"Proper" programming methods

[Marshal]

Alright, I'm curious as to what is considered the "proper" way of programming a 3-axis part that might have multiple operations in the same plane. For example, I've got a part that I'll be working on shortly that is made out of a 12"x12"x0.5" aluminum plate. At the moment I have 5 different files set up, one file for each operation, because that's how the last one was programmed. What I'd like to learn, is how to do it the "proper" way. There's machining work to be done on 3 sides of the plate, both large sides, and one end.

 

First I've got to drill some mounting holes, which we put in the vise for that, so that'd have to be a totally separate operation in itself.

Second we mount it to a plate using those holes and face it off and do some contours and slight surfacing work.

Third we flip it up on end by mounting it to an angle plate and do a contour and drill a few holes.

Fourth we put it face down and do some more contour and surfacing work on the back.

And finally, we put a fixture around the part to hold it down while we cut the rest out and split it in two.

 

So I guess I'm wondering if the proper way is to make 5 files and post 5 programs, or put them all into one MCam file and post multiple programs, or how it should work. I know the way I'm currently doing it works, but I'm curious if there's a better way.

 

Unfortunately, I can't post the file, so I hope I've described this enough.

[Cannon]

Separate the operations in different toolpath groups and use WCS. I also use manual input to write notes at the beginning of the toolpath group if there is something specific to remember.

[MIL-TFP-41]

Separate the operations in different toolpath groups and use WCS. I also use manual input to write notes at the beginning of the toolpath group if there is something specific to remember.

 

We do about the same thing....cept we use a different machine group for each operation. Then inside of each machine group we have toolpath groups...named things like rough, finish, holes, ect. Lots of parts we do the different operations are done on different machines, so we could have a 3 axis machine group named "stock prep", then a 5 axis machine group, then maybe another 3 axis group.....

[Tony35]

i use multiple toolpath groups like Cannon, that way all ops are under 1 file

[iowajim62]

We do about the same thing....cept we use a different machine group for each operation. Then inside of each machine group we have toolpath groups...named things like rough, finish, holes, ect. Lots of parts we do the different operations are done on different machines, so we could have a 3 axis machine group named "stock prep", then a 5 axis machine group, then maybe another 3 axis group.....

 

+1

 

Same machine just use Toolpath Groups and Different WCS for each op.

Different machines for different ops then use Machine Groups with Toolpath Groups.

One File for a job is alot easier if files are named by job number or part number.

With Rev Changes on a part number just copy and edit Rev Version, make changes and post.

[Marshal]

Ok, so I have no clue about WCS. How are they used?

 

Makes me wish I had a little more training on MCam in school

[iowajim62]

Marshal,

At the bottom right of your screen is "View Manager" click it and start lookin.

Also type WCS in help and start readin, help is the blue ? on your toolbar. And search here on the Forum for WCS. Been covered many times. Works OK since moving on to X platform, back in teh V7,8,9 days it was a pita.

[Tony35]

also check out the dynamic plane for WCS works awesome

[Mr. Wizzard]

It might have been for X4, not sure, but there's a WCS tutorial that would help you out. Look for that and it'll make things much clearer. I never rotate a part. The WCS and t-planes are all you need. I used to copy models and flip, rotate, etc... It just created a mess. Once you learn how the other planes work, it keeps your file much cleaner.

[OC_THE MCX]

+1

 

Same machine just use Toolpath Groups and Different WCS for each op.

Different machines for different ops then use Machine Groups with Toolpath Groups.

One File for a job is alot easier if files are named by job number or part number.

With Rev Changes on a part number just copy and edit Rev Version, make changes and post.

 

 

 

 

+2

 

That is exactly how I do it. when you verify toolpaths, The result of the rendering should look just like the finished part or solid I do a different machine group just to program a fixture or tooling.

[dforsythe]

1 mcx file

1 model

as many machine groups as needed.

 

FYI

i know this part dosnt have any lathe or 5 axis, but for futer reff make sure your lathe and or 5 axis alighment are top, top. or mastercam can frek out.

e.g. you have a part that has 2 vert ops then a five axis you set up you model to top/top, but your first op may use right/right ect. then when you get to the third op you are at top/top.

 

 

 

 

[Marshal]

1 mcx file

1 model

as many machine groups as needed.

 

FYI

i know this part dosnt have any lathe or 5 axis, but for futer reff make sure your lathe and or 5 axis alighment are top, top. or mastercam can frek out.

e.g. you have a part that has 2 vert ops then a five axis you set up you model to top/top, but your first op may use right/right ect. then when you get to the third op you are at top/top.

 

Good to know since I believe we're getting a lathe in the near future

 

I'll have to play with the WCS settings and see what I can learn.

[Newbeeee™]

It might have been for X4, not sure, but there's a WCS tutorial that would help you out. Look for that and it'll make things much clearer. I never rotate a part. The WCS and t-planes are all you need. I used to copy models and flip, rotate, etc... It just created a mess. Once you learn how the other planes work, it keeps your file much cleaner.

 

+10000000000000000

Search on here for WCS + planes. It takes a bit to get your head aroundit all at first but when it 'clicks', everything becomes sooooo much easier.

Plus you can verify your part in 1x go and do a stl compare to your original model.

[Jayson Kramer]

Same here and this how I teach class how to use one file for the project. with WCS, Machine defs and toolpath groups oh dont forget Levels every thing you need is right there.

Ps also compared to V9.1 all the formates can be done in one file to being Mill, lathe Wire and so on.

