Mastercam simply can't do dynamic Lead-In and Lead-Out when you initially do your chaining unless you add the geometry to the chain for Lead-In and Lead-Out. Adding geometry for Lead-In, Lead-Out is a total waste of time. For many years another product has been able to do this while you do your chaining and do most of it without dialog boxes and without unnecessary geometry creation for Lead-In and Lead-Out. It's all done graphically by dragging what are called "Machining Markers". When high precision or some options are needed for your Lead-In or Lead-Out you right click in the graphics area over the "Machining Marker" point you wish to modify. [ 11-27-2008, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: NeilJ ]

Colin, have you or anyone else tried using a product like Rhino (or another product) to solve this problem with using the Flowline toolpath when the U, V curves run in different directions? I asked this question about Rhino: One of my CAM program tool paths wants all the surfaces U, V curves that I'm going to machine to flow in the same direction. If I bring a file into Rhino where surface U,V curves flow in different directions does Rhino have the tools to easily change the existing surface U, V curves so that they all flow in the same direction? I got this answer from a McNeel employee: "You can use the Dir command and the command line options there to manipulate the U and V and normal, but in V4 only one surface at a time I'm afraid. In V5, you'll be able tweak multiple surfaces UV at once. For now, it might help to set up a new display mode with the U and V directions indicated by isocurve color. To do this, open Options> Appearance> Advanced Settings> and in the list there select, say, Wireframe and click the Copy button. Then, call it UV Wires or something and edit the settings on the Surfaces page of this new display mode- you will see a setting for Isocurve Usage where you can change the isocurves to display differently in U and V. Then in this mode, you'll be able to see which surfaces need it, and how to align the UVs in the Dir command."

quote: From what I can see X3 MU1 fixed enough of the problems that we will be upgrading our production seats from X2 MR2 SP1 to X3 MU1 in the near future... Helpful post. Thank you.

What problems does MAP.DLL have that I should be aware of? Are there any tutorials available on how to best use MAP.DLL?

I'm not a moldmaker but one of the things I like about the product that is made in Israel and has been mentioned is the years of heavy emphasis on having powerful CAD. I have no doubt this gives them major advantages for powerful and less chaining and better selection. I can't tell you how many times I've read comments from one poster here that it's MasterCAM no MasterCAD... well without powerful CAD you end up with the serious problems. Problems like not being able to change the color of different faces on a solid and use this as the basis for picking what you want to machine, chaining that could be much better, having to unnecessarily create wireframe, etc. Mastercam needs powerful CAD tools. As time goes on I think this is going to become very clear to more users of Mastercam.

quote: We are beta testers here and will be discontinuing 5 seats of maintenance in march and using that money towards buying another seat of NX Cam. I understand the logic of this decision.

quote: Niel you have narcissistic personality for thinking CNC is going to timetable thier production schedule to fit your views of what they need to work on. I've requested CNC Software layout a timetable on when the basics that I mentioned with be dealt with by CNC Software. Intel lays out a timetable. Is there some reason you feel CNC Software can't layout a timetable on when the basics (much better selection, much better chaining, faster toolpath regeneration, much less modal user interface, etc.)will be fixed? If asking for a timetable on fixing the basics in Mastercam is having a "narcissistic personality" I can easily live with that.

quote: Wow NeilJ, you certainly have a narcissistic personality. A certain case of "me, me, me" You're certainly entitled to your opinion but keep in mind I don't try and speak for others. If that gives me a "narcissistic personality" so be it. Many of my posts focus on improvements to basic functionality in Mastercam and that's where my focus will stay.

quote: Only beta testers sticking up for them Not all Mastercam beta testers do this. I don't think all Mastercam beta testers should be judged by the behavior of a few.

Thanks Colin, thanks Doug.

Is there a way to change the surface U, V curve flow in Mastercam without creating new surfaces?

