Thanks Colin, it was the second item. I need to go back to the drop down list and select it. Works as planned now. I am not one complain and I understand the reasoning behind the control and machine definitions and it is good that there are just copies of each that are included with each separate file much like importing tools. I do though have to agree with Micro here a bit, it all seems a bit complex at times.

Thanks for taking the time to explain Colin. I am having a bit of a problem with adding a post to the control definition. It allows me to add it fine but when I save and leave MC tells me I have not saved. When I loop back and check it the added post is not there. Any thoughts?

Yea, mprint is what I am using. Thanks.

Thanks mates for the quick responses. I think I have something that will work I just cannot remember the command for activating the post box when running. Right now it is grayed out, does anyone remember the command? I want to test it out before making it permanent.

Is there a way to have the post throw an error? Such as change of planes. We run into problems at times where an op is on an incorrect plane.

If I can jump back to the tooling part of the discussion for a moment. Bob you and I have similar thoughts on tooling. We also have spent a bit of time creating a tool library with assemblies that are standard, (over 700 assemblies). Also to go along with this we have built an extensive operation library for our commonly used ops. We build progressive dies, a lot of standard screws and dowels and such. All of our tools are given an ID #, using the manufacturer # in the tool definition. I wrote a windows app that tracks the ID #'s in the tool changer and in the program to be run. It will search and replace the T,H,D values for each program to match what is in the machine. Everything we do is one off it works well for using resident tooling. The biggest problem we have right now is that X9 seems to always ignore duplicate tool checking when importing ops. If I import 4 different drilling ops that use a 1/2 spot I get four 1/2 spots in the tool list. It did not do this in X7. We are spending a lot of time deleting and reassigning tools in X9. Wondering if anyone else is experiencing this. BTW sounds like you are setting up a nice place for yourself.

Hey thanks guys, I saw that on the MSDN website and it did not sink in. I know there is much more there than needed, baby steps.

I am in the process of rewriting a few windows apps that I wrote about 20 years ago in order to have them work better on our newer computers. It has been a while since I have done anything in VB and it did not take long before I came to an impasse. Below is the code I have started on for a radius generator for our toolmakers to give them step over values so that they can generate radiuses on the grinder. I know that the code is rudimentary but I am starting off very simple and straight forward in order to try and keep problems to a minimum. I am not getting the correct return for the "angle = Math.Asin(temp1)" function. Would someone mind taking a look at it for me? I am trying to get reacquainted with VB before I try and attempt writing hooks. Dim wheel_rad As Double Dim part_rad As Double Dim cusp As Double Dim side_c As Double Dim side_b As Double Dim side_a As Double Dim temp1 As Double Dim angle As Double part_rad = TextBox1.Text wheel_rad = TextBox2.Text cusp = TextBox3.Text side_c = wheel_rad side_b = wheel_rad - cusp side_c = side_c * side_c side_b = side_b * side_b side_a = side_c - side_b side_a = Math.Sqrt(side_a) temp1 = side_a / part_rad TextBox4.Text = temp1 angle = Math.Asin(temp1) TextBox5.Text = angle

I have dug into this a bit. The design software that we will be receiving the solid files from is called Logopress. It runs on top of Solidworks. They have a document that addresses how they see the handshaking between design and manufacturing. So as far as holes, there take is to use the 6th decimal place to identify the hole, it gives you 9 options. So if I am to use ATP I will need to first have circle gemoetry made from the solid out to 6 places and then have a hook that moves the particular dia to a specific level. So can I work to 6 places is the first question?

I don't know your name Mr. The Bear but you have a lot of good answers. Thanks a bunch. And if I ever get around to messing with hooks Mick I am sure I will be tapping you quite often.

Ok, now that you got me thinking a bit, using a standard set of operations and merging in the geometry is there a way to use variables rather than real numbers for depths? If you could do that it would be sick for us. I could see that saving us a huge amount of programming time and streamlining a lot of things. Not sure if MC has that ability but it sure would be more straight forward than writing a hook.

