Register now to participate in the forums, access the download area, buy Mastercam training materials, post processors and more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Use your display name or email address to sign in:
I often use an STL for rest machining. I generate the SLT in Mastercam verify. Some times the verify will take a while to generate. Will Vericut create an STL in a faster time that would be able to be used for the rest machining operations?
I do realize the software will indeed pay for itself. I think the need for some type of measure will help prioritise the different areas that need improvement and where to put the investment first in order.
To those Vericut users, does anyone have a measured savings, in terms of toolpath optimizing and tool life, especially in a very short run type atmosphere, that would help justify the purchase? I understand the path verification for toolpath collisions, but I was instructed to get more information but without ever using the software it is had to give that type of savings a measure. Thanks in advance for any help.
Paint loos seems to happen from cutting chips. Not sure which coolant type is best. I can recommend a recyclers that filters well and removes tramp oil. http://www.smartskim.com/
Yes, I do delete them. The real problem is that these parts are usually created from laser scan data with lots of surface facets and load time can take a while.
I have noticed that if:
1) create a contour toolpath,
2) create a pocket toolpath,
3) change the pocket to a contour, the parameters end up as the previous contour and I need to double check every thing.
X4 MR1
This may sound like an odd work around but it works for Me. I set the stock view to TOP. Load a solid in Mastercam. I use one "manual entry" operation and verify to the solid. This does have any real toolpath but it allow Me to save a SLT right from verify. I then use that verify for the rest material file.
I like to show the ways I do things consistently. That way when someone needs to look through a file I created, they will have a better understanding of the process I follow. I also encourage using the help on each window.
I like to groups tools in different ways.
Some buy screw size.
Tap drill, tap, clearance drill by sizes.
Some by milling type.
All rough milling tools, then finishing. I also like numbering backwards.
That way when bringing new tools into operations, setting sequentially starts at #1 and goes up from there
I do not personally use the wire module but can anyone here point out anything to watch for that I can let the wire guys know about before I install X4 for them? Thanks.
Was an X3 part opened in X4. I did as Justin said. I changed the tool radius. For the part I had it was not a big issue. Changed the radius by .0001". Worked fine. Toolpath was contour.
X4 MU1, verify dll patch installed.
Verify with a bullnose endmill shows the corner fillet of the tool way larger than is really is. Anyone else seeing this problem?
eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.
Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.