I tried your suggestion Bosto. Default was .002. Switched it to .0002, .0001, and .01, restarting MC everytime with the same results. Changing tool step over doesn't help much with the machining either. Mayby the viewing angle is distorting the edges. Looks like I'm being too picky here. I redrew the helix with different rads and used a .236 bullnose with a .02 rad and cleaned it up with a 3/16 flat e-mill.

Thanks for the help. Learned a lot from the answers but I've also opened up a can of worms. OK, here's what I've tried so far. FYI: The helix depth is only .112", .197 inner R, .3525 outer R., .125 pitch. With tangential line length, positive value is set to radius of the cutter. I get the start and exit points I want. But regardless of the tool type, whether it be a bullnose with a .02 rad., .156 ballnose, or a 3/16 flat e-mill, I get gouging at the bottom or too deep of a cut, even with depth limits set, relative to tip. Looks like I need to set up some type of boundaries? With the ball nose and bull nose tools, I get "notched geometry at the top of the cut as well. Flat e-mills look fine. The .156 ballnose e-mill I used refuses to take the inputted step over and ends up only taking about 25 passes. I suspect that its simply too large to fit through the smaller radius of the helix comfortably. A smaller ball would probably work better. Adding a second tool and then setting the depth limits worked great, kind of like re-machining to get the rad out. When I created the underlying helix geometry, I only used four lines to define the helix. I was pleased with the results. I then created a net surface. The net surface appears to have kinks or bends in it that, although small in size, appear to not touch the wireframe geometry in several places. Kind of looks like flats when you zoom in. This also shows up in the cuts. Do I need a different type of surface here, other than net, or is this just a visual anomaly? I'll redraw the helix wide enough to accomodate a 6mm bullnose with a .02 rad, then use a 3/16 flat e-mill to pick out the rad. Bet ya can't say "tangential line length" 5 times really fast with a mouth full of crackers. I'll check back in later. Thanks again, MCM.

Hey J, thanks for the reply. Bullnose or ball nose is out of the question for now as I need a sharp corner at the intersection. I was hoping to avoid redrawing it. Xform offset gave me some funny results when I tried to offset the inner and outer rads of the helix. I may just start it over from scratch. I would still get correct geometry with the sharp cornered e-mills though, right?

Is there an easy way to create a lead in / lead out for the edges of this geometry without redrawing the helix? I,m using sharp cornered e-mills and would like to have at least half the e-mill start and end outside the cut. This is my first helix flowline so please try to keep the laughing to a minimum.

Glad to be of help and welcome to the forum. This was the exact same quetion I asked about in my second post here and the credit goes to the forum indeed. I'm new at this myself and have gained quite a bit of knowledge by just lurking around. I glance at the forum posts almost daily, as if it were my morning newspaper. There is a lot to learn in MC and sometimes even the simplest issues can be hard to resolve on your own. You will find that one solution often opens many doors and if its a popular topic, lots of peeps will chime in. My employer does not offer anything in the way of education so this forum has become a valuable resource for an enthusiastic noob such as myself.

Fits perfect on a 22" wide screen.

Create a point where you want to start the cutter. Select "point" as your chaining option, then pick the point, select "chain", then chain your cut as a full chain, then select your point again using "point". Select " use entry point" and "use exit point" in your lead in /lead out and tweak your lead in/lead out accordingly. The cutter should return to the point you created before it chages Z depths. This also works good with closed shapes where a hole has been drilled as an entry point.

Yes, the ratio is 16:10. If your card doesn't support it with the latest drivers, your SOL, but that's probably not the case if your card is less than 5 years old. I'd personally would rather have the correct geometry on a faded monitor, than a crisp monitor with ovals.

Hmmm, don't know if this is what your after, but as me being a noob myself, I would set the c-plane to the front view, then set the view to ISO and snap a line from 1 end to the other. This would be simple if all the lines were the exact same distance in spacing. That drawing looks like its in backplot and somebody failed to select one of the lines.

The Machining Center that I was referring to was located in Brighton. I don't know what their called today but I still see the ocassinal help wanted add. Many former Galaxy and Paramount employees have worked there. Too far of a drive for myself, so I've never checked it out.

Yes, a corner rounding feature, right next to the taper feature in contour would be nice with the option to turn the corner, or come straight off the edge. Also, leave the coolant turned on in the tool libraries and operation defaults as I believe more people use coolant than not. Off topic: I'm forever going to associate this forum with the animated gif of the beanie guy. Can't get that face out of my head, lol.

