Horizontal Programming your method?

[Guest]

I did some searching here and TheeCNC Apps Guy made a statement saying that if you switch between Verts and Hori's then TOP/TOP programming makes sense.

Purely because it's easier to re-carve a program from one machine to the other.

I read that back a while (originally) all Mcam posts for Horis were TOP/TOP but I can't remember when or why it changed to TOP/FRONT (or even if I read it).

 

It changed from Top/Top to Top/Front for ease of plane changes (for the lazy guys). Front = B0, Right = B90, Back = B180, and Left = B270.

 

Those of us that are/were used to creating our own planes, it didn't really matter one way or another. But, like newbee said, Top/Top is WAY better if you want to take a part from a 3-Axis to a 4-Axis and don't want to re-do all the planes.

 

JM2CFWIW YMMV

[Newbeeee™]

It changed from Top/Top to Top/Front for ease of plane changes (for the lazy guys). Front = B0, Right = B90, Back = B180, and Left = B270.

 

Those of us that are/were used to creating our own planes, it didn't really matter one way or another. But, like newbee said, Top/Top is WAY better if you want to take a part from a 3-Axis to a 4-Axis and don't want to re-do all the planes.

 

JM2CFWIW YMMV

So with the introduction of viewsheets now making it really quick and easy to change from view to view (plane to plane), am I right in assuming that there is actually no benefit to TOP/FRONT whatsoever?

Create a template file with all your standard viewsheets set, and away you go???

[Guest]

Depends on how your posts/MD/CD are configured if that is possible or not. That said, creating "seed" files that have your planes/views, tools, default settings, etc... have ALWAYS had a great many benefits over new from scratch every time.

[BenK]

Now you got me scared. We are looking into getting Integrex or similar machine right now.

 

Shouldn't it be close to the lathe coordinate system.

 

Z+ is the long axis of the machine.

X+ is for the diameter

Y+or - is off center

C is the chuck rotary

B is the Y axis head rotary

 

They are nothing to be afraid of. It might take you a while to wrap your brain around the axis combination and plane setup but after a while it will become second nature to you.

[jlw™]

It's painful at first but then lathe was a stumbling block for me at first because I was used to lathe CAM making sense.

 

Now that mcam has warped my head I'd be lost in another system.

[Sticky]

Hrm....from the pic of the first NC machine in your link it sure does look like hacked up vertical 28 x 60  to me....

 

It is a B axis horizontal with 2 pallets and side mounted rotary atc.

 

My point is, that 4 axis horizontals were being developed at the same time.

[Müřlıń®]

It is a B axis horizontal with 2 pallets and side mounted rotary atc.

 

 

You are absolutely right I don't know what I was looking at...I had a bunch of windows open and I must have been on another site...

 

In fact the horizontal in your pic is not even the machine they are referring to in that whole article.  Judging by the control and the castings it was probably made in the 70's and does not even belong in that article.

 

The pic I was referring to was on this site and  was made in 1952 made it's debut at the very first IMTS in Chicago in 1955.

 

Same machine in your article except for the pic.  I guess they wanted a more modern pic since they are a machine dealer...as you can see the control for the first NC milling machine takes up a whole room

 

and is a retrofit.  It was a very complicated POS....

 

 

 

 

http://www.sme.org/Tertiary.aspx?id=36002

[markh496]

I started out hand coding g codes on a niigata hmc in the 80's. Did prove outs,set ups and  ran  G&l hbm's for 26 years and dealt with a lot of screwed up crap from various  cam systems over the years . operators that are good save millions of dollars of damage over the years,button pushers dont. Im going to be doing mastercam on a large quill spindle hmc. For me the top front method  makes a lot more sense than top top . if i rotate a part, i want it rotating  on the rotation axis  not spinning on z like a vertical . just my 2 cents  after 40 years from both sides of the equation

[markh496]

On 6/18/2010 at 7:04 AM, Tony35 said:

 

quote:

---

Personally I could care less about the operator's perspective.

---

+2

I ll bet the operators feel the same  about the programmers    team efforts work better and cost less

[pete_hull]

On ‎6‎/‎18‎/‎2010 at 4:04 AM, Tony35 said:

 

quote:

---

Personally I could care less about the operator's perspective.

---

+2

I am not trying to convert anybody, but I've always programmed toolpaths from the perspective of looking down the tool , and the  tool axis 0,0,1 normal to the XYplane is the same on a vertical and horizontal, so what's the advantage in programming them differently? .This is the way it is in the Cartesian geometry of APT.All the Top/Front Top/Top etc loses me, I accept that's maybe how CNC software want to do it but I don't like it.

