Thanks Dave, you could very well be right. However we currently have all common resource files, including the Tool Library stored and shared on the network. If anything then it must be just the FBM that is the problem.

We are finally trying to take advantage of FBM milling. We are using X3-MU1. I am trying to setup some base parameters within "Config/Operation Defaults". I expand the FBM Mill Folder and click on the Parameters Icon. When I do I get the following message: File does not exist. C:MCAMX3.....(and goes on to describe a partial network path to which it should be pointing at). The file it says it cannot find is our Tool Library. The problem is the first part of the path. It should be pointing at: F:Production.....then the rest of what currently follows would be correct. The tool library works fine in all other operations. Am I missing something somewhere? I have looked thru the config and Machine definition a couple times to see if I missed a key setting somewhere, but can't find anything. Is this a bug in X3 FBM?

It was an IPT (part) file I was attempting to open. Also the powers that be (here) won't grant us (programmers) full access to the Vault. We only get read rights.

We are currently on X3 MU1 and trying to open Autocad Inventor 2009 files. Previously we have been able to open these files. The only thing that has changed is we are now using Autocad Vault. I do know that we cannot access the files directly from the Vault via MC. So we save them to an accessible location. Then after trying to open the file I get the following error messages: 1st Error: In order to read Autodesk Inventor files, you must have Inventor or Inventor View (Design Tracking) installed. 2nd Error: Cannot find ACIS solid data Inventor file Both errors come up when making the attempt to open, and after saying OK to the first one the second then pops up. I am at a loss as to what to do. We have Inventor View 2009 installed. Is there a different version with Design Tracking that we need? Am I missing something else altogether?

Just a couple thoughts to throw into the mix here. For the guys with 64 bit OS, try installing the 32 bit version of MC, it may be slightly counter-productive, but I don't think it will make that much of a difference in overall performance. Another possibility for the errors that are popping up is that it could be related to specific motherboard chipsets and/or processors. I know that's not as common a problem these days, but still a possibility.

I agree with qwerty. It sounds like the system is seaching then saying "well I can't find it anywhere else, so this must be it". Check all your file "mapping" in the config. We have a similar config here. The only difference being that we did not map the resources as a drive letter. I simply made sure that everyone was pointing everything to the proper folders on the server. We had a few minor hiccups when we switched from X2 to X3 as I had set up separate folders for the X3 resources. But after checking and making a few corrections al is good.

Kannon, Thanks for the assist. Your solution worked great. Done with the first file now and starting on the second.

ooops....sorry....it's in X3 files

Ok...after having a brain fart by trying to get to the FTP via IE...I woke up and got there thru explorer and uploaded a file called 500-tran-nb-port.mcx The green lines that project thru the surface need to be trimmed at the surface intersection.....HELP!!

Sorry, can't project a point to the surface for trimming. I was going to upload the file to the FTP but I can't get in at the moment as I don't remember the userID and pw for it.

I've been looking for it, with no luck. Is there a way to trim lines at the intersection of a surface? I know the reverse exists.

There are a lot of C-hooks for X3 on the FTP site.

I have had this happen too. It has to do with where you have the "Insert Arrow" (the red arrow in the ops manager). If you have it positioned above all other Tool Groups and below the current Machine Group it will create a new Tool Group the next time you try to create a toolpath. If you position the Arrow below a tool group you won't have that problem.

For those of you who are Beta testers of X4, I have one simple question. Does X4 have backwards compatibility with X3? Let me clarify that. Backwards in native format without having to "Save As". As most know, that was a problem jumping to X3 from X2 and still having active seats of X2 or sharing with others who were still on X2.

If that is a 3D model, just take one of the full arcs and rotate it about the North/South axis. If ALL of the "arcs" are made up with short line segments I fail to see why the 3 point arc command won't work to place at least one arc and then rotate copies.

You have to specify a "from" and "to" folder for each one that you import from. Look in your other folders to see if it went somewhere else.

Can anyone tell me if there are any X3 advanced traing classes offered anywhere? My local MC Dealer only offers basic. I've been usuing MC for more than 2 years now. I have no problem with the basics and even some of the advanced features, but I'm sure there is a lot more I can do. Looking for someone who can show me first hand how to use some of the different commands, tips, tricks, shortcuts, etc....

Thanks gcode, that solves my confusion.

Hoping for a quick and simple response on this. While browsing thru Mastercam's website and checking the Download section, there is a file called: Direct Conv. - Mastercam X3 Direct for Autodesk® Inventor What is the difference between that and this: X3 Translator Update - AutoDesk Inventor View 2009 (x86 and/or x64)

I agree completely!! (+2) quote: How about fixing the bugs before adding new features. ummm.....that would be 5 hundred thou's not mill's quote: so you want verify to show a .00005" (50 millionths of an inch) change on the radius? btw....EXCELLENT idea starting a wish list now for X5 !!

Check your "Control Definition Manager" settings under the heading of "Arc" and see if you are set for full or broken arc output. You must also be certain your machine controller can handle full arc output, as some can't. You can also try using the "Spiral" option (assuming you have a full circle) to create your toolpath. This should also give you "one way" cutting as you desire.

Everybody else seems focused on HST, but since you never mentioned it in your question.... If my guess is right, what you want to do is go into: >Settings then >Control Definition Manager then select >Operation Defaults. From there go into the various types of operations that you perform (contour, pocket, etc.). Go thru the tabs & buttons just like you are creating your operations, but remember that anything you enter in there right now will be your defaults each time you invoke any given op you set things for.

If none of the other suggestion help speed up Verify, try this....before you start the verify simulation, zoom in on a small area of the part. Then start the verify, it should go much faster then. I do this when I have very large complex programs that I verify. When you see that it is at 100% zoom out and view your results. HTH

Has anyone else encountered this? ver. X3MU1 Router L3 with solids When starting a series of chains for one operation, I typically select the "Window" option on the chaining menu first. Then I will select either continuous or partial chain (still in the same operation). The problem is that when I switch to continuous or partial AFTER window I almost always get the response that the chain has a disconnect somewhere and the op fails. What I have found is that if I select continuous or partial FIRST (and without any kind of modification to the chain) it creates the toolpath without any problems and it also allows me to then finish my selections with window as needed. Is this a known bug? Anyone else have this problem?

Why not have them send you their post? Then you can send them usable G-code. After that you can save as the older version (without toolpaths) for them. Send both files (code & mcx) and if they have a problem they can re-do the toolpaths only on the ones that need it.