Thanks, too. I saw this thread months ago and thought it would be nice to have as default setting. I got tired of having to change it everytime. I just got around to fixing it tonight. It seems to be working fine,now. So easy, why'd I wait so long?

Colin, Thanks for the reply but when I typed in what you suggested and posted another program it did the same thing as before. Any other suggestions? Or any one else? Here is what my pretrac post block is. Is this where you thought something might be wrong? pretract #End of tool path, toolchange sav_absinc = absinc$ absinc$ = one sav_coolant = coolant$ coolant$ = zero #cc_pos is reset in the toolchange here cc_pos$ = zero gcode$ = zero pbld, n$, sccomp, "M0", psub_end_mny, e$ # pbld, n, sgabsinc, sgcode, *sg28ref, "Z0.", scoolant, e # pbld, n, *sg28ref, "X0.", "Y0.", protretinc, e absinc$ = sav_absinc coolant$ = sav_coolant thanks if anyone can help.

Gcode, because of engineering change possibilities I can't always move my parts to mastercam homes. So then I'm stuck making my own wcs's. Again, I'm glad it's not only me having these issues.

Yes, when I'm 5 axis machining with multiple wcs's, the most annoying thing is I jump into my wcs manager and when I close it, multiple toolpaths go bad. Normally I can get around it by only using the Gview button and not actually switch things in the wcs manager. But even that isn't foolproof.

Thanks, Vic. I was messing with it. I don't know why the double img came up. Thanks for the help.

Just giving this a try myself. I've been wondering how everyone did it.

Gcode, thanks for the suggestion on the stl file. I'll give it a try. I have, finally, gotten rid of the crashes (complete uninstall, got rid of all old versions of mc except X2SP1, clean reg, install MR2 as a stand alone), but the lag and large files are annoying. Now when I go to post my toolpaths all my toolpaths in my ops manager "disappear" while mc thinks about posting it, before the final ok to transfer the file to my machines. Just glad I'm not the only one having these kinds of issues.

I've been debating whether to approach my boss about dropping maintenance. I finally made the jump to X2 MR2 SP1, but boy is it A LOT slower than plain X2: everything hesitates when I click on stuff and my IT guy even bought me a new suped up video card, but it still doesn't help. I do like a couple of new features though. Wish List: 1) fix ALL the bugs before adding more bells and whistles. 2) fix the wcs so that when I make an stl in verify to use as a stock model for restmill, it's not floating out in space somewhere and then I have to manipulate it back to my part's wcs. How hard can it be to make these in sync? If they are, someone please help me out of my ignorance. 3) fix all the hesitation in mr2. I know that was a big thread when this new mr came out: my graphics screen slowly comes into view, in parts and pieces, when I first start mc. My files are getting ridiculously big, too. My iges and parasolids files don't seem much bigger, so is something in mc making all the toolpaths take up more memory in the latest versions??? I'm no computer expert. Just wondering.

I don't do much editting of my posts. But recently I've noticed that the end of my drill/tap/etc. files seems to have a "bug" in it. I opened the post file, and I think it looks ok. Here it is: peof #End of file for non-zero tool pretract comment #Remove pound character to output first tool with staged tools if stagetool = one, pbld, n, *first_tool, "M06", e n, "M30", e mergesub clearsub mergeaux clearaux "%", e But this is what I'm getting: N290 M0 N295 T1 M30 N300 M30 % In line N295 I'm getting T1 M30, but I want it to be T1 M06. Is this a post problem, or is some other parameter somewhere else overriding what I want? Thanks! Oh, I'm finally in X2 MR2 SP1, but this glitch has been present for me in plain X2 as well.

At least in my case, iges works great IF the one supplying the file uses the correct settings. Our guys who use powershape have to reset their iges export function for us mastercam users, and then the files normally come in almost perfect. But if they don't change their settings (from default?), I end up missing a lot of surfaces. I'm not sure what those settings need to be, but mastercam definitely has a preference. Our guys who use ug give us parasolids and those are normally fine.

I'm starting to wonder if this is a memory issue. On really small files X2 MR2 shades all my surfaces the same as X2 SP1. Is there a memory setting that affects the graphics and what should it be? Thanks.

Bump. Do none of the guru's on here have a suggestion??? I've been looking in the help and searching the forum files. Still don't know why my shaded surfaces are partially translucent when I don't have the parameter checked in the config settings. And how I get it back to how it was in all my other versions. Suggestions, please.

quote: Are you saying that the point was right on the shared edge of the 2 surfaces? I don't think I've ever run into exact that situation before. EDIT: I just tried a sample like that and it worked fine here. No, the vent hole was on the shared edge of 2 surfaces. So I couldn't use create surface fill holes. But when I put curves around the vent hole and created a ruled surface to cover the vent hole and then project a point onto the new surface (the point is so I can use it to drill to that depth incrementally since all the vent holes are at various depths), it won't project onto that ruled surface. Maybe no one else has this problem from the lack of replies. thanks, Ployd and Thad.

