was over here working on my X2 and started wondering: does it still take an act of congress to delete a layer or is there a simple delete button in X4?

that is super. thanks k

let's say that my finished part is a pyramid and i am handed a cube of material from which to cut it. i don't want to machine all that material so i go to the bandsaw and make a rough pyramid leaving half an inch of material to the finish surface. i've created a model of the bandsawed pyramid. how would i go about using that as a file to generate a Highspeed Roughing toolpath to remove the majority of the material and avoid cutting air? i was thinking i could use a Highspeed Rest Rough approach as there is a 'Compute remaining stock from CAD File' option, but i don't see a way to browse for the file of the roughed pyramid. when generating the toolpath with this selected i get a warning 'Operation does not have STL file.' how would i go about trying to do what i'm trying to do? thanks k (i've simplified the geometry for the explanation. i know i could create planes for each face and approach it that way)

what is the 'ram saver?' my X4 times have barely increased on the benchmark as opposed to others. trying to figure out why. i have multithreading enabled. check out the 'check this out' started by rickster. the last 4 or 5 posts if you want to get caught up.

HP xw6600 Intel® Xeon® CPU E5450 @ 3.00 GHz 3.00 GHz, 4.00 GB RAM Win XP Pro (32 bit) (oops - posted wrong processor previously) the only thing i might be doing differently from others is i am pulling up the sample file from X2. seemed to be the best way to keep track of actual comparative improvement AND i don't have the X4 sample files.

found it - under Toolpaths, general settings. it was already enabled.

HP xw6600 Intel® Xeon® Quad-Core E5420 processor

X2 MR2 SP1 - 5:35 VS. X4 - 5:14 what gives? where are my big time saving numbers for running the same system? are you guys who are reporting big leaps without any changes running 64 bit?

this doesn't directly answer your question, but a few years ago i purchased the X2 Handbook 3 on Multiaxis Machining written by Charles Davis from InHouse. i found it to be a clear and helpful overview of how things work. i imagine any updated version for X3 on basics of 3 axis (Handbook 1, i believe) would be equally helpful.

roger

nice point gcode. seemed possible there could be some small rapids hiding in the display graphics of the tool vectors that i might have missed. unfortunately, i went back to double check the backplot and it is all feed moves. well, at least two good things have come of this so far. had my eyes opened to some new integers to play with on 5X and 201 posts. maybe i'll make my avatar a giant question mark.

the program seems good; or at least does not appear to corrupt the surface. toward the end of the program the limitation on the spindle rotation in conjunction with the flowline causes alot of unwinding. i don't know if some of this could be avoided using different axis solutions. you have pointed to something i have wondered about but didn't know how to adjust - a method to direct C rotation positive or negative at the beginning of a toolpath - i thought it might just be built into the post. is there a parameter in mastercam to set this direction? - Have you indicated the alignment? - of the tool for runout? no i haven't; if that is what you are asking. i will but it couldn't be that far out. alignment of the spindle itself? in reference to what? the table?

i see. no, to any bumping or crashing - she's still spotless . . . well, dusty, but undented. the solutions for the axis are created in the post automatically? is this an integer pulled from the miscellaneous values tab? if so they appear to be the same.

hello travis (been out of town, thus the long delay) yes, using the same tool. 'C axis solution' . . . . hmmmmmm, don't follow the terminology there. is that a parameter setting somewhere?

ahhhh, i think i see the lightbulb. so MLS you are saying create a new and separate toolpath to move to and how you want to get from A to B? i have been thinking there was a way to reference this drive geometry in the original toolpath. if that is what you are saying, it seems simple . . . . . and obvious, now that you've said it. of course, i have yet to try it. maybe not as easy as it sounds.

this is a problem i come across pretty often - getting around the part between toolpaths without crashing. i frequently wonder what the best way is. A lot of times i will go in and write some extra code in by hand to manuever the spindle or i might segregate my toolpaths into different programs and run them separately. i've read some references to using lines as directional retracts, but i haven't figured that out yet. _________________________________________ You'll want to uncheck it before you post unless you want a toolchange posted.. _________________________________________ gcode, i don't think i get it - if you uncheck this before posting won't you be running into your actual part? maybe i am missing the point, why are you checking 'force toolchange?' to get a good verify result?

yes. this part is on a 5X Onsrud router with an Osai control. Post was written by the fellows at Onsrud. i was thinking that it might be a problem on the other side of MC and programming as the verify looks spot on. just wasn't sure if anyone has seen something like this and found the problem. there is a lot of C and A five axis motion. the surface is steep and curtain-like with waves and undulations.

i have a part which has a surface rough pocket using a rotated plane. i have followed up the rough with a 5X flow toolpath to finish the surface. in verify the part looks perfect. off the machine, the rough pocket has cut into the finished surface about a sixteenth of an inch in one area. any ideas as to what is going on? X2 MR2 SP1 (i tried to post this question about 10 minutes ago, but i haven't seen it. if you see this question twice . . . . well, you only have to answer one of them. )

i'll see if i can keep this clear and short: i have my #2 button on my space pilot set to pull up the level manager, but when first booting mastercam this button fails. this seemed to have begun when i started fooling around with key mapping so i went to key mapping and hit the 'reset all' button. this restored the #2 button to level manager but did not effect any of my newly key mapped functions. i was happy and went about business. the catch is i have to 'reset all' for every new session of mastercam to get my level manager button to work. what did i screw up? what am i resetting? how can i make it stick with the pilot? What is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

will this wipe out my current custom configs? and if so: are the saved configurations in the pilot itself? i was trying to 'save as' my configurations to my box where i could pull them up after reinstall - but you don't seem to have that option.

the navigational part of my space pilot has stopped working in rhino. my rhino configuration for the device pulled a houdini this morning- i can't find it anywhere. i have created a new rhino configuration, reset the buttons on the pilot and they work, but i can't get the navigational portion to engage. any suggestions? the pilot works as expected in mastercam. also in the past, the pilot would automatically switch to the configuration setting of the program i am using - note that i said, 'in the past' because in the present i now have to manually switch the device to the configuration i want as i jump from program to program.

super. i haven't gotten into keymapping with MC yet, but i am about to start after doing that. up to now i've been using my RMB.

if you are looking at a shaded model is there a way to set up a toggle on the keyboard to jump to translucent and back rather than pulling up the screen settings window and checking or unchecking the translucent box? still on X2 MR2 SP1 thanks k

changing the nc name seems to have solved the problem. thanks

so looks like the answer is no. unfortunate. seems a fairly straight forward for an enhancement. would be pretty handy. that's three votes for it if anyone out there is keeping score.