nice, so happy to see these new forums, tied up with work for a few days but i definitely have some interesting topics that i wanted to start on here soon! Love that we have this new forum because its going to be awesome to share some ideas and get others ideas on things, i of course use mastercam for all of my modeling, stl/mesh editing, etc and from there prusa slicer. i have an ender 3, hate this printer and most likely gonna replace it with a Bambu labs printer soon, i also have a prusa mini with upgraded extruder that i get great result with and really like the printer, before the upgrade to the extruder it was so/so but with the upgrade it does spectacular at almost everything ive thrown at it and except for the slowness (comparing it to bambu) and small print volume i think its great. Looking forward to getting my hands on one of a Bambu some day soon. also i hope everyone knows this but you can use the Mastercam HLE to make .stl files and .3mf files for 3d printing without having a full license, thanks to everyone at mastercam for letting this be possible, its a great way to stay sharp with the softwares cad tools and i think its a great thing that they let it be used for that at no cost, great way to get it into students hands as well and thanks Emastercam team and Daniel for starting this forum!

thanks so much Daniel!

i seen bob bashing mastercam on one of his blogs once, or at least making it seem like something else was superior to mastercam when it was all his opinions and nothing factual that i read, so i lost some interest in his products... was a while back and not sure if he still has it up or not but kindof ticket me off because he was incorrect on his opinions. if he has a good product feel free to use it if yall want to but he rubbed me the wrong way with that post he has up, ill see if i can track it down at all Edit: Sorry im talking about G-wizard not HSM advisor, just noticed you are all talking about hsm advisor so nevermind and found the article here https://www.cnccookbook.com/cnccookbook-2023-cam-software-survey-whats-the-best-cam/ , very opinion based article and states at the top somewhere that fusion 360 is the overall market leader and that mastercam bobcad and hsmworks are all down on share lol whatever that means, so we are grouped in with BOBCAD and fusion 360 is better than mastercam is just laughable

just an idea, but as popular as 3d printing is and as many of us here do it wouldn't it be awesome if emastercam created a specific forum for 3d printing, like when we go here https://www.emastercam.com/forums/forum/17-mastercam-forums/ , we see Industrial, educational, woodworking, and a few others but wheres the 3d printing forum, would love to see one of the folks at Emastercam make one and i would certainly contribute to it

Pencil can be a great toolpath this is how i typically get a pencil toolpath to work well if it gives me any trouble with a task. if your having trouble try the following leave the bitangency angle at about 165 degrees to start as mastercam defaults, thats a pretty decent number to begin with set overthickness to .01" , see if the toolpath generates, if the toolpath fails to generate just keep increasing this overthickness in small increments, like (.01, .02, .05, .1, .2, .4) and eventually when the overthickness becomes large enough mastercam should be able to target that radii. If your dealing with surfaces that meet up at very shallow angles above 165 degrees, then you can increase the bitangency angle but in most cases this is not needed. typically the bitangency angle wont need to go much below 165 degrees ever. another note is typically i dont need a containment boundary with pencil, but if your overthickness is too large and mastercams targeting too many radiis then a containment boundary can be helpful, but dont restrict yourself too much initially with a boundary or steep shallow as your testing the overthickness values with that type of processing i never have any trouble with pencil personally, perhaps someones found an even more efficient method but typically i can get it working great pretty quickly.

if the message really stated that location then something is pretty odd there because the material file should not be found in that location in the first place, my system had installed it here: C:\Program Files\Mastercam 2023\Mastercam\common\SharedDefaults\MATERIALS , i would first suggest reaching out to your mastercam reseller as they can offer the most assistance in my opinion, otherwise i think i would start with a re-installation of mastercam if it were me running into that error since its looking for a file in the wrong location and since that doesnt make a lot of sense

I know what you mean, back when i learned GD&T they taught what is considered industry standards, now everyone makes up their own standards

I've always been a big mastercam fan and love new features and think they do have a really great team up there, just about everyone at mastercam that i have met in person or worked with on anything are really great people. But it was frustrating to me the last couple years when all my customers complaints as well as mine fell on deaf ears on the new stock setup. theres so many reasons the old stock setup was better, im just tired of reporting it and it falling on deaf ears, never once has anyone that used an older version of mastercam with the older stock setup told me they like the new one better, ive only ever got complaints and in my honest opinion there is not one single feature of the new stock setup that i like better than the old, all of it is just extra work for no added benefit, makes the software harder to use, and have of that stuff isnt properly linked up anyways liek the mach sim stuff. it sucks being a huge mastercam fan and to use the software more than most and to continuously get ignored, makes it tough to even beta test but i still do anyways

are you guys saying someone left some dimensions off a blueprint, that's unheard of!

you must have went to 4 im guessing, 4 is max that is ever suggested even in their knowledge base article about the topic, so perhaps setting the precision factor to something like 2 or 3 may have been better for that system your working on. This setting is definitely not something intended to be used all the time, typically very small parts or when fine detail is needed and not everyone will be able to utilize the setting all the way up to 4 as you have discovered

if you need even better quality (at the expense of performance) you can make a more advanced setting change by doing the following. 1. go here C:\Users\(NAME)\Documents\My Mastercam (VERSION)\Mastercam 2. Duplicate the MastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml , then rename it to something like HighPrecisionMastercamSimulatorDefaults.xml 3. Right click the file and choose edit, then change the Force 5 axis option to True and also adjust the Precision Factor from 1 to 4 maximum. 4. then in verify, choose file --> defaults -- Open Defaults, choose your high precision file, and now your verify will be more precise and accurate looking, at the expense of some performance

Glad you found an answer to your question, the original poster Todd Tracey was my colleague, he has since retired and unfortunately since passed away, he was a great person and is still missed, he was a great friend and colleague

Hi Corey, my home pc does have an AMC Processor, but its just a Ryzen 7 and not the processor that i think they are discussing, but i definitely dont have any issues with my Ryzen 7 compared to intel i7 pcs' that i have used, cant say i see much of a difference between similar amd and intel processors in my experience but also have not put them head to head or had any real apples to apples comparisons, but in my experience i wouldn't be at all concerned with using a AMD processor for mastercam. in my opinion though i wouldn't switch from nvidia to amd when it comes to graphics though because i dont like amds graphics cards, also just my opinions and i could be wrong

the best option i can think of to accomplish this is using the toolpath editor, create the path exactly the way you want it to be, then use toolpath editor to make that feedrate adjustment by right clicking on the toolpath and choosing toolpath editor and then making the change in the toolpath editor, that should be easy enough.

no its not super great, plus with dynamic motion there is not typically any need to increase or decrease feedrates during a cut nor have i persoanlly ever seen any recommendations of feedrate changes during the cut by any tool vendors with trochoidal or dynamic motion. maybe it has a place with traditional milling processes but with dynamic or trochoidal type motion theres no need for it in my opinion and dynamic is pretty much the standard for high feed milling with solid carbide tools today so i think thats part of the reason the function gets little to no use today by mastercam users those are my opinions edit: i did since find some supporting evidence from a tool vendors site that claims slowing down feeds in corners is still suggested with dynamic type motion, but i doubt there are many out there that actually do that