CamMan1
-
Posts
283 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Store
eMastercam Wiki
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by CamMan1
-
-
That
Dave,
Many Thanks for the honest and open communication.
This is exactly the kind of thing we're all talking about.
It is very much appreciated.
That's what I am after.
-
CamMan1 I am sorry but I am not seeing the difference. I see you think tool 1 is picked, but everything else says and shows Tool 9. When you post the operations what do you get for tool output? Is it supposed to be tool 1 and not tool 9? Sorry, but those picture and your lack of a real idea leaves me asking more questions.
Operation 16 shows 3/4 (.750) diameter end mill. Operation tab for operation 16 shows 1/2 (.500) end mill selected and wrong holder selected. You actually think that is okay? So what if it does post fine. It's not right. Things like that are where you end up crashing machines or scrapping parts. This is typical of what we have gotten used to.
-
Typical example of a steamer! Import Operations to apply to some geometry for a family of parts. Look at the highlighted Operation tool and look at the tool that is shown on the Operation tabs.
-
-
Well I think the majority that complain, like me, are upset about the fact that there are so many features that do not function correctly and need a workaround. It has got to the point where everyone has become adept using workarounds. If the features that have had bugs for years would just get ironed out that would probably please the majority. No one can say without laughing at themselves that it was alright to release UVBS without a Front End. Come on. I to have made a good living using Mastercam, but with this release my work proficiency has gone backwards not forward as you would hope with a new release. Just my Opinion.
-
Thanks for the work around.
The future of the new verify seems promising. But CNC should be embarrassed for releasing it so incomplete.
Mike
+1000
-
-
Anyone know if the Tool Manager is being revamped for the MU1 release.
-
Are you telling it to plunge outside containment. It seems that it will plunge 1.50 times the diameter away from outside of the containment boundary.
-
Check out this thread and some of my others on the XML file.
http://www.emastercam.com/board/index.php?showtopic=72935&hl=
-
Yeah I know I'll admit everbody has been a big help on the forum. Back to he grind.
-
Well I am sorry Aaron but I have been swamped and I have not had any free time lately. One of our programmers was diagnosed with cancer and I have been pulling double duty while he gets his chemo treatments. Our other part time programmer/owner has been busy with our new building addition. Only reason I have a breather right now is 2 machines are being worked on but I will be swamped again in an hour. I will try and make some time.
-
Doesn't have it. Another UVBS issue. Along with the fact it doesn't diplay the cutter comp correctly either. When you have cutter comp turned off it still shows that it is turned on. In my opinion it should say "Off". The "Feedrate should be displayed under Verbose.
-
To be ISO compliant you need to save your mcx and nc files in a directory structure containing customer then part number and revision status. We store our mcx files so that whoever programs the part files is the only one to have write access (saves pointing fingers). We also store mcx and nc files in seperate locations for better access control. We aslo have a proof directory and a production directory. Programs proven out are moved to the production directory after everything has been bought off.
-
1
-
-
If you're not doing mold work with mastercam the verify being faster and able to handle much bigger files without crashing is a huge improvement to people. If people are happy with something they almost never create an account on the forum and start a thread about it (some people who already have an account do). So mostly here you hear negative feedback, but useful none the less.
One thing that I don't understand is why there isn't a user interface for changing <PrecisionFactor>1.0</PrecisionFactor> (from the XML file... mine is now set at 2.5)
the slider changes the precision but there is still artifacts that are way too large for almost any cutting work. you can accurate zoom, but without knowing being able to see where the problem is due to the triangulation, what's the point? I would rather run the verify 2x as long, and do other work in the process and only have to check it once, rather than be zooming in and out of regions trying to find my problem. Maybe that's just me??
No it's not just you. I also have my Pfactor set at 2.5. That has been my biggest complaint about UVBS from the start is the initial visual quality. Even with the Pfactor at 2.5 I get a lot of visual artifacts that look like they may be a false cut. And even at a Pfactor of 2.5 on the large parts I do they are huge artifacts so I still find myself doing a lot of zooming and unzooming. It seems like the precision is somehow scaled to the size of the part. The other problem with running the Pfactor at 2.5 is the load times for a large part with a lot of toolpath. Sometimes it is unbearable when you are in a hurry.
-
Aaron,
I am sorry if you believe I am being Excessively Negative but when about 70% of my life is spent in front of this software I believe I have a right to express my concerns about the direction Mastercam is going. When something has changed so drastically from one release to another that it has completely disrupted my workflow it also effects my life. Our company had no forewarning of the impending change (doom) that our maintenance purchase would bestow upon us. I am not saying that everything in X7 is a failure, just the implementation of UVBS.
