Quote Originally Posted by jrmach View Post
There are times when a relatively simple Equidistant Offset takes 15 minutes before the simulator is ready to go, where it used to take 15 seconds.

Holy Crud !!!!!
Can you share such a file and see if the rest of us get that same result ?
In more playing around, I'm thinking that the tolerance setting is where my problems are coming from. I've gone to a tighter tolerance setting over the last few months, more and more. Even though the toolpaths aren't that substantial, I think the simulation must run calculations in a similar manner to when the toolpath is calculated. As the tolerance gets tighter, those calculations get more complex. I don't really need the tolerances as high as I've set them, but I've found that the precision that Equidistant Offset will follow the edge of a part goes up considerably when the tolerance are tighter. After offseting the toolpath 100 times, the quality of the shape of the toolpath is better with tighter tolerances, which is just as important to me as how far apart the steps are. I'll see if I can post a comparison as to why I set the tolerances higher, but it's generally so that the toolpath runs along the surface paths better resulting in fewer areas where the toolpath needs to raise and rapid to a new position. In other words, it stays on the surface better and links better when the tolerances are higher. The main area I find this helps is when running the tool around the edges of a 3d/shapely part to create a 3d roundover.