I've done a bunch of parts like that. Usually with full radius keyway cutters or lollipop tools... depending on how much negative it goes. You have to turn off gouge checking.

Those walls' CAD looks problematic. I don't see how smooth motion is even going to be possible. You're going to have to make some decisions...

Sequence numbers at Tool Changes is handled in the Control Definition. Sequence numbers at each op would be handled in ptlchg0. Change the pbld$, n$, to pbld$, *n$, Been a while since I've edited a Mastercam/IHS post. That should get you close.

My 1st look would be WCS/T/C plane conditions in the Operation. After that if it checks out I'd make sure that absolute/incremental switch in Misc. Reals/Int. is correct since backplate is good to go from what you say. Next, I'd change the depth of the feature to absolute and re-pick a point on the feature and see if it matches the number I'm getting in my code. After that... I'd have to give it some more thought.

YOU win the Internet for the day. Where all the Celeron's at? Were you looking over my shoulder sometime around 1994?

I trust Backplot MUCH more than verify.

FWIW 99.9% of the time I use incremental. Because if I ever have to change a plane depth or change workholding stack height (which changes my simulation stuff) or something like that,, I want to be able to change it and regen everything without having to reset depths. I 100% of the time will miss something somewhere... guaranteed. Incremental helps me miss less.

I miss that one too from time to time. I don't use the transform very often so I forget what settings. Thank goodness for regen.

I had 32GB in my 2nd to last rig with a Zeon ( so maybe 7 years ago...) anyway, I had a span of 4-5 months where all I was getting were these massive projects that were large complicated assemblies (yes the fasteners threads were removed) and it was bring my system to it's knees. I bumped up to 64GB and it began performing as I would expect. Now, with price of RAM, to go from 64 to 128... really not a big deal. My current rig is doing OK with 64, though I'm working in a project that is 350MB+ (only 10mb is CAD) that is slowing things down a little so I don't run simulation simultaneously on this project. I may bump it up. I'm almost done though so we shall see. Long story short, it's not always an ego thing @medaq... sometimes it's a "I've gotta be prepared for whatever comes through the door thing." When I go out to a customer's site and I'm waiting forever for their file to load so we can do a simulation... it's a BAD look. When you own your own company as Ron does, he's routinely in front of customers... it's his livelihood. Time is money and impressions are a key to success.

Spiral method is cool, however it has it's ummmmmmm, tradeoffs too. With spiral, you tend to have leftovers on the 1st and last passes unless you have/can extend the surfaces... at least on the majority of surfaces I have tried the strategy on. I'm sure theere are many feature topologies that it looks awesome on, just not many I have used it on. Like Ron and the other guys said, check your Control Def to make sure that you have the appropriate settings for arc creation "on" or enabled.

You want to use the transform rotate function. Transform itself is move from A to B, rotate which is go CW/CCW around a point, and then you have mirror which is opposite about something... basically. On the 2nd page you set the rotational values, plane to rotate about and point to rotate about.

Thank you sir may I have another! Wonder what it would run the benchmark in? Though it being a Xenon, not as fast as one would think/hope.

No document. What is different? I may know.

I have a list of settings that I set on new CAMplete installs. These seem to provide the best results for the most part. How work offsets are handled is always a per-user discussion. I'm in the middle of updating the Mastercam MM stuff for CAMplete integration. I made one MD/CD/Post for LX/LF, VX, V.Plus, H.Plus, MX, and MAM72 series for inch mode last week. I may have to make one for the R-Type High Speed Modes but I'm putting that off as those machines are fewer and fewer. I always do a new one as opposed to migrating the old one. I've used the migration wizard before with no issues, I just prefer to make a new one with all the defaults I like and use. It only takes about a day, then I just distribute to my customers as needed. hen the new machines have program select for High Speed Modes meaning you can directly call the slider settings. ex. G131P1.3 for the slider at precision preference in the P1 setting, or G131P1.1 for the speed preference in the P1 setting. CAMplete 202x Setting Procedure - New Style (Mastercam Specific).pdf

PowerMill is good software. Very powerful. There will be a learning curve associated with it. It does a lot of things differently. It tends to make what should be easy things hard like drilling... in Mastercam you pick points and you're done vs. PowerMill you have to create a Hole Feature Set that will then allow you to drill the holes. I do like how it does Levels and Sets a little better than Mastercam does. You create your toolpaths then group them in NC Programs so you don't have to create them in any particular order, Don't expect to be proficient right away. There's more steps to create a program and the steps don't always correlate to something you would do in Mastercam. Think of it as learning a foreign language where not all the words have an English equivalent. If you can stop yourself from saying "Well in Mastercam..." all the time and just focus on the new steps and new process, you'll be much better off. HTH

On some occasions I get a solid that has to convert to surfaces, but other than that, STEP has proven to be VERY reliable for a great many years. I have files from almost every CAD system on the planet.

Yeah... [email protected] is no longer the e-mail to use. There is a separate partner e-mail address for persons like myself and then an e-mail for customers.

I use CC on my 5-Axis finish paths in all of them that support it. That could suck! You shoudl be getting G41.2/G42.2 not G41... :headscratch:

That was going to be my next question; as in are you sure those values aren't metric values? We created a setup and run program to make it easier for customers to run eZ-5. If you choose to get the output, the report to your I/O channel looks like this;

Gonna take the plunge this morning. No turning back. 2023 will be installed and 2022 will be uninstalled. Wish me luck.

Your #19700~#19705 parameters should be somewhere within less than 100µm of these numbers; N19700Q1L1P-575.015 N19701Q1L1P-629.9 N19702Q1L1P-1109.986 N19703Q1L1P0.0 SHOULD BE 0 no matter what) N19704Q1L1P-20.055 N19705Q1L1P0.001 If they are off more than that, then most likely the machine has either been crashed or the machine is out of geometric spec due to settling and needs to be checked with a test bar, granite square and levels. Or... your work offset it off Or... you have values in your WSEC offset tables that are either incorrect or there when they shoudl not be. Or... you have values in your common work offset that should not be there. Or... you have incorrect tool offsets L/LW and/or D/R/DW/RW

The Mastercam 2023 plugin for CAMplete TruePath is out along with CAMplete 2023.1 You should have received a notification from your AD Desktop App. This will DEFINITELY not work. Each Plug-In is compiled for a specific Mastercam version. I've tried before. Yep. Mastercam was a little slow on the final SDK release IIRC. I was able to acquire it so I sent it along to CAMplete to move things along. Had a new Plug-In in about a week or so... IIRC.

That's A LOT of error. Are you using G54.4, G68.2 and/or G43.4?

So far as I know, it's not available yet. Last time (MCAM 2022) I had to send them the SDK.

Changing the COR has no bearing Tool Length Offset.