Register now to participate in the forums, access the download area, buy Mastercam training materials, post processors and more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Use your display name or email address to sign in:
thanks for the response mkd. i too think that its the collision avoidance that he is talking about.
we did ask for the machine model from mazak if we do decide to go with them. we will meet with
vericut tommorow morning.
thanks again mkd,
jesse.
good morning fine gentlemen,,
I need your help people. we are looking into adding a 5 axis machine into our shop. I understand what we need for this machine.
including true g code machine simulation. we are looking into a Mazak i500 with the smooth control and the matsuura mx-520. if we go with mazak
were gonna look into adding vericut. we're going to meet with a matsuura sales rep in a couple of days.
the support in this area from Mazak is very limited, so we already know what were getting into with Mazak. as far as I know the support
from yamazen for the matsuura is better than mazaks. i'm pushing for matsuura, but at the end of the day the boss will make
the final decision. another plus for the matsuura is that it has camplete truepath package.
I read a lot of info here on the forum of matsuura users saying that camplete comes standard, but it almost sounds like it's an added option now.
we will find out Friday. the boss told the Mazak guy about the matsuura camplete package, and the guy told the boss that Mazak has software for that too.
as far as I know, I don't think Mazak offers that unless its something else that i'm not aware of, but I wanted to ask if anyone knows if Mazak offers any
kinf of g code simulation for the their smooth control that I haven't heard of.
thanks for any feedback guys.
jesse
same here. I used to use R's also, then started to have problems with holes and corner radius. i would run the original hole size (7.285) using ijk, and see what happens.
the worst that can happen is you're gonna cut a hole to size, cause now the hole is undersize using r values.
most of time preference is not up to the operator/machinist. it's what ever the machine likes.
pcrobotic, I admire the passion you have on learning. I too love learning, and also spend a lot of time and money on training. I took colins class on post editing also.
but that was for my own benefit to better understand posts, and make small edits. I let our reseller do the more complicated post edits. when ever I need a post edit I go see the big boss, and explain
to him what's in it for him. it sounds lilke you work for a really shi@y company, that doesn't support and appreciate what you're doing for them.
sometimes when I upgrade to latest version of mastercam, there is some adjusting needed.
once I set it up properly I don't see any big enough issues to go back to the previous
version. I'm currently using x9, and so far it's working really well for me.
dang, didn't even realize it was gone. used to use this for positioning my operations for stock, but stopped using
it when I started to use stock models
as a matter of fact I'm working on a manifold now, and I do the same.i copy my solid to another level ,then convert to surfaces, and delete
the face that's keeping me from seeing all the cross holes. for me this works the best.
if your talking about a double angle dovetail cutter, Harvey tool would be the place to look.
http://www.harveytool.com/prod/Double-Angle-Shank-Cutters/Specialty-Profiles/Browse-Our-Products_196/Double-Angle-Shank-Cutters_210.aspx
eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.
Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.