I posted this elsewhere, but I know there are some REALLY capable guys on this forum, so... I've done some C-axis programming, but nothing fancy. I have a job that I programmed from the center of a 7/32 inch ball mill. No tool comp. Set-up person has to subtract .109 for Z-axis and .218 for X-axis after touch off. He didn't even tho it says to in 3 separate places in the header. Okay then, I'll just subtract these values from the program. Easy enough, right? Wrong! Z-axis works, of course, but the X-axis is close only on the C0 slot. It cuts too much off both sides, tho not equally. The other 3 slots are way off, and, in fact, the 180 slot doesn't cut any chips. Why??? Obviously I am not understanding something that is basic to those familiar with C-axis programming. As I'm thinking about it, the thought occured to me that maybe I should have added .218 instead of subtracting on the 180 degree slot. Problem is the zero degree slot didn't come out right either. I modified program back to the original figures, and job is now running. I'd like to understand how to program it from the sides of the tool so the set-up person doesn't have to remember to move the offsets. (I realized too late that I should have left the Zs alone so only X-axis would need an offset. Easy to change, tho.) Since this is the Mastercam forum I should add that this isn't laid out in lathe. We didn't have any live tooling posts at that time, and in fact don't have a working one yet.

Thank you Mr. M!!!

How do I make an edit of something I just posted? I see I left the 'o' out of important, but don't know how to edit once I het the Add Reply.

BBprcise is correct. Make sure you turn on corner break. Another very imprtant item is to change the default angles. I use 179 and 1. Otherwise there will be times you won't get a radius. However, you probably already know that as it is the same in v9.

Wow, Paul, that was fast. Never expected to hear anything back for another couple weeks. Yup, the last tool is the only one with Mist and Thru-tool grayed out. How would I go about fixing it? Or will I know once I hear from the reseller? I have at least 2 other posts with the same problem. Thanks for the speedy reply. Must admit it was totally unexpected. A very pleasant surprise. I sent them another email today. G76 thread cycle puts out 60 for the compound infeed regardless of the value. Same post.

for the cut-off tool. New Hardinge posts won't put out M13 except for cut-off tool. Coolant is on in machine definition, tool definition, operation, & in edit common parameters. Reseller has sent a zip file to MC, but I thought I'd see if anyone else had this problem before. Older Hardinge posts work fine. Have to try reloading MC yet. My reseller rep said the NCI file isn't putting a command out to turn the coolant on. He showed me how to modify the settings to make it put out an M8. I'd rather do a global substitution latter as I already have a macro set up to do this. (Change M3's to M13s.) He thinks I may have a corrupted definition file. I wasn't involved in setting up the definition files when we switched to X, so if this is a possibility, I would need step-by-step instructions on how to do it. Thanks a bunch.

I think it might be you. Are you changing finish direction from OD to FACE? Compensation direction from RIGHT to LEFT? That should take care of it.

The Trojan and spyware on my home computer must be the problem. Works fine here at work. Thanks.

Hmmm. What am I missing? Can't make it do anything.

You lucky dog!!! Are the girls as beautiful as the countryside there? We have a 9 day Musikfest next month. Always hot, but I've never had a girl ask me to rub anything on her back. Wonder if it is because not only am I a lot older than you, but not nearly as good looking either. I have to be satisfied with looking. Boohoo. I will be out Monday and Tuesday on vacation. Spending some time with my grandsons. Wife wants to spend a day at the Franklin Institute, and I would like to spend one at the Philadelphia Zoo. Time to dig the 35 SLR out of the mothballs. Wonder if I can carry that and the digital without having a heart attack.

He didn't do a transform. He had to make a settings change somewhere. Now none of the posts will output a canned turning cycle on his computer. I do thank you for that little tidbit of information. Knowing it could come in handy. When he backplots and verifies, it puts a nice chamfer on the rear diameter. There isn't one. Only on the front diameter. When the tool finishes the front chamfer it cuts up to the retract point of the previous pass (cutting air). I can't post his file on my computer either, but all the old files and a new test file run perfect with any post I try on my computer. What is he going to lose if he reloads Mastercam? All his tool and material files?

Phil, no I haven't. Wouldn't know how to start. Could you give me a little more detail on how to do it? And, yes, I am also pretty anal about how my programs look. Did some part-time programming for another company. Their programmer could only use MC. He didn't know how to manually program. The set-up guy told me he much preferred my programs. They were much easier to follow.

Okay, not a post problem. Other programmer must have changed a setting somewhere. I can call up an older file, and the canned cycle will post. Use the same post on the new file, and it won't post the canned cycle. Any ideas?

