[PATTSUPV]

I have also tried to set up a specific profile for Mastercam but there are two problems. First, I am not sure what to use for the baseline. Right now I have 3D APP - Global Default Settings and then I disabled the Back depth buffer (which mastercam recommends for Verify issues. Second, you cannot disable acceleration, which so far is the only way to fix the issue I have with material not displaying during verify.

[Mike Mattera]

Sounds like your doing 2D router work (4x8 sheet) I dont think nesting supports solids.

If your making a million copies of a solid to fill a 4x8 sheet, that's probably a problem also.

If your doing 2D router work, just use the wireframe and make a million copies of that. A LOT less overhead. I know Mastercam is supposed to be a big robust CadCam package. But its really a CAM package. If the CAd stuff gets to be too much it can be a problem.

Think if it like this... I can carry a bucket of water. I can carry 2 buckets of water. I might be able to carry 3 buckets of water. But if you want to carry 12 buckets of water, somethings got to give.

And nesting is actually pretty cool and works pretty well. It is free in X4 (might be MU1).

Mike Mattera

[PATTSUPV]

I agree with the assesment of solids. I always create a surface model off of my solid and save as a different file, then program toolpaths from that. Even if you are not programming from the solid model just having in the same file will cause major problems.

[Mike Mattera]

BUZZ. Wrong. Not what I meant. Solids are not evil, having 100 of them in the same file can be evil. If he's having problems, and all he needs is 2D wireframe, Then eliminate too many solids

I always try to import as close to the original source as possible.
i.e. If it was drawn as an Inventor, I want the inventor file
If it was drawn as a Solidworks file, I want the solidworks file.
I never want IGES or DXF, only as a last resort, or if it's the only thing available.

Once inside of Mastercam I will keep it as a solid , <b>if it's practical</b>. Sometimes you just need surfaces, but most times, you can just grab the entire model and surface machine inside a boundary.

Surfaces can have holes. Solids are "water tight".

But I'm talking the difference between 2D router and 3D surfacing here.

Mike Mattera

[PATTSUPV]

Of course solids are not evil, they are absolutely nessecary for modeling these days. What I am saying is that I can save alot of issues by getting rid of the solid when it comes to machining. When you program a toolpath off a solid it is just creating a surface anyway. You always want to retain your solid model for changes later, and if the file is sufficiently small you may want to keep it a solid so you won't have to reprogram toolpaths. My point is that I have seen many glitches with solid models and toolpaths in the same file.

All I do is 3D surfacing, I am just trying to share some experience.