quote: Dood, i have found tht Real player installs way to much stuff and that it bogs down the computers. No kidding. Real Player's invasive-ness is about as bad as I've seen! If anybody is into converting lp's to cd's, here is a pretty good program, pretty darn technical,anybody who plays with Mcam will probably dig it!

quote: you need slicks to wrap around a 45 mph corner at 120 mph. and knee pucks!

The solids added onto level 1 really opens up alot of different avenues, for not a lot of $$$. Solid drawing, file importing, toolpath selecting, etc. Level 1 becomes alot more flexible with solids.

P.S. I also pride myself in studying, training, experimenting, and really knowing "how and why", especially of mcam.... I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate in my original post.

quote: There is definately going to be a huge market for automation of this type, but there will also always be a need to do something out of the ordinary, which is where the human intervention and control comes into play +1000 There was a Modern Machine Shop article recently about all sorts of interest in feature recognition (Gibbs,etc.), and basically how with little knowledge, folks would be able to program parts.... THAT sounds scary. I pride myself in doin' time cranking handles on manual machines, and feel that kind of knowledge is crucial to making a good machinist.

Howdy folks, I just attended a little presentation/lunchon on the Cimco HSM package at my dealer. I know there's been a bunch of talk about it here, but just thought I'd add my 2 cents and ask a few questions. - As someone learning surface machining (as you can tell by some of my other recent questions!), I found the HSM package to be a sort of "feature recognition" machining. The variables and decisions that the programmer makes are much more limited than traditional surface machining. Just point it to the part and let it rip...it figures it's own retracts, clearance, checks, etc. without user definition....interesting that it first generates a STL, then works from that for tool movement. So, is this system indicative of the future of surface machining?..user needs to know a lot less, software takes alot more control. Drastically reduces the learning curve, and certainly the amount of knowledge and decisions needed. Akin to going from DOS to GUI/Windows, of a sort. I guess that is what technological progress is all about, however it comes at the price of really knowing the nuts and bolts! Just my 2 cents...

Thx for the info everyone. Grinding the relief makes the most sense... I could swear that there was some sort of "shank protection" feature somewhere, in which you could actually define the tool shape. Maybe folks who use "lollipop" (or undercutting) style cutters have some tips? Oh, well.

How do y'all deal with tiny tools? In specific, I've got a .0312 ball end mill with of course a .125 shank. Flute length is .200, and then it tapers up to the .125 shank.... I want the thing to cut at some depths well beyond the flute lengths but not crash the larger shank into the walls (again). Custom draw tool profile on seperate level? But then how do you define what is the cutting edge, and what is the tapered shank? What a great thing the forum is....I leave work with a problem, come back in in the morning, and it will be solved! Thanks in advance everyone! I hope that I can return the help someday, too.

+1 everyone, I think the best support for Mastercam is an UN-monderated, UN-censored forum...just like the one we have here! Putting something (in this case software) unprotected from the public's firing line is the way to show true strength. Let it take the punches that come this way, that's how true strength and resilency are proven- in an un-censored and un-biased environment! As for our bandwidth comsumption and forum maintaince: heck, I'd buy a shirt, mug, or whatever if a couple bucks of the sale went to keeping the forum OURS!

Ha! quote: Get you some 2lb foam I just was down in the shop running my program on some old 10lb foam, probably just as you were posting! Thanks for the tips. I ran some parallel rough toolpaths with a .250 ball, then finish parallel with a .250 tool, then finish with a .125 tool, then a .0625. All the while decreasing my stock to leave. Worked pretty good, however the .125 tool got a bit buried in some tight spots that the .250 did'nt hit. I've been playing with some roughing restmill paths using the .125, trying to get some of the stock out that the .250 left. THEN going to some finish passes with the .125. Make sense? Any other secondary roughing passes recommended? Running the parallel surface paths "across" the shape, and setting the filter at 1:2, I am getting some beautiful arc moves.. I'm just experimenting with this project learning these surfaces moves, luckily I can play on a machine at night. thx

I've got it going pretty good here (finally).. I'm gonna cut some foam tonite, and see what she looks like. thx for the interest everyone. If I'm not embarrassed by the results, I show y'all the outcome.

Ok, I am COMPLETLY obsessed with my little project here. I downloaded the trial version of Rhino, (and it's a very slick program). Opened my .stl with it, oriented and scaled, then "draped" a surface over it...saved as both a parasolid and an IGES, and opened both pretty darn good in Mastercam. However do to my limited surfacing experience, I'm not real sure what's happening now.... Each file is pretty darn large (9mb), but is comprised of just one (1) solid. Alternatly using IGES format, it's just one NURBS surface. I can't even run a simple 2-d contour around the thing without either Mastercam hanging, or giving me "invalid memory allocation" error. I've got 1 gig of ram, with half of it allocated to Mcam...is the surface that complicated, being derrived from a .stl? or something else? For all of those who were interested in the image, (and anyone else, for that matter), it's on the ftp as "superheart.zip" . I need to step away from this for a bit, and get some paying work done tomorrow! Good leaning though.

Thx Millman, I grabbed that c-hook, but can't seem to make it do anything. I did a search, and apparently others have had good success with it though...anyone from this thread around??? stl chook users

Darn, that .3ds file also opens as a massive wireframe. Looks like if I want surfaces or solids, I've got to do it myself.

I found a .dxf of a heart that someone had created with some serious wireframe. I put that on the ftp for Thad, he was looking for some interesting wireframe to practice on...I'll put a surface on too, when I get it converted.

Thanks fellas, I've found a few .3ds files...Looks like Rhino can read them, and hopefully save as a parasolid or something MC9 friendly. Now I'll just have to track down my industrial design buddies that run Rhino.....

Hey Thad, I've got a really good one for you! It's a wireframe of a human heart, a little science project I'm working on. ftp heart

Sorry, human heart.

Anyone know where I might be able to find a model of a heart...something with surfaces? I've got a "science" project I'm attempting here.

Hi Thad, Funny you mention that, I was just doing the same myself. Trying to lay some toolpaths down though. I was using a file that I drew in my solidworks class, battery_plate.zip. It's on the ftp, mc9 folder. Wireframe level 1, solid level 2. Have Fun!

I grabbed LAZY4, with the letters rolled onto the cone. I'm playing with that c-hook (flatsurf.dll) right now, but could use some instructions. I'm assuming you wrapped the flat surface with the letters around the adjacent conical surface? I'll keep messin' around here, too.

The other day I got a non-watertight error as well. Always being the skeptic, I dumped a gallon of water on my screen...low and behold it was watertight! Liars! James, I think I will try your fix anyways. thx

I'm pretty green on surface toolpaths myself, BUT just finished some letters on a conical surface. I'm studying your work closely, Iskander! I'm eager to learn tricks from the pro's.. Now you did'nt project those letters on a surface, but rolled them instead? Would that only work on a single-axis curve (cylinder), as compared to an undulating surface? Advantages? Thx for sharing!

Yeah, that Lin and Shui book is a joke! Our lab grease board had a list a mile long of errors, and kept growing everyday. There has to be better books out there...why use these particular books? I can see that they are kind of all-inclusive, but quantity does not equal quality here!

Thanks for all the tips...I'll post back and let you know how things work out...I'm anxious to try that Mitee-Wax. TheePres, great idea about the left-helix endmills. I'll look into that too. Unfortunatly laser or H20 jet isn't really an option on these parts. "Send it out to the laser" is usually is my first reaction too!