-
I would like to know how CNC Software makes the decisions they do. Like the way they implemented everything in UVBS (Verify) for X7. Is it from feedback from a handful of beta testers and fanbois or the general user base. I sure had know idea that they were going to do what they did with the verification. If I had known we might not have paid maintenance. But that was probably the plan. Get us to pay our maintenance and they "shovel" us this release. I'm with you Buddy J I have gone back to X6.
-
Wonder why it has not been placed in the downloads section after all this time?
-
I couldn't get it to work. Do both instances of drawMode in that line need to be changed?
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<SimulationSettings xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" Version="v1.0">
<Tolerances>
<CollisionTolerance>0.006</CollisionTolerance>
<TargetTolerance>0.006</TargetTolerance>
<HolderCollisionTolerance>0</HolderCollisionTolerance>
</Tolerances>
<StopConditions>
<Operationchange>false</Operationchange>
<ToolChange>false</ToolChange>
<Collision>false</Collision>
<CheckChangeXValue>false</CheckChangeXValue>
<CheckChangeYValue>false</CheckChangeYValue>
<CheckChangeZValue>false</CheckChangeZValue>
<ChangeStep>false</ChangeStep>
<ChangeXValue>0</ChangeXValue>
<ChangeYValue>0</ChangeYValue>
<ChangeZValue>0</ChangeZValue>
<CheckChangeXDelta>false</CheckChangeXDelta>
<CheckChangeYDelta>false</CheckChangeYDelta>
<CheckChangeZDelta>false</CheckChangeZDelta>
<ChangeStepOneBasedValue>1</ChangeStepOneBasedValue>
</StopConditions>
<VerifySettings>
<TrueThreadCutting>false</TrueThreadCutting>
<ShowEdges>false</ShowEdges>
<FastRendering>false</FastRendering>
<PrecisionIndex>8</PrecisionIndex>
<TurningHolderCut>true</TurningHolderCut>
<TurningArborCut>true</TurningArborCut>
<TurningShaftCut>true</TurningShaftCut>
<TurningFluteCut>true</TurningFluteCut>
<LatheHolderCut>true</LatheHolderCut>
<LatheFluteCut>true</LatheFluteCut>
<TurningHolderCollCheck>true</TurningHolderCollCheck>
<TurningArborCollCheck>true</TurningArborCollCheck>
<TurningShaftCollCheck>true</TurningShaftCollCheck>
<TurningFluteCollCheck>true</TurningFluteCollCheck>
<LatheHolderCollCheck>true</LatheHolderCollCheck>
<LatheFluteCollCheck>true</LatheFluteCollCheck>
<PrecisionFactor>1.5</PrecisionFactor>
</VerifySettings>
<BackplotSettings>
<LineThinkness>2.5</LineThinkness>
<PointThinkness>3.5</PointThinkness>
<showOperation>AllOperations</showOperation>
<showToolpathSegment>Follow</showToolpathSegment>
<showToolVectors>false</showToolVectors>
<showPoints>false</showPoints>
<showRapidMoves>true</showRapidMoves>
<showCompleteFollow>true</showCompleteFollow>
<showCompleteTrace>true</showCompleteTrace>
<numTrace>1</numTrace>
<numFollow>1</numFollow>
</BackplotSettings>
<RenderingSettings>
<Tool>CV_SHOW</Tool>
<HolderVis>true</HolderVis>
<MillingHolderColor>#336699</MillingHolderColor>
<ArborVis>true</ArborVis>
<MillingArborColor>#666666</MillingArborColor>
<ShaftVis>true</ShaftVis>
<MillingShaftColor>#999999</MillingShaftColor>
<FluteVis>true</FluteVis>
<MillingFluteColor>#DDBB00</MillingFluteColor>
<MillingToolAlpha>0.5</MillingToolAlpha>
<HolderTurningVis>true</HolderTurningVis>
<LatheHolderColor>#336699</LatheHolderColor>
<InserterVis>true</InserterVis>
<LatheInserterColor>#DDBB00</LatheInserterColor>
<LatheToolAlpha>0.5</LatheToolAlpha>
<StockVis>CV_SHOW</StockVis>
<StockColor>#F66D6D</StockColor>
<StockAlpha>0.5</StockAlpha>
<InitialStockVis>CV_HIDE</InitialStockVis>
<InitialStockColor>Goldenrod</InitialStockColor>
<InitialStockAlpha>0.5</InitialStockAlpha>
<WorkpieceVis>CV_HIDE</WorkpieceVis>
<WorkpieceColor>#BFBFBF</WorkpieceColor>
<WorkpieceAlpha>0.5</WorkpieceAlpha>
<ToolpathVis>CV_HIDE</ToolpathVis>
<RapidMoveColor>Yellow</RapidMoveColor>
<LinearFeedMoveColor>Cyan</LinearFeedMoveColor>
<ClockwiseArcMoveColor>Cyan</ClockwiseArcMoveColor>
<CounterClockwiseArcMoveColor>Cyan</CounterClockwiseArcMoveColor>
<backplotlineWidth>1</backplotlineWidth>
<MachineVis>CV_SHOW</MachineVis>
<MachineVisAlpha>0.5</MachineVisAlpha>
<MachineColor>#808080</MachineColor>
<TailstockColor>#FF00FF</TailstockColor>
<SteadyrestColor>#80FFD8</SteadyrestColor>
<ToolvectorVis>CV_SHOW</ToolvectorVis>
<ToolVectorColor>Orange</ToolVectorColor>
<ToolVectorLength>1</ToolVectorLength>