Is there anything Finish Flowline can do better than Finish Blend?

quote: My opinion is X3 is a step backwards. Where are the improvements? I don't see any major steps forward. The system needs constant screen rebuilding. Renumbering tools is a crapshoot. Sometimes the operation manager and the tool manager tool list don't reflect each other. Overall I am pretty disappointed. Well said.

quote: Is it me or has anyone else noticed that there has been no response / reply from anyone at CNC Software? Only beta testers sticking up for them. I think there should be a roadmap from CNC Software on the issues I laid out. I think CNC Software should be much more active on commenting on Enhancement Suggestions. I've made a ton of them. I think Mastercam users who use SolidWorks should be more vocal in asking for better selection tools and better chaining tools. I find it hard to believe that when Mastercam In SolidWorks is released that its chaining and selection tools won't be significantly better than stand-alone Mastercam's chaining and selection tools.

quote: Some just have more than others, a lot more. Agree and along those lines is the FACT that there is a major advantage to having a powerful integrated CAD and CAM system. Thinking along the lines of its MasterCAM not MasterCAD is a huge mistake. With powerful integrated CAD you get better selection tools, better chaining, etc. Powerful CAD tools really make for a better CAM system. Recently saw a demo of a powerful integrated system you like. One of the things that amazed me was how little chaining was actually needed.

It would be nice if a roadmap was laid out by CNC Software that detailed what release the following issues will be addressed in: 1. WCS. (It seems that X4 might be where the WCS gets redone.) 2. Rewritten Chaining that's easier and faster to use (more dynamic, less dialog boxes needed) as well as much easier to see. (shaded / solid arrows rather than thin, fuzzy and dim wireframe.) 3. A less modal user interface where Verify, Backplot, Regen, Save To Machining Operation Manager, Add or Modify a Chain, Create or change WCS could all be done while a machining Parameters dialog box is open. When you're done with any of the items the machining Parameters dialog box pops back up. 4. More robust Machining Operations Manager with support for inheritance, a red arrow that stays put, more powerful Toolpath Groups, etc. 5. Faster toolpath generation. [ 11-24-2008, 10:47 PM: Message edited by: NeilJ ]

quote: Thanks for the email John you have your response. You're quite welcome. You have a response to your response.

Response sent to Jayson Kramer by e-mail.

We feel we might as well wait for X4. We tried X3 and had nothing but problems. X3 has been a huge disappointment for us because it doesn't fix the basic functionality that we feel is much more important than new features like FBM. When I say basic functionality I'm referring to much better chaining, more powerful WCS creation and management, a more powerful and robust Machining Operations Manager and for sure a far less modal user interface. At this point all five of our seats are back running X2 MR2 SP1.

quote: The new i7's don't have a front side bus so overclocking is difficult if not limited to the $1,400 965 unit. Your comments on the links below, please: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel...aspx?i=3453&p=5 "The overclocking story with Core i7 isn't as complex as it sounded at first, fundamentally you can still clock this thing the way you did the Core 2s before it. Turbo mode and the TDP/current limitations do add some complexities, but with the flip of a BIOS switch they go away if you don't wish to bother with them. Change can be scary, but in this case there's no reason to be worried. The Core i7 appears to be just as smooth of an overclocker as the Core 2s before it. Increase the BCLK and off you go, free performance from Intel and its wonderful fabs. The split between the core and the uncore in terms of clock speed and overclocking potential doesn't appear to be that big of a deal either. The uncore runs slower on the lower end chips, but increasing its clock speed doesn't really do all that much for performance. There's a reason Intel kept the uncore running slower than the core and it doesn't look like there's much real world benefit in pushing it much higher." http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html...W50aHVzaWFzdA== [ 11-17-2008, 05:18 PM: Message edited by: NeilJ ]

quote: I can't get the tool registry to take a positive number for an offset. Did you try what I posted to you earlier in this thread? Check parameter 64. "This setting changes the way the Tool Offset Measure button works. When this is ON, the entered tool offset will be the measured tool offset plus the work coordinate offset (Z axis). When it is OFF, the tool offset equals the Z machine position."

Good machinist / CADCAM programming jobs aren't listed in the newspaper in San Diego, CA. We're very busy and will stay very busy.

F1 overwrites whatever the value is and replaces it with the value you entered.

We touch the tool height offset gage and set the dial indicator to zero and then we zero out the Distance To Go in the Haas control. Then we touch the top of the part until we zero the dial indicator and enter the number that Distance To Go now displays in the fixture offset (G54, etc.) If the part is below the tool height offset gage you get a negative Z number. If the part is higher than the tool offset gage you get a positive Z number.

I'm no Haas expert but maybe check parameter 64. "This setting changes the way the Tool Offset Measure button works. When this is ON, the entered tool offset will be the measured tool offset plus the work coordinate offset (Z axis). When it is OFF, the tool offset equals the Z machine position."