3 hours ago, nickbe10 said:

So you want to identify the coordinates of a plane that does not exist yet? Is this in Mastercam Space or in the Machine Space?

Not quite. The plane would exist in Mastercam, it just wouldn't be used in any operations. It's sole purpose would be to allow me to reference a point on a fixture within the post, and provide a visually friendly way for our programmers to define said point. 

2 hours ago, jeff.D said:

You can call a NET-Hook from the post and use the NET-Hook to interrogate the Mastercam file.

If you wanted to use a system plane for this I think you could do it in the post without creating a extra toolpath, provided you are in 2017 or later (I realize that a system plane is limiting) .

 

Looks like this is where I'll probably have to go. I'll search around on the forums, but does anyone have any Mastercam 3rd party development documentation they'd be willing to share? I have an email in to my reseller as well. 

Never mind. Was able to access the documentation on Mastercam's website. 

Thanks for all the fast responses!

Hi everyone. I'm wondering if there's a way to access the coordinates of a plane that is not used in any operations. My end goal is to have our programmers to define a plane at a reference point on a fixture, and then pull the coordinates from that plane into the post so I can do some conditional logic. Is there anyone who can get me pointed in the right direction? I've searched through the MP documentation but nothing has jumped out at me. 

Thanks!

3 hours ago, Rich Thomas 4D Engineering said:

Circle 5-axis produces what is known internally as Type 11, or G11 moves.  These are always linear; in fact they aren't just XYZ positions they are XYZUVW coordinates and are used in all the other multiaxis toolpaths too (as far as I know).  Type 11 moves cannot be converted/filtered into arcs I'm afraid.  

If you really must have arcs then you'll have to create planes and use the 2D Circle Mill cycle.

I was afraid that was the case. Thanks for the explanation!

For some reason I can't get Circle 5 Axis to output arcs, it always outputs linear segments. There's no Arc Filter option in this tool path and this happens with multiple post-processors. Does anyone have a fix for this so I can get G02/G03 moves or am I stuck with what I currently have?

Any input is appreciated! Thanks! 

Hi everyone. In past releases of Mastercam I've been able to set the .Workspace file to read only so that it's not overwritten every time Mastercam is shut down. However, in 2019 if I set it to read only Mastercam will open briefly and then immediately crash. I've tested this on multiple PCs with the same result. 

I have multiple PCs that access a common workspace file on a network. I need to find a solution to this so my "default" workspace isn't constantly changing. Does anybody have a good workaround for this? 

Thanks!

Thanks for the replies everyone. This forum is a fantastic resource. Sounds like it's time for me to jump headfirst into the world of NET-hooks. 

Hi all. I'm trying to create a true/false variable for use within my post where 1=all operations have been posted or 0=not all operations have been posted. I'm comfortable writing the logic, but the problem I'm having is determining the total number of operations in a toolpath group regardless of which operations are posted. Being that only operations selected for posting are output to the NCI file, is there any way to "look ahead" to see if any operations exist after the last posted operation? Any help is appreciated! 

Thanks Matthew. That's the best explanation I've heard yet. I might give the highest ranked single thread processor a try.

Does anyone have any sense for what role, if any, the graphics card plays when Mastercam is number crunching? From what I'm seeing it looks like it does absolutely nothing. Like I said in my original post the only time I can get the GPU to spike to 100% usage  is when rotating a model in the graphics screen. If I were to upgrade the video card would I see any improvement in processing time?  

35 minutes ago, C^Millman said:

In the Multi Thread manager are you right clicking on the process and kicking them up to high? I see major reduction doing that. Before anyone asks no there is no way to force it to stay high and yes the user must do this for every operation and yes it is a pain and yes I(we) have requested it going back to X9 and no I have no idea when it will get added to the software ad yes I will argue with anyone that says it doesn't make a difference because I have tested it numerous times and have well over 100 different people who back me on that making a nice difference. Sorry not directed at you just a general answer to many that may read this and have questions that hopefully I just covered.

Just gave this a try and I'm seeing roughly the same result;  ~5 minutes from start to finish. I took screenshots of the CPU usage again and compared them with the screenshots I took when the operations were set to normal priority. The graph profiles look almost identical with only a few minor differences.  

Thanks for all the replies. Below is a series of screenshots (taken in order) showing the resource monitor while regenerating the operations in the benchmark file. The CPU usage looks like it spikes to 100% when it starts processing a new toolpath, but then rapidly drops to 50% or below. Along with this the memory usage is never above 20% and it looks like the GPU isn't getting worked at all. Can this be right?

1 hour ago, Colin Gilchrist said:

Read up on the "Benchmark Thread". You'll get some good recommendations on Processors, RAM, and Video Cards that work together to make the best Mastercam system possible.

The first question I would ask is: what is your percentage of available RAM that your system is set to use? (Look in your Configuration Dialog) I recommend setting this to between 70-80% of available RAM.

 

 

I took a look at this (configuration>toolpaths>memory buffering). It's set to 95% of physical memory. I've also read through the benchmark thread. My computer comes in at 4:48 which doesn't seem too bad in comparison.  

Suppose I upgrade to the best processor and video card money can buy. Will Mastercam still only work the processor to its full potential a fraction of the time (or not at all in the case of the GPU)? If this is the case it seems any improvement wouldn't be very significant.

Am I crazy for thinking that Mastercam is the performance bottleneck here, and not the hardware?  

Something that's always perplexed me and that I've never been able to get a straight answer to, is why Mastercam doesn't use all of the system's resources when it's number crunching? It seems like I'm frequently waiting on Mastercam to generate toolpaths, post process, run machine simulation, etc., but if I glance at the system's performance the CPU utilization is rarely over 50%, memory is almost never over 15%, and the GPU only maxes out if I have a complex model that I rotate in the graphics window. 

I ask because we're trying to cut back our time spent on programming. If we could decrease Mastercam's processing time it would have a huge impact on how long it takes us to program parts (we do a lot of surfacing and multiaxis toolpaths). If it was as simple as upgrading our computer's hardware I'd gladly do it, but it doesn't seem like this would make any difference if Mastercam isn't working our current hardware to its full potential.

So, in summary I guess I have three questions:

1. Am I missing something fundamental in my understanding of how Mastercam uses the system's resources?

2. Is this consistent with what everyone else is seeing on their PCs?

3. Is there anything I can do (or hardware that I can buy) to substantially reduce Mastercam's processing times? 

Thanks in advance for any help!

• Mastercam 2018 running on Windows 10
• Intel i7-7700 CPU @ 3.6GHz
• 32GB of RAM
• Nvidia GeForce GT730

Awesome. Thanks!

Does anyone have a copy of the benchmark file? The link seems to be broken. I'd like to see how my system stacks up.