Hey thanks everyone, I just ran thru the replies and will take a look at ATP. Going to be quite busy today and probably will not get to it today sofollow up questions a few days out. Again got some great insight from the guys on the forum. Thanks again.

Back in the day (15 years ago) I wrote a few windows apps in VB of which I still use today. I believe I have a basic grasp on writing code. It no doubt will be more of a project for me if I were to go down that road and writing hooks is probably the route that will end up on. I just want to get an idea of how FBM might help before I start trying to figure out hooks.

I work in the tool room of a die shop that builds progressive dies, and spend my time programming and running plates and such on a 2 pallet Matsuura. We have an extensive library of operations for the various screws, dowels and pins that we use to build our dies. We do our own designing here and they are moving from AutoCAD (2d) to a solids based system. I have messed around with FBM a bit hoping that it can help us streamline programming now that we will have solids. I am wondering though if my time would be better spent working on hooks to automate the process. The first hurdle I see with FBM is how do you have it leave stock in drilled holes that will be finished after heat treat? This forum has always been a great resource for me, just looking for a bit of direction from the many Gurus out there.

Thanks Colin, that is what I was looking for. I hate making edits to the code, they get lost when you repost and never are included if the part is made at a later date.

I work at a die shop and do not do too much 3d stuff but when I do it is almost always electrodes. I just ran a trode last night that is for a form punch that is about 3/8 dia and some what oblong bullet shaped at the tip. I used spiral for the finish pass with a 1/8 ball and was very happy with how it turned out except for the very center where it comes to a tip and the spirals are becoming rather small. I would like to slow down the feed for the last 5% of the cuts to improve finish. How do you mold guys handle this? Edit the code? Use 2 separate ops? I run a 20 year old Matsuura it is a great piece of equipment but I am worried that if I reposition for a 2nd op it might leave a blemish. Just looking for a bit of guidance here wondering what others do.

We have worked on this over the past few days with our reseller. Turns out it is a bug with assemblies. If you just import tools it works as expected. Our reseller has made CNC Software aware of it.

Dtuns, check your config in the toolpaths section. There is a check box for "Use existing tools when importing operations".

Thanks, Thad. I think that is probably it.

Trying to run this down on my own here. Our IT guy installed X9 for us and not sure exactly how he handled it. Do the operation files need to be converted when upgrading?

Moved from X7 to X9. We have extensive libraries of ops and in a good portion of our programs we import a lot of ops from our libraries. As best as I can tell our configs from 7 to 9 are set up the same. We now get multiple copies of the same tool in the part tool list. Disable duplicate tool checking is not checked, and in the config file "use existing tools when importing operations" is checked. I import 2 different 10-32 drill and tap ops that use the same tools, I get 2 spots 2 tap drills and 1 tap. Same ops same process that we used in 7 and did not get multiple tools imported. It also does not seem to be consistent where I get only 1 tap. Any thoughts?

Just moved from X7 to X9, really liking the expanded solid capabilities. I see on the bottom tool bar where you are able to set a color for wireframe, solid, and surface. Now it seems that when ever I define a solid it comes up in that set color. I would prefer them to be as it is set in the attributes. Any way of switching this off?

I do not know if this will help Thad, I too mostly import operations when programming. I have found if I select a different tool from a library every thing changes as you said. If I drag a tool from a different operation onto the one I am editing, the DOC and step-overs stay the same only the speeds and feeds get updated. We have from Matl checked in our tool settings.

Thanks Mick, I wanted to make sure that I did not start down the wrong path right from the beginning. Net hooks it is, and I will look at the examples. It has been a while since I have messed with VB, I can usually muscle through the basic stuff, but there is no doubt I will need some help from the sharp minds here when I run into road blocks.

Ok I think it is time I start looking into developing and modifying some c hooks to help streamline how we program here. My skills are limited, but over the years I have been able to write a few simple applications in Visual Basic. My initial questions are, can I use Visual Studio 2013 community, and is the source code for the chooks that are supplied available?