Martin, are you talking about the "translucent" box under the shading section of the system configuration? I do NOT have translucent marked but I can still see objects that are underneath my surfaces. Is there somewhere else so that part will show NOTHING underneath it? Edit: I'm now running backplot and even my tool has become translucent and disappears and reappears while it is backplotting the toolpath. I never had this problem in X2 SP1. [ 01-09-2008, 04:18 PM: Message edited by: sharles ]

Still some beginning questions. Has anyone had problems projecting in MR2? I filled a bunch of vent holes in my part surfaces and then tried to project points onto the surfaces that covered the holes (like I have many times in previous versions) but now in MR2 if I had created the surface with "create surface fill holes" the projection would work, but if the hole was in between two surfaces so I had to use a ruled surface, mc would NOT project the point. I had to go back and break up the curves so that I could create a net surface, and then mc would project the point. It works, but it's a waste of my time. Just wondering if anyone else had this problem or maybe there's some setting I could change. Thanks.

quote: 150 GB Doubles hate that. oops. I meant 150,000+KB.

Not sure how I would search for this question, so I'm sorry if it's already been asked. I'm trying to make the move to MR2 and I noticed a couple of things different about when I have my surfaces shaded. The one that really bothers me is that even when my surfaces are shaded I can still see curves and backplot lines that are below the surfaces. Is there any way to fix that? I want to be able to visually verify where curves and backplot lines are in relation to my surfaces. Thanks!

I finally got my IT guy to uninstall and clean the registry of X2 MR2 and he reinstalled yesterday and then I get on the forum and find out we have a new SP1. So I'm not going to try X2 MR2 until I get SP1 loaded. I'm relatively new to mastercam, but X was ok, XMR2 was the best I've had so far. X2 SP1 I've been begrudgingly using but they still have yet to fix the verify so that I can use it 100% on a 150,000MB file and not make special programs so I can kind of, sort of use verify. But hopefully with the unistall, registry cleaned, reinstall of X2MR2SP1, I'll be as happy as everyone else. If I am, I promise, I will NEVER jump with both feet into the next release until I'm sure it's usable. I'd rather 1 new release a year and CNC get it right, than new bells and whistles every couple of months along with the need for becoming more creative with work arounds because of the bugs. I like mc, but I'm not impressed with the "infestation" of bugs in all of the new releases.

Well, I guess upping the tolerance did the trick. It processed at .0015 when it wouldn't at .001. Thanks anyways.

I'm running a surface finish scallop program. 1.0 ball, .03 step, 0 stock on a fairly large part. Mastercam will generate the entire toolpath. Red lines go across the screen, then blue lines go back over, then it gets to the last step: "filtering" and it starts to filter the toolpath, then it crashes. I've got the filter set to .001 and NO arcs in any planes. Mastercam does this to me on a regular basis and so far my get around has been to split my part up into smaller sections and then mc will generate the toolpath fine. Today I decided to up the filter tolerance a little (.0015) and see if that helps so I don't have to chop my part into sections for my main finish program. Does anyone have any other suggestions? Thanks.

Some of our machines do that. I think it might be in the machines, not in mc or the post. You might try ramping in. That's what I do and set it to ramp at the feed rate. It's faster than plunging at a slower rate and it's not as hard on the inserts/tool.

Chris, Hopefully you've got mail. It took me 2 tries to get you everything you wanted. I'm a little challenged on computers sometimes.

I'm still having mr2 problems, too, after I got rid of my migrated config files (per the suggestions from another thread). Weird stuff like in my ops manager when I click on various operations the operation names will change to the names of other operations (normally just switching numbers as I name them sequentially). So I jumped back to X2 SP1 as I'm busy. From this thread it looks like maybe I need to completely unistall mr2, wipe everything clean, and then start totally fresh. Thaks for all the banter because I really do want to move up to mr2 sometime soon.

Never mind, I must be losing it. I guess it's too early in the morning for a second shifter to be working. I figured it out.

I'm using a simple pocket program and if I chain simply the pocket curves the tool stays within the pocket, but if I chain a point on the curve first (to use as an entry point) and then chain the entire pocket, in quick verify it looks like the tool is going outside of the curve on the side of the pocket where I gave it an entry point. This is technically ok, as my pocket is open on the one side, but why is it doing that?