X2 MR1 Lathe Verify vs. Backplot

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Ok, here's the dilemma...

 

Bacplot shows me good cartoons , Verify however.. nothing like what backplot shows... Which one should I trust?

 

I'd share it with the Forum but I can't for confidentiality reasons.

[Guest]

Nevermind, what I said, your in lathe

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Dang... I was hopin' for an answer.

[Guest]

As a rule I trust back plot over verify but I just don't have enough time into lathe yet to really be confident in that module as much as I am with mill.

 

sowwy

[DavidB]

The Lathe Verify is dodgy, I'd go with backplot or look at the gcode through Cimco edit V5 backplot.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

My gut says "trust backplot". But i just wanted to hear it from someone else too.

 

I'm going ot send this into CNC and ask WTF??? ROFL!!!! j/k

 

But I'll certainly ask the question why the difference between Backplot and Verify. I've tried different settings in Verify asl well... no difference in the visual representation.

 

Thanks John.

 

But if anyone else has 2¢ to add, I'd sure like to hear about it.

[Guest]

Damn, what a squirrely internet connection tonight.

 

A triple post :headshake:

[gcode]

I never use Verify in lathe.. backplot is good enough.

Just make sure your machine home postion is reasonably accuruate or toolchanges can hurt, especially in Z0 is the face of the chuck

[Alter Ego]

Since we're not privy to what your exact discrepancy is I can't offer any true insight, but, I'm with the consensus; trust the backplot. Verify has always had some quirks [drills coming in from the back of the part instead of the front, tools not taking stock when they really do, strange orphaned "unmachined" areas that don't really exist] in lathe so I don't think anybody completely trusts it; still a nice tool to have as long as you know that it ain't "the law"

 

C

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

The exact discrepancies are an "apparently" tapered OD, an "apparently" tapered ID, and blown out .004 corner radii.

 

I uploaded 2 pictures of the offending Operation to the Forum FTP. They are in the ".../Mastercam_forum/All_pictures_Jpg,gif,bmp's..." folder and are called "offending..."

 

If someone has some space to post the images, feel free.

 

I'm going ot send this into QC just for good measure as well.

[Bob Hedrick]

A suggestion (if you are NOT using comp in control only...):

Set the tool display to 'Step', regen the operation and watch the tool. Whatever agrees with that is generally correct.

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I NEVER... check that...NEVER use comp in control. so I'll try that.

[chris m]

James, I can't get to the ftp for some reason so I'm limited. Do you have the post required for your file? If so I'd suggest posting the code and backplotting in CimcEdit to have a look for the taper condition you're talking about. I don't understand about the 'blown out' .004R because I can't see your images so I'm no help there.

 

C

[Don S at Barefoot CNC South]

James

I have emailed CNC a list of problems in Lathe over the past few years such as verify, canned rough and finish cycles and so on they email me back and say yes lathe could use some love. But right now they are working on MATTS.

[chris m]

quote:

---

But right now they are working on MATTS

---

ROFLMAO at that one; been hearing that since 2002

[Don S at Barefoot CNC South]

Sent 03/15/07

Paul

I was talking about adding the skeleton code to older custom posts to utilize the stock advance tool paths for example. Also I wrote about the canned rough and finish turn cycles G71 and G70 the finish cycle has never worked correctly all the time, G70 should start at the same spot as the rough cycle but it doesn’t. This has been discussed in the forum a lot. The clearance on G70 will crash if you have a profile that has a larger diameter at the front of the tool path as well it tends to also hit the part on other times trying to get back for the next cut in rough. Also the tool libraries could use an update, I would think tool manufactures would offer these to CNC to help there sales rather than CNC having to create them. Here again I am not complaining just offering my thoughts

 

There reply

 

Don,

 

I’m sorry but we have no plans to go back and modify any of the older posts in this fashion. The changes coming with custom events make the old misc ops completely obsolete. It would not make sense for us to devote development time toward adding misc op support to the old posts when we really need to be focusing on developing new posts. And, I agree with you, Lathe can use some serious love from the developers. But again, Multi-tasking is the first priority. Once that is ready they will have time to go back and address other issues.

[calnet42]

Personally, I never trust either one.

 

I always backplot the .nc file with inplot.

This has saved me many, many times.

[kenfromlodi]

I would say backplot also.

Verify is very hard to determine exactly what is going on.

Stepping through backplot will usually show the problem.

Have faith my fellow lathe users,

I used to have to hand edit alot of stuff after posting my lathe programs but after using the software on a daily basis and a little post tweaking I found that alot of what I was having problems with was about 70% application and 30% post problems. MCX Lathe is definitely a different animal than mill.

I have been able to resolve almost everything I was having issues with and have not run into any big problems in quite awhile. Lathe is a little touchy in some areas but works very well if you learn the things it will not like.

I have good posts for the 5 different controls we have here and all my programs are now source correct which is something this place has never seen on the lathe side of things. I would love to see the Lathe package get an upgrade!!

 

According to my Boss here the only thing I should need for Lathe programming is a calculator!

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I was issued a bug number for this particular anomalie...

[Post dept]

If it helps....we setup posts to jive with backplot, not verify. That would apply for things like axis sub...

 

Brett

[HEAVY METAL]

anomaly

[Don S at Barefoot CNC South]

Makes ya wonder when they give you a bug number and its 8 digits. LOL

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Thanks Brett, that's been my gut feeling all along - to trust Backplot but I just wanted a few more voices (besides the usual suspects in my head )

 

In CNC's Defense about Bug Numbers... they have changed the naming convention at least a few times since I can remember. I think now, each digit means something so that the bugs get routed to the right department (i.e. Milling Group, Verify Group, Post Processor Group, etc...). Just a guess, an uneducated one but still a guess.

[Randy Morton @ Clem Industrial]

Unless there is something I am not seeing with the BP, I like the fact that verify crashes (or rather, gives collision detection). I run both, but really only use verify because of the collision detection, otherwise I like to see the exact tool (I define 98% of my tools to the book specs) and see where it goes like that.

[Hymen]

quote:

---

There reply

 

Don,

 

I’m sorry but we have no plans to go back and modify any of the older posts in this fashion. The changes coming with custom events make the old misc ops completely obsolete. It would not make sense for us to devote development time toward adding misc op support to the old posts when we really need to be focusing on developing new posts. And, I agree with you, Lathe can use some serious love from the developers. But again, Multi-tasking is the first priority. Once that is ready they will have time to go back and address other issues.

---

This is not a post side fix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!