Planes by geometry issue

[Greg_J]

I'm having a issue with planes by geometry, I created the plane I needed. I created the program and used the Top view as my WCS and my "New Back View" for my T/C plane and for my construction plane. When it post it, posts as A0 when I need it to post as A270. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

 

I am rotating my part in a 4th axis rotary, it rotates about the X axis.

 

 

Greg

[Justin Beebe at Folsom Tool]

Greg it is important to select your geometry in the proper chaining direction when you create planes by geometry. Chain in the X+ then Y+ direction when you select your geometry. Then make sure the arrows that come up for XYZ all point in the positive direction.

[Greg_J]

Thanks, I did make sure of that I picked the X+ then Y+ watching to make sure that my Z was pointing in the right direction. I had to do it for the bottom view and it worked it posted A90.

[Greg_J]

I noticed when I group posted the programs I got different offset numbers but when I post them by them self they were all the same.

 

HTH

[Justin Beebe at Folsom Tool]

What post are you using? If you are using mpmaster you can lock onto first wcs and you will get all all the same fixture offsets.

[gary adams]

Select the back view plane,then rotate it about the z axis 180 deg, and save this view as a named plane. Then select this plane as your tool and construction plane for the operation that is posting incorrectly.This works on my fanuc generic 4 axis post.

You may also note when you backplot your problem operation, that the x and y values display negetive when they should be positive or vice versa, this is your prompt that the post will not work out, and the previously described proceedure applies.

[Jim at Gentex]

I think Gary is correct.

It sounds like your new plane isn't oriented correctly.

 

I use 'planes by geometry' and 'planes by normal' quite a bit and have been fooled a number of times by thinking my axis directions were correct but find they aren't.

 

The easiest way I've found is to just click gview> named views> *your named view* and see if the X,Y, and Z orientations are correct when looking down the Z axis of your named plane / view. If is is not correct, I use planes> rotate> to orient it the way it needs to be.

 

I suspect if you use gview and look at your new back plane, the part will be upside down. Rotating the named plane / view 180 about Z should fix it.

[Greg_J]

On my part I have distinct features that show weither my part is upsidedown or not. When I turn on display WCS XYZ axes, it shows my T/C plains and they show the right direction and it also shows my WCS in the proper direction which is opposite to my New Back View.

 

Is there settings that need to be turned on like the Rotaty axis tab, or a check box in the Planes tab or even a setting in the post or machine def.

 

Thanks for your input,

Greg

[Greg_J]

Is the Z arrow point in the WCS + position or in the Z+ of the new plane when you create planes by geometry?

[Hardmill]

quote:

---

and it also shows my WCS in the proper direction which is opposite to my New Back View.

---

:edit:

Oops neva mind, sounds good.

If you want send me your file ill look in the AM.

 

 

PEACE

[Jim at Gentex]

quote:

---

Is the Z arrow point in the WCS + position or in the Z+ of the new plane when you create planes by geometry?

---

Z+

 

Like I said earlier, if you go to gview>named views> *your created view*, you are looking at the orientation of the new coordinate system looking down the Z axis with X+ pointing toward the right of your monitor, and Y+ pointing to the top of your monitor.

 

I've found this to be the simplest check to see if my created plane is oriented the way I think it is.

 

If you are sure it is oriented correctly, then yes, you have a different problem.

[Greg_J]

Sorry I've been away for abit we had a new guy start and I've been training him.

 

Anyway my part is on the FTP site under X3_files called GREGS_FILE.Z2G.

 

Let me know what you think.

The programs look good but the problem is when you post it messes up on the A270 it seems like the the A180 works. I created two new views.

 

Thanks,

Greg

[Greg_J]

BUMP

[Colin Gilchrist]

Hi Greg,

 

I think this is a post issue of some sort. I tried some different settings and creating new planes, and nothing changed.

 

Then I took a fresh copy of your file, replaced the machine definition with a Haas 4 axis vertical, and posted the code. I got A 90° for the backside operations, so I went into the 'A axis' properties in my machine definition, and reversed the CW/CCW rotary settings.

 

Your toolpaths posted out A 270° using the Top WCS and the 'New Back View' C/T planes.

 

I don't have enough time to dig into this until after work, but that is what I've found so far...

[Greg_J]

Good..... well sort of.

 

At least I know it's not me. Sometimes I wonder if it's me, am I doing something wrong.

 

I went over this with Colin awhile back and I couldn't get it straight.

 

Is the post included in the Ziptogo file?

[Colin Gilchrist]

Yep, a copy of your post came through, but I've got zero experience with these controls. You might want to shoot an email to your reseller or in-house to see if they can help...

 

I can give you one tip though for 4 axis vertical machine programming.