It was killing me, Shiloh was on the tip of my tongue. They have (Had?) a large facility in Taylor. Tryout or stamping there, I believe. After checking out the link, sure looks like PP is trying to distance themselves from the Michigan labor force, doesn't it? We've been blackballed! This is the 3rd down cycle I've seen in the trade. The 1st was in the late 70's as a kid, watching my Father try to make a go of it. The day is soon upon us where our skills will command a decent wage and respect once again. For the last 10 years or so, finding decent help has been a struggle to say the least. No more trade programs around, and it seems like the educational community is steering students away from this skill set. I don't know why PP bought Galaxy, lack of Due Diligence I guess as the market for machining large castings on Horizontal machining centers was already saturated and highly competitive. Galaxy, Paramount Boring, Machining Center , Lincoln Park Boring, Royal Oak Boring, and Dart to name a few were all biding on the same jobs. Speaking of blabbing, later, MCM

Actually, we have a 18i controller on a Makino S50 with very few options on it. It totally suxs. $250k of uselessness as our Haas machines are much more flexible and way easier to set-up and at 1/3 the cost. I started out on a 6m, then went on to Mazaks for quite a few years and have not seen much of the Fanuc's untill recently.

Ronda Drive in 89 with the occasional trip to the Joy Rd. facility. Recently, just around the corner at Haber/Goodyear/Colt industries (on Koppernick.) which was purchased by Die-Namic, I've seen the Greenfield shop. You probably know all the tool shops in the area and we probably have a few of Greenfield's former employees with us now. Alken_Ziegler just relocated its tool and die division to Taylor, big place I hear. We have a few of their former employees also and vise-versa. Small circle indeed. Are you with PP now? They still machining engine blocks at the shop on Michigan Ave?

Quoting the Quote. -.- quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ...Feed IPR for tapping may require a parameter change in the actual machine control... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Generally it is a standard option included with the machine. I think in all my years running machines I've seen less than 10 that did not have it and all were late 80's machines or older. _________________________________________________ If it's standard, then its not an option. Anyone want some Jumbo Shrimp?

Galaxy Industries in the late 80's running large horizontals, primarily large castings such as engine blocks, heads, trans housing etc. Paramount Boring in Oakpark was my next expedition. Same type of work and machines, more cash. Currently running verticals, doing tool & die and everything else quotable, on the west side.

I'm new with mastercam so I can't tell you which is better. Streaming teacher cost a few bucks more though.

Feed IPR for tapping may require a parameter change in the actual machine control.

Nah, and I can't push the issue either -.- As John mentioned in the previous post, I'm gonna bury that subject, On the bright side, I just got a new department manager that I've worked with in the past, that knows surfcam and understands the need for educational material. He's going start breaking in on the Mcam and I may be able to get him to push for some training videos. I'm thinking about the "Tips for manufacturing" series mentioned on this topic as it's only $400. I'm getting ready to spring for it myself. I see your from Farmington Hills. Cool. I've worked in Canton, and Oak Park for a while. I'm on the west side now.

Dude? I like that. I've been kindly asking myself to refrain from using the word "Dude" in the forums. As far as the reseller..well, I'm biting my tounge and will keep the "1st rule of fight club" taped to my keyboard. Thanks. Keep up the good work here, you guys are always prompt. Later Du... um, Buddy.

Hello. I've modified the mill2.set file to output the code in the order that I like and it seems to work well. Saved that file as Motor.set. I then tried to put it in another machine. When I run the setup sheet, I get a buffer overflow error on the other machine. The "other machine" has 1gb of ram and a crappy CPU, the cheaper AMD chip. It still runs MCX ok. Could this weak machine be the problem?

That's too bad. I'd rather deal with, and spend my hard earned cash on the prep package with one of the resellers here at the forum. Our reseller SUX. Hasn't a clue. No contact yet. Heh, when I spoke with him, he was talking about X2 mr2 being old and 13 was coming out soon. Bafoon.

2 for the price of one. Hmmm, thats going on now where I work, only we also have to program the mills. Not a bad concept if you dont mind one machine sitting idle while the other one gets set-up. If your looking to maximize spindle time, one man, one machine, on time, quality parts. Of course, part quantity and complexity would end up governing how many machines a guy could run. On occasion, I have up to 4 machines running. Reading? Other than prints and machine manuals, we have no spare time. Incentives such as monetary bonuses for increased production would weed out the slackers.

I dont know if this is what your looking for but if the tool comes to a point, I end up turning off the comp so that it follows the line on center. I then offset the stock to leave and the Z depth so that I dont rag on the point. Also, like Doyleg said, be sure the tool is idendtified correctly.

File, save as, (.txt), then pick your location.