[huskermcdoogle]

On 11/19/2018 at 9:57 AM, pete_hull said:

I am not trying to convert anybody, but I've always programmed toolpaths from the perspective of looking down the tool , and the  tool axis 0,0,1 normal to the XYplane is the same on a vertical and horizontal, so what's the advantage in programming them differently? .This is the way it is in the Cartesian geometry of APT.All the Top/Front Top/Top etc loses me, I accept that's maybe how CNC software want to do it but I don't like it.

I know I have heard the argument many times, but can't for the life of me remember the details behind why CNC chose Top/Front.  The only argument I have now, is that this is the config that mach sim and probing are setup around.  Does it make any sense to me, no.  But that's because I always used Top/Top and since moving into the five axis world, still use Top/Top as my 0,0 plane so to speak.

[Newbeeee™]

24 minutes ago, huskermcdoogle said:

I know I have heard the argument many times, but can't for the life of me remember the details behind why CNC chose Top/Front.  The only argument I have now, is that this is the config that mach sim and probing are setup around.  Does it make any sense to me, no.  But that's because I always used Top/Top and since moving into the five axis world, still use Top/Top as my 0,0 plane so to speak.

Husker,

Top/Top was changed to Top/Front for Hori programming so the Front/Side/Back etc planes worked out of the box. This was because the vast majority of 'grammers couldn't get their heads around planes and WCS

[nickbe10]

TOP/TOP all the way.

Pretty much every shop I have worked in had both Horizontal and Vertical 4ax machines.

In the most efficient shops we proved out on the verticals and then transferred to the Horizontal Cell.

This ensured minimum downtime on the cell which of course was the big moneymaker.

Just translate to the new position on the tombstone, select new machine and regen.

Never had a problem.

TOP/FRONT does save you a whole 1.5 mins automatically creating A90, A180 and A270 for you......

and often in aerospace there are no rotations to these values because these values imply a "square" part.....don't know if anyone has noticed that airplanes aren't square.......

[nickbe10]

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 11:11 AM, markh496 said:

For me the top front method  makes a lot more sense than top top . if i rotate a part, i want it rotating  on the rotation axis  not spinning on z like a vertical

I think you will find that TOP/TOP is the one which rotates around the Y axis, as long as you reselect the rotational axis in the machine def.

[huskermcdoogle]

3 hours ago, Newbeeee™ said:

Top/Top was changed to Top/Front for Hori programming so the Front/Side/Back etc planes worked out of the box. This was because the vast majority of 'grammers couldn't get their heads around planes and WCS

I guess the simple is the best one here.

2 hours ago, nickbe10 said:

TOP/FRONT does save you a whole 1.5 mins automatically creating A90, A180 and A270 for you......

I reality even less.  All you have to do is duplicate and flip x with the edit function.  Now that said back in the day it wasn't quite as fast to edit, so you could just do a rotate WCS from top by 180 about y.  But still 1.5 minutes is generous.

[?Mark]

Top/Front

 

Anything else is illegal

[nickbe10]

 

17 hours ago, huskermcdoogle said:

I guess the simple is the best one here.

Here's the other deal for me tho', why have one oddball configuration when TOP/TOP works for everything?

Just from a flexibility stand point it just makes so much more sense...

[JParis]

14 minutes ago, nickbe10 said:

 

Here's the other deal for me tho', why have one oddball configuration when TOP/TOP works for everything?

Just from a flexibility stand point it just makes so much more sense...

I prefer Top/Front....a 3D visual thing for me. Considering the we run lots of prototype almost exclusively on Verticals programming for those isn't always a cycle time 1st  or even 2nd consideration as such, those programs never get converted to run on an HMC.

When things get to production though, those programs are mostly ignored.  All parts get a fresh look, fixtures designed and the programmed using production methods. 

 

[MadMike3006]

I go with Scott from Shopware. We have 2 different HMCs, for which they supplied our posts, and they work flawlessly. ZERO issues, as long as you do the WCS Top and TPlanes to the orientations! I barely even look at the output G Code anymore...works predictably the right way, every time.

[SlaveCam]

None of our horizontal mills support dynamic work offset, that is, the work offset rotates automatically with the pallet. Because of this I have started implementing logic into my post that uses G55 as the source work offset and after each rotation, the rotated work offset is written into G56 that is used by every rotated plane. G54 is always (0,0,0) and thus reserved for center-of-rotation programming, meaning every single program prior to 2018.

The reason I am forced to do this is because probing is becoming very common it is a huge PIA to handle rotations with work offset corrections.