Bold claim: 2023, is the new "X3". There, I said it... You have to use the "Stock Display" button on the "Toolpaths Ribbon". You basically "set the stock size" in Machine Group Setup. But the display is handled on the View Ribbon.

I'm 100% not surprised, especially considering how they are looking to price it out of existence, and they will likely roll all that functionality into Fusion eventually... I don't believe this will work. Those DLL Files need to be compiled for each individual Mastercam Build. Would likely fail, but probably won't hurt to try. I don't think that will brick your computer, you're just likely to get a start-up error message in Mastercam, or the icons won't show up in the Ribbon/Toolbar customization...

You should not need to create a "solid model", just to machine the geometry. Mastercam will apply toolpaths to a "Mesh Entity", just like a solid. The issue with a Mesh, is that it is made up of small polygons. There are no "curved surfaces" in a Mesh. Only a collection of triangles, where each 'facet' has a normal direction, pointing "outwards" from the hollow interior of the Mesh. Both Polyworks and Geomagics have tools in them, to convert sections of your Mesh into "CAD Geometry" (boundaries, planes, curves, arcs, surfaces, etc.) Both Polyworks and Geomagics will do a much better/cleaner job of creating CAD Geometry from your Mesh. There are a limited set of tools in Mastercam to accomplish this, and it will involve generating simple wireframe geometry, using the Mesh verticies, which you can then use to build up a Solid, through the normal solid modeling commands, but this is a "ground up" process. There is no magic button in Mastercam to recognize CAD features on the mesh, and have it auto-create actual CAD geometry. Both Polyworks and Geomagics have tools available to semi-automate this process. https://www.innovmetric.com/products/polyworks-modeler Having used both softwares you mentioned, my preference is to work in Polyworks, but I haven't touched either software since about 2011, so I have no idea what has changed or improved in either package. Mastercam has recently added a new "Mesh Ribbon" to the software, which does allow you to work with, repair, and manipulate mesh entities, but the tools are still fairly rudimentary when it comes to working with faceted data.

No, not really. They released a "new workflow", but without having it really give you anything new. Plus, they took some stuff away, all in the name of getting a new interface "done". But, they took away functionality, from the guys who use the software to make parts, day-in/day-out. You can still show the "Red Dashed Wireframe" for your parts, but not easily. When you go to the 3rd Page > Stock Setup, you can use the "Show Wireframe Entities" checkbox to show Wireframe on your screen. (Why, why, would that be "off" by default?) Press the "Bounding Box" button, and you get the Bounding Box function panel. Here, you can press the "All shown" radio button, to actually get an XY bounding box, which will also include "Z" if your entities have any "thickness" to them. If you've only got "flat" wireframe, you'll get XY, but no Z. You can manually type in a Z Thickness if needed. Now, you've "Defined" the stock, right? So, why isn't it showing up? Because you've got to use the "Stock Display" option under "Toolpaths Ribbon" to actually get that dashed box wireframe to show up. Brilliant!!! You can also use the "Stock Shading" button to toggle between Red Dashed Wireframe, and a translucent solid.

Fresh from the Tech Exchange, these should support the Haas High-Speed Modes, with the Misc Integers and Real Numbers, to give you G187 P1-P3, and to control the E corner rounding values. I recommend: G187 P1 E0.04, G187 P2 E0.008, G187 P3 E0.004 > Generic Tolerance parts G187 P1 E0.02, G187 P2 E0.004, G187 P3 E0.0004 > Medium Tolerance parts G187 P1 E0.01, G187 P2 E0.002, G187 P3 E0.0002 > Tight Tolerance parts Generic Haas 3X Mill.mcam-content Generic Haas 4X Mill.mcam-content

This is exactly how it works. You create all of your Pocketing or paths to remove material, and then run the "Start-Hole" path. This puts the Drill Operation at the end, and you just move it in front of the Pocket Ops. You do have to be careful, as this creates the Points "at the current plunge location" for your Pocket Paths, but this is not "associative" to the Pocket Paths. If you redo the pocketing, you must redo the Start Hole path. (Best to delete the existing points/operation, and just create a new one.)

For the Hybrid System itself, we're happy to send you a quote. Same for the M450 system. **** NOTE: I had to redact the pricing, as that really shouldn't be posted publicly. **** I would have to ask Brian what the cost is for the M450, so give me a few to get you an answer. We can do Steel, Stainless (316L), Inconel 718, and Titanium. I believe we've done some Copper as well. I'm sure if you can get welding wire in a particular material, we can help you figure out how to print it. I can tell everyone that we're by far the most economical solution available, and at the lower end of your range, not the upper...

