cutter comp. vs. wear

[30rock*2]

If programming using both control cutter comp. and wear comp. in the same program, would a typical machine tool be able to differentiate between the two comps. using the same offset number? Or, would two different offset numbers need to be used? For example, if I am using D1 as my dia. offset, and my machine tool is set up to use the radius of the cutter for dia. comps., will both wear comp. and control comp. recognize that my 1/2 in. dia. endmill is now .245(reground)? This may be more of a machine tool issue, but I would like feedback either way.

[bet338]

If programming using both control cutter comp. and wear comp. in the same program, would a typical machine tool be able to differentiate between the two comps. using the same offset number?

 

No. You will need to add another 'D' offset call for wear.

 

But I guess my question would be why? Stick with control comp OR wear comp to avoid confusion and a possible crash.

 

JM2C

HTH

[BenK]

I don't recommend using both wear and control comp, you should really pick one method and stick with it. I use wear comp all the time no exceptions. Using wear comp you need the difference between your programmed tool radius and your actual radius. With control you need to make sure you have the actual tool radius in the control or you can crash the the tool. Wear also requires a much smaller lead in. If you do a search you will find many topics covering this topic.

[Buddy J]

I don't recommend using both wear and control comp, you should really pick one method and stick with it. I use wear comp all the time no exceptions. Using wear comp you need the difference between your programmed tool radius and your actual radius. With control you need to make sure you have the actual tool radius in the control or you can crash the the tool. Wear also requires a much smaller lead in. If you do a search you will find many topics covering this topic.

 

 

+10000

 

Back in the day I always used Control (TR) because.. When I used to write out code by hand and/or type it into a teletype the diminsions reflected the actual print diminsions and you could track what was happening.

Ah the days of simple 2d basic contours....

If for no other reason the lack of troubles in regards to lead in/outs in tight areas because you don't need the tool's radius as a minimum distance to travel are well worth using strickly wear!

 

BTW, hand writing anything except minor clearance moves at this point would cause my 54 yo head to explode!!

[AshM]

Quick question, I have strictly used control comp in the past because myself and others also program at the machines and the in machine length setters need the r value to move the tools sideways to measure the length with the tip not the body, how do handle these problems if you use wear comp?

[Buddy J]

Quick question, I have strictly used control comp in the past because myself and others also program at the machines and the in machine length setters need the r value to move the tools sideways to measure the length with the tip not the body, how do handle these problems if you use wear comp?

 

Can't help you here, sorry

I only have one machine that has a laser setter and there are 2 different programs to run.

1 for length only, 1 for length/radius

Which for this machine I have to change the value (comp) to (prg radius - actual= D) cause it puts the actual tool radius in the register.

When it does radius, it keeps bumping outward until it clears a set parameter, then creeps back in to find tool radius.

Its a MARPOSS laser setter on an Italian (CMS) machine

[BenK]

Quick question, I have strictly used control comp in the past because myself and others also program at the machines and the in machine length setters need the r value to move the tools sideways to measure the length with the tip not the body, how do handle these problems if you use wear comp?

 

I use a presetter to measure all of my tools. You might want to call your machine tool rep for that one.