I noticed this also. it only happens when selecting any geometry for cutter paths. As soon as you say "done" after selecting any geometry for any kind of toolpath, the construction depth changes to zero. I tried turning off the tool plane but that didn't change anything. Running W2K pro V9.1

Well, i finally moved up to V9 this week. I've been playing with it and so far so good. One question i have is whenever i create a toolpath my z constuction plane depth always reverts back to Z0 as soon as i finish selecting the geometry. This happens for all toolpaths ( contour, pocket, surface, etc )Is there a setting i can change somewhere, or is this tied in to the WCS. not a big problem really, but kind of annoying.

I put a file up on jay's ftp site in the mc8 directory. you could mill the under cut on the soft jaws or make a removable top plate out of steel to reduce wear. this configuration should push the material down flat when you clamp the vise. hope this is of help to you. the file is called V_jaw. [ 03-04-2003, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: camguy ]

Andy, take a look at "spiral.mc8" file on Jays ftp site under mc8files directory. I just used the "spiral" chook, 1 revolution. break the spline at the midpoint, create two arcs on top of the splines. delete splines, offset the arcs .007. In toolpaths chain the arcs from the inside out and select your .625 arc last. lead in off, lead out perpendicular .063, arc "0". save this and import into your files anytime. use the same method for different size holes and c'bore sizes and create a library to speed things up. hope this helps

Mark, I have had the same problem with this also. If you are set to "normal to cplane", try changing 'normal to surface". If this does not work, run "rmnodes" chook and pick any splines that are in your trim curves to reduce the number of node points in the splines. This works 99% of the time. Hope this helps

If you can save the file as an MC8, I would be happy to take a look at it. If it's faster, Email the file to me at [email protected]

Heeler, was the part held in a 3 jaw chuck when it was bored? If this is the case, then the part could be out of round by.009. checking with calipers or a 2 point bore gage will not show this. the only way is to check it with a pin, or a 3 point hole micrometer. I ran into this same problem many years ago. when the part is removed from the chuck, the contact areas of the part with the jaws will move out about .0045" (in this case), and the areas opposite those 3 points will collapse in by .0045". this will always give you a "correct" measurement with calipers.if you can clamp the part with less pressure, you will see the out of round will decrease. hope this helps.

Hey Chris, No you didn't offend me, i just grabbed a gremlin without looking at what it meant. . Actually, I agree that soccer rules should be updated somewhat. One thing i would like to see is no more tie games in the world cup. Sudden death would really liven things up after 90 min. Another thing i don't like is all the acting like they broke a leg when all they did was get bumped. Give 'em a ten minute penalty.

"Most every other pro sport supports the idea of replaying a call when it is in doubt." Let's see...Hockey,Football..... yes Basketball,Baseball,Lacrosse,Tennis,Rugby,Cricket, and probably most others that i can't think of right now, No!

They should have called this series " Carolina Hurricanes vs Detroit men-with-Canes"

This operation can be done using a macro, which you can assign to the tool bar, or use a shortcut on the keyboard. First, create an arc segment on the screen, then start the macro record button. then create line end points, end point, center create line end points, end point, center create line, tangent through a point, pick line, end point of line, and select which line to keep. repeat for next line. stop macro record. Now open up the macro in the editor, and you will see the last 2 items as [clprppt] ENT POINT LENGTH = 1.0 <- CHANGE TO -> LENGTH = ? LINE = E* <- CHANGE TO -> LINE = ? This will prompt you to enter the length of the line, and select which line to keep. If the line length is constant, then leave the length as shown, or change it to whatever length you want. Note- you can create the prompt during the macro record, but i find it easier to edit the macro after. hope this helps

cut tolerance is the only thing you should be concerned with. the toolpath generated depends on the shape of the geometry. if you are cutting a radius on the outside of the arc, and your cut tolerance is set to .01", then the cutter will gouge the surface by .005" in some areas. if you are on the inside of the arc, it will leave .005" heavy in some areas. to test this, create 2 arcs in an "s" shape, create vertical surfaces, and run a surface finish tool path. offset the arcs by the radius of the cutter. backplot the toolpath and save as geometry. reset the tolerance, regen, and backplot again using a different color. zoom in on the toolpath and you will see the difference. hope this clears things up for you. [ 05-02-2002, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: camguy ]

Just kidding around Jay. I know your heart's in the right place, even though your fingers aren't.

Hmmmm, this could explain cadcams postings

Greg, It really depends on your geometry. would be helpful if you could put a sample of a part on the ftp site. Does the geometry have wireframe? If not, are you allowed to create the wireframe from the model? Are the walls vertical or is there a draft angle? Suface cutting routines are faster at the programming end, but slower on the machine. 2D programs require a lot more time to create, but you can be much more efficient on cycle times. Of course, if you have revisions to part models, then surface routines are easier to regenerate. Just some thoughts to chew on. Cheers.

Hi Eric. I was involved about 20 years ago with a similar idea to this. the company (McDonnel Douglas Aircraft) wanted to do "lights out machining" running multiple parts. the program actually loaded/unloaded the parts and fastened them down with s.h cap screws. However, after 6 months and about $60,000 the idea was scrapped. the biggest problem was chips. the tapped block for storing the screws, and the threaded holes in the work fixture always had some chips left in them. we even had high pressure air programmed to blow out the holes. but all it took was 1 hole to have a chip stuck in it. sometimes the holes would get cross threaded. Anyway, the fastest way of taking screws in and out would be to use an electric screwdriver or an impact gun. with the torque set correctly, it's fast and safe. btw, i can install 4 or 5 screws this way before the machine can do one. just my .02 Steve.

Create,Spline,From curves,chain,do it

Screen, change attributes, select color

Wildcat, a little more information would be helpfull. is this a 5 axis cut? does the bottom of the hole have to match the upper edges (3d)or can it be flat? if you can, put the file up on the ftp site so we can have a look at it.

Mat, put the file up on the ftp site so we can have a look at it, or Email me the file [email protected]

Hi Mat. This is steve taylor. I'm the guy who sold you mastercam when i was working at In House Solutions. I work at Lincor tool down in Leamington. If you ever need help, feel free to give me a call.

SEM001, In this instance the radius on a cone is constant along the edge. If you sliced it on an angle the radius would vary, same as if you created a cone shape that looked like the "0" the radius would constantly be changing. I think the min. radius output is the smallest arc that could fit the surface at the cursor position. btw, sem, are you Jeff Rice at semtec ?

When you do dynamic analyze, the value shown is the radius normal to the surface. this value is equal to the hypotenus of the triangle. if you go to a front or side view you should see the arrow pointing at an angle. I will put a file on the ftp site called "dynamic.mc8" so you can see. hope this clarify's things for you.

Kathy, copy the geometry to z-.375 and z-.75, create a line at the end point to join the 2 lines, set depth of cut to "0" incremental. hopr this is what you want

FRED, Look in same folder for surface_help2. the best i could manage was to do it in 2 surfaces. you had way too much geometry to start with. some splines were only .0005" long, there were also some splines sticking out past the ends of the part. i ended up recreating all the splines because you had way too many control points on them, also most of the splines had small gaps between the end points. i don't know if the surfaces are what you want, but i would consider adding more geometry at the "fork" end of the part to give you more control over the shape. hope this helps you out.