If you have to use the facing path, how about cutting the sphere into slices to the depths of cuts that you want. Then those slices would represent the actual cutting area. LeoC

Thank you very much David. I can make that work. When things calm down a little here since we are short handed, I'll spend more time on this to get more familiar on how it works. Creating custom tools for the mill package is a breeze for me, the lathe, not so much. Merci beaucoup David LeoC

I am taking over programming our Haas SL10 lathe for our regular guy who is out sick. I am working on a small plastic part with a through hole with a tapered entrance. I want to cut the taper with a Harvey boring bar, http://www.harveytool.com/ToolTechInfo.aspx?ToolNumber=29210 . I can't seem to design a tool to work so I tried using a small boring bar, but obviously the tip geometry isn't the same. I have no idea on how to get this to work so any help would be appreciated. I attached my working file, and sorry, but it was done in MC4SW. Thanks, LeoC Tube Modification 2_X02.zip

Thank you for your contribution. LeoC

Call me weird, but I actually liked Surfcam lathe LeoC

I think the new update that came out today fixed this issue? LeoC

Make sure to turn off SolidWorks CAM as it does not play nicely with MC4SW when you have both add-ins on at the same time. LeoC

I've never had any issues of running MC4SW with any version of SolidWorks. LeoC

Yeah to the tool path editor for MC4SW! I have asked about this numerous times. LeoC

Sorry, don't run an Okuma, but there are quite a few posts available on the tech exchange, https://community.mastercam.com/TechExchange#files You probably already know about that though since I see you post often. LeoC

Cimquest always make great videos. LeoC

I use MC4SW exclusively. I started using SolidWorks back in 1999 so I am very comfortable using it. When we bought our Mastercam license, I think it was the 2nd year that MC4SW was available, so for that reason, I do not have the option to use the standard version of Mastercam. Our facility is a product development company and we have about 75 engineers here that all use SolidWorks, so for me, it is simple to open the models and be current and have a trouble free model. And I feel very comfortable if I have to add geometry or modify the model in any way. The other 2 machinist that work here, use the regular version. As Pete mentioned, "most" of the tool paths are available to me using my seat of MC4SW. Now having said that, I have had issues with training material from various vendors as they are almost exclusively designed for the standard Mastercam. With the Emastercam series of training material, I sometimes run into issues with some machining options just not being available. I was working on one of the multiaxis books and they wanted the user to use "roll die", that is not available to me with MC4SW. Also, quite often the models provided for study purposes simply won't work in SolidWorks, they blow up or are missing surfaces. I have tried exporting them in various formats and still can't get them to open properly in SolidWorks. To me, the main difference between the two versions is the CAD part. If most of the students are versed in drawing with SolidWorks, then MC4SW might be the better version to use as more time can be spent on teaching the different machining methods versus time spent on the CAD part. But also keep in mind, that I believe most machine shops are using the standard version of Mastercam, so if they were taught in school MC4SW, when they go out in the real world for a job, they might get a little push back from possible employers because they know a different version of Mastercam. Yes, if machine shops are current on their maintenance, they can run either version, but realistically, how many owners would be willing to have their programmers use different versions of Mastercam in their shop? Just my opinion, LeoC

To me, the second tool path would result in an unfinished "corner", the tool moved away from the driving arc. So yet another tool path would be required, like pencil or something, to accurately machine the "corner". Or am I missing something? LeoC

I have had that before but it was a long time ago. I think it was a mouse driver issue and Windows not playing together well. You might try updating your mouse driver to see if that helps. LeoC

Usually when I have that problem is that I did not use a chamfer tool. You can not use a spot drill for this toolpath like you can in contour/chamfer. You can cheat and go to create chamfer tool and use a spot drill and put a very small tip diameter on it, like .005" and then it will work or modify an existing chamfer tool. You also start by selecting the solid model then choose the edge that you want to chamfer. for video--- not my video, thanks to CamInstructor LeoC

The asterisks were added just here, not on my post. Just wanted to highlight in some way what I had changed. I used to use Surfcam and I had no problems changing the post in that program but Mastercam is a bit more advanced. Thanks again for your help. LeoC

Thanks for the pointers. I first tried your suggestions but it didn't seem to be effecting anything so I figured there must have been some other control for tapping. I ended up changing this, pmisc2$ #Canned Rigid Tapping Cycle pdrlcommonb #RH/LH based on spindle direction result = newfs(17, feed) **** changed original newsf(12,feed) to 17 and then I got my desired output**** pcan1, pbld, n$, *sgdrlref, *sgdrill, pxout, pyout, pfzout, pcout, prdrlout, *feed, strcantext, e$ pcom_movea This is what I had for fs2 17: fs2 17 0.2 0.3 #Decimal, absolute, 2/3 place (tapping feedrate) Hopefully I didn't screw something else up LeoC

I modified my tapping cycle last year and I made the huge mistake of not taking notes of what I changed, yes, I know, bad operating procedure. My post is now generating a feed rate like this, G98 G84 Z-.4 R.2 F15.625 and my desired output would be for only 2 numbers past the decimal point. I can't seem to find the trigger for controlling that output. Can someone point me in the right direction? I have included my post and control definition. Thanks, LeoC Generic Haas 3X Mill 17.pst GENERIC HAAS 3X MILL 17.mcam-mmd tap test.NC

I use one of these, the micro style, http://www.big-daishowa.com/product_page/data_15_base-master.php . Seems to work well for our needs so far, but so far the smallest tool I have used with it so far was a .006" Harvey carbide drill. I think it was around $700 for it. LeoC

Hi: Looking for some coolant advice. We are a prototyping shop that supports about 80 engineers doing product development on various projects. Materials cut are lots of plastics, aluminum and stainless steels. We have 3 CNC mills and a CNC lathe. Currently we are using Blaser Blasocut BC 20 and it usually works pretty well for us. The issue that we are having is that at times, we are slow in the machine shop while the engineers are transitioning to another project. This means that at times, the machines will set unused or very slightly used for a week at a time. Of course, when that happens, the coolant starts diluting and gets the tables rusty. We use a premixer and have and use a refractometer at times. We recently had a rep come by from Qualichem and wanted us to try their product. He gave us a pail of Q-cut 215 to try. Has anyone tried their product or can anyone recommend a coolant to use for our needs? thanks for your advice, LeoC

Have you checked this place? https://www.calmotion.com LeoC

Have you tried here, lots of stuff: https://community.mastercam.com/techexchange#files LeoC

I can confirm this, I just went through this yesterday. It is an added cost for the translator. LeoC

I use MC4SW exclusively and I have not had any problems with closing the program at all, although I use Solidworks 2017. With Solidworks 2018 and above, they included the CAM add on, make sure that it is turned off as I had found that the two do not play nicely together. As far as the 3D Connexion device, I do not use Simulation but I do have issues with the controller when using it in verify, as it doesn't work at all. It works in backplot, but not verify. LeoC

You can always try sending the files to [email protected] and explain what troubles you are having. Maybe it is a bug or how you are picking surfaces? They could tell you. LeoC