gstephens, quote: Why?? How does Mastercam know whether you want to cut with the eside of the tool or at some (infinite number)point along the corner radius? How does MC know how to cut *anything* that you tell it. It is a CAM system and based on the information it is given...tool dia, corner radius, depth of pocket..it figures it out. quote: Are you looking for it to automatically offset based on an incremental depth from the geometry? If the pocket depth is shallower than the tool's corner radius, then yes. I expect the CAM system to cut the geometry dimensionally correct. If this is what it takes to accomplish that, that's what I expect. quote: I guess that would be nice;It is nice! Gibbscam does it and who knows what other systems do it. (Not a slam on MC). quote: however, there has been a quite acceptable workaround for a LONG time... Workaround? Only "problems" require workarounds. quote: just chain the geometry at the tangecy at the bottom of the radius, and give it a NEGATIVE xy stock to leave equal to the corner radius. Works perfectly every time, and won't require an additional type of pocket and contour toolpath.Are you sure? Have you measured it? This will only work if you have a full 90 degree radius on the edges of the pocket, i.e. a .250 deep pocket with a .250 radius. AND, if that *is* the case, there is no need to use "special" geometry or cut with negative stock. Just cut it like you normally would. With an .08 deep pocket and a .250 radius your method will not work. Some more math has to be done. This is my point. These "extra" calculations should be done by the CAM system. Either 1) How far will I have to offset the geometry so a .250 corner radius will cut an .08 deep pocket to the correct dimensions or 2) How much negative stock should I give it to cut an .08 deep pocket with a .250 corner radius to the correct dimensions? quote: I can just see trying to explain Standard/Open/Facing/Island Facing/PARTIAL CORNER RADIUS options to a bunch of people who have never run CAD/CAM before.I hear ya! Drawing a line seemed to be a bit much for some of the guys who were in *my* MC class. Thad [ 08-27-2002, 09:39 AM: Message edited by: thad ]

Andrew, My intent is not to cut an open ended pocket. If you cut a pocket that was shallower than the corner radius of your tool, then you backplotted it and verified it, you would not even give it a second thought because everything "looked" OK. But when you cut it, you'd see that it did not cut the geometry correctly. Since you cannot measure in the verify mode, I came up with this example to *show* you how it wasn't compensating. The only way that I could think of to *show* you this is to cut a pocket where one wall of the pocket shares the edge of the part. They are exactly the same plane, therefore the bottom of the pocket should be perfectly flat and the end result would look like an open pocket. But it doesn't. Thus the "radiused lip" on the edge that shares the pocket wall and edge of the part. Clearly, my way of describing this is not making sense you the readers. So, forget everything that I have said and try it. Cut a pocket in the middle of a part where the depth is less than the corner radius of your tool and then measure the pocket. The pocket will not be diminsionally correct. It will be smaller. The larger the corner radius, the smaller the pocket will be. Therefore, MC did not account for the corner radius of the tool. Period! The proof is in the pudding. Unfortunately, I'm not at work today to look at your file. Thad

Which file looks good, Rob? The original one I put up or the modified one by Andrew? Man, now I wish I wouldn't have left work early! Thad

Andrew, I'm off for the weekend now so I'll have to check it out on Monday. But just for conversation sake, if the cutter leaves any step along the edge, then it is not compensating for the corner rad. I didn't want a step. This is not a real job either. It's just the easiest way that I could show that it doesn't compensate for the corner radius. If you programmed that same toolpath with a flat bottom tool, the bullnose that I used, or even a ball nose, you'd get the same X value, as it cuts along that wall, in all 3 posted programs. That means that it isn't taking the corner radius into consideration. As another example, if you really want to put it to the test, machine a pocket of some simple nominal dimensions that is shallower than your corner radius and then measure the pocket when you're done. It will not be the correct size. It will be smaller. Do you do 3D work with bullnose cutters? Perhaps it only does this in a 2D arena. Thad

