Not trying to enter into an argument here, and I hope I don´t, but I´ve learned that verification is really something an ideal shop should have, regardless the brand. It´s just a different animal and CAM is not there yet nor needs to. We both understand why very well Ron... So I´d recommend it for nearly every shop with a machine with at least one rotary axis. That being said, some other CAMs can handle synchronization of channels and machine simulation remarkably well, and although I´d never say "Verification is not needed" because I understand verification offers much more than collision detection, I´d risk a finger or two of my own for a few CAM systems in areas I´d not do it for MC by no means. Like an old friend use to say, nothing can be everything to everyone. I understand this, but I also understand that a bunch of things don´t need to be necessarily heavily dependent on the skill set of who is doing it... Technology exists to make complex things easier and simple for people that not necessarily have the willing to stand out in their trades... Multi-channel sync is one of these things... I understand it very well, but I find disgusting to use my time and capacity to workaround it when and if there are better ways... I prefer to let technology to handle it for me... Look at this example: Right now 99.9% of us are not dealing with it what is shown above... I honestly don´t even know if I´d know how to program correctly in the first shot, by hand, the part above in machine above with the approach shown above... One day, it might become a standard. I prefer to learn and know about it now rather than when it becomes a must to know. JM2C

Very simple example: Reordering synched operations in a system that cannot handle it well is a real PITA. Now do it in a system designed to support it well and you are good to go in seconds. Had an Edgecam training a few weeks ago about this and I was surprised to see how well it handles synched operations. These days, WYSIWYG is a must for these tasks, IMHO. Crashing a MTM machine is not only expensive: It´s bad business too because they´re mechanically more sophisticated (and therefore often less robust) and a crash may render poor accuracy results in the mid/long term. We have a dual spindle Mori NT here and operators crashed it half dozen times in the past 3 years. It´s now just unreliable for certain tasks, and Mori wants a ton of $$$ to "attempt" to make it Ok again. Those crashes had nothing to do with sync codes though... That speaks volumes to me about how important the right CAM system and post, well trained people and simulation are for these machines.

I've learned along the years that adding sync codes in the right locations is not a trivial task, although the command itself is. IMHO is one of the most underestimated tasks in programming. I also learned that a system with native functionality to handle it is like water to wine in terms of how fast and safe it makes the programming tasks. I'm sure Mastercam MT kicks MC lathe xxxx hands down in this area.

Got your point... But mine is... With the options out there that can do the entire job, does it make sense to get a half baked solution just to stay in the same ecosystem? If it was my dollar I'd say no. No need to have half dozen systems in a shop, but with that machine, regular MC does not make sense. MT might be a solution as long as it delivers the whole package. I would not risk the safety of an operator or the accuracy of the machine playing with bad simulation knowing there are options.... Just my opinion...

J... I've never seen or heard about a control that handles anything related to sync without user explicit programming. Have you seen anything like this before? If so, could you please elaborate more? I'm interested to learn about it...

I might be wrong about this but last time I heard CNC was not offering MT posts for machines other than the mainstream machines out there, like Doosans, Okumas, Mazaks... I think it's highly unlikely they already cover this specific machine. But again, I might be bloody wrong about this.

The answer for your question is French and it's on version 7.10 It's a mistake IMHO to spend time tweaking MC and a post for that equipment. It's way to complex to be handled by MC. Now let me put on my flameproof suit. JM2C

Chris, Been using Cimco since 2007, I know with some intimacy all modules and products they sell, except for the HSM Performance Pack product. MTConnect is a great decision. We're now in what I'd call the 2nd generation of shop floor monitoring technology. The 1st generation was signal based and required hardware and plc mods to make the controls to output their status. Machine builders were not offering this off the shelf. The 2nd generation uses software interfaces and protocols. MTConnect is one of them. Can also be done via Fanuc FOCAS, Okuma API, Heidenhain Option 18,Haas Connect, Mitsubishi DCOM, Netlink Pro, etc. It's the best way, because it's nearly plug and play, more comprehensive in terms of what can be monitored, more flexible and can be enhanced and fixed via software. This industry 4.0 hype made machine and control builders to offer this and much more. Cimco is a good decision because they do support every relevant protocol in the market and they do it remarkably well, keeping it continuously updated. This is instrumental in making a decision because it makes implementations easier and successful. It's common to get a new enhancement or fix a week after a Cimco reseller or field engineer accomplishes a new installation. They are very keen in implementing special requirements. I brought one of their engineers to Brazil in 2013 and in 3 days we're up. But in the following year they implemented dozens of requests I asked for that installation. Let alone someone else's requests. I witnessed a boom in the technology behind their MDC-Max product. Many vendors do the talk but don't walk the walk. Cimco does. Jm2c

Andreia is the only normal person there...

It seemed to me that a bunch of old man!

Chris, Which machines you have? If memory serves me correctly you work on an Okuma shop right? If possible provide some details about the control models and brands and how old they are, and I can tell you some approaches to monitor them.

Best ones I've worked with: Freedom eLog from 5ME Cimco MDC-Max If you already have Cimco DNC-Max, it makes sense to buy this extra module and the services to get it up. MDC-Max is now a mature product yet it gets lots of attention and enhancements from development.

A few things I miss in CIMCO-Edit that are supported by its competitors: #1 – Multistep translation in XYZ (Helpful with patterns - Ex: Turning grooves equally spaced) #2 – Convert coordinates between absolute and incremental commands #3 - Address Replace / Address Swap / Custom Address Calculator ( ) #4 - Convert absolute I / J / K arc center coordinates to or from incremental I / J / K <-> Convert R specified arcs to or from I / J / K specified arcs #5 – Support of 3Dconnexion devices ( ) #6 – Viewport support #7 – Custom Macro B Support in the Editor - Currently supported in the backplotter (NC-Plot offers a sort of debugger for this - How can CIMCO-Edit not have it? ) #8 – Backplotter - Import of DXF files in the backplotter as the part geometry #9 – Backplotter - Sectioning of STLs for turning simulation These just the things I consider very important... the list is bigger than that...

Not long ago I put together a big list to cimco development about the many little tools their competitors are offering for years and they're not. So they know what they're missing. But I think we will have to join voices to get these things on the product. I like the idea to have machine simulation... But axis swapping and better comparison is more important in my humble opinion. After all, it's a NC Editor, not VERICUT. First things first. Shouldn't have said that on a public forum... But had to spit it out...

I agree the comparator is subpar compared to WM. Not sure if they will work on it. It would be nice if cimco license WM engine... Probably won't happen ever... The second suggestion is better handled in V8...

The good news is that Vericut 8 no longer require a step license to convert a step model to ply format.

I'll wait for the next SP... Just saying...

I'm currently loosing my passion for the current company. Old boss was too good and was sent to Italy. A real good xxxx kicker but was able to get our best. New guy is cold, no passion for the trade, just want the beans well counted. Went home today feeling I'm working for money. Need to find a way out of here. I don't mind to work hard, but Jesus... I need to work on a dream...

I think in the world we live now it's the system that makes more sense.

Yes...

Yes...

Try to use Machining Cloud app for Iscar, Kennametal, Widia, and others. 2D drawings, 3D models and much more in a single place. They have or are about to release a Mastercam interface. https://www.machiningcloud.com/partners/ Huge time saver for us.

The real world is metric. (Claus Terp)

It's a 2008 e650H II...

Thanks a ton J!