Control vs. Wear

[tlarue]

I have been programming in wear for a number of years and I started at a new shop and the machinists want me to program with cutter comp. in control. Is there any real problems with this? what do you guys program in?

[Guest]

Wear only.

 

Control is "Old School" and can be limiting in some uses.

 

Next opinion coming up shortly.

 

[Psychomill]

quote:

---

Wear only.

 

Control is "Old School" and can be limiting in some uses.

 

Next opinion coming up shortly.

 

---

Next opinion coming up shortly...

 

[bhayden10]

Lol John,

I only used wear until we were trying to use Mazatrol tool data and cutter comp. We have to use "control" because Mazatrol won't accept a negative number. I wish we could get around this because now I have to know what machine i am programming for as I write the program since we also have a haas mill.

Brian

[Psychomill]

Don't use tool data. Any reason why you have to? I'm not particular to tool data unless of course, the program is in mazatrol.

 

[Bruce Caulley]

I am actually a fan of control. Making sure the tool table in your machine is correct is basic house keeping IMHO. Leaving all the diameter/radius values as zero is a recipe for disaster if someone has to do a quick programme at the control. Sure as eggs someone will forget to put the value back to 0. We tried using wear for a while and if the programme was for one of our heidenhains and needed comp in control then we used a DR of half the diameter on each tool call. MESSY

 

Bruce

[cadcam]

quote:

---

We have to use "control" because Mazatrol won't accept a negative number. I wish we could get around this

---

Have you tried "Reverse Wear"

 

Reverse Wear – This works just like the Wear option except that the wear adjustment is entered as a positive number.

[Lars Christensen]

My biggest problem with "wear in control", is it makes it difficuelt to trouble shoot NC code.

[gti_jay]

HAha. It really doesn't matter. The end result will be the same.

 

As a shopwide standard, be sure to choose one and stick with it. Makes it easier for operators to set up and maintain machines.

 

However, Wear is marginaly safer. Here is why;

 

Imagine a whole tool set in wear mode...

Chances are all your (d-comp)numbers in the tool table will be .0005", .001", .0025", etc.

All very small numbers.

Changing from a 1/32 endmill to a 2.5" endmill will NOT MATTER if someone forgets to change a D-comp in the register.

 

Now, same situation in "control".

All your numbers will be 1/2 the cutter diameter.

Changing from a 1/32 endmill to a 2.5" endmill will for sure destroy the part and the cutter and potentially the fixture, the holder, the machine tool etc. if you forget to edit the register.

 

Not good for simply forgetting to change a value in the machine control.

[DavidB]

I use wear.I'd much rather have the guys on the shop floor not have to worry about putting in half the diameter of every tool. One job I did recent used 99 tools. Imagine it wouldn't be hard to put 1 value wrong if the operator had to put in every diameter.

I think its easier and safer to leave all the diameters as 0 and have small values if needed for wear adjustment in the wear colum of the tool offsets.

 

Also we can do 2 or 3 different jobs on a machine a day.So there is to much error there for operators forgeting to put in half diameters for tool changes.

[jeff]

I personally prefer control,because that's just how I have always programmed AT the machine,plus it's easier to read a program.

 

I currently use wear when using Mcam.

Control does have some limitations such as when your endmill is close to the size as the id you are cuttind or just smaller than a slot AND you have lead ins/outs...you would have to calculate the leads so you wont get a comp alarm at the machine.

With wear,I dont get those alarms anymore.

 

I guess it's mostly a matter of preference really.

 

HTH

[chris m]

Wear is the only way to fly. We use reverse wear in our Okuma VMCs because when we got them the machine didn't like negative diameter comp values, a software update for something else apparently cured this prob but we stick with reverse wear to be consistent. Comp in control requires longer lead-ins, more operator input during setup, and generates many more CRC alarms than wear does. The only real reason I see for the 'old style' control comp is if you don't know what tool the guy will have in the machine so you just program everything for a 1/2 endmill and the guy can stick whatever he scrounges up off the bench into the machine, mic it, put the direct value in and go...

 

C

[Mgrenier]

Here we only use control cutter compensation because it is easier to read at the machine (the NC code repeats the prints dimensions) and the operator can change cutter without the programmer having to retouch the program. In addition, our posts are setup to write the cutter compensation within the NC code so that the operator does not forget to write it in the tools offsets page.

[within a thou]

I vote for wear also if it isn't in there that operator will be back on ya when he is out of tolerance thru cutter wear IMHO I think the only reason the operator oesn;t want to add the comp himself is because if something is out of tolerance its his @ss with you using control the onis is put back on you and he has smooth sailing. I have had operators like that run my programs they are the same type that the cutter couldbe screaming cause a speed or feed could be out and they will sit back watch the 4th of July show and asked MTF they are doin turn and say "Hey I didn;t program it"

[Storkman]

quote:

---

We have to use "control" because Mazatrol won't accept a negative number.

