What is your normal finish pass step down ? 

Chamfering and engraving. I prefer 4 flutes, they tend to leave a better chamfer finish and no sharp hairs on the hard stuffs. Reducing the chip load really makes a difference when trying to deburr at 100 ipm. They do have a small flat but not .020, more like .003 on a 1/8.

Beam trolley over our gantry mill with electric chain hoist. Engine hoist to put tombstones on horizontals and indexers on verticals. Engine hoist are great for tight areas. Also we have large suction cups that are used on large aerospace chassis. Each one supports 300 pounds. We have three connected on a rail, just in case one fails, two will still support the part. I still wouldn't camp under it. But for large chassis or fixtures that you don't want to slide or get damaged its awesome. 

So what would be favored on a true 4th machine? Any cost difference between options on a Fanuc?

Melin has 220 degree lollipop mills pretty cheap

TCP is only for 5 axis correct?

http://www.emastercam.com/board/topic/80553-tool-and-holder-runs-through-entire-part-when-simulating-4-axis/

older thread...

I have the same issue on 3 + 1. Drilling is fine, but milling is a no go. The tool starts off in the last space from the previous operation, rather than rotating and starting from the retract point. At least that's what it looks like to me. I have seen a video of x9 and it has a way to link rotary operations to avoid these fake collisions. It would be great if I was just doing something wrong, I really could use machine sim. Mainly because the powers at be refuse to get on the x9 train. 

What about solid set screw bullets? 

5th axis consulting was nice enough to post a rotary machine sim file, with the table on the right side.

I will have to look at the rapid settings in my control defs. 

edit, I don't see why this would even matter if the tool retract is in the line before the rotary move. 

Fanuc (YCM) MXP 200 using IJKs, not r values. It was pretty good and would have been ok, but small (.003 ish lines, its been a few months) made it with no facets. I think it was more like a 22 x 15 ellipse now that I think about it. Also it may have had to do with the model because it was multiple entities before I created my own ellipse. 

edit. maybe because of the 5th decimal place? smoothing didn't work 100%

Also I have noticed that axis sub drilling is not synced with posted values. Drills at A0, but verify shows it 90 degrees off. Not an issue if the hole pattern goes all the way around a cylinder and no other features hinder the 90 degree spacing. Recently I used it to put two holes that were not symmetrically spaced with regard to rotation, posted correctly but verify had it off. 

I think it has to be a setting because there are videos of x8 on youtube doing 3+1 without the fake collisions

I have the exact same problem. Also in Verify it does something similar but does not cut material, it shows the tool in the part but no collision. 

Misc integrers did it, thanks, was loosing my mind.

No old files just old post. Started off as a mcx8 file using my mp master x8 post. Post fine with correct work coordinates, go to switch to my x8 converted v9 post. No work coordinates output. I will try the misc integrers.

I modified a mpmaster post for x8 a few months ago. When I creating my current file I had that post being my current machine. It posts just as it should however, when I go to repost using an older machine post it does not output a work coordinate. These "older" post are updated from V9.

We do a lot of weldments that take up the whole work envelope. Those are usually programmed in top view with manual entry rotary calls between operations. Parts that sit on c/l are programed in front view and associated angled views. Not a whole lot of production, so jobs constantly switch between verticals and horizontals. There are a lot of three op vertical jobs programmed in top view and go to the hmc's. Those also get a manual entry for side operation rotations. 

If its a production run sure by all means invest the resources. It looks like a bleed/vent hole....

How many do you have to make? Im sure that radi was spot on in 1970

I had a 20" x 15" ellipse, was able to reduce the facets through cut tolerance filtering. But I never got it completely smooth. Ended up drawing it with very small line segments. 

Plunging with larger diameter endmills than the probe causes error due to the endmills center clearance. Does Blum have a manual setting macro to handwheel off center to pick up a single flute? We plunge on center with all of our probes. The higher powers didn't like the idea of the tools spinning on a carbide probe surface. Anyway, a 1/2 inch endmill on a 1/2 inch chamfered probe usually picks up a .001 error. I have seen 3/4's on the same 1/2 probe be off .003. I either just account for the distance or set it manually by hand wheeling off center line. If all the tools were being set accurately but just off the same amount, it would we a work coordinate issue. Blend issues are caused from errors in picking up large and smaller tools while plunging. And if the probe face is not indicated in. 

All the Fanucs with Renishaws (ts27r), I have setup have the "z adjustment number" in two variable places. Easiest way to find out what variables are relevant is to record macro variables, run calibration and see what changed. Its around 520 like previous poster said. Also, on your blum are you just plunging on the c/l of the disk? 

 I use Helical five flutes for finishing tight holes/bores, works pretty well just have to back off the rpms a bit. 

Also, larger diameters for finishing walls, 3/4 5 flute will leave almost no taper with a spring pass on a 2.0 DOC. 

We have a 120 x 60 x 30 Viper. 50 taper with a 6000 rpm spindle. Its been a good machine, not the fastest but it has always done what it needed to do. Viper installer knew what they were doing unlike other MTB we have been dealing with. Any real specific questions feel free to PM me, we have had it for over 4 years.