MC doesn't account for the corner radius on the tool. I have proven this by milling a pocket that is shallower than the size of the corner radius. In this instance, MC *should* compensate for the diameter of the cutter at that particular depth. On a 1.0 cutter with .25 corner radius going .08 deep, MC should *really* be compensating for a .867 dia cutter. I have uploaded a file (corner rad.mc9) to the MC9 files directory on cadcam's FTP that demonstrates this. In this file, I have a pocket in which one of it's walls shares the edge of the part. When verified in the top view, if MC compensated for the corner radius, there would be no "radiused lip" (on the wall at X0) remaining after milling. If MC doesn't take into consideration the corner radius of the tool, that is not a good thing. Thad

Am I the only one that has problems when organizing/editing my library? Here are a few examples. 1) I have ops for all of my reaming cycle. They consist of a spot drill, reamer drill, stabber, and reamer. I just went through and edited all my speeds and feeds on the reamer drill. I compressed the library and then when I called a reaming cycle up, it put the drill cycle before the spotting cycle. I had to go back to the library and change the order back. I had to do this to 14 operations! 2) When updating ops libraries from V7 to V8 and V8 to V9, I had to reorganize my ops because they got all jumbled up. The upgrade removed all my group names and mixed all the individual ops together. So instead of: *Ream .250 Spot drill for .250 Ream drill for .250 Stab for .250 Ream for .250 *Ream .312 Spot drill for .312 Ream drill for .312 Stab for .312 Ream for .312 I had: Ream drill for .312 Ream for .312 Stab for .312 Ream for .250 Spot drill for .250 Ream for .312 Spot drill for .312 Stab for .250 Not only that, but clicking on "move before" or "move after" weren't working correctly. If I wanted to move it after, I actually had to select the operation BEFORE the one I wanted it after, and select "move before." It took me almost 3 hours to put things back where they belong. 3) Then to top it all off, when I went to use the library for the first time, it had all the ops that made up the group in reverse order...ream, stab, drill, spot. Talk about a pain in the a$$. And what's up with this MC file that shows up when saving or compressing a library? It shows up during the saving/compressing and then goes back to the current file. Thad

NCUtils/Def tools/library. From here you can add new tools or edit tools. I've had strange things happen if I don't compress the library when I'm done. Same goes for operations library. Thad [ 08-22-2002, 09:25 AM: Message edited by: thad ]

Glen and Peter, I couldn't have said it better myself. I worked in a union shop for 6 weeks. That's all I could stand before I quit. $23.50 an hour, the best benefits package around, but I couldn't stand it. It was mindless work rebuilding forging dies (I was an experienced machinist), that they could have trained a monkey to do. Well, maybe not...I'm not sure the monkey could read or use a 23-24" mic. Anyway, rebuilding one die took about 4 hours. That's all they wanted done in an 8 hour shift. Believe me, even F'ing off gets old after a while. Thad

I've only been using MC for a few months and when we updated to v9, we (my boss) opted not to have our reseller come out and install it. I'm just saying that it may not be as common as you think. quote: Usually I refrain from e-mail addresses coming from @hotmail.com, @yahoo.com, etc... because these are more often than not, just e-mail boxes so they can take advantage of resources like this withouth having to divulge who they really are. It's king of like an anonymizer. James, I hope you don't refrain from helping with my questions because of my email addy. My ISP makes me use Outhouse Express (which I hate) so I don't use it...nor do I want to pay for a mail program. I set up a yahoo mail account that I can access wherever I access this forum from. If you choose not to reply, I have to live with it. I appreciate the help you have given me. Thad

Is there any reason why I *shouldn't* download and execute the patch "V9 'In House' Add-ons" dated 8-13-02 on the Patches page? Thad