 

Do yourself a favor and create a 'seed' model that contains your 4 standard A axis planes, all rotated about the X axis.

 

What I do is take an empty Mastercam file, go into View Manager and make a copy of Top.

 

I rename this "new" Top Plane to "A0 Deg - Top"

 

Then I use WCS - Rotate (which rotates the system Top view) and rotate 90 about X (Should be = to front plane), I rename this view to A90 - Front, I do the same process for "bottom", rotating the Top plane 180, and the same for Back, rotating the top plane 270.

 

This will leave you with the normal system views, and 4 new views, all named with the correct A angle, and all useable for Vertical machining...

 

Then if you need to set a different origin for A0 - Top, you are not effecting the origin of the original 'System Top view'.

 

Now save this as a seed file and you are set.

[cobra95kev]

Another great post by Colin.

 

[Greg_J]

When you say "seed file" do you mean when you click save as... then you select the type of file then you can pick seed file?

 

I haven't done this before, I tried to save this one and but I did it wrong and my views were gone. I just tried to save it a .MCX file. What is the extension for seed file?

[Colin Gilchrist]

Hi Greg,

 

What I mean is that you are going to save a "template". So you are just saving a regular Masteram .MCX file.

 

When you start a new job, you open your template file and do a 'Save As'. This takes your template file and saves it with a new name (like your job or part number). Now you can create your geometry or import your geometry and start programming.

 

There is one other option which I use.

 

If you have a file with these planes already created, you can start a new Mastercam file, import your geometry, then go to the view manager and right-click in the view list, select 'import' and then browse to the file that has the correct planes.

 

When you select that file, a view list will pop-up and you can select the views you want to import. I like using the 'import' option because there is no chance of accidentally over-writing your template file...

 

HTH,

[Colin Gilchrist]

Thanks Kevin, right back at ya!

[nbet]

Hey, so it's been almost two months since this thread died. Has anybody figured out anything else on this topic? The problem is, out of the box, the generic 4 axis VMC machine def and post that come with MCX3 don't post the correct angle for the Back view using the Top WCS. This is described in detail above and I have found it to be the case as well.

 

Test it out for yourself...select the Generic Fanuc 4X Mill.MMD, create a point at the origin, drill it from the Top, Front, Bottom, and Back, and post it. I would expect the rotary angles to be 0, 90, 180, 270 (since the machine def sets up a rotary axis about X). But the Back operation doesn't comes out right. You can do as Colin suggests above and rotate the Back view 180 about Z to get it to post the correct angle of 270/-90 for the Back operation, but then the Y-axis is upside down, so that's not much help.

 

I've checked the debugger and found that an error is given at the posting of the Back operation indicating that, "Only single-axis rotation is allowed! Angles may be incorrect."

 

Does this seem wierd to you?

[Colin Gilchrist]

nbet,

 

I think you mis-understood what I was getting at in the above posts...

 

Mastercam's Planes are setup for programming a horizontal machine out of the box.

 

To get the correct rotary output for a vertical machine, you need to rotate the 'Top' plane about the X axis. For a correct 'Back' view, you would rotate the 'Top' plane either 90° or -90°, depending on which gives you the correct view. Your Y axis will be oriented correctly and the X+ axis will be pointing the same direction on all views (this is what you want for programming a vertical machine).

 

The behavior you notice is the same for all versions of Mastercam. By default, the Back and Bottom planes will not post correct rotations for a Verticle machine.

 

Try what I mentioned above: Start with "Top" and use the "Copy" button in the View Manager. Rename this to "Top A0 Deg" or something similar.

 

Now use the WCS | Rotate WCS function and create a new "Front - A90", "Bottom - A180", "Back - A270", by rotating about the X axis in 90 degree increments and saving these new planes...

 

Then save the current file and name it "Seed" or "Template" or something similar.

 

When you are working on a new job, open the template file, then do a 'Save As' and save it with the correct name.

[nbet]

Thanks Colin. I have done as you described and found that the output is correct for a 4X VMC (it makes sense now too!).

 

I'm curious about Boeing using Mastercam...why didn't they stick with CATIA's NC modules? Is CATIA NC being phased out at Boeing?

[Greg_J]

I had my reseller look at my post, (MPMASTER.HEID.CONV.DMG) and it was posting wrong. They fixed it and it works just like it should.

[Colin Gilchrist]

quote:

---

I'm curious about Boeing using Mastercam...why didn't they stick with CATIA's NC modules? Is CATIA NC being phased out at Boeing?

---

No, Catia is not being phased out here. Catia is great software, but it is also very complex. For what our group does, Mastercam is just a better fit. We make NC programs all day, every day. For what our particular group does, Mastercam is faster and easier to learn and use. There are many other groups in Boeing that use Catia exclusively, Mastercam exclusively, or a combination of the two.