The fine thing with the Haas controllers using M97 instead of M98 is that the sub routines are in the same program after the M30. You do not have to save and name a whole bunch of programs as it is one continuous program. As far as the Haas reading an M98 I could be wrong but I have not seen one yet that won't.

First make a copy of your post. ALWAYS make a copy before editing. Open your post with your editor. Do a find and replace. Find M98 and replace with M97. This should do it for you.

Thanks anyways Thad. You never know though your information might have been something I did not know. P.S. Really like the photo in your signature.

That's what I was asking John. I know how to point most things to where I need to go but was not sure if this could be done. Thanks again. Hmm improvement?

OK maybe I'm dumb as a stump or not communicating well. It's a 50-50 shot. quote: Its on the Files page of the Operations ManagerI see tool and operation defaults. quote: ...File Usage window, not the Data Paths window.Again material, operation, post, setup, tool default paths. What I am looking for is when you right click in the op manager select import the source file is by default C:McamX4MillOps. I want to be able to point this to my engineering folder where I store my Mastercam files so I can import ops from mastercam files of similar parts. Hope I'm a little clearer.

Is there a way to change the default source file for import operations? Can't find it in the list in configuration files list where you can change a bunch of the others to what you want your default to be. Thanks

Update. Seems to be only doing it on a flat geometry. If I create a flat square and do bounding box I get nothing. If I make the geometry 3D whether through extrude or translate join I get stock boundaries. Does not matter whether I am in 2D or 3D. Looks like I have to give it a thickness in Z.If I manually type in a Z thickness I get a stock boundary. Never noticed this before.

X4 MU1. When I set up stock definition I get nothing. Display stock gives me nothing. Go to run verify and use stock definition and its not right. Don't think I had this problem before MU1. Anyone else having a problem with stock definition?

How many parts? Don't you have a local guy who resharpens your tools? Take a 3/4 82 degree c'sink have him make it 79. C'sink the hole. Done in a minute. What is the angle tolerance? Can you get away with it being 82 degrees? Sometimes we just over think things and the old and simple way is still the best and fastest.

Try translate toolpath. In the operations manager right click, toolpaths, scroll down to translate. Translate,tool plane. Translate tab at the top select your step over in X or Y and number of steps.

quote: Yes, you can do it with Translate toolpaths, but on a simple part like you describe, drawing the geometry for each part is likely faster. Ahhh. Something new to play with and learn. Thanks. Will definitely be giving it some time to figure out how to do it. This is why this site is so good.

Update. If you then do save after redoing the geometry it does go dirty and the chains that were undone disappear. quote: Also, you might find Transform toolpath will accomplish your multiple parts programming much more cleanly. It is a simple part a contour and 2 holes. I find it myself just as easy to translate the geometry. I can then also work the parts left to right and then right to left with no wasted movements. Not sure if that is possible with translate toolpaths?

Doing a job where I want to do more than 1 part at a time. Drew the shape then translated over X amount 5 times. Did tool paths and then decided I wanted to use a larger endmill. Hit undo back to a single shape then grabbed the geometry translated again X.5 5 times. Not a single op went dirty even though I had basically erased the geometry I was chained to. Anyone else see this or is it something I'm doing? Opened a new file basically made a square and repeated the process and it did the same thing. Oh yeah. X4 MU1, Windows XP SP3

quote: Yes sir/mam that works. Thanks again folks. OK John which one do you go by?

The control panel is completely missing it is not that the debugger itself won't launch. If I search and find the debugger I can get it to launch but it does not link to Mastercam. There is nothing in the control panel for Mastercam at all. If I remember correctly it was there before because I checked out the debugger once before.

Does not work. Have searched and have not been able to find a solution to this on the site. Found out when I tried to enable the post debugger. As was stated in a previous thread I get a quick hour glass then nothing. If I go to the *.cpl in system they work fine when double clicked except for the MCxapplet. Do I need to reinstall. Repair does nothing. Thanks http://www.emastercam.com/cgi-bin/ultimate...t=034584#000000

Thanks. As always appreciate the help.

Just got a machine with an Anilam 1100 controller on it. Doing a search about a post for it. In one post it says that Mastercam comes with MPAN113X generic post. quote: the MPAN113X post that comes on MC install disc should work for you. Might need a little tweaking, but it should at least get you running http://www.emastercam.com/cgi-bin/ultimate...t=024548#000000 Can't seem to find it. Got all my discs from V9 to X4. Is there a way to pull it from a disc if its there. Or do I need to contact my reseller for this. Thanks.

quote: Does anyone have any idea how to eliminate the space between the parenthesis and the man readable comments using this post? Here is what I am getting. The haas control doesn't like it Just curious what the Haas didn't like about it. I actually like the space and use it all the time. Have a VF-2 and VF-6 and never a problem with the Haas controller or any other for that matter.

Seems to me you have 2 different things going on. Your post is spitting out inches per minute and you are saying you want feed per rev. with a G95. I have run a bunch of different machines with different Fanuc controllers and have never had to use a G95. The M29 sets up for rigid tapping if it is not the default. We run a couple of older Supermax machines with the Fanuc O-M controller and only put an M29 before the tapping routine call out. This is what code would look like that we run. G0G54G90X0Y0 G43H201Z.1 M29 S100 G84G99R.1Z-.75F5.56 G80 M5 G28G91Z0 G28Y0 M30 You can get your post to spit out code pretty much any way you want. There is plenty of help on here.

quote: ...try with the "gouge check" unchecked quote: gouge check can supress ramping motion.. Bingo. I think that was about the only thing I did not try. Thanks guy's. Appreciate all the responses.

O.K. at work now. Yes, we are both on the same page. 2D contour, lead in lead out. Settings are: Contour type 2D, comp off, lead in/out tangent, enter at mid point, length 2.0 , ramp height .25, depth cuts set to .25. Top of stock is -1.0 with cut depth to -1.675. Plunges straight to depth and then starts cut. I can write the code by hand so its not really a problem. It's just when I want Mastercam to do something I get friggin stubborn and got to figure it out.

Colin at home now but I believe I tried all combination's of the lead in ramp. Set the height to .25 the length to 2.0 tangent and it still went straight to the bottom. But I will double check in the morning. Thanks

Using X4 Doing a slot .675 dp. in SS cutting on center no comp. Want to ramp to a depth cut in say a 2 inch length then go around the part and repeat for 2 or 3 passes. If I use ramp and put in say .25 it ramps .25 in a single pass around on a continious ramp. Cant use depth cuts with ramp. Is there a way to ramp for a certain distance and then finish the cut.

Why do we have to understand exactly to be better than "clueless" or " know what it's like". We don't know exactly how Mastercam works or understand how our machines interpret the code but we know it works and we like it. The bottom line I think we will all agree on is that here in the U.S. manufacturing some time ago became something that is looked down on. They do not even advertize machinist jobs here uner the Construction and Trades catergory. Somehow machining stopped being a trade. For a long time we were under the General Help listing until they created a Manufacturing catagory. Very rarely do you hear anything from our politicians or the media about how we need to resurrect our manufacturing industry. And when you do it is a blurb that is quickly passed over. Building things and being creative is what made this country great. It's a shame that it seems to have been forgotten.