And... For the M450, it is essentially plug-and-play, since it is a standalone metal printing system. The startup is a day or less, (sometimes as few as 2 hours), and then we commence with the training.

After talking with Brian, there are other builders who use Fanuc controls, that are in the prototyping stages for building a system. We are at the point where this is a commercially viable product. We can perform the integration and training on a Haas machine, in 4-Days. Basically, 2 days to integrate the system, and 2 days to train you (or your programmers/operators) on how to run the equipment. (More training available and/or applications help, upon request, which would be an additional cost.) We are currently programming using the Aplus Add-on for Mastercam, which is not included in the purchase price, but is readily available, and we can work with the team that develops Aplus to get your software and help you integrate it into an existing Post Processor. All of the Meltio functions are operated by M-Code, using relays and M-Fin signals in the back of the machine. (We add 8M PCB Relay Board, and wire that into the Meltio Control unit.)

I believe we are the only MTB integrator currently. However, they do have a standalone M450 Machine, which just does the printing. The advantage there, is that you can have two separate process working simultaneously. If you're interested in learning more, shoot me a PM, and I'll give you Brian's contact information. I believe we are the sole distributor for the Meltio M450 in the US Market, but I'm touching base with Brian to confirm that.

The other issue you will find, is that used machinery holds good resale value. There isn't much difference between new/used equipment, unless you go really old, and then you will have issues with finding parts and someone to repair the machine when it goes down. And, it will go down. I have lost count of the number of people I've helped over the years, and friends I've known, who go down the used machine route, and spend all their time trying to keep the machine running. At the end of the day, used machines are slow, so you're going to find really quickly that it takes 3-5 times as long to make a part with old machinery, versus a new machine. Who are you going to get to train you on an old machine? Who are you going to get to setup, program, and specify all the tooling you will need to make these parts? If you opt for a new machine, you can bundle the whole machine, and all of the tooling, fixturing, programming, and training, into a single monthly bill, and have someone come in, program everything, do all the hard work of developing the whole process, and end up with a machine that cuts your parts, quickly and accurately, which essentially becomes a printing press for dollar bills, when done right. If you are a talented machinist, who knows machines and controls inside-and-out, and you've programmed, setup, and ran dozens of parts, then sure, go ahead and buy a used machine, scrape together the tooling, and write the G-Code program by any means necessary, just to get something going. Do you want to be in the machine shop business? From what I'm hearing you say, your end goal is just to source parts cheaply and quickly, without having to deal with an overseas supply chain. If that is the case, I'm 100% positive you can find a machine shop here in the United States of America, who can produce these parts with the speed and economy you desire. The won't be "as cheap as doing it yourself", but I don't think you really understand all the things you need to successfully run a machine shop which cuts metal. You don't just buy a used machine, plug it in, and "presto", out comes your parts. I'm not trying to come off as condescending here. Just speaking from the heart, and from decades of hard-won experience, seeing people get into the industry without ever having worked in the industry. If you are still undeterred, and want to make your own parts, then welcome to the brotherhood of manufacturing professionals, and I wish you the best of luck in the pursuit of your dreams. By the way, full disclosure, I work for a Machine Tool Distributor, who happens to sell the most economical brand of machines on the planet (and the largest MTB also); Haas Automation. Where are you located? I'd be happy to pass along your information to someone who can truly help. No hard sell, ever, just someone who can provide another perspective and offer options. This part would fit great on a Haas ST-40 Lathe, with Y-Axis, Bar Feeder, and a Parts Catcher. You could 100% automate the process with minimal operator interaction, to simply load bar material, and remove finished parts from the Parts Catcher when complete. This could be done turnkey, so you can get up and running very quickly, and still have the flexibility to either program new parts yourself, or contract someone to program, setup, and prove-out your new parts. That part is 100% achievable on a Y-Axis Lathe, including the Broaching...

Hi Matt, One teeny, tiny, correction: these machines are built by Phillips, using a Haas machine as the base. Phillips warranties the Meltio Hybrid System, while Haas warranties the base-machine (unless, of course, you're installing on a machine where the manufacturer's warranty has already expired.) So these are technically "Phillips Hybrid Machines". These systems also do not require a new machine purchase. If your machine is from 2011 onwards, we can retrofit the Meltio System onto your existing machine... If anyone is interested in exploring this option, I'd be happy to put you in touch with Brian Kristaponis, our General Manager of Phillips Hybrid. These systems use commercial welding wire, so the material costs can be up to 10X less than a powder-bed additive machine. Thanks for posting!

