I programmed wire many many years ago. For this case you may want to start offsetting those finish surfaces and creating your own core cut paths. Just my suggestion.

If the same tool is moving between planes, try for test purposes only, check force tool change then run the simulator. I would use to check the force tool change if I was unsure about what I was seeing in the simulation. I most cases I sometimes left them in and posed code. It does not hurt and may save a crash.

To me if a form tool is used or even a t slot cutter the tool axis vector needs to be kept perpendicular to the floor or you'll "wash" out the form behind the tool. That's what I visualize as what can happen. Is this something that is being considered?

I had similar issues with our IT "pushing" updates. I had to go back and update the graphics card drivers right from the Nvidia (in my case) web site. At least check the drivers you are running and compare with the latest available.

How about Analyze, Dynamic. Check the normal vector values. Would that not be the same with parallel faces. As long as the normal direction is the same. Make surface and flip them to point in the same direction if needed. Try it, not sure if it's what you are looking for.

Mine seems OK. Zoom out as your default distance throws it off screen????

Try turning lead in/out on for contour. For a pocket I don't think it will call dia comp

Thanks for the feedback. Would you mind to mention if you milled it in the pre-sintered state? It looks like you did. Then the piece was sintered, correct. What was the appx rpm you used and feed per tooth. Looks good, we appreciate the information you have given.

Same here. Had to update drivers from Nvidia and use their app for setting what uses which card. A Win updated killed all that was once working.

Can let us know the OS and ver/build. (ie; Win10 ver 1909??) Also is it lap top with an on board vcard. Do you have another vcard and is 2021 assigned to use that card. Update the vcard with chipset drivers not Win issued drivers.

I'm not an expert but have done some reading. Is the Z block pre-sintered. If so then a 10K-30K rpm spindle and light fpt due to the small tools (carbide). Apparently there is going to be shrinkage 20-30% (after sintering- like making pressed inserts) but that's what I have read. Sinter then final polish and colour to suit. Milling after sintering??? Here's a link to some interesting info. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/12/19/3253/pdf Enjoy and let the group know what you discovered. Maybe a few of us will learn a thing or two. I would be interested to know what worked out best for this application. I'm not involved in dental work.

draw in a small entry move at your contour start and check these in the lead in/out. Test is as i don't normally use this feature but I think it turns the comp on above the contour

I'm going to think that you checked that you are in G94 fpm mode??? If that's what you need.

I would do a simplified 3d block sketch of the vise/base to use as guide when you work on your created planes. I had a look at the file and am not sure about your paths on the front and back planes. With the simple vise giving a bit of clarity of the table orientation you can get a clear idea of the plane definition required. Spend a 1/2 hr out the machine to get a better understanding of the table orientations you have to deal with. This is what seems to work for me in getting thing straight in my head.

I've done something similar by setting up a single plane and using 3ax surface finish contour to rough out a gear tooth. Then rotated the operation using transform for the remaining teeth. You have to play around to get that 1st plane set up to mill what ever you can.. It may work for your application.

I don't know how you would tie in CSS with Y axis cut off motion. Normally the rpm change is with the X motion. Let us know. Also setting up the tool offset for Y axis cut off is to be considered.

No, not the mastercam ver of swarf. Not that I know of anyway. The module works ver of swarf is more involved but I think even for that the tool is working on just one side. If you can complete a wall for guiding the tool around to cut both sides then try it that way. Maybe others who use this toolpath more often then I do can offer more advice. I just make 2 ops to cut both sides.

@westernoftexas: here is a sample. It's mcam 2019 pov_DWG_00005074_OGS_FINAL_SPRIAL.mcam

I like using swarf 4ax output. Keeps the tool side cutting along the wall. The tool needs to shift off on Y in a vert machine with a rot axis.

I ran the op's thru AR setup sheets

Running this toolpath group (1-26) thru vericut quickly shows just about 29min

I don't know what goes on with backplot times...op6 reports 16min???

For the old school swarf it's under the collision control- Distance above lower rail (use +/-). For the new "Swarf Milling" toolpath I believe it's under Multi Cuts and then set the tool shifts to constant and then enter a value in the "To" field. I's been a while since I used the newer swarf but I think that's what does it...Try it out

I'm getting the same result with a quick toolpath check using mpfan. Looks like psccomp post call may be missing from parts of ltlchg$

My guess would be to create a rotated top plane to the angle of the cut you want to make for the scoring blade. This is OK for 1-2 cuts on the top plane but if you are doing many angle cuts then creating all those planes is going to become a chore. I created a router post many, many years ago that looked at the angle of the single contour scoring line and output the angle as a head rotation. There is a post command to calculate the angle of motion. I would never remember how I did this....