectable would have real beneficial use. Then there were jokes about CAD functions yadda yadda I'll say again, there is a use for this function.

:OFFTOPIC: When I started, guys got fired for things like attitude, not following directions, doing dumb things, hitting things with a hammer and stuff like that. Yelling was common and expectations were always very high. i started by cleaning machines. Now, a new guy just starts making parts. No need to even measure a part....?? I would say that things are different, but what is the most damning for our industry is setting expectations at a level that encourages learning and getting it right.

I got that one figured out...planes too just so I can check. Still never know if the coolant is on.

Now, can we have levels visible but NOT selectable?? Or is that just too much? :hijack off: