Verified Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19 Good

About pete_hull

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Location
    sea level

Recent Profile Visitors

548 profile views
  1. pete_hull

    Incremental contour

    Colin, Thank you for taking the time to come up with this very elegant solution. I don't know if you have had experienced similar, but the challenge was to use a HMC as a VTL substitute, and incremental moves with a B360. on each line has worked well, so wanted to figure out this little irksome issue. Not being patronizing when I say that having read many of your contributions to this forum, the level of your knowledge and your willingness to assist is exceptional . Thanks again.
  2. pete_hull

    Incremental contour

    I'm trying to get mcam2018 to output a contour toolpath in .02 incremental moves in G91 mode. I'm controlling it with the segment length setting on the Arc Filter / Tolerance page. I modified an existing Fanuc post and the output looks good - Except - consistently on the first entity of the contour (7 line/arc entities total), whatever I do, the .02 segment length control is ignored . If I reverse direction , the segment control is ignored on what was previously the last entity so direction makes no difference . I'm getting around it by adding a piece of fake geometry at the start of the contour, but I am curious as to why this is happening.
  3. pete_hull

    Mill-Turn Machine Recommendation

    analogous to the beatles being the "british monkees"
  4. pete_hull

    quantity of programmers required rule of thumb?

    There once was a speedy hare who bragged about how fast he could run. Tired of hearing him boast, Slow and Steady, the tortoise, challenged him to a race. .....
  5. pete_hull

    Horizontal Programming your method?

    I am not trying to convert anybody, but I've always programmed toolpaths from the perspective of looking down the tool , and the tool axis 0,0,1 normal to the XYplane is the same on a vertical and horizontal, so what's the advantage in programming them differently? .This is the way it is in the Cartesian geometry of APT.All the Top/Front Top/Top etc loses me, I accept that's maybe how CNC software want to do it but I don't like it.
  6. Thanks Colin. That is very good to know.
  7. Does this mean that the Tool Plane must be the Front Plane relative to the currently active Top WCS, or that it must be specifically the Mastercam 'Top/Front' planes ? ( which would necessitate moving the part geometry) ? Thanks
  8. pete_hull

    Rolling Back Version

    Thanks for your valued advise. I am really disappointed to be going this route, as I clearly macam2018 works just fine for others, but at this point I think its my best option.
  9. pete_hull

    Rolling Back Version

    Unfortunately for me, Mcam2018 has been a series of frustrations eg. slow toolpath processing ,multiple buggy issues, crashing, tool library issues, glacially slow verify etc, to such an extent that I am giving up before I waste any more time with it . I don't need any of the 'lipstick on a pig veneer' that the latest release usually has, so I don't routinely install every new version, and I regret installing mcam2018 as my efficiency has dropped significantly . I am not trying to claim that it's bad software, but for whatever reason that I have been unable to pinpoint, it has been a very bad experience for me. I am running on the same hardware and O/S as the previous (mcamx8) version, so I know that's not the issue. I am not a computer guru, and also have the problem, as many do, of working with an indifferent IT dept. I have little sovereignty over my computer settings, and after months of trying, we have failed to find the cause of many of the problems that persist. At least as a short term fix, I am cutting my losses and intend to reinstall Mcamx8, which ran like a Rolls-Royce. I have a very large visibility project imminent and can't afford any time to be continually battling software issues . Again this is not to bash the product which I have used and advocated for many years , but for whatever reason(s), mcam2018 has been a lemon. I still have my mcamx8 installation disk, tool libraries, posts/machine defs etc. I know that there is the issue of backwards compatibility for mcam2018 created files, but I can live with that for now. My question is, will I need to uninstall mcam2018 before I try to re-install mcamx8? Are there any other issues that I may not be aware of?
  10. pete_hull

    Adding g8 to fadal format1 post

    if (opcode$ = three), pcan1, pbld, n$, *sgcode, *sgabsinc, "G9", pwcs, pfxout, pfyout, *speed, *spindle, pgear, strcantext, e$ else, pcan1, pbld, n$, *sgcode, *sgabsinc, "G8", pwcs, pfxout, pfyout, *speed, *spindle, pgear, strcantext, e$ is how I do it.
  11. pete_hull

    Mastercam 2018-freezing-stuttering

    Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately can't link to due to our bullet proof security set to paranoia level.Once again I'll refer it back to IT and hope for a miracle .
  12. pete_hull

    Mastercam 2018-freezing-stuttering

    IT recently eviscerated my computer due to an apparent 'threat'. Was happily running MC2017 - like a Rolls-Royce. After wipe & reload of Win7 Pro 64bit os, MC2018 was installed - so far has been a bobcad-esque experience. Before I start ripping the product, which I like and have used for years, I notice that it is very slow to fire-up & after the initial splash screen 'Loading commands...' etc the screen momentarily goes blank before continuing to start-up (Quadro M2000). Never used to do this. It seems sluggish in every respect, esp. verify which is glacially slow. Backplot will not display many of the tool holders from my Tool catalog I built in mcam2017. I know the product can't be this bad, its gotta be some or other setting. Bearing in mind I have almost zero sovereignty over my computer - any suggestions ?
  13. pete_hull

    Compensation Poll - Take the poll

    It had actually not crossed my mind that anyone would by choice employ the 'control compensation' method until the issue came up a few years ago on my first day on the job with a new employer. During 'orientation' the supervisor informed me that their policy was to use what they termed 'centerline programming' with the compensation applied at the control. I was absolutely blindsided by this news and my incredulity at hearing this was clearly betrayed by the dumbfounded 'for what possible reason?'' look on my face. Afterall I had to believe the genius developers of APT at MIT had necessarily included the 'CUTTER' statement for good reason( yes, I know you can set it to '0'). Anyhow, I was thankfully tendered an instant 'get out of jail', when my prolonged look of disbelief was rewarded with an offer that I was free to use whichever method I was more comfortable with. Not totally sure but I think some of the older machines I worked on did not have diameter compensation anyway.
  14. pete_hull

    Why I have stuck with X7sp2

    switched from x8 to 2017 same opinion. Not exactly lipstick on a pig scenario, because I like Mastercam, but superficial changes to a 'click rich' interface that don't add a lot of value, waste of money and especially time. Maintenance should be invested in innovative, substantive changes driven by user demand.
  15. pete_hull

    Catia - save out file.

    ..or just open a new part window and copy/paste it - save as v5.

Join us!

eMastercam - your online source for all things Mastercam.

Together, we are the strongest Mastercam community on the web with over 56,000 members, and our online store offers a wide selection of training materials for all applications and skill levels.

Follow us