Blend works on the driving chains on the centerline... The inner curves, I always offset by .001" less that half the dia of the tool...that keeps it from diving down further

Here you go David... https://www.dropbox.com/s/veibgjwn3u6wpze/tombstone%20sample.mcam?dl=0 Now, the 99998888 is a raw posted file but you can see the offsets have output with a "basic" note on the origins...if you look inside of the 653 file, you can see how it looks after I clean it all up and get it ready for the machines. Perhaps a couple caveats that won't fit what you're specifically planning on doing.... When it comes to our HMC's almost every single job a I program is a production job, the quantities are into the thousands and many run for several years, if not longer. We have parts running still that were orignially done in 2010, some sooner, On those, we set up at the begining of the years with 100,000 parts schehuled...many times later in the year we have to added a couple 10,000's to our yearly numners. Consider when I came here, every program was output in incremental, every single offset have to be picked up by hand.....programs were created to run one part, once proven, the program came back into programming to have all of the transforms done, subprograms we non-existant....and then re-sent to the machine to be proven again and then signed off by QC. Desptie attempts, there was "no" standards....tombstone sizes with guesstimated, Y offsets were given off the top of the tombstone, all tombstone were aluminum and made in-house....there was a LOT of manual interdiction and work that HAD to be done to get a job running. Many times, it was a month or more..... Now, programs are completly done ahead of time, I set all of those macro skips in it to allow running flexibilty. The setup guys and set it to run a single part and get that part signed off, they can then start tuening on faces and get those signed off.....ALL of the offsets are calculated in my post, and output as you see in the 99998888 file. We've moved over to cast iron tombstones, every one we have purchased has gone into the machine within a .001" of centerline...we square them up just to "clean", they have a hard number to hit....if we are using hard tooling as in the sample file, those numbers are spot on...I just finished up a job, 4 sides, 8 parts on the upper section of the plate, 8 parts on the lower section of the tombstone....the upper section is Mitee Bites, the lower section is steel fixtures that in process parts can be mounted on to for machining. The guys running the show down there he hits the numbers I give him, this job was set to run a single part, it ran through clean with no adjustments to the offsets.....he turned on all 4 sides, not a single adjustment excpet for a diamter comp to hold a size and got the who tombstone signed off,... If I were doing a single part, I would never use this method....but in a production area, setups have gone from a month+ sometimes where we can get through an entire setup, signed off and running in a couple days...and I mean to carve that time down even further.

I am about to make some people fall of their chairs... Haas....great startup machines...in a few years after you hopefully establish yourself, look to upgrade.

Yes, the WCS is ALWAYS Top.....The T&C planes are origins where ever you want them.... The machine parameters "know" where the COR of rotation is, in this case, that doe not need to be accounted for...as it's already in the machine. Yes, when you set your T&C place, you have an "origin" established at the point...you can choose which G54/G54.1P?? whatever.. My post automagically output all G5* origin locations, they get set via a G10 line... I sent you a message, shoot me your email, I'll send over a sample file of how "I" do it...

Spot on!!!! If people understood exactly how much time and effort I have put into "me" they'd be floored. Hours upon hours, upon hours. I am never done learning, I am always exploring new things, new ways and new ideas....despite what some people think, you can learn something from everyone.

Years ago I was doing some one on one training with a customer....we going over somethings and he asked me, "What's better, solids or surfaces?" He's still around this forum and the other, so he may remember asking me... My answer to him was, "you really need to have both of them in your toolbox, they both serve purpose and at times one will give you a better result than another" and I stand by that to this day. In and around the same timeframe, a company, who was not a Mastercam customer by the way, contacted us and asked about some contract programming time.....well, they sent in the file and it was a large engine casing....that single solid was so heavy in the system, that as I programmed it and the file size grew, I would literally get up and hit the mathroom, get a cup of coffee, grab a snack come back and sit down and still wait a minute or 2 for the dialog to open... That's no way to program....10pm at night, I'm in hotel room in CT, bitching here on this forum and someone suggested converting it to surfaces and dumping the solid....as soon as I did that, the file performance was like night and day..... I am not saying don't use solids but saying be careful copying solids too many times, they bloat the file.....and in my world any way, it makes the inevitable Rev chamnges easier too :) JM2C YMMV

Let's see, really a 2 part thing here...I "try" not to copy solids unless I have to...I'll pull surfaces in many cases and clean those up...the reasoning is 2 fold... 1 Copying solids too many times will inflate your file size and affect performance... 2. Surfaces are just lighter weight and have more tools to clean them up and create things to assist in machining

For me, it was really just practice....none of the available material will cover all the scenerios that you run into from part to part to part.... After you've done it for a bit, you get a really good idea of which toolpaths react best to the surfaces that you're going to apply them machine. To the best of my knowledge, there's really no one tutorial or video that will cover all the info that you'll acquire from experience.