Reseller is working on my problem, but maybe between us we can have the post fixed before they do. This is the output I am looking for. N1G54M98P877 (RUN 1ST PART) M54 (PART COUNTER) M1 N2G55M98P877 (RUN 2ND PART) M54 (PART COUNTER) M1 N3G56M98P877 (RUN 3RD PART) M54 (PART COUNTER) M1 N4G57M98P877 (RUN 4TH PART) M54 (PART COUNTER) M1 N5G58M98P877 (RUN 5TH PART) /M54 (PART COUNTER) /M99 M30 This is what I am getting with the post. G0G54X.7134Z.02 M98P0001 M92 M1 G54X.7134Z-.116 M98P0002 M92 M1 G54X.7134Z-.252 M98P0003 M92 M1 G54X.7134Z-.388 M98P0004 M92 M1 G54X.7134Z-.524 M98P0005 M92 /M54 (PART COUNTER) /M99 M30 Obviously I only need one subprogram. The finish operations on the part are being repeated 5 times. Just as obvious is the fact that I can't use G54 for all 5 parts. Nor can I use the X.7134Z-*** although I always give the Z work coordinates in the header for the setup person. Not so obvious is the fact that the M92 is going to cause a crash. It calls up a safe index subprogram for internal tools. First thing it does is rapid to Z.5. Not a good thing without an offset being in affect. Wasted time if an offset was in affect.

Drill and Thread canned cycles are posting. Rough turn canned cycle isn't. I just changed all the parameters given in an ealier thread by Mr. Paul Decelles. Made sure the pmatrix_su was okay. Also tried adding the c1_ as indicated. (Transform ops paramater only) was not turned on in the file section of the control def., so I turned it on. All the lathe canned cycles are turned on in the control def. manager. I have an idea that it might not be in the post. If he needs something done in the post, he comes to me. However, he does setup the control and machine def. to his liking and is more familiar than I with most of its intricacies. Thanks for any help.

Phil & axela, you posted while I was typing up my reply. I have to admit that your remarks are probably right on. Awful hard for me, tho, to break old habits. Those habits are probably why X2 is still giving me fits at times. I do appreciate all the help I have been getting. This is the first place I turn to for any questions on MC. Even before emailing our reseller. Usually get a quicker answer, too!

quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is one of the major reasons that we use MC for turning as well. I have 1980 Mori-Seiki lathes and 2005 Okuma lathes and a variety in between, so MC works great if I need to move jobs around. I can create a program for a different machine in seconds using MC and know that it is correct, where manual editing requires a lot more concentration and time to get this done. When I first started using MC at V8 I would get VERY frustrated because I had many an episode of fighting with the software to machine a simple feature like the one you're doing; It would take an hour to make a finish toolpath when I could've programmed the whole job in 15 minutes. Now that I have the workarounds and little glitch fixes burned into my brain, I am at least as productive with MC as I was with the pad of paper and pencil. MC has also eliminated all of the typos and screwups that had our guys single-blocking every program the first time through and I think it is well worth the time investment; I know it sucks now but you'll be glad when you have it mastered. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, I make the occasional typo. Refuse to admit how often. We have one Okuma, but I am not the one programming for it unless the other programmer is on vacation. I couldn't manually modify to the Okuma from our other lathes faster than using MC. Canned cycles in particular are too different. Nor do I normally program for the EMAGs which also require a lot of changes. However, much of my program changes are between Hardinge lathes and Daewoo lathes of various models or between lathes of the same make but different models that might require minor changes. All use Fanuc controls. I have macros set up in the editor. Click on the macro icon, click on the desired change, click ok. No typing. Very fast. I do like the fact that I don't have to worry about typos causing a crash, or alarming because I missed a code or something. I like my programs to be as clean as possible. I can get very close with MC, but it takes a lot longer to achieve. We make a lot of studs for a sister company. Almost all have at least one under-cut at a shoulder. These in particular require lots of modifying, regenerating, re-posting, remodifying, regenerating, re-posting, etc. since I rough these out for the same reason I rough .015 x 45 degree or larger back chamfers as in the part we have been discussing. That is because most times the finish looks like crap if I don't.

Heavychevy: No problem doing it with 2 ops, but that is not what I want. Phil: Am not using a canned cycle for one pass. I did not use the Add line function before tho I did extend the line by .007. I've done it before, but don't know how to accurately do that with this part so I extended the geometry the desired amount, put an arc tangent at the end point (size of tool radius), created a 90 deg. tangent line, trimmed the vertical and 45 degree line, rechained geometry to include the new lines. It machined the rear chamfer, but not in one shot. I can accomplish the same thing without adding the line. See program example. Stock was defined to include 5 parts plus a little extra. axela: That is basically what I want except my chamfer is small enough to be done in one shot. See comments to Phil. This is the output I am looking for, and can get with Lathe Finish Toolpath (minus the F.008): X.7134Z.02 G1X.798Z-.0223F.005 Z-.0787 X.7458Z-.1048F.002 X.82F.008 This is what I get with the Lathe Rough Toolpath: X.7141Z.0208 G1Z.0196F.005 X.798Z-.0223 Z-.0787 X.7978Z-.1048F.002 X.872F.005 G0X.922 Z-.0787 X.798 G1X.7458Z-.1048F.002 X.82F.005 End result is the same, but 11 blocks vs. 5 blocks. Not nearly as pretty either!

