This may be a tough one as I'm working on a project that has a non-disclosure agreement, so I won't be able to post my current file. I'll see if I can create another similar file later and post it. Also, it will probably only be something that others who use full machine simulation will be able to answer, since I think it is probably linked to a setting in the Pro simulation.

I'm working in V26 3 axis Mill Pro, and have the Pro Simulation as well. My work flow in the "Machine Setup" up until a day or two ago was that I set my clearance height and adjust the Work Offset Z values to -200 plus the height of my stock and an X and Y value of 50, 50 to move the part slighting inboard of the edge of my machine table. The top of my stock is Z0, so using the Work Offset in this manner has always produced the correct result in the simulation, so that the stock is properly located on the machine, and the tool/spindle is properly located in relation to the stock. When I post process the features, the work offset has never affected the values of the program, so while the simulation has always read those values and provided the correct adjustment, the post processor has always (correctly) ignored them so that you get the program as it would be relative from the Machine Setup Origin.

Unfortunately, that has changed in the last couple days, and now the Work Offset is being read by the post processor and the values added to what the values should be. Instead of posting a X0, Y0, Z0 when it should, I now get an X50, Y50, Z-148 (or whatever I have set those values to be in the Work Offset). The machine simulation is still the same, showing the correct location of the stock and tool/spindle, but I can't get Bobcad to post process with the correct unaffected values like it always has. If I change the Work Offset back to 0,0,0, I can get the correctly posted program, but then the simulation does not work correctly because the stock is floating. For now, I've just been going back and forth between two Work Offsets. One has 0,0,0 to post the program and the other has the shifted coordinates to place the stock correctly in the simulation.

Has anyone else had this problem? Is there a setting that may be causing this that I've overlooked? Really don't think I've changed any settings in that time, but the results are clearly completely different now.