On top of this superb post, which underlines the fact that putting on the managers hat and big-spurred cowboy boots, is, the easy bit it would be worth discussing this with the accounts dept or "someone who knows" if any project investments and cost-kickbacks, are available? Because if you launch this out as a proper structured project, and time sheet it and cost it as a proper project, you may be eligible for the project cost to be written off against the company taxes. Which means it possibly won't cost anywhere near as much money, Aaron laid out. In the EU, there's free money thrown everywhere for things like this (training)....

This! IME, usually shops tend to specialise in a "type of work"....so when something different appears, it can be a head scratcher. Once it is 'grammed, save a copy of the part (or more specifically the toolpaths used) naming the part "Multi-part Transform Rotate" (or whatever) - but something that you can easily find again in the future within the "examples directory". I also have a notepad file of unusual tools - predominantly long and specials with all the (working) info and stickout speeds and feeds DOC's mtl etc. Only because our tool library wasn't as good as it should have been....

Old. As. Dirt. Just checked (memory) X Editor is what I was using before hand....even copied that into the X7 directory and used it for then too. I used the default xspurt for 9 onwards though....

Have a shortcut on your desktop (/mastercam/extensions/codeexpert) and open it 1st thing in the morn. Once it is open, any new posting (did) opens(?) virtually immediately. Then just close down that posted prog, keeping codeex-spurt open....?

I remember being LoL'd at when I asked the benefit of code expert (why it was written) when it was introduced in the Beta days....because the historic editor worked so fast and well. And it still had more features at the time (IDK now). But I was told "the historic editor was (at the time) 15 years old written in (can't remember the language now) and the new is blah blah C+++++++++++++++++ or whatever)".... I remember at the time saying I didn't care what language it was written in, but it was a backward step....

To add to the excellent advice.... i'll add "standardisation of doing things". That's from dealing with Customers (incoming) electronic data (Network folder by Customer>Part Number AND ISSUE) etc, to the way they use Mcam and the way they 'gram. Everyone does things differently - but as already pointed out - mandate same posts, tool library, file creation (level naming etc) etc - is VERY important. Big white board of who is working on what project so everyone knows what's on the go and dates etc. Then their workflow - such as firstly ORDER ANY SPECIAL CUTTERS FIRST SO YOU'RE NOT WAITING DUMASS , prog, verify and file compare, run X+ to check datums + coolant etc, Post, run posted code through backplotter or Vericut or ?etc, then create setup sheet, fixture drawing etc etc so you're handing over something with confidence - a basic flow sheet of your agreed process for all to see WITH EVERYONE's buy-in is good IMHO. And when people cut corners, you gotta pull them up. LoL @ "world class" though

Yes thanks for telling me what I already knew LoL He's prolly describing what happens if they pulled your work...the company would be FUBAR

AOG (Aircraft on Ground)? Or perhaps "GRAVY"....

If you're Dumb, I'm your Dumber

New hotness - you talkin 'bout tail chasin in Cuba? Old n foolish is where it's at!

As agreed in the X7 Beta days....

I guess I was lucky with my place, because I could standardise right at the start of day 1. So 4x identical 850x VMC machines, all with 10k spindles and same pullstuds, grid plates on the table dowelled with the same XY (grid shifted), all with the same Bison 6" vices, and jaws milled with steps in for holding stock (no parallels for 90% jobs). Also rotarys were doweled and datums in the progs. The 3x 15k drill/taps all setup the same. And the 2x siemens lathes identical so the same spindle liners, VDI tooling, programs etc would run in either. Same chucks and collet heads so bored jaws would even run between the machines. It's a bit of work to get to that, but it makes life easy(er). Ultimately - should you be employing someone to sit and read through a printed our prog and figure out how to get a job going? Certainly my Customers wouldn't want to have paid for that

