Recent posts

#1

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by champshire - Today at 08:05 AM

Oddly enough when I use the GPU, that's when it reports the collision.

#2

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by Here's Johnny! - Today at 08:04 AM

I think the GPU verify does not support collision checking?

#3

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by champshire - Today at 07:51 AM

Funny thing, I just did back to back testing using the CPU/GPU (difference being with stop on collision turned on/off) and one way shows a collision with my holder, and the other way does not. What do you trust?

Also, when I try and import ops from another file Mastercam repeatedly crashes. Import ops has been screwy since at least x7. I really really wish they would fix a basic feature such as that. Yes I have reported it multiple times, to Dylan even. It still exists.

#4

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by SuperHoneyBadger - Today at 05:30 AM

GPU verify is fast as fuck boiii. Like a second or two for a 3 axis program, ~450 holes (spotted, drilled, tapped), 2D contours.

#5

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by gcode - February 06, 2026, 07:33 AM

Except for this time it was a breeze.

Because the beta testers got beat like rented mules ironing out the problems 

#6

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by Jeff - February 06, 2026, 02:54 AM

Getting R2 via the AUS (Auto Update Service) was a real chore.

It always is for me.
Except for this time it was a breeze.

#7

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by CNCAppsJames - February 05, 2026, 09:04 PM

Unless there's Group A containing level 8 in the donor file, and Group 123 containing level 8 in the receiving file. Who wins the tug of war? There can't be two level 8's with both retaining their original entities. Someone has to squash someone else.

The new kid gets put up for adoption. We can't afford another mouth to feed.

 

#8

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by Zoffen - February 05, 2026, 05:07 PM

Unless there's Group A containing level 8 in the donor file, and Group 123 containing level 8 in the receiving file. Who wins the tug of war? There can't be two level 8's with both retaining their original entities. Someone has to squash someone else.

Simple

The group + new group is combined.

The group name would be called "A-123" and the level 8 is merged together.

Invoice is in the mail.

#9

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by Dylan Gondyke - February 05, 2026, 02:36 PM

I haven't tried this, but perhaps the best course of action would be to save the doner file in 2026
and create the proper groups before merging it.
Then there would be no conflicts between the donor file and the receiving file.

Unless there's Group A containing level 8 in the donor file, and Group 123 containing level 8 in the receiving file. Who wins the tug of war? There can't be two level 8's with both retaining their original entities. Someone has to squash someone else.

#10

Industrial / Re: MC 2026R2

Last post by gcode - February 05, 2026, 12:51 PM

There are no grouping controls in Merge, so we have to programmatically decide the best average choice, if you will.

I haven't tried this, but perhaps the best course of action would be to save the doner file in 2026
and create the proper groups before merging it.
Then there would be no conflicts between the donor file and the receiving file.