Horizontal Programming your method?

[Josh T™]

Top/Front here as well. One of my customers has elaborate fixtures/tooling that IMO looks better by using Top/Front. You could program it either way but I prefer to look at the file in MC as I would look at the part/fixtures on the machine.

[iowajim62]

quote:

---

You could program it either way but I prefer to look at the file in MC as I would look at the part/fixtures on the machine.

---

Having been taught to "draw" in Autocad before using MC made it automatic to use Top/Front.

[gms1]

I use TOP WCS Front B0. Center of rotation for work offsets.

 

quote:

---

Mastercam took 4 separate groups inside of one machine and now divided them into 4 different machine groups and took the machine I was using and replaced it with generic Mill. It will take 30 minutes to fix all this.

---

So freaking annoying!! I just sat here yesterday with a file that has 5 diff. machine groups and 400+ tool paths fixing it. This bug and the fact that when you place the "red arrow of doom" in a different machine group it changes the WCS and g-view to something completely different than what Im looking at! Drives me insane.

[crazy^millman]

Guys I complained about the random problem for 4 years and always said it was just me. I can't say I am glad to see more people have had the problem, but glad to know I am less the crazy person on the forum than I thought.

 

Everyone thanks for your replies and I got a method that works.

 

This machine group changing problem does not happen when you make each operation a Mastercam file. I have done it that way for the last 3 years and never get this turning operations groups into machine groups. Again customer wants everything in one file so I give the customer what they want. I guess I will just have to add time on to my quotes to cover the problems Mastercam gives me is all. I hate it, but someone talked about best practices well I have developed them from all the trouble Mastercam has given me over the years and sure is annoying when something you reported a long time ago as what I consider a major bug still has not been found and addressed.

[john316]

.

 

quote:

---

This machine group changing problem does not happen when you make each operation a Mastercam file. I have done it that way for the last 3 years and never get this turning operations groups into machine groups.

---

I always have the entire job in one file. If I have to change one operation it makes it so much easier to change the rest of the ops without chasing down the change from file to file. It makes it a lot easier in verify also.

 

.

[RandleXX]

Always used TOP/FRONT(B0), been that way for over 10 years now with no problems.

[Joe788]

quote:

---

This machine group changing problem does not happen when you make each operation a Mastercam file.

---

Unfortunately, it does still happen when you've only got one machine group in the file. It's only happened to me once, but I certainly know the frustration that follows....

 

[The Bruce]

Wow, I don’t post much but every now and then I run into a little glitch and this is were I go. But I do have to say coming from the shop floor as a base I use Top Top for A zero and B zero if you notice MC rotates views like a drawing so logically how could Front be B 90 Front is A 90 just as A axis would rotates around your X axis. Now if you wanted your B axis to rotate you would rotate around Y to create a tool plane B 90 or B-90 but then again I am just an old machinist stuck in programming.

[Code_Breaker]

I use the FRONT face of the tombstone as TOP PLANE and program MC naturally (IMHO) ... that will make Z0 anad X0 the center of rotation, the operator picks up Y0 and pushed the buttom ...

 

If we transfer to verticle (rotary) then it is minor changes in Z0 and regenerate ... of course, you need to use incremental tool path to make your program versatile ...

 

I know this might be against the grain, but KISS ...

[crazy^millman]

Don I use this rule along the line of naturally speaking. When you go to ISO does the tombstone look it does on the machine or does it look it would on a Vertical?

 

If anyone use Mastercam's solid layout they know that is does not support WCS. So when someone goes to create set-up sheet they also know they would not look correct per what is running on the machine thus making confusion for the shop personnel. If Mastercam supported WCS with solid layout then yes it would not matter. For those of us programming Mill/Turns where back is C0 we have to create one set of solids for our toolpaths and one set of solids for our solid layout. That is a PIA, but what do you do when all you got is Mastercam? You make what you got work and I and I want to see on the screen what I see going on in the machine. When I Verify a HMC program in ISO using WCS top and Front C-plane it looks like it does on the machine any other way and it looks like if I were running it on a different machine.

[Jack Neelands™]

Top/Front....better for changing 4 to 5 axis programs as the transition is alot smoother when you change from 4 to 5 axis machines when posting

[McLaren]

I see comments about having the file look like it would while on the machine, but all of the horizontals where I work have the spindle coming in from the right hand side, so wouldn't the Front be B270?

 

Personally I use Top/Top because we do alot of chick tower/chick vise work and it makes it easy to switch between horizontal/vertical.

 

Plus I'm not too advanced so I don't know all of the benefits yet.

