Hi All, On the FTP, in the X5 files folder, I have a Z2G called surface trim help. I get alot of parts like this. There will be a corner radius around the outside of the part, but the surfaces will be broken by holes that intersect the surfaces. I want to create one one surface the entire way around the part, but I'm having trouble finding the best way. The way I do it now is to basically take the wireframe geometry that represents the surface I want, join/trim the entities, and create a swept surface. I guess I'm just wondering if there is a easier way to trim two similar surfaces together...think "Join entities". Also, how does one orient the surfaces so that the flowline cut direction is uniform for multiple surfaces. For example, if I pick 3 or 4 surfaces around this part, I may get different cut directions for different surfaces. If I hit the cut direction button, they indeed switch directions, but it's impossible to ever get them to line up the same. I don't want to have to make several roughing and finishing toolpaths for pairs of surfaces.

Yup. All those ideas worked. Thanks.

All, I'm having trouble using the depth mask. I'm picking arcs around a bolt circle for drilling. I select entities in the drill dialog, then go to make my mask. I choose the "All" Mask as opposed to "Only". For parameters, I set "Arcs" under entities, and under "Miscellaneous", I choose diameter and depth. If I use the little arrow to go out and pick an arc, the diameter comes in OK, but the depth is always at 0. It should be at -.0075. The WCS and planes are both in Top. I've tried doing the "Ignore Depths" and "Plane Mask" but it doesn't work. This is X5. Thoughts?

At the top, I notice that the extension is tooldb rather than a tools-5 file. Could this be it?

We did this on our VF3 a couple years ago. We went through Haas or our reseller. they didn't just have the USB, you have to buy a whole package of USB, 40 GB hard drive, and ethernet port. Apparently the motherboard also has to be replaced, as well as the software getting upgraded. It ended up running us about 2500 bucks for all of that.

I wasn't clear in my post. I was wondering if he shunned the start hole for a toolpath like this, or for all toolpaths in general. I have no doubt that you'd lose money. I'm just wondering how one balances drilling the start hole versus having to plunge the cutter at 1 IPM so that you can make it last for more than 5 parts. In other words, what technique works best for getting an endmill into mild steel or stainless using a 2D toolpath. If I want to contour around a part to cut it out, I don't want to plunge the cutter in that slow. There is no entry motion dialog for 2D contour. I'd use ramp to cut it out, but when using ramp, the tool doesn't retract for chip clearance AND you can't use tabs. So what does one do in a situation like this?

Are you talking about a toolpath similar to this, or all toolpaths in general? Usually I drill an entry hole in stainless or mild steel for my entry moves in a 2D contour toolpath. I found that I have to plunge the tool at like 1 or 2 IPM to not bust it (even a 1/2" endmill). So, for me, it's just as easy to setup a drill and make a start hole. In pocketing, I use the entry motion. I tried the start hole toolpath, but that was a complete waste of time, IMHO. Creating new machine groups and making like 4 start holes for one toolpath was a joke.

Thanks for all the advice. I think I'm going to ramp it.

We cut alot of o-ring grooves here, and I'm just curious what everyone's method is for cutting these, specifically in stainless. The groove I'm cutting is a -134, so we're talking about a .118 wide groove by .077 deep (or so). I have the heebie jeebies of plunging a 3/32" endmill into stainless. I've done it, but even at 1 IPM, the cutter is usually shot by the end of the groove. I was thinking of doing a contour ramp with a .025 ramp depth. I'd love to hear anyone's advice. This would be on a Haas VMC with Mastercam X5.

Can't it just be changed in the control definition? Under linear in the control def, "Each axis moves at maximum feedrate independently". Unless I'm not understanding what you are wanting.

I think it has something to do with a corner radius on the insert or endmill. You could define the cutter as a smaller diameter, I suppose and it would go away, or play with the stepover.

