It looks to me like the CAD guys have decent Simulation Software (i.e. CAMWorks, PROManufacture, Catia) and have for years. I saw CAMWorks simulate their Trunion back in 2005 (FBM too). Verifying the toolpathed model is also important.... (Ron) I don't mean to call you out but, If your stack up is .005 out of your tolerance and your 0.500 degree out on your compound angle, an you have to start twisting your geometry to match what you have in the machine. Your model need to reflect your code to make sure your adjustments aren't 180 off... The poor guys wants a machine simulation...

A tough issue would be to verify model geometry when the finish product has nothing to verify to except curves.... This part has sphere axis to compounded hole axis and the finished product edges are curves! I would take 'constructive criticism with a 'grain of salt'. There are those that 'DO' and those that 'watch' those that 'DO'. 1_.MCX-7

Wasn't that the point of 'Machine Definition'. I thought they were starting to log machine information.... Looks like that got put on the back burner for FBM?

:POPCORN:

I hear ya.... I'm playing around with what's efficient to what cost effective. Everyone has indexable ball cutters. Those seem to be more sensitive to material condition (minimun seems to be best). The ajax doesn't seem to care if its full diameter or .010 to clean up. P.S. I'd rather spread rumors that I watch country with Reese Witherspoon than waste time on R. and D. for someone elses benefit. It's really competitive out there. Iscar-KENNEMETAL-Sandvik-MITSUBISHI all have quality tools. This project is really taking its toll!!

CH1P.MCX-7

WOW! I got a machine limit alarm! I didn't even hurt the part or the machine! Would this thing get mad if it found out I was using a Mitsubishi Ajax High Feed Cutters?? P.S. That would be kuhl If I could surface with the profile of the Ajax inserts! CH1P

an ol friend called and needed a hand.... he bought a new computer and needed to get a re+pete job up and running.... i jumped in loaded Masrtcam. I got as far as updating the post, then a couple network settings wouldn't let me overwrite the config files an before I knew it the setup guy on the floor was ready for the program and his operator was waiting around for a 1st article..... what a mess. 2) inspectors, setup machinist, operator all waiting for this hot job! Ever heard the expression "a quarter waiting on a dime"? That was fun! .........i forgot a lot on setting up some of these definitions..... ive never set up a 3+2.... but ill check out that webinar if its posted. .........id be lucky if he calls me back. :chip teh still un-3mployed:

Its not a macro... That's kind of funny, try not running Program 2. Put the fixture offset (G54.1) in P3. If he runs that fixture offset program, there's probabably a reason for it. Maybe machine specific. The point of subs is to save memory.... if a program has the same code like a pocket with multiple depths. The code would be Z-.050 The M98 P2 (pocket code).... Z-.0100 M98 P2 (pocket code).... Its rather simple. They came out with that back in the punch tape days (I think) Then there's controlls like HAAS, you could have all this in one program. It will loop down to a specific M98. Where some controlls have seperate programs. The control goes from program to program.

Unfortunatially not, Mastercam uses those entities to drive the tool(path)s. I would put (only) those entities that you worked on on a seperate level. Delete the SW model that you don't need (for file space) and file merge the updated SW file.

Hole feature with Helix

I took a post that didn't have a any variables for "n numbers" and I couldn't get her to go.... I could manipulate some of the numbers like start with N10 (instead of N1000) and stat with 11 and inc x 1 in the output something like that. Anyway I had to... if g71type = 2 | g71type = 3, pbld, *n$, *string3, *speed, e$ if g71type = 1 | g71type = 0, pbld, *n$, *string3, *speed, "W0.", e$ ] else, [ if omitseq$ = one & rc3 = size3 + one, pbld, *n$, *string3, e$ else, pbld, n$, *string3, e$ I remove the (multiply) *n$ to-----> n$ (in these three strings) And she goes..... Way kuhl. I really miss being a full time programmer.....

Allright..... I took a post that didn't have any "n number". And started with this (last post). They were adding variables to a rough canned cycle. Some machines require a finish toolpath and it roughs to the finish profile... so I 1)rough canned 2)finish 3)rough canned cycle 4) finish to make sure the variables were Inc. As stated. I couldn't get it to Inc. The desired Inc. 10s then Inc x 1. I was able to manipulate the values something like 20 then in the mach. Settings start at like 11 and Inc. By 1. Anyway..... if g71type = 2 | g71type = 3, pbld, *n$, *string3, *speed, e$ if g71type = 1 | g71type = 0, pbld, *n$, *string3, *speed, "W0.", e$ ] else, [ if omitseq$ = one & rc3 = size3 + one, pbld, *n$, *string3, e$ else, pbld, n$, *string3, e$ I remove the (multiply) *n$ to-----> n$ (in these three strings) And she goes..... It must have been some time since I've needed eob ( it might be in the control def. Or it might be easier to go to an older post. Again I wanted to try to control the output because you wanted quotes (") and eob(. As I started to place the n number throughout the post using this format. I got stumped..... because my post uses (") quotes to force the code... i couldnt get it to post (") quotes.... before I knew it my time was up... Way more work then I originally stated!

I'm guessing your stock post has n numbers. (Master cam might not condone this) but I'd try to manipulate my n number variable to post ". And I'd try to add " to my (eob) ; ive been searching around to see if there's something simple to add to your control definition. I didn't see anything other than Manuel entry. Anyway, if that doesn't work you could create a new variable. Instead of a variable you input the ". My experience with wires I was using n numbers for how the machine picks up its e-pack. So if you don't want to change the n numbers create a new variable use that format to post a " on every line. You could see here that my experience with anything other than a 2011BA24 is simply limited. Good luck