[gms1]

Ron I gave up on solids layout for making my setup sheets a long time ago. I'm sure that feature is nice for some folks but the majority of the stuff I do is all over 60" in length which just gives nightmares trying to dimension scaled geometry and then switching back to unscaled dimensions and geometry. Its burned me to many times to count so I make all my own views and prints and keep hoping the boss man will spring for solidworks some day

[crazy^millman]

gms1 I in those cases do them one to one and then just scaled my template to the part and not do no scale the part to the sheet makes life easier that way. I wish we would get something else, but I got what I got and try to use it to the best of my abilities. My way is not the right way, there are many different ways in which to do something. What way have you developed really comes down to the tools you have available for you to use. I have seen many different methods over the years and can program it any way, but problems I have seen from the software guide me to do the ways that create the least amount of problems for me as a programmer.

[Verndog]

quote:

---

Guys I complained about the random problem for 4 years and always said it was just me. I can't say I am glad to see more people have had the problem

---

Ya, its funny what you find out when you actually USE the software day in and day out under a variety of conditions...vs play around with it some and think its all good.

 

I have a series of tests / files / translations / that I put new versions thru before deciding if I want to go thru the "same headache / different year syndrome".

 

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

 

quote:

---

If anyone use Mastercam's solid layout they know that is does not support WCS.

---

Very irritating to make tooling dwgs. out of top / top. I'm sure by X12.0 they get that straightened out, it's only been about 8 years that way.

[crazy^millman]

Verndog like I said my way to fix that is to make programs for each operation. It was until recently having to do everything in one file that I ran back into this problem.

[Verndog]

I hear you, there are many advantages to keeping a file for each op. My irritation toward the issues was aimed at CNC software reps that are making "advancements" and missing getting important key features working 100% correct first...It would be nice to get back to 1 page of work arounds.

[specv]

top/front here, since v8

[Richard Thomas - Mastercam UK]

We used to be Top/Top back in the old days (pre V7) when the horizontal posts generally preferred it that way

 

So ever since, it's been Top/Front, and that has not been a problem... until last week

 

We are trying to set up X4s' Machsim add-on to simulate a customers' Haas ES-5 5-axis HMC. So

we program a job in Top/Front. Now the actual Haas post procesor outputs B0 like we expect. But in the machine simulation, B0 faces the spindle at the back of the machine and therefore thinks our toolpath in the Front plane is actually at B180. This means that Machsim initially shows the part facing the wrong way on the table and makes one rotary axis spin 180 degrees to machine the part

 

We have found no way so far of telling Machsim that the Front plane in Mastercam is B0 and not B180. So we've been waiting for a reply from CNC while the customer gets shirty waiting for the machine simulation. Moduleworks won't help and tell us to contact CNC

 

There maybe an easy fix for this but we haven't found it and we have looked.

 

Oh yes - sorry it's a bit off topic!

 

[ 06-15-2010, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Rich Thomas ]

[Ron Branch @ Verisurf]

Do a Inverse WCS and try that. Take a Top Plane and rotate it 180. It will crate a New Plane. Use that for the WCs and see if that tricks out the machine sim.

[Mr. Wizzard]

Top/Front is the way i have always done it, as well.

I do remember finding out setting up the tombstone on an EC400 for machsim was a bit odd. I'm thinking, if my memory works, that it was Top/Top, but could be wrong. If your position in machsim works and you just have the wrong rotation, go to the machine definition in machsim and change the rotation direction for the B-axis to -1 instead of 1.

That might help.

[Mr. Wizzard]

Oh, and by "remember", i mean i messed with it 4 months ago and have not touched it since.

If you can't get it to work, CNC will help you out. They got it to work for me, but, of course i didn't write anything down and now it slips my mind as to what i had to do exactly.

[gcode]

Try this..

Open the Machine Def and go to the Properties page of the axis in question

Check out the "World Coordinate system" field

and see what the "0 deg position" is set to.

On my HBM machine def its set to "-Y"

Reverse you setting and try machine sim again.

[Richard Thomas - Mastercam UK]

Thanks you guys for you replies on Machsim. We've tried a couple of suggestions but no changes in the Machine definition seem to help the resulting simulation (not for our needs anyway)

 

If you think about it, to *really* program a part in Mastercam as you would expect to see it on a horizontal machine (Haas ES-5 for example) - you should really be programming Top/Back!

 

Picture it, a part on screen in the isometric view..... if you were viewing the machine from the same isometric view in the workshop, the tool would machine from the back of the m/c cabinet, not the front.

 

But no posts I know would correctly output B0 if we programmed the Back plane. So we think while Machsim in technically correct in it's simulation, it doesn't match the real world usage of Mastercam and the development of horizontal posts.

 

It's a can of worms to be sure...

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

If you think about it, to *really* program a part in Mastercam as you would expect to see it on a horizontal machine (Haas ES-5 for example) - you should really be programming Top/Back!

---

Not really. What we see (and makes total sense) is from the tool's perspective, not from the operator's perspective. Personally I could care less about the operator's perspective.

 

JM2C