That sets whether shading is active or not, but there is no check box for edge display when shaded. David's used to be off by default, and now it is on by default. Mine is off by default, and maybe I want it on, and grey. Neither of us can figure out how to make it stick. We know that the behavior we want is possible, we just don't know where to make the change.

I am going to be no help, but I wanted this to be on by default I couldn't figure out how to do that. I also wanted grey rather than black. I couldn't figure out how to make that stick, either. This was with X2, I haven't loaded X3 yet. I wanted the edges hilighted, until I figured out that this made video performance really bad and jerky, and this is with a good graphics card. Maybe this has been fixed in X3?

I am guessing a spiral toolpath on a cone isn't a helix- the radius changes continually in the z axis.

I am going to complain and say this doesn't work like it used to, and it is worse. The right click - "all selected on" or "all selected off" option isn't there anymore, and current behavior is somewhat unpredictable. If you select a range of levels by click- shift click, you just toggle visibility in that selection, e.g., if you wanted all the selected on, and there were some on already, those would get turned off. If the first level was off, your initial click turns it on, and then when you shift-click the end of the range, the first level gets turned back off. You can sort of get around some of this, but I think the behaviour is a step backwards. While I am griping about the level list, it appears you get one chance and one chance only to "get named levels". If your source level names list isn't correct to begin with, going through the "get named levels" exercise doesn't update any level that already has a name. Is there something I am missing? Does anybody else feel this way?

Hijack on Neil Que pasa?

So, after a year or two of low level griping about my MC rig (it had issues beyond distance from cutting edge), I got a new system. Old computer: Dell Precision 360 Intel Pentium 2 2.8 Win XP Pro 1G RAM Quadro FX 500 12:56 It would slow down a bit if I had much else running. New computer: Dell Precision T5400 Intel Xeon quad core 3.16G Win XP Pro 64 Bit 8G RAM Quadro FX 4600 5:05 out of the box, no tweaking yet. Right on. Incidently, RealView in SW2008 looks pretty good with this card.

- Thread hijack- Ken On a hunch, I looked up Oviso Manufacturing. I interviewed there for an engineering position in 2002 when it was Isys. I could have interviewed with you for all I know. - thread unhijack-

What happens at 5 decimal places? If you drew a point at an angle and distance, I would guess this would be a result of trig rounding. If you drew them at an XY location, this would be an odd (not obviously explained) result.

Settings > Configuration > Shading has no place to either turn on either outline shaded edges or adjust the color (I like a shade of grey rather than black). I also can't get it to default to dim hidden edges, they are either hidden altogether or not dimmed at all, and it isn't clear how to make which the default. I want outline shaded edges, in grey, to be the default, along with dimmed hidden edges when shading is turned off. Can this be done?

In screen> shade settings, you can turn on edge display and select a color. You can also choose how hidden edges are displayed in wireframe (or not displayed). I can't find where to change the default behavior in Settings>>Configuration. Can it be changed?

Matts are outnumbering Johns in this thread

I hadn't tried Mastercam Direct in a while, so I just installed the latest version. It doesn't appear in assembly mode, so I saved the assembly as a part and launched Mastercam Direct there. It opens Mastercam, but not the part. I know it used to, but I don't even see where I can change anything. In any case, you can't control how the file ends up in Mastercam with Mastercam Direct, I don't think. What I want to do is extract the Assembly tree out of Solidworks so I can import that into Mastercam as the level list. I can get close, but I want to cut down on the hand editing required. Am I describing the issue any better? I don't think I did too good on my first try.

I know some others are doing all their layout planning-fixturing-etc., in Solidworks, as I am attempting. If I save the file as a parasolid, and then bring in solids only into Mastercam, each solid in the assembly is on its own level. Cool, but there is no identification of what is actually on each level. At this point, I can extract a BOM in excel format from solidworks, save as a CSV file, and bring into Mastercam. This has been working, but the BOM from solidworks will list qty 12 pit bulls, for instance, instead of 12 individual pit bulls. The levels match up to the order the parts appear in the solidworks assembly, but the BOM starts needing some editing when there is more than one part in the assembly. How are others handling this, or am I just making this too complicated?

Tolerance? "take about 4mm off the top". I didn't measure it, but it wasn't visibly deformed. The part holds little vials that sit flush with the existing top. We needed some clearance so a gripper could come down and grab the vial. I've seen (pictures) of the Witte Icevice, I think their literature says -20 is optimal. For an experiment, I put this on an aluminum block with a film of water. It was sticking really good, but the aluminum got to room temperature in about 5 minutes. If we put our physicist hats on, water has "an extraordinarily high latent heat of transformation" associated with going from ice to water, so it will stay solid for a while. For this particular part, I just threw it on a manual mill and gave it a haircut (posts only, not the perimeter). I have also used the cerro-bismuth alloys for holding a series of parts I cut out of a single block. It worked great for aluminum, I melted out the alloy in hot water. The parts were floating on top of the alloy, and the alloy didn't stick to the aluminum at all. It left residue on stainless when I tried it there.