Seems to me I saw that same error a LONG TIME ago in a galaxy far, far away.... If memory serves me right it has to do with the .net installations.... May need to uninstalled the .netframewrork and reinstall it....but it's been awhile

I would say going to the people that wrote the post is the next step.. If you've figured out what the machine needs then go to the post people and give them that info... If you don't know what the machine needs then you need to get with the machine people to figure that out first

I would go this way, I'd bump it up to 64gigs RAM and 2 SSD's...that I9 will blow that Xeon away or Workstation 2: - HP Z2 G9 -- Intel i9-12900k (8C+8C/24T @ 3.2GHz) -- 32GB DDR5 (or 64GB?) -- Nvidia RTX A4000 - 16GB -- 1TB PCIe 4.0 nVm

You can use a file to import them them... Set up your file with level names, then in the Level Mangler, right click sand export levels... you can then import it or create a seed file setup the way you want, open that, import your geometry and do a "Save As"

It used to be available on the Verisurf website for downloading

Well, you'll have to pardon the bit of boohoo on my end...there is a cost asscoaietd with it... Can it work, yes, the results of doing it are painfully slow...it would need to be left on the work system, Mastercam running and you would need to log into that system with a screen sharing app and run it remotely...it's painful, it's slow and no way to program remotely, if it crashes, you cannot restart it remotely...the other option is carying the HASP home and then carrying your files back & forth. To really be able to program efficiently remotely, a network license is really necessary....

I come at this more from the support side of things...having done support for several years.... So many problems I saw were directly related to systems that simply were not up to the task....single biggest being video cards, followed by poor performance and long crunch times becasue the CPU & RAM..and to a smaller degree slow hard drives.... A business generally buys computers for the longer term. They don't replace them every year or two and as computer demands change they NEED to be at least slightly ahead of where they are NOW. What I would consider a minimal CAD/CAM system that's going to function well and not be outdated tomorrow is generally going to put you in the $2500-$3500 range. CAM systems like CPU clock & bus speed 1st, Video card 2nd and RAM 3rd.... My last system, which died last September and had been with me since July of 2015 we even still better spec'd than what you're thinking.... Spend it once and get something better or believe me, you'll end up buying another one sooner rather than later. JM2C YMMV

You may have to go WAY into the training manuals, pre-V9...to find that kind of info any more... More or less, you can peel off edge curves, and using, Netsurface, Coons, Loft, Sweep...the Help file is somewhat reasonable of utilizing each of the different surfacing types... BTW, where in Nah' Hampsha'

To answer your question more dorectly, no, you do not need to reprogram.... Your WCS is TOP, it stays TOP but your T & C planes are reflective of your actual part origin....so that all you would need to adjust is your G5? of G54.1P?

IMO, short of changing CAM systems...this is one of the hardest and dangerous changes that can be made in a shop. There are just too many opportunities for an operator or a setup guy that's not paying close attention to be bitten....HARD! cncappsjames is offering a good way way to move down this path. The key will be to have something in the new programs that is different and WILL STAND OUT....that's an attention getter...the other big thing is to try to make sure that you use Wear comp in a consistent manner...this helps operators to transition in the new more easily, instead of having to wonder how it's used in this program...for me, I use wear only, I make all of my cuts using wear & G41 for climb milling....this means a consistent use of +/- wear values reacting the same way. On those only a handful of instances where a feature gets cut in a conventional cut, I use G42 and i note the hell out of the program so that it stands out. Trying to balance between the 2 uses will be fraught with danger.....make the change and automate as you can, loading offsets(G10) clearing diameter comp values, and notate, notate, notate.

If I understand, that is where you would want to use some tilt or lead/lag angling to get the cut off of the tip and more on the periphery Walls of course being mostly an exception

I've seen Mastercam used on Waterjets, lasers, depending on the output necessary, I imagine it is likely able to be accomplished.

Who the hell are you? and WTF with all the "satan spaces"? :P

Did you ask your reseller? What did they say?

I disagree... That will change it for all drill cycles...he has asked especially about peck drilling, that's exactly why I broke it out into the ppeck_2$ postblock

OK, so I went at this a bit differently to maintain the absolute/incremental flexibily... I tested it quickly but don't fly blind with this until you've verified its accuracy across different uses. N100 G20 N110 G0 G17 G40 G49 G80 G90 N120 T124 M6 N130 G0 G90 G54 X-.0052 Y1.0964 A0. S1069 M3 N140 G43 H124 Z1. N150 G98 G83 Z-.5 R.1 Q.125 F4.28 N160 G98 G83 X1.0208 Y.1432 Z-.5 R.1 F4.28 N170 G98 G83 X.9948 Y-.7526 Z-.5 R.1 F4.28 N180 G98 G83 X-.125 Y-1.3307 Z-.5 R.1 F4.28 N190 G98 G83 X-1.1823 Y-.5964 Z-.5 R.1 F4.28 N200 G98 G83 X-1.2344 Y.4505 Z-.5 R.1 F4.28 N210 G80 N220 M5 N230 G91 G28 Z0. N240 G28 X0. Y0. A0. N250 M30 **Edit, quick screen cap change, I had left out the peck1$ by accident

I do...WCS Top and planes wherever I need them...we don't have G68.2 on the HMC's....on our 5 axis machines, we have G68.2 and I do use that on those I'm not sure I would use it on the HMC's even if I had it on them, unless something really required it for best use....I don't do any real 4 axis simultaneous cutting them. We could, just have had the need.