Computer, or control countour toolpaths

[Tinny]

I dont see anything in the arguements above that convince me wear is better or worse than control. Its down to choice in the end, and changing a shop's programs from control to wear would be an expensive waste of time.

 

Do you guys use tool pre-setters?

[Guest]

Have an operator "forget" to place the comp in or use the right comp and you'll find out pretty quickly why you should use wear instaed.

[ToolMan184]

quote:

---

Have an operator "forget" to place the comp in or use the right comp and you'll find out pretty quickly why you should use wear instaed.

---

OK Guys an interesting read for me. But, the comp would be in the program already if its control. Or are you saying "to forget to put in the tool dia.?" because that would be bad. I have always used control, but since this thread I have been talking to my operators about changing to wear. We just completed some testing and I think they like the wear.

[john316]

.

 

I've tried both methods.

 

Wear has less possibilities for error.

 

It would be hard to change a whole shop from one to the other though. So if your shop is used to putting the cutter size in the control radius offset, I would leave it that way.

 

.

[RandleXX]

Control will fault out on some machines when it encounters a radius smaller than the tool. Really bad with arc in/out.

 

I use Wear always.

[Tinny]

Just as a matter of interest, what would happen if you had a wear proogram and someone entered an offset into the control?

[Guest]

it will adjust the cutter path by the entered amount.

 

However when using wear if you have more than a couple of thousandths entered in wear, you have a problem and it is MORE than apparent

[Tinny]

Lol what I mean is will it compensate away or towards the material?

[Guest]

If you are climb milling with a G41 a minus number will cut more material

[Tinny]

Ok I can now see the benifit as a safty margin kind of thing, but we have very skilled people here and off days like forgetting to enter an offset are very few and far between. Our tools are pre set and the values entered onto a chip in the pullstud. The offset information is read when the tool goes into the machine. We can even put the tool in any pocket in our 60 tool 5 axis and the control sorts it out, we just have to call a 4 digit toolnumber assigned to the chip on the pullstud.

[Kyle Waters]

+1000 to wear and computer.

If we had a chip on our tooling, it wouldn't matter so much but we don't. We have had ALOT of days when it has been "overlooked", usually after lunch. I have even made a short clearing program to eliminate using values from the previous jobs, but someone at the machine still has to run it thru(see problem above). When I was writing programs at the control with a calculator, it made it faster, but now I am a full time desk jockey so there shouldn't be a need for it anymore.

[ToolMan184]

With using WEAR you can only offset in the - direction, am I correct here? You cant add to the offset just subtract from it?

 

Example: I program a contour with wear, run on machine and contour is small. Can I go into the offset and add say .002" or can you only do -.002"?

[Guest]

Your machine will determine that. All of our Moris and Fadal take + and - comp, so we can adjust in both directions. I think Okumas have a hard time with the postive comp, but then you can use reverse comp

[ToolMan184]

We will have to give it a try Monday. We have Fanuc controls so it should work. We are going to test on one machine and if every one likes it we are making the switch. we have some problems with control and arcs and I believe this will solve our problem.

[Guest]

quote:

---

we have some problems with control and arcs and I believe this will solve our problem.

---

Yes this likely will

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Control - Old School for people that HAVE to see code that corresponds to a number on the print (in other words they don't trust their CAM software to output the right numbers)

Wear - New School for people that could care less what the numbers are and want the most flexibility.

 

JM2C

[Trim Break]

What if I'm using Mazaks. I have Mazatrol programs that have to look to the tool data page for the "actual dia" for its offset.

The Mazatrol M64 tool data page also has a field for length and Dia compensation in addition to the tool length and Act. Dia field. I'm assuming this is like the wear field on the Fanuc. I have a good bit of "wear programing" experience on a Haas with SmufCAM and I liked it alot.

 

Any body have any hints for a shop that is still sucking on the Mazatrol teat.

[Fig sign]

I hate wear .

So I use computer and control .

When and what - it depends .

But never Wear .

This is an old ? and every one choose for himself what he prefers

Every way has it strong and weak sides .

It was covered prelly good before ,make a search and see .

You need to be constant ,if you choosed wear or control ,stay with one of them ,never use both or you`ll have big problems with your operators

[pip]

How do you program wear at the machine. It seems there would need to be a lot more working out of the coordinates.

This does seem to be a europe verse America type thing, if you read through the answer most of the members from America use wear, here as those in europe prefer Control, just my observation.

[Guest]

Yeah, you guys in Europe use that screwy thing called the Metric system too meh thinks.

 

 

It's a good though, even though you're all wrong

 

[Fig sign]

Pip I am not sure with your statement .

Cimatron (Israely program )used widely in European countries is wear and only wear .

I do agree with James (we the old-timers prefer control )

[pip]

Iskander, I think you'll find James is a wear man. I can only talk about my expierience. Here (Switzerland) the 3 main contenders are, Mastercam, Alphacam and Unigraphics. Not in that order, but with most of the firms I have worked for the programmers have to program for the operators, so that mean we(programers) have no choice in how me make our programs. The programs must be editable at the machine by the operator. I have just started with a new firm, and am just relearning how to program 5 axis machine, so I don't program with comp anymore.

[PeterM]

We use both here. I am able to program any cut either way although using wear is simpler and faster for me, and provides an extra level of safty from offset errors. I have switched to using wear type cutter comp in my new programs, but we posses thousands of older but perfectly good programs, and I don't need to spend the time reprogramming all of them. What I have done is to modify my posts to output what type of cutter comp a particular tool is using. so that the setup /operator knows what is up.

[Zoober]

Tim - We have a mazak that we have been using strictly a a toolroom machine. Conversational only, one guy programming and running.

Now, we need to convert a program (or maybe re-program) to the mazak. I have an EIA post, but do you know of a way to use the mazatrol side out of MC? Can we even post to the controversial , uh conversational side. I know I'm showing my ignorance, but I just don't know.

We use wear for everything else, and want to be able to on the mazak. We got a lot of learning ahead this week.

Any ideas?

[pip]

there was a post from camaix that could post in mazak conversational, but I dont think it is available anymore. I don't think you can use wear in mazak because it does need the diameter of the tool. I don't know much about the eia side of it.