Edit of previous post. Should say "If I eliminate the front chamfer from the geometry, Lathe Rough Toolpath with stock recognition turned off works correctly.

Phil: Disabling stock recognition did and didn't work which I will explain in a minute. We also tried an .008R insert. Also tried a test part with .100 x 45 degree chamfers, & it still wouldn't run right. Extended contour by .05, but didn't add an extra line. Still no go. Chris: See above regarding TNR. So far I like v9 better myself, but I can see that X2 has advantages. Just need to learn it like I know v9. Reason I have to do all programs in MC is because we have several makes of lathes. Powers that be want every part in MC so we only need to run a different post. I can manually modify from one machine to another faster than doing it in MC. Prosin Molds: Don't see how it can be my tool definition or the 3 degree clearance angle as it runs perfect if I use Lathe Finish instead of Lathe Rough. Phil, I accidently made a discovery this morning. If I eliminate the front chamfer from the geometry, Lathe Rough Toolpath with stock recognition works correctly. Add the front chamfer back in, and poop. Other programmer just came to me with more information. His finding is that you can only use Lathe Rough Toolpath in one direction. Can't machine going up, turn OD, and switch direction by going back down. This reinforces what I accidentally found out this morning. Lathe Finsh Toolpath doesn't care if the tool switches directions. That is the way to go. Much less headache.

axela: The Plunge parameters are set correctly. I always use the 2nd from left option for finishing. Had them set up that way as default in v9 to save time. Like I said before, I've done next to nothing with the X2 settings yet.

Stock was defined. We had a rep in for 2 days (separated by about 3 weeks) early this year. Had him in last year for a couple days, but never got to use MC at that time because our posts weren't set up for X. We run them off a company wide server instead of off our C-drive. Couldn't get them to update to the server. That has been solved, but many of our posts are still not where they need to be. Some old ones couldn't be used in X because of their age. Wouldn't update properly. You and one or two others helped me get some of them running much better, but we still don't have live tooling or subspindle posts set up right yet. I admit to not using Mastercam as much as I should (or the company would like) as I prefer manual programming. Always before I would run a finish pass...leaving extra for finishing...and c/p it into my program. Remove the extra stock allowance, regenerate, and re-post it again for my finish pass. Cut-and-paste that. I have been asked to do all my programming in MC. Thus I am running into problems I never had before. One thing holding us back is that we were not using X2 until this year even tho we were upgraded to X when it first came out. Post problems are one reason we didn't bother using X. Not having enough training is another reason. Would you like to try this simple part, and see if the Lathe Rough toolpath works for you? .799/.785 OD, .655/.650 ID, .070/.068 thick, .015 x 45 degree typical on all 4 corners. 13/16 inch material. Rough OD leaving .005 on X and Z with 35 degree tool. Does it rough machine the rear OD chamfer for you? I personally feel at the moment that this is a Mastercam problem. The other lathe programmer programs using MC only. He couldn't get it to work either when using the Lathe Rough Toolpath.

Simple part. Want to rough turn including rear OD chamfer. Lathe Rough Toolpath won't work. Have to select Lathe Finish Toolpath. Why? Is it a Mastercam problem? Or are my settings wrong? Settings are as downloaded. I've made only minor changes per reseller & hints from the fine gentlemen on this forum. Most changes I made were to the posts. I think this may be why I had the problem mentioned in the earlier thread I made today. I had used the Rough Toolpath.

already made a good post. Copied output only to realize that, although I had re-turned the thread, I had forgotten to re-thread. Went back and copied the thread cycle after re-turning. Changed 1200 SFM to 4500 RPM on some of the 1st operations. Regenerated. Alarm. What...? Finish turning tool also roughed in the relief behind the thread. Finish op. ran fine, but rough op. no longer was machining the 45 deg. on the backside of the relief. Couldn't see anything wrong. Redefining the geometry didn't help. Sought help from other lathe programmer after running out of patience. He uses MC much more than I. He couldn't get it to run right until trying someting that I NEVER would have tried. He shut off overlap, regenerated, turned overlap back on, regenerated. It worked. I wanted to know if just turning the overlap off and on without regenerating would work, so I tried it on my computer. (We had been working on his to see if it made a difference in the output.) Didn't work. Have to turn off overlap, regenerate, turn it back on, and regenerate for the output to be correct. Why? More importantly, is there a setting that will keep this from happening again?

Thanks Mr. Gilchrist. It worked. Does this mean that I have to keep that beautiful field full of sunshine, and sky of wispy clouds, as my wallpaper?