Thanks Jay, that worked. I didn't know that -1 foced a change.

Yes, it does seem like more of a warning and does work. It just isn't "clean". There was a suggestion to use a Fanuc post and force with misc. integers, what happened to the suggestion?

My part is a cylinder with small holes drilled radially around it and flats machined at various angles. The machine is a Haas with rotary axis rotating about X. I am using the generic Haas 4-axis post. The holes are drilled with a 2D toolpath with rotary positioning. I am defining the flats with toolplanes. When I post, the drills starts at G54 (correct) and drills the correct pattern. When the tool for the flats starts the post switches to the next workshift (G55) and with each subsiquent flat the workshift changes (G56). I can force G54 in parameters by changing the default work offset from -1 to 54. This does work but an alarm is generated during posting. Is there a better way to do this?

My part is a cylinder with small holes drilled radially around it and flats machined at various angles. The machine is a Haas with rotary axis rotating about X. I am using the generic Haas 4-axis post. The holes are drilled with a 2D toolpath with rotary positioning. I am defining the flats with toolplanes. When I post, the drills starts at G54 (correct) and drills the correct pattern. When the tool for the flats starts the post switches to the next workshift (G55) and with each subsiquent flat the workshift changes (G56). I can force G54 in parameters by changing the default work offset from -1 to 54. This does work but an alarm is generated during posting. Is there a better way to do this?

Thanks, now I know the "process". Is the defect number required for the selection of the chicken?

I have submitted a problem to Mastercam QC. They explained that a defect report has been logged and that my information has been added. I understand that others have experienced the same problem. What happens next? I was waiting for MU1 in hopes that the problem would be addressed.

I checked my file, tool is correct. I also deleted the tool and created a new one, and the verify is still incorrect. It will verify correctly if I do one of two things, 1) comp to tip or 2) remove all filter settings. Should I send this to QC?

Randle, I was programming to center and changed it to tip. It verifys correctly now. When set to center it verify's erratic, not just offset by cutter radius. We ususlly program to center so that we can follow the contour of a arc if needed. It worked fine in X4.

I have been working with this. I have found that if I change my surfacing filter settings ( turn off create arcs in XY, XZ and YZ ) it verifys fine. When I change the filter settings back, it appears to drive tool thru part again. Depending on tolerance settings it may obliterate entire stock in verify.

I just installed MCX5. I opened a file that I created im MCX4. The model includes surfacing a cylindrical bore. The file backplots and posts fine. I checked the NC file against the MCX4 NC file and they posted the same. My problem is when I verify. On my surface finish parrallel toolpath verify does not work correctly. It shows the tool driving thru the stock. I regenerated the file and made sure that the NCI file was saving to the correct MCX5 folder. Does anyone have any ideas? Thanks.

The X5 Transition guide notes that the CPU must be SSE2 compatable. I am running an HP dc7100CMT with a Pentium 4 3.20 GHZ and 2.50 GB Ram. I am not sure if this CPU complies. Will X5 run on this?

I am currently using X4 MU3. When I open an existing (MC9) file the Flow 5-Axis tool paths are locked and marked "Repaired NCI". If I regenerate and save they still come back the same. I did a search for this problem and found that this was addressed in MU1? I tried creating a new Flow 5-Axis tool path and it is the same. Does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks.