So Rick you mean use minimum distance instead of minimum vertical retract? I can try that on a cheaper piece of 6061. The next block is going to be full vertical retract. Thanks.

Do not see a keep tool down on any of the parameters for that toolpath. I see .156 distance form stock and 1" absolute. top of part is Zero. Straight moves in my rapids.

looking from the bottom of the surface.

I normally force a full retract, but in a rush yada yada yada.

No. It doesn't show it violating. At first I thought the material may have chipped with a rapid move going thru an area that had heavy stock, but it looks more like a cutter gouge. Material does chip easily though.

Running X6 Surface High Speed Core Roughing. Ran the verify with the the roughing and finishing tool paths and I found no issues. However, the rapid moves in certain areas gouged my part. The part shape is a Convex shape 8" x 13" with about a 22 inch radius swelling up in the center. That little piece of Metapor ran about 500 bucks. is there a setting I missed on verify to show rapid gouges? here is what I had it set to (tool parameters). I am asking a question. I am not asking for piling by anyone about the software. Thanks

Not sure about AZ state law but our shop is a non smoking facility. Must exit the building.

I get this error. But I hit ok and it continues as if nothing was wrong. I have X6 loaded along with X5. I did the utility update. Could it be a default change that was made?

Right here.

I have been at certain places where IT thought we were all idiots so they kept permissions out of our hands. This was a complete pain doing anything locally on the pc because you had asked for rights on certain folders. The User folders seems to have helped get rid of this issue. I used the migration utility just recently, I will post if I see any issues.

You are welcome. Forgot how to drop an image on the forum... been away too long I guess.

Under machine group properties tool settings above stock.

Uncheck set sequentially .

What Mr. Paris says... and are you right clicking? or just activating the color dialogue box? You can also F4 select entity and change there. Believe that was a feature on X4. Sorry. I see right clicking. Is it a solid you are trying to change?

Oh and btw.. Yes I am a multi millionaire. I just do this for fun. When they do hand me my check... it's like they pay me for this much fun? Cool

No. Sorry for the confusion. I leave my data in its native form (solid model). On occasion I will create surface from solids to use as check surfaces or if its shut off I don't want to hit but roll over I will take the runoff as surfaces and raise them up a couple grand.

I use the surfacing toolpaths on solid models. I used mostly surfaces back in X4 and prior. I seemed to have hit a nerve with you. Your not being impressed with me really hurts. I have been a CAD/CAM supervisor. I know that some guys (typically younger guys) try to take the easy way out. Mostly due to lack of experience. Newer is not always better. It is sometimes faster attacking the toolpaths with your head. I do try and will try everything that is offered in the new releases and determine whether or not I think its worth it to go that route. I typically do not try them on rush jobs or when I am under time constraints. That's all I am saying on the matter.

Right. I have cut and programmed 12 ton cavity and cores. With thousands of surfaces. I know process speed are slowed down when trying to filter through of the restmill cr&p. It is far faster for me to throw a quick boundary up and USE my Moronic head and get the results I want quicker. But I guess that's because I have been doing this since 1992 so I am very good in figuring that stuff out.

Rick, on the pencil do you pick all surfaces? Or limit to the ones that are actually around cutter contact? Reason I ask this... I am too impatient to have the processor go through all of the surfaces. I would just pick the ones I need to seeing you have a boundary. Picking just those contact surfaces still causes it to fail?

I am with you. Some of the complaints I am sure are legitimate. But some like complaining about the drill tip angle default setting? Seriously? Default values to me are irrelevant. I typically create my own tool library, op library and so on. I believe some issues can be compatibility. I mean by that is... what is running on the PC...running files on a network... network traffic etc... I think another possibility and I know some folks may take issue with it is using some of the new "techniques" out of laziness. What I mean by that... yes they offer restmill this and that and all of these "cool" toolpaths. Trying to make it look like it saves us time, but in all actuality it really is just saving us the trouble of figuring out best practices for cutting. Whether it is the programmer or the model itself... some errors may occur between the chair and the keyboard/mouse. I am not saying that the new stuff shouldn't work, but I find some of them just window dressing. As far as the HS scallop, I haven't had an issue with it, but I will say I haven't used surfaces. When I get the chance I will try my solid models as surfaces and see how that works.

I have tried it just to check. Really is not something I use. I delete duplicates in the beginning. PC's nowadays can pretty much handle it. No crashes. Tried it on several files.

Had that happen.

Don't use it anymore. Electrodes are all designed in UG, SW., or Cat. However I do remember how much I liked the surface extend feature (untrim or something of that name) to extend the surface for run off or tool run off for oversized blocks or electrodes.

I see it more if I am rechaining or reselecting geometery.

You may also want to check under properties...tool settings by the stock setup page. assign from tool or material.