Thanks all, and I also agree.

I am reviewing how the Varco Reports deals with reporting for cases where multiple holders are used for a milling tool. An example might be the holder in the spindle, then an ER32 collet chuck, a ER8 collet chuck, and finally the tool. The report application supports this, with separate fields for each holder, including the length. My question is should the holder in the spindle be considered the first (primary) holder, or the one that holds the tool?

These types of issues have been generally caused by system permissions, as some of my application files were installed to the Mastercam folder in Program Files. With my next release the Varco Reports will install outside of Mastercam in the users Public Documents folder, which should avoid permissions issues. They will continue to be used the same way they have been, just like using the Mastercam reports. I am doing more testing and hope to have this release available very soon.

It has been quite some time since I posted here, thought I would mention some of the recent enhancements to the Varco Reports: Automatic full-function 30 day trial when reports are installed. Append additional PDF’s to the exported report PDF. Run other applications from within the report, such as Machine Simulation Presentations. ‘Shop Mode’ that supports running the reports on systems that do not have Mastercam installed. Provide feedback to programming from ‘Shop Mode’. Sync code list for Mill-Turn machines listing the sync codes and the code lines they are used on. User configurable work offset display for machines that do not use Mastercam’s default Fanuc style. Improved formatting of report data. Barcoding supported for almost all data fields, including QR codes. Drag & Drop support for rearranging data display for operations & tools. Support added for newer Mastercam toolpaths such as the B-Axis Contour. Duplicate tool filtering. Support for extension milling tool holders. Option to display screen image, stock image, & General Information fields side-by-side. If you would like to try the reports, the installer can be downloaded from the Varco Reporting Forum. You will need to register to have access to the downloads. I would be pleased to do a web meeting with you to look at the features and numerous options for the reports.

David, Here are the fields you would select from the available tool fields list in the Settings menu in the report:

The Varco Reports support tool assemblies that use two holders:

Do I need to add an option to the Varco Reports to filter out the display of duplicate tools? IF so, what would the compare parameters be? Number, type, and diameter only? Or provide several user selected choices to filter on?

You may want to look at M1 by ECI, I have done custom reporting for it in the past and it is powerful and highly customizable package designed specifically for manufacturing. http://manufacturing.ecisolutions.com/

Hi PcRobotic, Sorry I was not able to get back to you quickly after you asked me to make the additional changes to your report code. Instead of: If (IsNumeric(txtTIP_ANGLE1.Text)) Then If (CDbl(txtTIP_ANGLE1.Text) > 0) Then txtTIP_ANGLE1.Forecolor = Color.Black DEG.Forecolor = Color.Black Else txtTIP_ANGLE1.Forecolor = Color.LightGray DEG.Forecolor = Color.LightGray End If Try: If (IsNumeric(txtTIP_ANGLE1.Text)) Then If (CDbl(txtTIP_ANGLE1.Text) > 0) Then txtTIP_ANGLE1.Forecolor = Color.Black DEG.Forecolor = Color.Black txtTIP_ANGLE1.Visible = True DEG.Visible = True Else txtTIP_ANGLE1.Visible = False DEG.Visible = False End If

Ron, Thanks, I did not realize that my Google Drive was displaying the file like it was. I have zipped the file now, the same link will work: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzFYb3w5RaFVam0wdkxXdUZTOWM/view?usp=sharing

The formatting issue I mentioned has been corrected, the sample for the link has been updated.

The way the reports are structured it is not practical to add to an existing template, however the reports are highly and easily customizable by the user. Logos, sections of the report to display, right down to what data fields to display for each tool or operation type.

I have included below a link to a sample report exported to RTF. I do see a couple of minor formatting issues (some fields that should have a border do not), I know what is causing this and will address it in the next few days. One of the goals was to allow easily merging documentation into the Setup Sheet instead of the other way around. Once the document or images to be merged are created, there is nothing you need to do other than create a Setup Sheet the normal way, the merge takes place automatically https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzFYb3w5RaFVam0wdkxXdUZTOWM/view?usp=sharing

Yes it can, the export is saved as a Rich Text (RTF) format. Why would you need to convert the Setup Sheet to Word format? Two of the options for this report is it can read in and add to the Setup Sheet an existing TEXT or RTF file, typically used for programmer instructions to the shop staff. Photos can also be easily added to the report.

Having been personally involved in the development of a popular g-code verification package, please consider that a g-code verification program must process the code through the equivalent of a post processor and makes its own interpretation of what the code is supposed to do. In other words, there is still plenty of opportunity for error. The only “true” g-code verification would be from the actual machine control.