<toolVectorLineWidth>1</toolVectorLineWidth>
<ShowWireframeGeometries>false</ShowWireframeGeometries>
<autoFocus>CF_NONE</autoFocus>
</RenderingSettings>
<CustomSettings xsi:type="UbvsCustomSettings">
<StockToLeave>0</StockToLeave>
<ShowOnScreenInformation>false</ShowOnScreenInformation>
<drawMode>Toolnumber</drawMode>
<IsColorLoop>true</IsColorLoop>
<ShowStlCompareMesh>true</ShowStlCompareMesh>
<StockCompareColors>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>-0.015</EndValue>
<col>DarkRed</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>-0.010</EndValue>
<col>Red</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>-0.003</EndValue>
<col>Yellow</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>0.003</EndValue>
<col>Green</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>0.010</EndValue>
<col>LightBlue</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>0.015</EndValue>
<col>Blue</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
<StockCompareGridItem>
<EndValue>INF</EndValue>
<col>DarkBlue</col>
</StockCompareGridItem>
</StockCompareColors>
<Scheme>
<SchemeColor>#DCFF00</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>#00A3FF</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>DarkMagenta</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Green</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Pink</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Aqua</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Orange</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Lime</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Maroon</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>#7F68AC</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Gold</SchemeColor>
<SchemeColor>Fuchsia</SchemeColor>
</Scheme>
<ToleranceUnit>Imperial</ToleranceUnit>
<SaveStlTolerance>0.001</SaveStlTolerance>
<PerformanceIndexVerification>15</PerformanceIndexVerification>
<PerformanceIndexBackplot>10</PerformanceIndexBackplot>
<MwSimCollCheckAgainstFixture>false</MwSimCollCheckAgainstFixture>
<MwSimCollCheckAgainstWorkpiece>false</MwSimCollCheckAgainstWorkpiece>
<MwSimCollCheckEnabledInBackplot>true</MwSimCollCheckEnabledInBackplot>
<MwSimCollCheckEnabledInVerification>true</MwSimCollCheckEnabledInVerification>
<MwSimCollCheckBetweenMoves>true</MwSimCollCheckBetweenMoves>
</CustomSettings>
</SimulationSettings>
-
I agree that it is a PITA but I think it is a MAJOR PITA especially when you have a large file to verify and you forget to grab a manual entry with your ops then you have to switch to 5AX and let it recalculate again. Hopefully we will get a frontend for UVBS sometime in the near future. I still can't believe they didn't release a Service Pack with that in it. I have gone back to X6 for the time being because of all the UVBS flaws. Hopefully they will all be fixed in the next release. HaHa.
-
I worked with our reseller on this one.
In the XML file, line 102 drawMode, needs to be "Toolnumber".
Thanks man.
I tried every variation of "tool change" I could think of because that is what is listed in the options. I never thought of trying "tool number".
-
Thanks gcode.
-
I have the same issue and it drives me crazy because I want it defaulted to "Tool Change" also. From what I seen in the XML file it looks like that option is not being driven from the XML file at this point. I have asked the powers that be to jump in on this one before and no answers.
-
ROn - can you use the stock model for this operation instead of saving STL files?
Here we are again talking about stock models for verification. This has been brought up before. They do work okay for verification as long as you don't have very many stock models in your ops manager. If you are at all human we make mistakes and if you have to change something 5 stock models back now you have to sit and wait to regen all 5 if you have done them sequentially. Don't get me wrong, stock models have there place especially for rest roughing and such but they are not effecient enough for verification. I would like to have my useable STL's back.
i found a way to fix every problem in X7
in Industrial Forum
Posted
Sorry I am busy WORKING. I can't help the fact that I don't have any free time right now. This reply looks more like a public flogging to embarrass me then a helping hand.