Sorry, the link should have been: http://www.celeritive.com/company-news.htm Thanks,

I am happy to report that the lawsuit between Celeritive and Surfware has been dismissed. For the formal statement, please visit our website at http://www.celeritive.com/company-news.htm. Also note on our News and Events page that we have released VoluMill 3.0, which includes VoluMill for 3-axis roughing, and several enhancements to our 2-axis product. Thanks,

Neurosis, There are a couple of settings you should know about when machining titanium (or other hard materials) with VoluMill. Be sure to check the “Side-mill only” checkbox at the lower-right of the “VoluMill parameters” dialog. This will ensure that no slot milling takes place anywhere in your toolpath. Then, as an option, you may want to check the “Side-mill stepover” box in the “Slot-mill/side-mill overrides” frame. This will allow you to enter a smaller stepover value to be used in the tighter areas of your part, such as when working into corners, necks, and other narrow areas. I used .025 in this example, based on the.035 stepover you mentioned in your post. This is an example only. Using this option will lessen the load that would otherwise be in play in the tighter areas of your part. We have found that values in the neighborhood of 1/2 to 2/3 of your main stepover to work well in materials such as 17-4, 15-5, and 304 stainless. For softer materials such as aluminum, it is usually not necessary to override your main stepover.

Thanks. Please tell Steve I said "hello." I'll be speaking at Cimtech's Tech Expo up your way on August 5. Will you be attending?

Thanks for the support, Colin. Perhaps starting a new thread for VoluMill is the right thing to do. Have you had a chance to try VoluMill yet? Thanks again,

Thanks for the comment, CNC Apps Guy 1. We use software security, much like SolidWorks.

quote: I tried Surfcams Truemill, X4's dynamic mill and the free trial version of Volumill. They all produced a good toolpath but the Surfcam still looked a little better and more consistent. I would still have to give the slight advantage to Surfcam because of the different ways you can chain the geometry. You can chain a single closed chain as partially either part geometry or Material(stock). Just to be clear, VoluMill supports any combination of part boundaries and material boundaries. But since VoluMill is a Mastercam C-hook, we are limited to the chaining options in the SDK, which do not support a closed chain that is partially part-boundary and partially material-boundary. It seems that this is not possible even with a native Mastercam toolpath; but we absolutely needed VoluMill to handle such conditions, so we decided to “brute force” it. The options for defining material boundaries in VoluMill are in the “Material boundaries defined by:” frame at the lower left of the VoluMill parameters dialog. If the open shape you want to machine can be defined like a Mastercam open pocket (where the system connects the two ends of an open chain with a straight line), select an open chain of geometry and choose the “Open chains” radio button in the above frame. If the material boundary you need to specify is more complicated than that, choose the “Levels” radio button instead. But first you’ll need to do one thing: Prior to picking the VoluMill icon from your toolbar, move the geometry elements that will be material boundaries to a different level from the geometry elements that will be part boundaries. Then pick the VoluMill icon and select all of the geometry that you need for the toolpath. On the “VoluMill parameters” dialog, push the “Part/Material levels…” button. A list will be displayed showing all of the levels on which exists geometry you selected for this toolpath. All levels will default to “Part” geometry. Select the level(s) containing your material boundary elements (it helps to name the level(s) appropriately) and push the “Material” radio button. Close the “Level mappings” dialog, make sure all of the other VoluMill parameters are set as desired, and generate the toolpath. Using this option enables you to generate VoluMill toolpaths for any possible geometric configuration, including an unlimited number of islands. In our next release, VoluMill 3.0, due out later this month, we have added another option whereby you can specify material-boundary elements by setting their line style to dashed. This release also introduces the 3-axis version of VoluMill. If (or when) CNC Software adds support for selecting multiple chains with different attributes, we will be able to use that capability and these methods will no longer be necessary. I apologize for the mini training session, but those of you using or evaluating VoluMill may not be aware of this capability.

Hi Kevin, We would love to create a VoluMill plug-in to CATIA V5. Not all companies are as progressive as CNC Software, however, in encouraging 3rd party development of applications to increase the productivity of their customers. Consequently, I can't give you a firm timeframe as to when this might be available.

I am a co-founder of Celeritive Technologies, Inc., the creators of VoluMill. I hope I can accurately address some of your questions and comments. It is true that Surfware has filed a lawsuit against Celeritive, but we believe the lawsuit is without merit. We have countersued and are defending ourselves vigorously. The judge has already denied Surfware's motion for a preliminary injunction, we recently received what we consider to be a very favorable construction of the patent claims, and we are preparing to move for summary judgment. We expect to prevail, but in any case, we have strong financial backing and are not going away. From the technology standpoint, we believe that TrueMill and VoluMill are completely different. As is well known, TrueMill controls the angle of engagement between the cutting tool and the material. It generates a toolpath that never exceeds the specified angle regardless of the shape of the part. VoluMill does not do that. It controls the volume of material being removed in cubic units per minute (hence the name VoluMill). It generates a toolpath that keeps the material removal rate (MRR) at or below a known value regardless of the shape of the part. From the marketing perspective, TrueMill does not run inside of Mastercam, whereas VoluMill most certainly does. As for Adaptive Clearing, we have seen many videos, but we have not had the opportunity to machine anything with it firsthand. We could get a trial version and run some tests on our own, I suppose, but we believe that such comparisons are only worthwhile when experts at both systems are present to diagnose any problems and fine tune the toolpaths. If anyone experienced with Adaptive Clearing is interested, we would be happy to conduct a comparison with you. This is ultimately the best way to determine which technology is most appropriate for any given shop anyway. We do have Mastercam X4, however, and plan on conducting some on-machine tests soon, naturally with a Mastercam expert involved. Regarding some of the other comments in this thread, I respectfully suggest that everyone should be careful in comparing the performance of various toolpath technologies based on what they look like on the screen. Toolpath science is a tricky business, and differences that may be almost imperceptible on the screen can result from the use of completely different technology and have dramatic impact on the shop floor. On-machine performance is what counts – reduced cycle times and increased tool life.