Mastercam 2023 - Concensus after update 2?

[neurosis]

I've been putting off using 2023 after finding some issues in the initial release that affected my personal work flow.

I would assume that after update 2 everything is mostly ironed out and working fine? Speaking of workflow, I'd like to familiarize myself with the new machine group setup workflow before we hit another version. 

[CNCAppsJames]

2023 is all I have.

Not many "problems" other than the normal difference from one version to another.

Not a fan of the Machine Definition stuff. I just want a part. But Mastercam is not unique in this matter. Seems like all CAM systems are migrating to forcing an user to select a machine.

My point against that is now the CAM system is attempting to dictate to me what is or isn't possible. That may be fine for Fred the FNG who asks his CAM system to do stuff for him, but for someone like a lot of us, that bullshit ain't gonna fly. We TELL our CAM systems what to do.

[gcode]

Not a fan of the Machine Definition stuff. I

its easy enough to turn it off

[JParis]

I have 2021 and 2023 installed...I have not started 2021 since 2023 was installed.

[Here's Johnny!]

its easy enough to turn it off

Tom how do you turn this off?

[gcode]

Tom how do you turn this off?

Launch the Machine Def
then
General Machine Parameters
Simulation
Click the "Use Machine definition" radio button

If you want to load a machine sim later you can still do it the old way

[Jeff]

I've been putting off using 2023 after finding some issues in the initial release that affected my personal work flow.

I would assume that after update 2 everything is mostly ironed out and working fine? Speaking of workflow, I'd like to familiarize myself with the new machine group setup workflow before we hit another version. 

The machine group changes are a major downgrade for my personal workflow and efficiency. The material list for mills in particular. That is a complete clusterfuck if you have a bunch of user-created material names. There is no set order for which they appear, you can't sort them, and if you select a material at the beginning of a program, you WILL have to reselect it when you post it. It forgets what you've chosen somewhere along the way.

But the response I've gotten from them is that it's not important enough to be even considered for the 2024 release. Basically a big middle finger if you want any of the functionality back from any previous release.
They haven't responded to my last post, probably because I wasn't very nice, I get it. But users aren't happy with the changes and stuff that got broken.

https://forum.mastercam.com/Topic46440.aspx

[JParis]

In fairness Jeff and I know this is likely to start a bit of a shitstorm but if they listened to all of the caterwauling, we'd still be using V9...

I get it, there's aggravation...I've had more than my fair share too...

[Jeff]

In fairness Jeff and I know this is likely to start a bit of a shitstorm but if they listened to all of the caterwauling, we'd still be using V9...

I get it, there's aggravation...I've had more than my fair share too...

You're probably right.

[neurosis]

I know that this is just wind peeing here -

Would it be worth while to start a tips and tricks topic? 

And along side of that - a bugs i'd like to see fixed with workarounds topic? 

The workarounds emphasized for people like me?   

[gcode]

I really like MC2023 but it has it's quirks.
Yesterday I opened a vane file to make a quick edit.
The old regime wanted cycle time, they didn't mind a little benching to bring dimensions in.
Now the old hand bench guys are retired, their replacements are not doing the work properly,
and vanes are failing CMM inspection.
The file in question was programmed in X7, edited in X9 and again in X21.
I opened it in X23 and tried out some new Unified stuff.  The results looked pretty good so I tried
running them through verify
That's when this went south. I have an old machine sim Yo Doug and Ben built for me back in the day and a new Postability machine sim. The old machine sim was linked to the Machine Def via the new interface.

3X toolpaths verified just file, but the 5X paths would not. It was a 3 hour crash fest
and  nothing I did would make the 5X paths run through verify, even though they ran fine in Machine SIM.
Toolpaths functioned properly and posted good code, but they would not run through Verify
I was about to give up and make the edits in X22, but X22 could not make the toolpath I had created in X23
Finally I tried using the super generic 5AxTableTable machine def. 
That fixed the problem.

X23 settled down and started working properly, the crashes stopped, verify ran properly and I got the work
finished in about an hour.
Now, ... here is the very weird part... when I finished up, I checked the settings in Machine Def... and
the Machine Sim tab had the Postabilty machine sim attached.

I must say, this does not happen with a new file created from scratch in X23. They work properly,
right from the start. There must be some invisible setting deep in the bowels of that old X7 file
that caused all that trouble.

This was all a huge PIA, but in the end, X23 is more than worth it if your are doing 5X stuff.
Stock recognition, calculation times and toolpath creation and quality are simply outstanding.
The Common Direction switch on the Tool Axis Control page actually works now.. quick calc times and outstanding results ... and the new "Tilt relative to Reference Surface" setting yields some really sweet
toolpaths.

While I'm at it the 3X toolpaths are really making progress these days. Toolpaths that used to take hours of screwing around with containment boundaries now produce outstanding results just picking solid surfaces
and the new 3D linking gives you the power to make really efficient toolpaths.
We've got one part, a big steel forging (a Ø115" 12 sided star shape) that used to run 120 to 140 hours
over 3 mill ops. I just finished reprogramming one of these parts in X23 and it's running in 70 hours now.

Wish I could share some of this but...