[greenene]

I am cutting multiple pieces at the same time. However, each toolpath transform operation always brings the tool to the start position, or the first piece, which was used for generating all the toolpath transform operations.
Ideally, I would like to start the second cutting operation where the first operation ends, thus eliminating the z axis from traveling back to the first piece.

Just in case I am not making myself clear, I am cutting round pieces and at the same time performing some pocketing operations. I start the pocketing in piece one and then continue to all six pieces. At the six piece, the pocketing operation ends, and this is the point where I would like the contouring operation to start, eliminating the Z travel to the first piece.

Is it possible to do this without having to duplicate the first piece geometry and creating a sixth piece? I know that if I have a first piece and and sixth piece, then I can start my toolpath transforms from either.

thanks in advance.
tc

[WOTDesigns]

good question. it really would seem that if there is no tool change that the start of one op should automatically be nearest the end of the precious op.

I noticed this same issue with cambam but could set the start point manually with two mouse clicks.

curious how it is done in MC

[Superman]

There is a way...but

the transform operations would be a lot more complicated
each operation may need it's own transform pattern ie A-->Z then Z-->A

this may be done by the use of T/C planes
the operation requiring a transform from A would need a plane established around A ( like normal ), where Z-->A patterns, a plane created for Z toolpaths & a transform would run from Z back to A
( there will be a learning curve for you to get the verify stock to run correct-suggest starting with a big bit of stock )

- best method may be to program the part as normal ( around A ),,,get it correct.
then insert transform ops.
then move( don't copy ) the geometry from A to Z , and reverse the transform patterns

-You also should weigh up the time involved in getting the program correct verses the time saved on the machine
( ie 4-6 hours to get the program correct to save 1-2 hour2 of machine time - doesn't justify this method. Plus, if a fault is found, can it be simply rectified at the machine or does it have to be fixed in Mcam )