I was in your shoes a couple of years ago. We had a Milltronics lathe that was being programmed with it's proprietary conversational nonsense. It was...how do I say this nicely...unique. So I took the reins and got everything I needed for Mastercam, and haven't looked back. There are a few differences between mill and lathe in respect to things like stock recognition, stock updates, chaining, etc. But it'll be easy for ya. You'll have to learn about a few things that may bite you (reference points for ID ops, and lead in/out) but you should be golden. This forum is a great place to ask questions.

I was aware of those. I was talking about something more like the helix dialogue on the 2D pocket toolpath.

Hi all. I use the ramp contour alot when I program. I'd looooooooooooooooooooooooooove to see an enhancement where I can use tabs with the ramp toolpath. Either that or be able to helix into a toolpath like you can in pocket. I use ramp alot whilst cutting stainless or even mild steel, because, IMHO, it saves cutters. But I have to create additional toolpaths to actually cut out the part. I can ramp down to where the tops of my tabs would be in one toolpath, then create another toolpath to finish cutting out the part using tabs. A helical entry option would be nice too, rather than plunging into the part directly. 2D contour can be a pain sometimes. It would be an extremely powerful toolpath if you could do all these things in it. Not one or the other or neither. Or maybe I'm missing something here. Can this be done? If not, I kinda wanna see if others would use it before I send in something to CNC.

Very cool video!

I just had this happen as well, but I think I know what caused it. I imported a group of operations. None of them have H or D numbers.

0 stock makes a good toolpath, but I get an error when I do it saying that I should adjust either drive or check stock to leave so that they're both not the same. It seems logical to me at that point that I would want to leave a positive amount in the check stock, but then I get that funky motion.

TK, there is no option for start point. I tried the 2D swept, but it gouges the top of the part, where the check surfaces would be. I'll give scallop a try.

All, Is there a way to set a start point for finish flowline toolpaths? I'm having a weird thing happen. If I have any positive value in my stock to leave on check surfaces, the tool starts in the middle of the surface and goes right across the part like this: If I change the stock to leave to any negative value, the tool starts and ends perfectly where I want it: I think I've gone through all the options I can, but can't find a way to change the start point. Or is there a better toolpath to do what I want? I'm simply stitching a .05 radius on the top of the part. Thanks.

I just noticed something today. I was switching tool libraries in mill, and noticed that one of my tool libraries had a nice little preview picture with it: Don't know how it happened, though.

I did take a gander at his config file, though. It's weird. The files that the default machine dialogs were pointed towards had all been updated. They all had the .mmd-5 or appropriate extension. In the config file, they were only listed with the .mmd or .lmd file name. I added a "-5" to them, reloaded that config and it worked as well.

I just made him do a new config file and that took care of the problem so far.

Greetings, I installed X5 on all my co-workers computers. I did an update of all our machine/control defs and posts once, put them on our server, and when I installed X5, I just copied those files into the appropriate (and correct) places. I, nor some of the co-workers I've spoke to, have had a problem so far. One guy is having a problem with errors when he picks the default machine. When he goes up to the menus and picks "Machine Type", then either Mill or Lathe default, he gets an error "Machine definition not valid", then when he clicks through them, he gets several of the same error about the control def not being correct for the machine, or something like that. So Mastercam automatically loads some generic file. Then, he can go in to the machine group properties, do a replace with the correct machine def, and everything is fine. Also, I have his machine type menus managed so that he can either hit default or the #1 machine def there. If he hits default, he gets an error. If he picks #1, everything is fine. So here's what I know. I am not having the problem on my system with the same machine/control def and post. The files were updated correctly. The files are in the correct location. The configuration for default machines is pointed to the right place. Any thoughts?

So what does it say in your post under your peck drill cycle? Perhaps we can do a couple of quick modifications and get you to where you want to be.

The thread tables are off. Plain and simple. I have all my thread inserts defined EXACTLY how the Kennametal book says. The amount that I have to comp varies from thread to thread. I've had to comp between .000 and .018" depending on the diameter and pitch. I had to develop my own formula for a given pitch and that gets me within .002-.003 each time.