Yep, short sleeves. I was thinking "this isn't that bad" when I first walked in (and thinking it was a mere -80F), but that went away pretty quickly. It really hits you when you walk out- "I'm cold and I wasn't in there very long". There are some beefy parkas outside the door, I will be wearing one if I have to be in there more than a minute.

A search didn't turn up anything on this, so I thought I would share... I was handed a plastic part that had a bunch of approx 5mm across sort of square posts sticking up, with the request to take 4mm off the top. I tried supporting them with wax, which worked great for the support portion, but the wax reacted in a negative way with the plastic, which subsequently crumbled. So I filled the part with water and froze it. This worked great, and cleaned way easier than wax. The interesting side story is the freezer. We have a walk-in "-80" freezer here, that I hadn't been in before. You are getting a bit chilly after 30 seconds inside. It turns out that it is -80C, that works out to -112F.

I went skiing Saturday at Big Bear, about 1-1/2 hours from Irvine. If you didn't want snow that day, you could just stay in Irvine. To continue the hijack- One 4th of July weekend when I was living in the Bay Area, I went snow skiing on the 4th and waterskiing on the 5th. I think I rode my dirtbike the following day. Pretty cool.

I can't help, but I sure would like to see pictures of this, if the typical work around Livermore doesn't prohibit it.

Significant digits are not addressed in ANSI Y14.5. I think tolerances are absolute, .0002 > .000 no matter how many times you count. Think of this another way. What would be your response if they were .0002 undersize and the inspector/client complained that was too close to .000?

The issue wasn't with opening, MC would open the way it was when it was closed. It occurs when unlocking the computer. So.... saving a toolbar state is helping (a lot) with the toolbar issue, so thanks for that suggestion. I have now fumbled around with the resizing with no result that my strategy has switched to making IT share my irritation and make them figure it out. I'll share if we ever find a fix. Thanks again.

OK, IT around here recently implemented an automatic workstation locking system, which is probably a sound security measure. The problem is, after unlocking, Mastercam, previously stretched across 1-1/2 monitors, is reduced to 1 monitor, and the toolbars are rearranged. Dragging it back to the previous position does not put the toolbars back, so they have to be dragged individually to their prior position. This is an irritating nuisance. This happens in Solidworks as well, but the Solidworks toolbars will return to their previous positions. And just to really confound the situation, of the 5 engineers here, this is happening to 4 of us, and isn't happening to 1. So, the question is, does anyone know how to 1) fix this so that applications covering more than 1 monitor return to their previous state, and/or 2) set Mastercam so at least the toolbars go back where they were after resizing? The office computers are running Nvidia Quadro FX3400 cards, with various driver levels (I am running the current Solidworks blessed driver). The shop computer with both Solidworks and Mastercam is running an Nvidia Quadro FX500 card. I am guessing there is some setting buried somewhere to fix this, but I've stumbled around in the dark long enough with no real clue what I am looking for. Any help appreciated. TIA

I don't know anything about X+ (been meaning to look into it), but if the list can be exported as a text file or .csv file, it can be imported into Excel without too much effort.

I used to have a coworker who described this kind of activity as "like a pack of dogs around a fire hydrant, all having to xxxx on it to leave their scent." This pretty well described 99% of the activity at the Shipyard we were working at. Like some others, our engineer, programmer, setup guy, and operator are fairly harmonious.

quote: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Considering what monitors now cost, everyone should have two monitors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hey...can you tell that to my bosses...and the bean counters....I'd love to have dual 20" in flat screens. This seems to be a common problem, I'm not sure how to address this. It is illogical in this industry. When you consider what tools cost (how many are programming for over $1 million worth of tools?), and what Mastercam costs, and what a workstation to run Mastercam costs, and what a programmer's salary typically is, dual monitors and a space pilot are a trivial expense, and make a very pleasant difference. Especially considering how graphically intense CAD/CAM systems have become. After having used them, I would spend my own money to have them- but I would think the management I was working for were out of touch and not worth working for long term. Two very nice 20" LCD monitors from Dell and a space pilot can be had for less than $1500. It is insane to make CAD/CAM jockeys work without. Without knowing, I would imagine most video cards capable of running Mastercam would support dual monitors.

At the risk of stating the obvious, rigid tapping is an option on the MiniMill. If your speed and feed are in synch, having this option turned off would do it...