**IMPORTANT POLL**
- Thread starter kiwicnc
- Start date
After using the Mach 3 wizards for quite a few years l found the masso wizards painful to use. I have been using fusion 360 and solidworks with hsmexpress.
I have found the majority of my work needs to be modeled so using these programs are not a problem. They also give me cutter comp.
I am all for the probing wizards.
I have found the majority of my work needs to be modeled so using these programs are not a problem. They also give me cutter comp.
I am all for the probing wizards.
machinedude
machinedude
unless I am missing something the only way fusion can give you cutter comp is by changing the diameter in your tool list and re posting the program?
that's not something I would want to do all the time. your still only programing in computer and the only control you have is lying to the software and telling it your using a different size tool. we need an actual tool list in the controller where you can adjust your wear so you can fine tune the program at the controller and not need to re post the program. you need a actual G41 and G42 for cutter comp left and right in my opinion. and a G40 to cancel as well.
machinedude
machinedude
and personally wizards are a waste of time too 
I would rather see cutter comp, backlash comp and ridged tapping features honestly.
I would rather see cutter comp, backlash comp and ridged tapping features honestly.@machinedude You can give a theoretical cutter comp by changing the radial stock to leave.
So if you were doing a 2D contour as a finishing pass and you measured as still having your actual dimensions .01" too big, you could add -.005 radial stock to leave and, in theory, it would tighten up that dimension.
So if you were doing a 2D contour as a finishing pass and you measured as still having your actual dimensions .01" too big, you could add -.005 radial stock to leave and, in theory, it would tighten up that dimension.
machinedude
machinedude
now is that in masso or Fusion 360 ? if it's in 360 then you have to repost the code to get your results if i'm not mistaken. would be nice to have a tool offset page that works off a radius of the tool like most machines. have a D value to correspond with the tool being used so this can be done at the controller rather than in fusion or some other cam software.
nice to see you back around again too by the way
@machinedude Yeah unfortunately you have to repost, but I suppose it's better than adjusting the tool diameter on top of reposting. I agree it should be an option on the Masso though.
I've been here but just checking and waiting for backlash comp to come trough.
I've been here but just checking and waiting for backlash comp to come trough.
machinedude
machinedude
you have to ask for it. they have a test version I think now.
I voted yes but I kind of regret it. Not because I realised that Conversational/Wizards is needed but because I think the alternatives is not very well formed. They are practically telling anyone wanting the features is dumb.
Maybe it was thought to be less formal and stiff but I think it just ends up with a less valid result.
Maybe it was thought to be less formal and stiff but I think it just ends up with a less valid result.
chucktilbury
chucktilbury
I am an abject noob to CNC. I know how to make stuff, but I am just learning CNC. What I want to see is less wizards and more written documentation. I find myself running back and forth between my PC and the shop to answer trivial questions.