Saving back mc files

[dtm]

Good afternoon everyone. I'm new to mastercam. I have been using for about eight months. I was just wondering if you can save a mastercam x5 file back to x4 without lossing all of the toolpaths. I used gibbscam for many years and you can do this very easy. My friend is a good programmer but he doesn't have maitanance and he has x4 and when I send him an x5 file when he opens the file it defaults all of the toolpaths and he can't see any of my settings.

[Superman]

In one word.....No

The only way you could work this,:-

You set up the file in X4 or X5 ( geometry only ), & "Save as" X4

He programs the job in X4, you could open, ammend & post that file in X4 . And he would still be able to do stuff with that file

Once you overwrite that file with a later verion, the toolpath ops are only available to the same ( or later ) versions. He could open ( without toolpaths only ) if he saves, then those toolpaths are gone from that file for good.

Best senario would be for you to download & install X4 - you both work at the same version level
( you can run both versions on the same machine )

[dtm]

That sucks. Mastercam is ok, however there verify sucks ass and working with solids is a joke. I really don't understand how mastercam has taken over the market. I'm not trying to bash anyone, but I just can't understand how a software this glitchy can flood the market.

[Superman]

You will find most software does this.

a file that is created using functions that have, say, ABCD capability in version V123
then you open the same file in V100 that has function that were not even known to it, ( or has only ABC capability), then what would you expect would happen.....
you would get the standard error "UNKNOWN FILE FORMAT", & it would not even let you get anything in.

- At least Mastercam allows you the chance to save the geometry into an earlier format

But, just a query, how did verify & solids get into the argument ?
what issues do you have ?
had it been setup or explained correctly ?
What Mastercam X5 are you using ? the full blown version or the cheap solidworks add-on ?
---don't expect the add-on to perform like the proper one ?

[dtm]

I'm using full blown x5. I just made an impeller and the verify ran complete. Then I ran the compair to stl and everything looked good. When I ran the part the blades were goughed up. The rough toolpath was goughing the blades. I used the surfaces off the model I created in mastercam. Then I created surfaces from the model and left more stock on the check surfaces and it was ok. However, I was roughing between the blades and had the blades as check surfaces and the tool still goughed the blades. Mastercam said verify doesn't reconize rapid moves. Also, when you have a solid and geometry on the screen you can't select the geometery it always selects the model. I know how to hide the solid or move geometry but that is tedious. another issue is in the 5-axis flow toolpath I created if you change the stepdown from anythig other than .020 the toolpath freaks out and hacks the blade, but at .020 it works fine. Another problem was in one of the 5-axis toolpaths the box to remove selected surfaces doesn't work.

[dtm]

Have you looked at Siemens NX. Even the diehard fanbois from Emastercam are jumping ship to NX.

John

No. Is that unigraphix? I'm not looking to buy software. I just changed jobs nine month ago and switched to mastercam. I made the move because everyone is using mastercam. I'm not liking the software much.

[cadcam]

DTM there are option for picking faces on a solid or edges you will find this to be easer then Gibbs when it comes to solids. are you using any of the new impper option in the multiaxis for doing the impellers?

[dtm]

DTM there are option for picking faces on a solid or edges you will find this to be easer then Gibbs when it comes to solids. are you using any of the new impper option in the multiaxis for doing the impellers?

I tried all of the impeller options in the mutiaxis toolpaths. I can't get any to work. Also, when I send the files to mastercam ( cad-cam consultants) they always use the flow toolpath. When I specifically ask about the impeller toolpaths they just tell me this is better. I don't think they know how to use them. I have so many hours into trying the impeller toolpaths and no luck. Were are you located? I'm in orange county, cal. I'm looking for a tutor. Maybe one or two sessions. E-mail me if you are interested and local. Dtm016@yahoo.com

Also, what are the options for picking faces.

[cadcam]

DTM you have Email

[WOTDesigns]

You will find most software does this.

a file that is created using functions that have, say, ABCD capability in version V123
then you open the same file in V100 that has function that were not even known to it, ( or has only ABC capability), then what would you expect would happen.....
you would get the standard error "UNKNOWN FILE FORMAT", & it would not even let you get anything in.

- At least Mastercam allows you the chance to save the geometry into an earlier format

But, just a query, how did verify & solids get into the argument ?
what issues do you have ?
had it been setup or explained correctly ?
What Mastercam X5 are you using ? the full blown version or the cheap solidworks add-on ?
---don't expect the add-on to perform like the proper one ?

I have a question regarding this comment-

I am trying to learn MCX54SW but I believe I should be able to get access to X5 full. I requested SW version because I am some what familur with SW and was unable to get into MC this semester so o figured the learning curve would be easier.

is the full that much better than the add on that I should try learning it instead? I didn't realize there were functionality differences between the two.

is it worth having to save files and import (and with my limited understanding) create surfaces from the imported file?

[TheBigJW]

DTM you have Email

Troll. Why not advertise?

John

[cadcam]

[/B]

I have a question regarding this comment-

I am trying to learn MCX54SW but I believe I should be able to get access to X5 full. I requested SW version because I am some what familur with SW and was unable to get into MC this semester so o figured the learning curve would be easier.

is the full that much better than the add on that I should try learning it instead? I didn't realize there were functionality differences between the two.

is it worth having to save files and import (and with my limited understanding) create surfaces from the imported file?

The Full version of MC has more Tool path options so of course it gives you more ways to cut the part.

I would take the time and use the MC for SW sense you are comfetable with SW. Your Local Dealer for you has a guy on Staff just for this part of MC his Name is Chris.

PS if you go with the Stand alone MC you would just open the SLDPRT file right in to MC and you can cut from the Solid.

Hope this helps.