Last time i had to do this was for a Waterjet application, we ended up applying the 5axis operation to the first part, then used the Transform toolpath to do a rectangular array. Its obviously not like true shape nesting or anything but that might work for you since the transform operation supports multi-axis operations and since transform offers a lot of options for copying the operation over a rectangular or polar coordinate.

Hi Grimes, i think you might be referring to a milling tool, lathe custom tools are created in a similar process but when you said is will spin the tool it leads me to think your referring to milling where i think they are talking about a lathe boring bar. On a side note, i dont think Jparis is a beginner to the software if you look at some of his 17,000+ posts lol.

I do not know much about this but i just watched a Haas Tip of the day recently that talked about this and right in the video the individual mentions this data is read only and can only be viewed and nothing can be sent back to the control. Im only going by what he stated in the video but from that video i dont think you can send data to the controller. Here is a link to the Haas Tip of the day where he discusses this.

Nick, i am not sure if this is the problem but i would try enabling dedicated graphics for mastercam. here is a link where they show how to do this but i think i had this problem before and i believe this was the fix we used. https://kb.mastercam.com/KnowledgebaseArticle50338.aspx?Keywords=dedicated Let us know if that does not fix this problem.

With Silhouette boundary you can just specify a z depth, or you can do like ron said and do a curve on all edges or curve on one edge. the video below shows how to do this. But what im wondering is why you need to build edge curves in the first place, Do you use Solid Chaining or know what thats about? I personally don't find much need to build any wireframe for most of my parts but i chain my parts mostly solid chaining similar to how they show in the video below or using other solid chaining methods.

Its probably the post you are using for that VTL if i had to guess. Typically as soon as you load a post that is setup for a VTL and then you do top view or alt+1 the whole part rotates vertical just like you described. So if you load that post and go to top view and it does not rotate my guess would be that the post you are using is for a horizontal lathe and not a vtl.

The tool vendor you got your tool from would probably know best in my opinion but if you dont get what you need from them i think i would start somewhere around Here:

you are right that you do not need blade expert to do blades but if you bought the blade expert software i would think you would want to use it. That mentality is like having a farrari and driving your bicycle to work because you dont know how to drive a stick. the way is see it is i would rather learn to use a clutch or stick shift and not drive the bike to work every day, just like i would rather learn blade expert so i don't have to use regular 5axis toolpaths and can utilize the blade expert software to its full potential. And blade expert is pretty darn awesome on blades so this is an accurate analogy ;).

I know a while back i sent up an enhancement request to cnc software about this and I am pretty sure they logged it as an enhancement or something, How i got around it was splitting that long length of material into two smaller sections and using two operations instead of one. basically split that machining region into two smaller ones, cut the one region while avoiding the other for the first toolpath. then for the second toolpath cut the other side and pick the already cut area as an air region. by dividing the machining region in half and doing 2 operations it wont be as lengthy and will likely not have any sliver of material left behind. that should work nicely but let me know if it doesn't make sense and i can make an example file if needed.

oh i see roger, yea depth calculation wont work correctly with the way we lied to that centerdrill. That was just a work around since i dont know of a better way to get this done, in my opinion there needs to be some additions to the Drill selection for Lathe drills. might be a good thing to send up as an enhancement request.

yea i assume he was talking about a Live chuck and dead drill. Not a live drill. If its a live drill or mill, then you are correct that it is very easy through the Mill Tool manager, if its a rotating chuck and non rotating tool its gonna need to be defined as a lathe tool.

Hi Roger, I think i would just lie to a center drill as shown below or use the custom tool suggestion.

What version are you running? Dragging and dropping files i dopping files was new to 2017 if i remember correctly so you need 2017 or later to drag and drop. Also, make sure a machine is loaded. Will not work if you have not loaded a machine into the toolpath manager. Let us know if you cant get it to work

There is a few ways to do this, I borrowed some links to some vids i found on youtube that show the way i do it. I suggest learning both methods.

I am not sure what actually causes the problem, so that i can not help with that part of the issue, but to release all license you should be able to go on your license server, go into services and restart HaspLoader service. That should give you all your licenses back. Note: anyone using mastercam during the restart of the Hasp loader service will get shut down with 1 opportunity to save their work so if you do this i would suggest having everyone save and shut down mastercam prior to restarting that service. Hopefully someone knows what causes this because i have seen it on a few rare occasions but never tracked down the problem

there is a + next to linking that opens up additional linking settings, check under linking and see if those area links, links between regions and slices are set to use default links or if they are set to something else.