[BrianP.]

You can also move or copy geometry to different levels and name them. That way say your first tool path group uses geometry on level 1, 2 on 2 and so on. We use only one Mastercam file for each part.

[Joe788]

When I'm doing simple parts, or parts that are only being machined one at a time, I'll do it all in one file. This typically amounts to fixture plates and other various tooling components. We never have customer parts that are simple cut, flip, cut, flip vise jobs. Everything else usually has some pretty significant fixturing and design work done in Solidworks, so we'll have totally separate files for OP10, OP20, etc.

 

The stock remaining after OP10 is already known and modeled before the it's even programmed, because that's part of the process design. So the OP20 fixture and model already has the stock built right into it. Keeps things very simple, and I think it's part of the reason why we have virtually no stability issues, despite having files with 300-400 operations.

[Bob W.]

When I first started I had a separate file for each operation group as you have described above. I was not utilizing the level manager or WCS. I subscribed to streaming teacher and the first hour of lessons paid for the subscription ten times over. Other useful things I learned from that subscription were the silhouette boundary feature and view manager details. It was money very well spent.

[Joe788]

When I first started I had a separate file for each operation group as you have described above. I was not utilizing the level manager or WCS. I subscribed to streaming teacher and the first hour of lessons paid for the subscription ten times over. Other useful things I learned from that subscription were the silhouette boundary feature and view manager details. It was money very well spent.

 

I rely heavily on WCS and Tplanes as it is. The only real benefit of doing everything in one file is keeping the stock from one OP to the next in verify. On parts with hundreds and hundreds of operations, the process is already planned so thoroughly, the stock for each operation is modeled long before the Mastercam is ever opened up. For HMC work, the verify stock is actually the tombstone, all of the fixtures, and all of the parts, so the verified model is useless for the following operations.

 

For 5 axis work we usually do it all in the same file, because the first and third operations are typically very simple (ie, dovetail, and dovetail removal).

[iowajim62]

For HMC work, the verify stock is actually the tombstone, all of the fixtures, and all of the parts, so the verified model is useless for the following operations.

 

Not always useless unless the part and fixture for follow on ops is a different tombstone.

 

 

Sometimes tho it's easier with multiple files like this job.

 

 

[Joe788]

It's pretty rare that we're not running different operations on different pallets (and typically a totally different orientation.) You can imagine what the stock looks like after the verification on this model is complete:

 

 

99% of the time, my largest concern is the fixture, clearances, access etc. Knowing the stock left over from the previous op is the easy part.

[Bob W.]

I rely heavily on WCS and Tplanes as it is. The only real benefit of doing everything in one file is keeping the stock from one OP to the next in verify. On parts with hundreds and hundreds of operations, the process is already planned so thoroughly, the stock for each operation is modeled long before the Mastercam is ever opened up. For HMC work, the verify stock is actually the tombstone, all of the fixtures, and all of the parts, so the verified model is useless for the following operations.

 

For 5 axis work we usually do it all in the same file, because the first and third operations are typically very simple (ie, dovetail, and dovetail removal).

 

I have found that keeping things in one file is much better for revisions as well. If one part was in several different files and a revision came along it would be a real PITA to adjust or copy every file.

[Joe788]

I have found that keeping things in one file is much better for revisions as well. If one part was in several different files and a revision came along it would be a real PITA to adjust or copy every file.

 

Fortunately most of the parts we make are relatively mature, but in the event of a revision, the work at the CAM system is miniscule compared to the effort that goes into re-proving the process and re-submitting a first article.

 

Revisions are just added onto a new level, with the affected toolpaths modified and labeled. Since they need to be verified with the complete fixture model again anyways, you still come out ahead having them in separate files. Really the only difference is the two mouse clicks of "file>open", since the verify stock and model is 100% different between different operations anyways.

[Bob W.]

Revisions are just added onto a new level, with the affected toolpaths modified and labeled. Since they need to be verified with the complete fixture model again anyways, you still come out ahead having them in separate files. Really the only difference is the two mouse clicks of "file>open", since the verify stock and model is 100% different between different operations anyways.

 

I'll have to keep this in mind on future jobs that are complex. I do my fixture design in ProE and I usually export raw stock and fixture models directly from ProE as STLs that reference the appropriate WCS. These import as stock into Mastercam in the right location but it can be a hassle when I need to change the stock stl file for different operations and try to keep everything straight. I can see where it could get confusing with a multi pallet horizontal. The most challenging work I do uses two machine groups with 3-axis and 5-axis machines.

[Marshal]

I have found that keeping things in one file is much better for revisions as well. If one part was in several different files and a revision came along it would be a real PITA to adjust or copy every file.

 

Yeah, the last time we made this product, we had 7 different files for programs, and when something changed, it was a huge pain to go back and reprogram everything.

 

On that same note, if there is a design change, how do you go about bringing that change into MCam if the part is modeled in SolidWorks?

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

Yeah, the last time we made this product, we had 7 different files for programs, and when something changed, it was a huge pain to go back and reprogram everything.

 

On that same note, if there is a design change, how do you go about bringing that change into MCam if the part is modeled in SolidWorks?

 

Mastercam does have "Change Recognition" in X5. I've never had the oportunity to use it, but I've seen a few demonstrations and it could be a worthwhile tool. GUessing that how well it works is going to depend on the amount of change.

 

Myself, I like to keep everything in 1 file as well. It's just so much easier to manage that way.