Are you using 'Reference Points'? What are your values for "Home Position", and do you have "Show Mill/Router Home Position" enabled in the Backplot Settings [!] menu?

Money > Sandvik has it in spades Effort > Let's see if the Swedes kick things into high-gear. I would imagine it would be to their benefit to do some technology sharing between all of their code-bases, and just build "Sandvik CAM", with everything under the sun: UI, kinematics, machines, posts, simulators, etc. But that does come back to the Money & Effort argument, so hopefully something does change...

Sure, and that's great. I get that completely. But it isn't here yet, and this new attempt at building the UI feels incomplete. More pages, but less functionality. That is going backwards to me. When CNC Software has rolled-out new functions like this in the past, there was typically a way to "disable it, and use the old way", so that the technology could mature before everyone was ready to migrate over to the new interface. Kinematic Awareness would be awesome, but that requires a whole system to be able to build kinematic models for both Programming Purposes (machine awareness at the toolpath level), and models for Simulation Purposes > showing what happens during when executing NC Code. This isn't just "tool removing material from stock". It requires being able to simulate the moves to/from a Tool Change, and all the other "motions" of the machine. At the higher levels (VERICUT, CAMplete, NC Simul), this includes things like simulating the motion of the tool changer arm when exchanging tools, or being able to model a tool carousel, where all of your loaded tools are available to interact with the stock/part/fixture models. It also requires the ability to simulate both "dynamic codes", and the correct interpretation of "how the rotary behaves on the machine". When you configure a Rotary Axis in VERICUT, guess how many "rotary behavior options" are available in the drop-down selection menu? You have the following Absolute Rotary Direction settings, which control how the rotary motion is interpreted: Positive -> CCW Positive -> CW Always CCW Always CW Shortest Distance Linear Shortest Distance - 180 CW Shortest Distance - 180 CCW Positive -> CW Absolute Positive -> CCW Absolute Shortest Distance 2 Shortest Distance 3 Shortest Distance - 180 Linear Shortest Distance 4 Question: why on earth would they have so many different configuration options, just for a Rotary Axis? Answer: because they have identified different machine behaviors during testing (all generally based on controller and parameter settings on the machine), where they had a need to create different internal routines for handling how the rotary moves, based on 1.) current position, and 2.) next commanded position. Since Sandvik owns VERICUT, ICAM, and Mastercam now (oh, and Gibbs for good measure), there would really need to be some type of integration inside Mastercam with the combination of ICAM & VERICUT. I'd be curious to see what the overall plan is for the next 2-years, 5-years, and 10-years. There CAD/CAM industry is going through quite a bit of upheaval, and I'm curious to see how that all plays out in the next decade...

I really don't understand why CNC Software would release Machine Group Setup, in its current form. - You can "setup your machine simulation", but not really. Because the MGS selections, don't actually "do anything". You still have to use the "Machine Simulation Setup", so I just see a bunch of "extra stuff for the future", with no practical application in 2023. But even worse, things that "used to work in Machine Group Properties", now no longer work in Machine Group Setup. - You can select "material", but that doesn't actually select material for your Speed/Feed calculations. You must go to the "Material button" on the ribbon bar. You actually "set the material" under the Master Model menu, but it is only "displayed" under the Stock Setup. Why wouldn't they just use the same controls on each panel, so you could see & edit the material type and properties, in both places? - Stock Setup > they got rid of '2-points', and you now must go through the 'Bounding Box' button, to create rectangular or cylindrical stock. But the interface for Bounding Box doesn't really make it clear that you can just "type in stock values", as the first control you are presented with is "manual geometry selection" or "automatic". How is this not completely worse than the old method User Interface for Machine Group Properties? There is the "Machine Setup", which is the files you are programming with (MD/CD/PST), oh, and they stuck the Line (Sequence Numbering), Program Number, and Comment Output Checkboxes, with the MD, CD, PST Files? If it were me, I would make the following changes to the layout of the Machine Group Setup: Page 1 would be Machine Setup > MD/CD/PST, and Machine Simulation drop-downs/selection, and configuration options (move other settings below) Page 2 would be Model Setup > which would include 'Master Model' (Part) section, 'Stock' section, and 'Workholding' section. Material could be assigned/viewed/edited with a 'common control' on both Part and Stock pages. (Keep the 'Master Model' term if you like it, but I think Siemens may have a legitimate grip with using that term, although I don't know if they have it copyrighted, they've been using that term for a long time in their training materials...) Page 3 would be Program & Tool Settings > (Basically, take the "Tools" page, and add some controls, and move some settings from other pages. For example, move Tool & Operation Library selection to this page, also Program Comment Control, Sequence Numbers, and Program Number settings, I would eventually love to see "Control Settings" available on the "Program & Tool Settings" panel, because then all "program output and formatting controls" would be accessible through the MGS panels, rather than having to use the Machine Definition Manager, and Control Definition Manager functions, in a separate part of the software. It would also be cool if there was an option for "material", where we could have a "HUD" (Head's Up Display) checkbox, where that data would display overlayed on the screen, while manipulating the Bounding Box function. It would be cool if you could edit or push/pull the stock size, and based on the HUD being enabled, and material assigned, and see the results of those changes in the HUD data being overlaid on the screen. Vericut has the HUD function for displaying your NC Program, while running, and I love that feature. I think honestly, the only change I really like, is the ability to set a different 'Stock Color' on the Stock Setup page.