Smit, Check the posted code and see if it's actually cutting an arc. I had this problem when helixing. It would cut one arc and then do a straight Z stepdown until finish depth and then finish with an arc. Even though the backplot showed a helix cut, it didn't helix. The funny thing was that I would helix a group of holes in one operation and some of them would work fine and some wouldn't. I thought it was an issue with my post because of the new 360 degree arc support with v9, and sent my post to my reseller for fixing. It was determined that it was a bug with v9 and I was advised to use linear moves (instead of output arcs) until it got fixed. This makes the file size HUGE...but it does work. Let us know if you find out anything else. Thad

quote: Water Polo is a tough sport. You ain't kiddin'...It's especially tough on the horses! Thad

Andrew, Did you try Screen, Configure, Files, File Usage, Operation Library...you select which op is your default. There you can set the path to your default. Then when you want to change libraries, it should default to the folder you set up. What other "nightmare" are you having with one of your OP files? Thad

I'm not aware of a default that can be set...but I am a new MC user. I have various OP9 files in one directory and MC remembers where I was last. So when I want to change to a different library, I click "change library" and I'm already there. Does this work for you? You should be able to put your OP9 files where ever you want, access them once and then MC will remember where they are. Is this what you were asking for? Thad [ 08-14-2002, 03:48 PM: Message edited by: thad ]

This recent thread discussed a similar issue. Perhaps it will help? http://www.emastercam.com/cgi-bin/ultimate...ic;f=1;t=003605 Thad

Thanks for the replies. Got it figured out. It was the "nut on the handle." Thad

Does anyone have any suggestions on importing files from Unigraphics? Here is our situation. The detail is designed as a solid in UG, then converted to IGES for me to import. I'm using mill level 1 so I can't read in the solid (or surfaces?) so I just get 3D wire frame. The geometry comes in skewed and generally, just kind of a mess. Actually, since I'm only doing 2D programming, having the 3D wire frame is kind of clutter. The 2D files that I'm using now (until we transition into UG across the board) seem to work out just fine. Our designer is looking into it on the UG end, and I thought I'd pick your brains also. I believe the chook costs a couple grand and I'm not sure if we'd benefit from it anyway since I only have mill level 1. Any comments? Thad [ 08-14-2002, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: thad ]

I was pretty sure that you could purchase an offline version of Haas Quick Code. I did a Google search for, yup...you guessed it...Haas Quick Code, and this was the first hit. http://shop.store.yahoo.com/espritaddin/eas015.html Good luck. Thad

Thanks for the reply Scott. Did you happen to look at the file or just recall this from memory? The reason I ask is because the ruffing path seems to work fine but the finish is noticeably offset. Could it be because of the different directions of cut? I just flip flopped the along and across chains. The ruff cuts lengthwise and then the finish laces. Being limited to mill level 1, I'd like to get this figured out. Thad [ 08-08-2002, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: thad ]

I was playing around with a swept toolpath and I can't figure out why I can't finish the angle or rad with a bullnose cutter. It seems to ruff it alright but when viewed from the side (or end), it stays off the shape. A ball works fine. I uploaded the file (sweep.mc9) to cadcam's FTP. It's in the V9 folder. I'm using mill level 1. Thad

Randy, I just upgraded to v9 myself. It will install to a different folder (mc9) so you'll have the 2 different version installed separately. Actually, I have 7, 8 and 9. You will need to run the updatePST9 chook to update your posts. You'll also have to update your tool and operations libraries. At the end of the install (before it prompts to reboot), you will be asked if you want to use your v8 settings. I said yes, but it didn't seem to work. I must've done something wrong because I had to change my settings myself. Thad [ 08-05-2002, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: thad ]

Thanks for the excellent reply Roger! You just saved my butt. Not too many resellers open at 6 AM on Monday morning. Thad

Eric, Is this the type of ramp that you're looking for (minus the angled walls)? If it is, I'll give you more info on it. There is a file on Cadcam's FTP in the V8 folder called EricRamp.mc8. Thad

Just got v9 yesterday. Only mill level one. For 2D machining only...it does the job! Thad

That's exactly what I was asking, Jay. Thanks...again! Thad