has anyone had trouble 5 axising on a mam72-35v?

[Leon82]

we are moving a job to the mam using a rotary 4 axis rough tool path and the mam is gouging the part .015" in spots. we have the g131 on F3. we tried r10 for the fun of it and it made it worse. the same tool path on the 520 pc4 looks great.

 

[Leon82]

The older man. Cuts the same program fine. They bar ball tested it and it is good there. 

[crazy^millman]

Tried giving it more code? Change the distance between points to a smaller value? Sounds like a 4th Axis move that is great that what you expect is creating the gouge.

[Leon82]

They had us switch 11775.0 to a 0. It was 1 and the other mam is 0.  We will see tomorrow if it makes a difference.

7 hours ago, crazy^millman said:

Tried giving it more code? Change the distance between points to a smaller value? Sounds like a 4th Axis move that is great that what you expect is creating the gouge.

The pc4 and other mam run it fine. If the parameter change doesn't help I'll try it

[Leon82]

So switching that parameter to 0 fixed the issue 

[cncappsjames]

Certain machines have trouble with #11775.0=1 and others need it. Trying to figure out which ones need it. :headscratch:

[huskermcdoogle]

11775.0 is Smooth TCP correct?  It would seem to me that it isn't configured properly on the machines that don't like it......

That would be a fun one to dive into and diagnose.  But also goes to show how all of those options intertwine and make it very hard to configure a "stock" configuration, that works on most setups.  No two builders option machines exactly the same, no builder typically options two like machines exactly the same either....  That to me is the head scratch.

[Slick]

Leon82, (just curious)

Is your G code applying G43.4 on either or both machines?

[Leon82]

On 8/22/2023 at 11:05 PM, Slick said:

Leon82, (just curious)

Is your G code applying G43.4 on either or both machines?

All three that ran the program.

 

The pc4 is an ac machine.

 

Both mam72 are bc and only a couple years apart 

[cncappsjames]

On 8/22/2023 at 6:20 AM, huskermcdoogle said:

11775.0 is Smooth TCP correct?  It would seem to me that it isn't configured properly on the machines that don't like it.

Forcing Smooth TCP if no P is specified. It could be that the correct High Speed Mode has not been applied (G05.1Q1 before the work offset is activated and G05.1Q3X0Y0Z0[AX]4[AX]5 after the tool length offset is activated) for example. There's a lot in play. Correct program formatting (turning this on first, that on second, the other thing on third, etc...) has a lot to say about performance/results. Sometimes you can turn things on in the wrong order and not know it. i.e. no alarm is generated, just results are less than expected.

On 8/22/2023 at 6:20 AM, huskermcdoogle said:

... No two builders option machines exactly the same, no builder typically options two like machines exactly the same either....  That to me is the head scratch.

That is less true today than it has been in the past. FANUC in the l;ast 10-15 years has done a good job with bundling options in such a way as to make the most sense based on the type of work being done.  F.A.S.T. packages for example. However, it is still the builder's responsibility to option the machine appropriately.

On 8/22/2023 at 6:20 AM, huskermcdoogle said:

..no builder typically options two like machines exactly the same either....  That to me is the head scratch.

That is inaccurate. I know of 10 machines same make, same model, ranging in build years from 2017 to 2023 in the same 2-3 square block radius that all have the same option package. Now, the machines with build dates later than 12/2021 have some capabilities the previous build dates do not possess, but that is a function of product improvement (FANUC Series and Edition, PMC, and Ladder improvements), not lack of options. Perhaps this is true of lesser builders, but the upper echelon builders option their machines appropriately and consistently... at least in my experience.