Also, if you have a Hole in the model, you can use the "Hole Axis" command, to create a "Centerline" of the Hole. With a line (Vector) down the center, you can then use that to create a Plane. By viewing the part in different orientations (Top, Front, Right, Etc.), you can create wireframe geometry, and then "project the compound angled line, "flat" to one view. That way you can measure the angular distance for Tilt, and for Rotation.

I realize this is an old thread, but wanted to mention something, which may help with the availability of moving tools from your 1st Machine Group, to the other machine groups. I will typically create a "Part File Tool Library" ("part_name" or "job number".tooldb). When programming the 1st Machine Group, I'm typically pulling tools from a large master tool library, and creating/editing the tools as needed for that 1st Setup. When finished with that 1st program, I will go into the Tool Manager (for lathe files, need to do this twice, once for mill tools, and again for lathe tools), and I will select "all used tools" from my "part tools", and use the 'down arrow button' on the dialog to copy all of those tools to the 'part_file.tooldb'. There is no "save button", but when you close the Tool Manager, you'll be asked if you want to save the changes to your tool library? (yes) Then, when I load the 2nd machine group, I can simply select this 'part_file.tooldb' as my Tool Library, and I've got all of those previously programmed tools from the 1st Setup, ready to bring into my next Machine Group. If I add new tools during the following setups (maybe I add a couple of tools on the 3rd Setup...), I can use the Tool Manager, to copy my "part tools" (from that setup), into the 'part_file.tooldb' file, and those tools are now available in my other Machine Groups, so long as I pick that library. Note: you can switch up libraries on-the-fly while programming. So, if you've got a tool in 'Mill_Inch.tooldb', you can simply open the Tool Manager, pick that other library, copy the tool into your 'Part Tools' section of the manager (up arrow button), and then switch back to your 'part_file.tooldb'. I typically ignore any warnings about creating duplicate tools. I probably have 200+ "T1's", in my Mill_Inch.tooldb. I just use the filtering functions to select the tools I'm after.

First, this was an excellent video, thanks for posting it Aaron!!! As Freya rolled the credits, this link caught my eye: https://pomax.github.io/bezierinfo/index.html This particular site is like an extension of the mathematics, which underlie that video. There are a bunch of interactive applets, which allow you to "visually play" with the underlying math. Pretty cool.

Post up a Zip-2-Go, that contains the Post, and a sample file. To be clear > are you talking about programming all the operations from the same WCS (top view), without using different Toolplanes? I'm with Ron > it could be as simple as having 'two axis combinations defined' in the Axis Combo list, and just picking the "3-Axis combination", but it would depend on who built your Post, and what they used as a "Base Post" to start with.

The other possible solution would be to not use CSS, use RPM mode only, and then reduce the feed, starting at about 0.080" Diameter, down to about 0.0004 IPR, and then at 0.040" diameter, reducing to 0.0002 IPR. Also, possibly increase the SFM by 25-50, and see if that helps at all. What color were the chips coming off at your current programmed SFM? But I also like G-Code's advice to stop early, leaving the part connected, and breaking it off by hand. Either way, you will need to do some clean-up/finishing, unless that part of the pin is hidden in the fixture, and you can live with it. I'd also suggest reprogramming the part-off code, to "plunge in" about 0.060", pull-back for clearance, and then add a "chamfer" move, from out-to-in, to help push any burr formed towards the pin center. If you put a 0.01-0.02" chamfer, that would be plenty. Might want to program at 35-degrees, or 40-degrees, instead of 45-degrees, to help with pushing the pin into the hole, if the installation will be permanent. After cutting the chamfer, then proceed with the part-off cut, in stages, where you reduce the Feed-per-Revolution accordingly, or stop early, and hand-break the part.

