C:\Users\XXXX\Documents\My Mastercam 2023 .....Delete My Mastercam 2023 folder...

A Thread Mill operation can be completed, but the steps are a bit troublesome now... Maybe it will be more practical to wait for Mastercam to support radial and depth in the future.

I don't understand English and can't understand the meaning...Is this so? But in this case, the wear of the tool will be concentrated on the front end of the tool....

You may be using or setting incorrect Machine Definition (MMD) It is no problem to modify or replace the correct machine definition (MMD), recalculate, save, and then open it again.

I tried 3 computers, and it didn't work if I zoomed in and then zoomed out...? I have the same situation as jstell. After zooming out and pressing OK, it will update immediately (the original tolerance set by mastercam)...so it will still return to the original roughness. But you and danatoem don't seem to have this problem... Is this a graphics card issue?

Adjust tolerances only when needed, the surface is correct as it is small...just a display issue! It doesn't actually affect...it's just visually bad I tried 3 computers, zooming in and then zooming out...none of them worked?? I have the same situation as jstell, after zooming out... it returned to its original rough state. Maybe you use a very good and expensive graphics card?....If you execute "Fit or Regenerate Display List" after zooming out...how will the surface look like? Can you test it? Thank you!

Use CoonsSurf or Net to create a surface, Net will be more convenient! No need to doubt, the surface is correct, it's just a tolerance issue in shading mode... Because it's so small....if you're bothered by visual problems You can adjust the tolerance and perform a redisplay after adjustment... Net...

Oh...I just found out that cruzila has proposed 2D tool paths...! Sorry for the repetition...

Can you accept 2D toolpaths? 2D tool paths have NC codes for shortest and concentric arcs... It can also be done from bottom to top...

Maybe there is a better one...I think it's not perfect (the first and last depths, the step amount are different, the results are different) Using the contact point algorithm, the calculation results are not completely accurate at the edge?! Unified's algorithm will be more accurate...

There is a misjudgment problem when using Ctrl+Shift+clic for hollow solids...unless you are willing to split the solids! When this problem occurs when using Ctrl+Shift+clic, I will not cancel or reselect, but directly use the mouse window to select the unnecessary holes (it may take 2 times, because the first time will select all the holes in the range, the second time It takes 2 times to cancel all holes) I'm used to doing it this way...I also want to know other good ways!?

Maybe.... (very small R).....or blade type

Sorry, my English is not good. I don’t understand what you mean? Your stock is wrong, I did not use it, because 2 times using 3D high-speed Contour does not require the use of stock! Just control the depth...the focus is on the use of the tool Use END MILL or END MILL BULL (very small R).... I only created another stock to simulate using it. I think the simulation results are acceptable... But there is a problem of docking accuracy... It may be necessary to set the reserve amount separately for individual surfaces to avoid overcutting the previously processed surfaces...

...

Using 3D high-speed Contour Use END MILL or END MILL BULL (very small R) Maybe there is a better way...