Control vs. Wear

[Psychomill]

88Matt, what you're describing is the basis for "positive tool offsetting". You create a 'relativity' between the machines. You really don't have to have a 'Master Machine' to do this. You just need a standardized form (or setup) to aquire your tool lengths from. What Concepttool is doing works great from a single machine stand point but makes it tough to move/utilize the same tooling in another machine because you have no idea what the 'gage length' of T1 is. On top of that, the rest of the tools are set relative to this particular T1. Don't get me wrong, what he's doing works, just a "different way".

 

You only need to establish your standard. From there you can set all of your tool lengths for any given machine. Just use the work offsets to adjust. If you can use multiple work offsets (G54-G59, G54.1 etc) then its easy.

 

Another thing I've done is to actually set the grid of each machine the same. If you have a bunch of similar or the same model machines, you can shift the grid parameters so that all of these machines have the same X, Y, and Z point at a specific place on the table. Now, not only is the tool length standardized, but so is your work since the part position is now the same on all machines. Makes having modular setups even that much more efficient. You can setup and/or move fixtures and tools to any machine and not have to pick up any offsets.

 

[within a thou]

PsychoMill I have the luxuary of having enough tooling I have one tool of eaach for each mill but I see your point if that isn't a option. A lot of manufactures give the tool bodies away when ya buy so many inserts so I have a bunch lying around. But I do see your point if ya don;t have that. I only do custom one off work so I don;t have fancy work fixtures for repeating X and Y we have thought about making a plate with keys cut thru it but haven;t been able to standardise our tools yet to make it worth it.

[88Matt]

Thanks for the info guys. My apologizes, my intent was to not skew the thread of subject. Hence, I left out a lot of info.

 

Concepttool, we currently use the same set up on a number of machines as you. But, tools are set with the machine for each machine. I was just saying that part of my project I am going to try to set up a TLO parameter in Tool Definition. Then have the post pull the TLO out and spit out a G10. This part would also work for those using control wear to reduce button pushing at the machine and improve QC.

 

FYI: We currently dont have an electronic setter in my dept. So using a ground-to-length piece of round stock (4"length x 3.5"dia), I will drill and bore a taper (matching a C40) until the gage distance from the top of my stock to the shoulder of the tool holder matches the gage between the tool holder and spindle nose of one machine. Then I will set the g53 z offset in the rest to compensate for the differences in spindles.

 

Now I should be able to have set TLO's in my tool library that never change and set each new tool to the current TLO on file. Eliminating using the machine for setting tools, the chance of punching in the wrong offset and the program can run on any of the machines in the group.

 

We only build gages, fixtures, models and R&D parts. So currently I am just interest mainly in the TLO set-up. If it runs smoothly, I will probably move to incorporate fixture offsets, but that is down the road.

 

Again, I apologize for getting the thread a little of track. Maybe I should learn to start one? lol

[tedly]

(I only use wear comp.

1. I do not need to have the code agree with the print.

2. I like my tool table cutter comp to start out all zeros and change them +- a few .001 as needed.

3. I don't have to enter the different tool dia's into the table every setup and won't make entry errors because all tools are zero dia.)

 

Would somneone explain how to set-up thie wear comp please? How is "0" tool dia works?

 

Thanks

[3rdstring]

When you use wear comp MC has already compensated for the tool dia so you can just adjust a few thou in the tool table to adjust for feature size or to compensate for a resharpened tool.

 

HTH

 

Welcome to the forum.

[Fig sign]

This leads to nowhere .

For 15 Years I work in CNC field what`s better question never was answered .

I can give you pro and con for every type of comp .

Personally I prefere to use control or computer .

I hate wear .(being oldtimer reading and writing code when there is a need )

Using Cimatron I had no other way )Cimatron uses only wear )

That had not made me happy .

But you can work in any type of comp.

Only be consistent and never mix them .

If your shop chosed wear use only wear .

Or only control .

And be happy .

[Guest]

quote:

---

If your shop chosed wear use only wear .

Or only control .

And be happy .

---

Hell NO!!!!

 

At least in these parts the ONLY shops I see running comp control are the ones who don't like to spend money on tooling, so they stick in whatever will work.

 

With the advent of the CAM system there is no longer any reason what so ever to use control. It is one more thing for an operator to screw up and scrap a part. Take control of all of the process as you can as a programmer and make it easy for the guy on the floor.

[Programinator]

The first shop i worked used control and thats how i learned. I left there and started working by myself and was told by a friend to try wear and at first i didnt like it because the program didnt match the print.. but then i wised up and realized that i needed to trust mcam and once i did that i never used control again. So just trust it and forget about control its for the old timers

[Thee Dragracer1951]

I also learned with comp in the control. Programmed at the machine. Realized that programming at the machine was not real smart when I woned the machines...learned about wear and it just makes sense. No more comp errors. I do lots of small interpolated holes that need to be close tol. With wear I can use a larger more rigid tool to make those holes. It's a no brainer for us. Nothing to change in the ofset page. We have standardized tooling in the carosel, so it works nicely here.

[kenfromlodi]

We are running wear only and positive length offsets on EVERY mill, vertical and horizontals.

It really is the best way to eliminate operator error.

Think about it like this, 3 programmers, 80 cnc's, 100+ machinists on 4 different shifts.

Where would most of the error happen?

On the floor literally inputting thousands of different tool diameter is a huge window for mistakes.

IMO programming needs to be responsible for putting out programs that can be trusted to make good parts using the least human involvement possible.

 

Humans = Error

[nine blue]

We have a Mazak Nexus mill with the 640 Fusion control.I have always used negative offset numbers on Fanuc controls and the Wear offset function in Mastercam so I was disappointed to see that the Tool Data Table did not allow their usage so to get around that problem I do the following.

If I am using a .5 end mill I'll lie to Mastercam and call it a .490 end mill and use wear comp. In the Tool Data table I'll punch in .010 for cutter size. Now I can comp down to zero. If I need more comp room I'll lower the cutter size in Mastercam and increase it the same amount in the Tool Data Table. It's not pretty but it works. Probably would not work in a big shop where the machinist did not do the programming. Too confusing to keep track of tool size.

I would like to use the tool offset page but I can't get the Tool Auto Measure function to put the tool lengths in the offset page. Probably have to change a parameter somewhere.

Do not like control comp. Wear is the only way to go.

[Programinator]

quote:

---

Wear is the only way to go.

---

True that...I would not even mind if they took the control comp right out of mcam all together.