You might consider: Yes, Center-height of the tool, could play a role. Should be as close to perfect as possible. Try using RPM, instead of CSS. The "ramping" can have a big effect as you get close to "zero", and will be limited by your G50/Max. RPM line anyway. Might consider starting at 0.0008 IPR, but only going down to about 0.080" Diameter, and then dropping down to 0.0002-0.0004" per revolution If you continue to chip the inserts, consider dropping SFM by 50-75. (Try 250, or 275 SFM)

"3mm High-Feed" > excellent choice. What brand if I may ask?

I'm with Matt. Carbide is roughly 70-80 HRc. Take light depths of cut, maybe 0.005-0.010 per pass, and just do a "zig-zag in depth, to move through the material. No need to grind with a grinding bit, unless you're requirement is for the ground finish on the cut-end of the gauge pin. Cutting with carbide should be much quicker, and you could likely "gang" these parts together, if you have a group of pins with the same length, using pockets in soft-jaws. (Cut in X or Y, drop down your depth-of-cut in Z, and reverse the cutting direction to go the opposite way, then repeat.) If you hold the pins "on the side of the jaws" (as opposed to sticking "straight up"), you could slot-through the side of the pin. So, instead of machining away the entire material, you could just have to cut through the diameter, making slotting passes. 200-400 SFM, and 1-2% of the Tool Diameter, "per tooth".

I do, but I work for the Federal Division, however I know the Applications Manager for Phillips Commercial quite well. Please PM me your Serial Number, and I'll touch base with my counterpart in the Commercial Division, and we'll get you the Service/Support you need. To be fair, it sounds like there is also an opportunity for both Applications & Probing Training at your company, because "Probe Calibration" is a process you should know intimately. I would suggest that you'll want to calibrate weekly, until you really get the hang of the process. You may even want to spend a full day where you cut-and-test to get some data. Start by "calibrating at the low air temperature (after warming up the axes & spindle) first thing in the morning" (record all values), and then perform that same "full calibration process at Noon" - recording all data, and do a final calibration at 4-or-5 PM. What we are after here is "how much influence does the thermal cycle have on the process". As I mentioned, it takes process knowledge and Probing to really get the full capability of these machines, in addition to a properly formatted Post Processor. Things like using the High-Speed Codes, proper use of TCPC & DWO, and in-process Probing for those high-accuracy applications, are all critical to holding super tight tolerances. I have setup a process (funnily enough, on a Pallet Pool, just not a Haas Pallet Pool), that performed "full Calibration" before each part was cut. This allowed us to hold very tight tolerances, even as the machine warmed up from cold (cycle time was about 18-minutes). I don't believe you'll need to go to that extent, but it always depends on the part size, material, tools, fixturing, and thermal stability of the shop in question. In this case, performing the calibration (tool probe & spindle probe), then measuring the tools, and then probing the part which was freshly loaded into the machine, gave us the ability to hold some very critical in-line bore tolerances and true position locations, for some Port Features. I could not have done that using the static accuracy of the machine, throughout the thermal cycle of daily production. Without the Probe, I would have been chasing offset adjustments all day, and scrapping parts. By integrating the Probe into the process, not only did I hold tolerance, but setups became a lot less fussy. I could simply clamp parts in a fixture or vise, without stressing over trying to get those OP20 Parts precisely on location. I could measure each part "in the location it was at", without worrying if each pallet was built or setup precisely like the other pallets. This vastly simplifies your setup, because it just doesn't matter if you are slightly out of position, so long as you "probe that error", and correct the twist or positional error using your C-Axis Work Offset value. (NOTE: you must correct any C-Axis Error, and recall the work offset, and C-Axis (zero) position, before Probing for XYZ translation error). But you should also be aware of this limitation on the Haas > the DWO Function only compensates for single "rotary axis errors". So you can correct a C-Axis misalignment, but not a B-Axis error. So what I mean to say there, is that you shouldn't be sloppy with your fixture setup/building. If possible, machine soft jaws, or the mounting surfaces of your fixture "in place, on the machine", so the fixture is as precise as you can get it. But when you mount parts, if you incorporate the Probe into the mix, you don't have to be as careful in setting up the parts for XYZ location, but you should still be careful, as some rotary error cannot be corrected for using the DWO Function. (Fanuc WSEC Function allows 6-degrees of freedom correction for errors.)