Are there any updates on uptake of newer Centroid CNC software versions? I understand Avid uptake is tied to ATC considerations. Particularly I am interested in the material size capabilities introduced in 5.40 (https://www.centroidcnc.com/centroid_diy/downloads/centroid_cnc12_download/cnc12_v5.40.02_release_notes.pdf)
If you can’t provide a timeline, can you at least confirm which Centroid CNC version the next avid release will be based on? Thanks.
We’re going to release in a very short period of time 5.40 for our ATC system.
It will initially be available to ATC users, and then roll-out to everyone else who wants it.
is this the update that will include some the additional functionality you’ve hinted at in other posts in regards to custom user functions?
Probably 
If you can be more specific with your ask I can answer
This is from a conversation we had in another thread on March 11 regarding a future update. I was curious when it was going to drop but I didn’t want to bug you about it.
That statement is still true. The subjective part is how easy they’ll be to edit… They’re all plain text and decently commented, however for ATC there are something like 60 macros
I understand. I will still need to do my homework but I have been holding off digging around in CNC 12 in case the updated version came with what I wanted.
My main issue has been the manual tool change script. I would like to create a work flow similar to what was available in Mach 4 that includes a user defined area to change the tool before heading over to the tool touch off. I know you can just drive the machine to safe area and change the tool before activating the tool change script but that seems like a band aid rather then a solution.
That’s solved for you on this new version
AWSOME! Good things come to those who wait. Between that and the fact that it take less then 30 seconds to swap an endmill I don’t know why i would ever need an ATC…except for the fact that they are really cool.
I see the value of ATC in a production environment, but what I can’t seem to grasp is what the complexity and cost of the sliding tool rack actually buys you. How many inches of previously machinable area do you gain/lose by using the sliding tool rack, given you can’t have a spoil board over any of the ~14" at the end of your machine.
With the movable rack I don’t lose any of my work area for full sheets of plywood so if I’m only going to do smaller one offs it wouldn’t make any sense to have all that for me.. unless you got to have everything 
A lot of retractable racks come in higher than the material you might be working with, e.g. well above a sheet of ply. That makes sense.
The Avid design seems to make you sacrifice previously usable space to fit the sliding design because much of the hardware is below or infringing on where you would have a spoil board/cutting area already.
So the tools slide in and out, OK, but what usable gains does that get you?
I hope I’m missing something here, but I don’t get it.
The sliding rack uses “dead” space in the back of your machine to hold all of the tools. So you lose no machinable area when the rack is retracted. This is space that the machine cannot reach to machine. That’s the real value and justification for the complexity: There is no loss in work area when adding this system.
It doesn’t infringe on space for typical spoilboard arrangements. We’ll publish a dimension guide soon so you can see how it works, but for most sheet goods you’re fine at the back of the machine.
The tools only go over a very small amount of your machine’s reach at the back of the machine, so it should be pretty easy to fixture around it back there if you need. A 12" tall clamp at 96.5 inches on a 4x8 could be an issue though
We decided to go with the moving rack at launch first because most of our customers bought their machines with a particular workflow/workarea in mind and this sliding rack doesn’t infringe on that.
Later we’ll be offering a fixed rack. That rack will require you to use your work area for tool holders. For folks that have unused space on their machines this can be a less complex and more economical option.