+1 - Morph it

The "Best" Toolpath for one part may be the wrong choice for the next part or what is "Best" for one machine may not be the Best for another machine, so the question of best rough and best finish is not an easy one to answer since part shape dictates what motion is best. I find, for Roughing i typically cant beat an Opti-rough for most applications. Cimquest made an awesome video that shows the Opti-Rough in action and the toolpath they show in the video below is my Fav roughing strat. Thanks to the guys at Cimquest for making the video below. For finishing, in my opinion, Scallop is great for Shallow angles and shallow features, Waterline is Great for Steep Features, Hybrid is good for a mix of both, Raster is good for parallel motion of course and flowline is good when you need cutter motion to flow with the flow of the surfaces or faces, that is how i decide what to use typically but there is often more than one way to get any job done. a

I would use I would do it like Leigh, i made a quick video here showing the steps if it helps: https://fastechincorporated-my.sharepoint.com/:v:/g/personal/joshc_fastechinc_net/EZHzkqBrWpFLuqJRkbuIIiwBtqFjVwpI-uvzwLUZKZWrLw?e=7XxHjT

I would suggest checking your length offset for the tool in Mastercam, found on the tool page. I am seeing Tool # 1 but the length offset is set to 0. I am not sure if you are very familiar with how the machine handles a G43 call but its something to consider since its not all that common to run a length offset 0, at least not from my experience or the machines that I have ran. I would basically make the length offset 1 to match the tool number and that could potentially be the problem. If you find that it happens to be a length offset issue, there are things that can be done or settings that can be changed to prevent that from happening again so if this is the cause let us know and we can recommend where to make that change. Edit: never mind about G43, after looking at your code file i see that code is pretty conversational so the stuff i mentioned about G43 would not be applicable but it still could be caused by the length offset value as this may still be needed even with that conversational code.

Hi daniel, This is not related to your specific question but have you ever used the Mastercam Stock Model? Saving STL files is becoming a thing of the past in my opinion with the power of Mastercams stock models. Stock models can do so much and are extremely easy and powerful. The only reason i bring this up is if you know how to work with stock models then i personally believe the stock model will ultimately be an easier and better choice for verify, etc. If you already knew about stock models then great, but if not i highly encourage you to do some research or ask some questions but i personally like Stock models better than saving STL files for a variety of reasons.

First off Ben, i was just trying to help and was not ever intending to get in a heated argument. I am a big fan of mastercam, the guys on these forums that ask questions and post helpful responses. Secondly, your not MY customer nor do i feel the need to treat you as if you were but i was not trying to be rude even though it seems it must have been interpreted that way. I dont work for this forum, i work for my employer and am only here to help when i can or when i have free time on breaks and was just responding to this forum question the same way i would respond to a friend or a colleague. His question was an easy one that i thought i could help him with as I have seen others turn on work piece and have then had to deal with collisions. I do not need to see your video, i know what you are talking about with the tolerance and how it will help. His original question could have been caused by a variety of things like others have mentioned like holders etc. but i still think there is not a problem with my suggestion. The tolerance idea is great but still can get you into problems so i find its Better to turn off work piece, like if you have a solid model that has been modeled for a flat bottom hole, but you want to put the tip of the drill into the part and bring the full dia of the drill to that flat bottom, in this scenario your tolerance idea does not help us. I know my way around the software just like you do but I ultimately find that i am better off and I prefer to not use work piece collision detection for the reasons already mentioned like that drilling example. And by turning that off, i still have never missed a collision from having that off. You will still get collisions on holders, stock, and everything else and you can even see any gouge after its done verifying and/or in the compare in verify. So ultimately, my advice i provided was not just thrown out at random but was provided because that is how i like my verify collision detection to be set. Sorry again for offending you and that is not what i was shooting for here or for if my response was interpreted as rude. Again, just trying to help and I still dont think my advice is poor advice nor has my suggestion caused me any problems in the past.

i dont think you really know what you are talking about or what i am talking about, but i dont feel like arguing or spending the time to explain... have a great day ben

Your the Man JParis, I looked and looked all over for this database the other day and couldnt find it anywhere, i thought it had been lost forever. Thanks for giving us that link, that is some useful info in my opinion, i like to see cutting data from others since i dont get all the Fancy materials that others get to play with.

Excellent point Gcode, holders can certainly be it since you can have those turned off visually in verify and still have collision detection against them.