maybe you should re-read what i suggested, i suggested he turns off workpiece collisions not all collisions. Try drilling a half inch hole with a half inch tool with workpiece collisions turned on, oh look a collision... thats because your .5" tool is hitting the Workpiece wall so you now have a collision. I still leave on stock collisions, fixture collisions if im using fixutres, etc. but workpiece collision i typically dont use because of the reasons mentioned above, or even with contouring, contour a part down to 0 stock to leave and there is another collision when workpiece is turned on because again, the tools hitting the workpiece. So no, i did not suggest he turns off all collisions.

in verify, go to File --> Options and check the Collision Checking Options and turn off the check mark next to work piece.

On one of my first scrapped parts from undersizing something one of my colleagues Told me its best to Run the spindle/tool in reverse and sprinkle metal chips on the part and it adds material back. Haven't tried it yet but in theory it sounds just Great!

I think we all have different opinions on what he is asking for some reason lol, I think what he was asking is; if a shop purchases a new mastercam license if they can run an older version of Mastercam as well? The answer to that question is Yes you can. With a Mastercam license that is up to date or current on Maintenance you can run any older version that you would like, X2,x3,x4,x5....

sounds like you guys found a solution but i wanted to mention that a tool not accurately defined can cause this too. The last time i had this problem on one of our parts it was caused by me not fully defining the tool accurately, if your Corner rad of the Tool is not accurate then this could be the problem because a Flat end mill would use a different step over amount than a Bull end mill would.

Hi Milehighxr, The default tool libraries in lathe will not have tools oriented like that so you will need to rotate the tool yourself. To do this you first need to double click the tool (or right click and hit edit tool) --> Click Setup tool (top Right on the edit tool window) and then Change the tool to Lower Turret instead of Upper turret. By changing the tool from upper turret to lower turret with the steps above the tool will then face the correct direction, You can then hit Display tool to make sure it looks correct. Note: Under setup tool, you also can change the chuck rotation, if a yellow insert is showning on the tool the insert needs to be FACE UP on the machine. If the insert is showning oarnge it needs to be FACE DOWN on the machine. If you find a problem with tool direction (like if it faces the sub spindle or away from the main spindle) you may even need to change the holder to the other hand holder. Please let us know if you can not find these settings or if this does not fix the problem

Hi Milehighxr, I dont know what you have tried or not tried but what side of the Xaxis are you toolpathing on? The TL is a Tool room lathe and not a slant bed so you "should" be programming on the Lower side of X like i have shown in the image below with tools set to the Lower. It is possible to program these TL machines like a Slant bed, but if your post is not setup to do so and if you are not on the correct side on the axis for that specific post this could very well be part of the problem you are seeing. I hope this helps

It would be nice to see a Poll on what the majority of programmers on here are using, control or wear. I am betting its over 75% of programmers use wear but i could be wrong. Wear is my favorite for a lot of reasons but the biggest is lead in moves, its easy to lead into a .625dia hole with a .5" tool with wear, not quite as easy with control. From my experience Wear is way better but I can understand why some are hesitant to switch when they have a ton of legacy nc files programmed under control or a team of setup guys who are unfamiliar with the differences. To me, it would be worth investing the time and effort in switching the shops mentality on this subject due to how much better it can be for them in years to come.

I posted this question a while back on the Mastercam.com forums and Ruth with CNC software has a solution. http://forum.mastercam.com/Topic20963.aspx The answer you are looking for is Ruths Response to this topic.

On a side note, if you get a lot of Catia type part files you can always contact your reseller and purchase a Catia Translator and read in Native catia files. Linky: http://www.mastercam.com/en-us/solutions/3rd-party-solutions/translators

Hi Roboter, Welcome to the forums. there have been various options in the past to accomplish this but the latest enhancement to 2018 is the best for this in my opinion. I would suggest getting Mastercam 2018 if you have not already downloaded it and then you can take advantage of this new arc feed rate adjustment enhancement. Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTk_HDnbgQQ

My work recently purchased a nice LG curved monitor for me and I absolutely love this thing, its about 2x as long as my old monitor but about the same height so with my laptop screen and then this thing next to it its like I am working with 3 screens because its large enough where I can split the screen and still see everything clearly. from what I hear they are pricy, but in my opinion this huge curved screen did help me become slightly more productive so in the long run I think it was a worth while investment for my company in my opinion.