---

Just run your Mazak in EIA/ISO format, then it will accept negative offsets. At least ours does. We program our Mazak the same as our Fanucs.

[MACHINEMASTERG]

wear here also

[Jack K]

Funny this topic should come up today! We are battleing the same thing here! Our mazak does not like a positive # when programming with wear....all kinds of error messages, but seems to work with a neg #. Spent all day yesterday on 1 program because of this and 2 tool tables. I do not understand what the big deal is running eia programs in a mazak. It is like pulling teeth around here...all I hear is Mazatrol this and Mazatrol that......is this really that big a deal?

 

I like my comp in the computer... but if I have to use it I like wear best.

 

My two cents,

Jack Kalal

[Psychomill]

quote:

---

Just run your Mazak in EIA/ISO format, then it will accept negative offsets.

---

I think he is. The only thing is that they are using Tool Data for values instead of the tool offsets page. In Tool Data, you can't input any negative values for comp. This is what Mazatrol uses for values in programming since its conversational and thats what makes it 'control' type ( or centerline ) programming. This is why I suggested to change that and use the Offsets page instead.

 

I'm all for programming in wear for all of the same reasons that others here are. I'm used to it enough that I can figure out "where I'm at" easy enough. If the program has to be changed that drastically where the operator has to change a bunch of cutter paths, then IMO, I need to reprogram it in MC because I really screwed up somewhere.

 

quote:

---

... and the operator can change cutter without the programmer having to retouch the program.

---

You can do this in wear also. I can hardly remember the last shop I was at that still programmed in control.

 

quote:

---

As a shopwide standard, be sure to choose one and stick with it. Makes it easier for operators to set up and maintain machines.

---

I can go along with this though. I think it can avoid some possible confusion and "silly human errors".

 

Never had any problems with positive comp on a Mazak. Not any more than other controls anyway. And Mazatrol on a mill?... Forget it. I think its worthless and not smart enough even with tweaking the TPC unless the part is simple. On a lathe though, only Mazatrol. Even on lathe/mills like the Integrex I'd use mazatrol with the exception to 3D mill paths or other "complicated" pocket routines.

 

[JG]

Wear here also,BUT you have to be aware that internal arcs that are equal to the tool rad won't be in the code, so if regrinds are used the rads will be off basic by the offset amount.

 

Jg

[betts]

quote:

---

Here we only use control cutter compensation because it is easier to read at the machine (the NC code repeats the prints dimensions) and the operator can change cutter without the programmer having to retouch the program.

---

I use wear when I need to, but for the above reasons usually use "control", but I am not paying operator wages, I am paying toolmaker wages, so they have all the flexibility I can give them, and they are held accountable as such.

[bhayden10]

We have been using Mazatrol for 18 years now and have made many complicated parts. We recently just got Mastercam and I am just learning it. The operators thought that it was less confusing to keep using mazatrol tool data only instead of going back and forth so that is why after calling the mazak tech we found we "had" to use control and so far it has worked fine. There are times when i may program just the complicated part of a project and let them finish up with mazatrol since i wear many hats here. I am certainly interested in how everyone else does things as my background is not that strong on mills. One thing John showed me was to use perpendicular entry in order for the comp to work right.

Brian

[PeterM]

I use both types of cuttercomp in our shop. We have lots of old programs written exclusivly with ccomp in computer, so eliminating regular ccomp would be a hassle. The rule is simple, A perpendicular linear move greater than the rad of the cutter does it, I use 56% for smaller tools. Wear type ccomp is more flexible and I use it exclusively for threadmilling, and it's an easy add on for a non comped toolpath out on the floor, I did edit my posts to quote the type of ccomp used in order to prevent crashes. Hope this helps.

Peter

[cadcam]

bhayden10 Did you see my reply to you earler on your issue?

[bhayden10]

Jay,

Sorry, pretty hectic around here today. We've been off since Christmas. I haven't tried reverse wear and not sure what that even does. Do you run mazaks too? I put out a program today for a mazak 16a and it works great with control other than i didn't have big enough lead ins to make the comp work right. But we comped a tool .03 and had no problems. I'm interested in any advice you or anyone else has though.

Brian

[email protected]

[chris m]

Reverse wear makes the machine 'think' it is on the opposite side of the contour so you can use a + offset instead of -. You get G42 instead of G41 but the cutter still travels the same direction.

 

C