Computer vs. Control Comp. - advice needed

[K2csq7]

I'm in the same boat as you.

 

Is this your boat?

[Reko]

Is this your boat?

 

LOL!

 

Okay, someone needs to 'splain this to me.

 

If I program a contour for a 3/4" EM and set it for 100% length entry, the operator can use anything from 1.500" to .0156" diameter EM. It is the operator's choice... they just have to put the radius of the EM they are using in the controller's comp field.

 

If I use "wear" comp, and I program for a 3/4" EM, then the operator chooses to use a different size EM... they have to do some math to input the difference of the two radii in the controller's comp field. It isn't a simple matter.

 

I would consider switching if "wear" was obviously better.

 

So how is "wear" comp better?

 

[K2csq7]

Reko, 1st let me say if it aint broke, don't fix it.

If you & your team like how you do it now.... more power to ya

 

Now here is my opinion

It is the operator's choice

Sounds like you have lots of confidence in your operators... good for you!

I wish I had that.

 

Using wear allows you to set all comp values to zero and just enter all the height offsets. The operators don't have to put in the radius of every tool. If they want to take .002 more off a surf, they just put -.002 in the comp.

 

 

then the operator chooses to use a different size EM

That doesn't happen here. When a job comes up, I am responsible for giving the tools out with the job folder. If they use a 3/4 EM reground to .730, they just put in the radial difference (-.010)

[Reko]

Gotcha. That makes sense. Thank you for the clarification.

[jeff]

 

 

So how is "wear" comp better?

 

More versatility in programming, and a LOT less headaches in programming.

[Reko]

More versatility in programming, and a LOT less headaches in programming.

 

I guess I don't see what you mean. It seems like the same thing to me. Don't you still have to use an entry length and/or arc length either way?

 

The only real difference seems to be at the controller and what gets input into the controller's comp field, i.e. the radius of the EM or zero.

 

What am I missing?

[BenK]

With wear comp you can have a much shorter lead in line.

[gcode]

This is one of the most hotly debates subjects on eMastercam

 

Do a search.. I'll bet there are 25/30 seperate threads and 5K+ posts..

 

my 2 cents...

If you're doing your own programs and running them on a machine you throughly understand

Control Comp can be used safely.

 

A couple of things to keep in mind..

Mastercam cannot know how the machine is going to respond or what comp value an operator is going to

enter.. so Mastercam Backplot and Verify are only guesstimates of what Mastercam thinks the machine will do.

 

 

You may enter a value of .500 into control comp offset and get a good part.

Enter .625 or .750 and get a 360° loop and a scrapped part.

Some machines are very tolerant of large comp offsets some are very picky..

Now you add the varibles in operators and things get worse..

 

With Wear comp, what you see in back plot is pretty much what you get.

You can screw up wear comp at the machine ( enter a .200 comp offset for a .05" lead in for example)

but you really have to work at it.

 

The bottom line is wear comp is much much safer at the cost of a little vesatility.

 

Contol comp is OK with simple contors and good operators.. but for complex stuff

and unknown operators, wear is the only way to go..

 

I personally haven't used control comp since I gave up PencilCam and started using

computers to generate my code.... and the last 4 shops I've worked in absolutely forbid

the use of control comp.

[Tony35]

+10000 gcode

[pip]

Coming from over the see, to most of you mastercammers, we have a different approach and only use control or computer for comp.

All the firms I have worked for here have a tooling department, who programm the length and diameter of the tools and the tools are put on a cart and given to the setter

to load into the machine. The data for the tools and the programs are then read into the machine and off we go. Us bloody foriegners ha.

[K2csq7]

pip, What's your average lead in/out length for a 1/2" EM?

[pip]

We normal go 55% length and 65% radial lead in. We also use the angle setting but these are different depending on control type.

Heidenhain has to have 70deg and tangential start, all the others have 30deg and perpendicular.

[Guest]

Can you cut that .275 wide slot with a .250 e/m using Control comp and NOT feed down on the wall?

 

And I NEVER leave to an operator to decide what tool to use.

 

My speeds and feeds are set for cutters of a certain size.

A different choice than what I made and things and parts go bad, quick.

 

I am the programmer for a reason

[jeff]

I am the programmer for a reason

 

Exactly.

[BenK]

I am the programmer for a reason

 

+2

[Tony35]

I am the programmer for a reason

 

+3

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

I am the programmer for a reason

Damn Straight!!!

+4

[Reko]

Cool. Maybe that is something I needed to hear. Perhaps, I spend too much time trying to keep the operator's happy, and not enough time telling them how I want it done.

[Tony35]

Perhaps, I spend too much time trying to keep the operator's happy, and not enough time telling them how I want it done.

 

WHAT!!!!!

 

YOU are the programmer, they are the operators

they run what YOU program

if they dont like it tell em "there is the door and dont let it hit you in the a$$ on your way out"