Limit turned length

[Dave Ball]

When turning the OD of a solid how do I limit the length of a chain so as not to hit the chuck?

[Guest]

On the Lead In/Lead Out dialog you have the option of extending or shortening a contour.

 

I don't usually use the solid for tool paths though, I will do a Create >> Curve >> slice to obtain line geometry and program to that instead

[Dave Ball]

Is the lesd in/lead out the only or "prefered method? I have tried that and it works fine but i was hoping for a more global setting and safety zone seems flakey.

[Dave Ball]

Also John, there is no lead in/lead out in canned cycles so I can't shorten it there.

[Guest]

My opinion, don't used canned cycles, you will be better off for it in Soooo many ways

 

You still do have to option of extend/shorten the contour however, click on the box to activate the Lead in/Lead out option

[Dave Ball]

I had been sensing that vibe around here. Since I haven't actually ran any lathe code yet I will take your advice.

[Thee Dragracer1951]

I second (or third) the notion of using the lead out to control the line length. I also don't use canned cycles.

[Chris Rizzo]

can the canned cycles. you'll chase your tail trying to get a toolpath exactly how you want it.

[kazmir44]

quote:

---

My opinion, don't used canned cycles, you will be better off for it in Soooo many ways

---

Could you give me some specific examples?

I used canned cycles for roughing 99% of the time. It is much easier to modify a depth of cut of stock to leave when doing it this way.

 

In my opinion, if it is drawn and programmed correctly, and your post is set up correctly, canned cycles are the way to go.

 

quote:

---

When turning the OD of a solid how do I limit the length of a chain so as not to hit the chuck?

---

To limit the length of the chain, you could always just break the line. I usually just draw a vertical line where I want to end the chain.

[gcode]

quote:

---

In my opinion, if it is drawn and programmed correctly, and your post is set up correctly, canned cycles are the way to go.

---

If you can tell at a glance that your code is good and you trust your operators to find the occasional glitch, canned cycles are fine.

 

I write programs for 15-20 different lathes

20-30 different operators and parts that may cost $30,000 and weigh over 20,000 pounds.

In that weight class, mistakes kill people.

Mumbling " Oh,that should have been an R,

not a D", is not going to cut it.

Even if Mastercam canned cycle output was bullet

proof (which it's not), I would not use canned cycles, there is just too much difference from machine to machine and operator to operator.

I can review gcode and know its good... canned cycles..well maybe?? ... and that's not good enough.

[cappy]

I agree with using the lead-in lead-outs. I first started adding geometry but once you get sued to using the lead dialog boxes they work pretty well.

 

Greg.

[chris m]

quote:

---

Even if Mastercam canned cycle output was bullet

proof (which it's not), I would not use canned cycles, there is just too much difference from machine to machine and operator to operator.

---

I probably have 3000 lathe programs and a majority used canned roughing cycles so I'm not sure where you're coming from here. I have about 6 or 8 different lathe controls that each have their own post and I have never run into a problem once the post was proven out. To me, 300 lines of code are much more difficult to trust than a 10-line canned toolpath.

 

I am personally a 'draw it like you want it' guy so I always create the geometry that I want the machine to produce and therefore don't worry about things like hitting the chuck jaws. I know that's not practical in every application but I've seen enough toolpath parameters un-edit themselves to stay with the method I have.

 

C

[Dave Ball]

From what I have heard on this forum it's the finish canned cycles that have problems. I'm not sure why rough and finish would be different but thats what people seem to run into.

[kazmir44]

I use the canned cycles to rough only, and always finish with a separate finish toolpath. You have more control that way.

[gcode]

quote:

---

I probably have 3000 lathe programs and a majority used canned roughing cycles so I'm not sure where you're coming from here.

---

We've got 20-30 different lathes and operators

who range from 30 year vets to 3 days out of trade school. I don't know what each machine needs, won't get the time to find out and can't trust the operators to know.

To add the mix, I may program for 1 machine and

find that the production manager has scheduled it for a completely different machine a week later.

 

90% of wat we do is huge castings, some of the cycle times are up to 60 hours with a single roughing cut taking half a shift. There are no dry runs, they load it and start cutting.

We post it and review it in Cimco Edit backplot.

Gcode is gcode and runs the same from machine to machine. They have never used canned dydles here

and I think it is the right decision.

[crazy^millman]

If you are doing pinch turning how do you control your entry and exit points to each others if you turn control over to the machine??? I hate caned cycles and like them at the same time. We have 4 different types of lathe controls here and if it is a canned cycle program has to be reposted every time it changes from machine to machine. If it is a gcode program little tweaks is all they need. Each have their place it is really up to the operation, preference, skill set, and machine as to what will or will not work for each application of said canned cycles. My biggest complaint about canned cycles I turn control over to the machine and I always want control of my code.

[gcode]

I'm sure I'll get an arguement out of this, but I believe that, properly done, a Mastercam roughing

ccyle is more effecient that a canned cycle

[chris m]

They both have their own inefficient moves, no doubt. At least with a straight roughing cycle you have more of a chance to catch the wasted passes on the screen. I do mostly small parts, so wasted moves in a canned cycle don't hurt me like they'd hurt you on those big parts.

 

quote:

---

I don't know what each machine needs, won't get the time to find out and can't trust the operators to know.

---

That is a tough situation to be in; knowing that I'd run straight code too.

 

C

[Dan@home]

You could allways break your geometry and then use the canned ruff..

[Reece L Gibson]

In the Canned Rough, in the lead-in/lead-out function, use the "Add line", set it to .500, and "0" degrees. It should shorten the chain by .500