Take this with a pinch of salt - as my primary hands-on experience is a majority of pristmatic-type electrical enclosures, and their associated internals on 4ax VM'c and Hori. Parts with <150ops 'gramming - and the vast majority 2x machining ops only (for the 6x faces). Disclaimer over.... With todays pressures and skill levels etc, IMHO a (clean) tool list is best fit for the majority of applications. Showing:- Machine type/number Prog Number Part number and Issue T#, H#, D#, Tool description, Holder type and tool stickout Mtl size Datum setup Vice end stop position and parallels if used for OP1 Fixture number Any other comments with perhaps a photo showing setup And if operator is in any doubt, they can watch through mcam's verify before setting, to see "what it does". Not forgetting "If in doubt - ASK"! All the additional info I see on some generated set sheets detailing each OP#, operation types, tool speed and feed, cut depths etc etc is all surplus noise and wouldn't get looked at. That's all within the prog the 'grammer has set, so it should be safe and reliable (based on known info). When I was Eng mgr at a previous place, the QM for years, had dictated that all jobs were run with a paper printout of the prog so the operator could see what the machine would be doing A total, unnecessarily, waste of paper and someone printing it, as obviously no one ever looked at it. Too much info.... :shrug:

Back in the day (X7) there was another enhancement request high up the pole, for making levels similar to Autocad - ie you can lock them with no edit, to stop accidental moving or deletion....

IDK....You maybe right....we need a setup sheet which also details what machine it's going on

Where's the setup sheet? I thought he was referring to tool dia, tool length, and tool number

Waddabout Datums?

Dunno. But it's been in mcam since 2009.... And if it was "one click", that would be a great selling point over any other system that wasn't?

LoL @ "but it's free"....I could say I bought it for 20k and got mastercam thrown in For auld time sake, IMHO the most important thing for a 'grammer to do, is convey the minimum required information to the shop floor, to swiftly and successfully make the part. Obviously, both concise and accurate information. The reason why I say minimum, is because some of these set-sheets are data creators - and IME, people's eyes glaze over - they don't bother to read it. Less is best. And it really should be (as close as possible) one-click. If you are already running Varco - I would first email Jim and see if there's anything he can do. The problem with too many different softwares, can be upkeep.... Ref x+, yes. it loads to a folder and you have an icon on the top bar.

X+ Yes, I (we/company) used it as a set sheet for prototype work or parts that probably wouldn't repeat. Easy. And used it every time for exactly as you say - planes set okay, coolant on, THD okay etc. Don't get me wrong, I had it outputting exactly what I wanted (in reality it was effectively a tool list) - my reseller had Ruth @CNC work on it for me when we initially struggled. Saving as pdf and then opening into Nitro, it allowed amendments, adding photographs of the part set-up etc which in the end worked okayish. Regarding a new report writer....it would be far easier to buy Gunthers X+ or Jim's Varco reports, and package it with the product. At least people know it. History has shown, that "implementing new" can be a "bit of a PITA"....(as AR, initial View Sheets, and Tool manager as a few examples, show).....

IMHO, you're too kind Bill! I remember the excitement and fanfare of the AR release, back in X4. 2009. And here we are, 14 years later...10bucks says Gunthers X+ still knocks AR out the park. As a (former) purchaser of 2x full seats and many years of paying maintenance, I invested a small fortune into mcam. So my disappointed opinion, is AR was a badly conceived and implemented, college project.

In the halcyon days the X7/X9 era, there was issues with using this - I tried it and there was something that was a problem - "boxes" import not aligning with text perhaps (or that may have been the HTML)? Anyway, Nitro was the only thing I could get to handle it faultlessly. Although a bit of a PITA at editing and adding/aligning text. But it worked well. Whether Acrobat handles it perfect now though....?

That was on the enhancement request radar back in the X7 days....It's crazy because the main AR package has the option - it's just CNC don't pay to license it. RTF, TXT, HTML, yada yada don't import 100% - the best I had was save as pdf and load/edit/save in Nitro. It was maddening to me because all the info is within the mcam file - it's all there - so "in this day and age" "we should be able to get the one click output But apparently I'm the only one that ever moaned LoLz....but then I valued my time and never liked wasting it.

+1 to AR being capable of producing what you see for sht 1 + 3. I'm sure the image can be generated - the issue is your annotation. That (correct me if I'm wrong) will always need to go into an editing tool to "add your words". Serious Q as I'm only familiar upto 2020....does the latest version save in native MSword format yet?

So....will it verify correctly before posting?