I do this too, I use the Hide a bunch for most things but for all my solid construction geometry I like to use blank because it protects my geometry and I can not mess it up unless I try really hard.

John has a great suggestion because that is what I have seen to be the problem about 80% of the time, if its not that then get Maintenance Update #2 for 2017 because update#2 updates the Solidworks Translator so you may also be in need of a Mastercam update since that can also be the problem if its a Solidworks 2017 type file

Sounds like a Graphics related issue if I had to guess, there is not much info there to go on but I know that is certainly where I would start my search if I were in your shoes. Also If the computer has more than 1 gfx card you may want to also check to see which is being used. that's my $.02 on this topic and I hope this helps.

+1 to this, that is how I would tackle a job like that too is with contour set to chamfer because then you don't need to offset that geometry that I see you created, another benefit by taking doing it in this manor is on a close wall like you have in that pic you could even use the Tip Offset setting for the chamfer toolpath to allow a higher contact point so you can allow the toolpath to cut with closer to the top of the chamfer mill which gets you further away from that wall instead of cutting with closer to the tip of the chamfer mill.

You can fix that too,

Well that is interesting, I just tested this and it looks like you are both correct about them needing to be visible on screen still. I will submit this to QC because I was under the impression in 2017 the lines were associative and the level with the lines and points was not needed to be visible but from my testing just a couple of minutes ago this is not the case. good find

You must be in x9 or prior, because in Mastercam 2017 those lines and points are not needed to be on screen. Check your whats new document Here: C:\Program Files\mcam2017\documentation and go to page #108

I would suggest Dynamic Motion Technology. There are many videos and materials online that will go over using the toolpath but from a chaining standpoint I listed everything that you need to know to get the toolpath started in the picture below, If you setup the chaining as shown then all you will need is just the toolpath parameters and cutting conditions. On a side note, Your question originally was what is the "Best" way to cut the part, in my opinion this is a difficult question with the very little info you provided because what may be the Best for me may not be the Best for you since things like Runtime, Accuracy, Quantity of parts to produce, Tooling, machine capabilities, etc. all play a driving factor in machining strategies and toolpath selections.

Not to get you too far off topic, but in my opinion there are better ways to do this in Mastercam. What I personally do is a simple drill toolpath first, Create a circle that is the same size and location of where I drilled. Then when I just use the 2d Area toolpath or 2d Dynamic toolpath and when selecting geometry I make sure to select that arc as an air region and the Area/Dynamic path will automatically plunge into that air region if the tool is small enough to fit. I Just find that that will give me much better and newer tool motion technology compared to that old pocket, plus its super easy to pick an air region, Just a suggestion because some of those old toolpaths like pocket and start hole have toolpaths that can do those tasks better and more efficiently.

If your units are incorrect, go to File --> Configuration (or for x9 and prior, Settings --> Configuration). Then at the bottom of the configuration you will see there is a config for Inch and a Config for metric, Change the config file itself over to the other units.

If you find you place the Rolled Geometry at the wrong position you can shift the geometry manually. Since Pie*Dia is Circumfrence, then we can simply take pie*Dia*.25 for a 90° move

That's the first thing I noticed on Johns screen shot haha, Looks like a M-Lok Style which are my favorite types of forends. Cool part BTW!

I was not saying draw anything, just chain Additional geometry that you already have in your file. Like add the other Arc or the line to your chain because you can always Shorten that chain if you chain additional geometry. Or you can use the Add line extension setting on your lead out page and that should work without any trouble. There are probably other methods too that wouldn't require any geometry creation but with the brief glance I had at your part I would chain more geometry since your chain stops halfway up that Radii.