Makino PS95 V Doosan DNM 500

[Guest MTB Technical Services]

I dunno, I've programmed Multus machines for some time. They seem much more intuative to me than the other B-Axis machines I've run/seen

 

Sent from my SCH-I905 using Tapatalk

 

Now you're just Bullxxxxting.

 

There is nothing intuitive about a B-Axis Mill/Turn where you can't just command G00 B45.0 .

No reference return, yet another brilliant OKUMA idea.

[Mr. M]

Why do you need a ref return? Many FANUC controlled machines are starting to be able to do that as well. I am not sure why that is a limitation :shrugs:

 

As far as the B axis index, when I index the B I want my tool offset active anyway.

 

How about using the sub-spindle on a lathe? I can move my W forward and the subs offset will follow. No work shift required.

[Guest]

Not a fan of B-Axis lathes where B0 is parallel to Z. That just feels weird.

[Guest MTB Technical Services]

Why do you need a ref return?

 

Not an issue of need, it's choice and flexibility.

Clearly WAY too many of OKUMA design Engineers never actually programmed a machine.

 

Many FANUC controlled machines are starting to be able to do that as well. I am not sure why that is a limitation :shrugs:

 

FYI, All builders use Absolute Encoders

OKUMA isn't doing anything special.

 

As far as the B axis index, when I index the B I want my tool offset active anyway.

 

And you can't do that with a B-Axis address? Phhttt.

They should fire the engineer who came up with BA=

 

How about using the sub-spindle on a lathe? I can move my W forward and the subs offset will follow. No work shift required.

 

Again, nothing special.

[Guest MTB Technical Services]

Not a fan of B-Axis lathes where B0 is parallel to Z. That just feels weird.

 

 

TRUE DAT!

 

At least with Mazak they pretty much follow FANUC on the programming side

[YoDoug®]

What i HATE about them is that Rube Goldberg designed the CNC Programming syntax.

Nothing makes any sense at all.

They have to be different just to say they are different.

 

Ehh, Shouldn't be big deal for an experienced programmer. Like switching from .NET to Java to C++. They all are doing the same thing and just get there a little different.

 

And as far as bashing Okuma and then thanking me for the info, REALLY. I could come on here and tell all kinds of stories of the shops we work with and their Doosan's. I know one shop that the operators are afraid to take a full half hour lunch because if they don't keep the machine at running temp they can't can't make consistent goods part for the next 1-2 hours. Or how about shop we just put our third Okuma into that used to buy only Doosan. All I had to do there was a simple test cut to show we could double the sub spindle depth of cut over their Doosan. Or how about the shop that quoted us against Doosan for a lathe to do high power face driving applications. Okuma quoted a build machine that had a beefed up spindle to match the face driver pressure. Doosan won the bid by just simply adding a bigger hydraulic pump on the tailstock. The first spindle went out in 6 months. I could go on for quite a while. That's great some great engineering there. I know I'd much rather have to type in BA= over replacing a spindle in the first year.

[Joe788]

I love watching MTB employee wizzing contests.

 

[Guest MTB Technical Services]

Ehh, Shouldn't be big deal for an experienced programmer. Like switching from .NET to Java to C++. They all are doing the same thing and just get there a little different.

 

And as far as bashing Okuma and then thanking me for the info, REALLY. I could come on here and tell all kinds of stories of the shops we work with and their Doosan's. I know one shop that the operators are afraid to take a full half hour lunch because if they don't keep the machine at running temp they can't can't make consistent goods part for the next 1-2 hours. Or how about shop we just put our third Okuma into that used to buy only Doosan. All I had to do there was a simple test cut to show we could double the sub spindle depth of cut over their Doosan. Or how about the shop that quoted us against Doosan for a lathe to do high power face driving applications. Okuma quoted a build machine that had a beefed up spindle to match the face driver pressure. Doosan won the bid by just simply adding a bigger hydraulic pump on the tailstock. The first spindle went out in 6 months. I could go on for quite a while. That's great some great engineering there. I know I'd much rather have to type in BA= over replacing a spindle in the first year.

 

Doug, I do appreciate your assistance and I said so.

It certainly wasn't my intention to offend you or anyone.

However, I'll speak my mind and let the chips fall where they may.

 

OKUMA doesn't do ANYTHING like any other company when it comes to programming syntax.

Nothing is intuitive.

 

As far as experience in Mill/Turn, I'll argue I've done more of it than anyone else on this board with the possible exception of Ron Branch.

OKUMA's program syntax sucks balls and it's completely non-standard in almost every respect.

 

I have NOT knocked the quality of the OKUMA machines just the completely nonsensical programming syntax.

If that offends you, so be it.

 

Perhaps you would care to tell us all why OKUMA used Doosan castings for their VTLs?

[YoDoug®]

Perhaps you would care to tell us all why OKUMA uses Doosan castings for their VTLs?

 

A couple of points on this. Doosan is one the largest casting manufacturers in the world. There are a lot of builders that use Doosan castings. However, the Doosan castings in Okuma's are Okuma designed and built to Okuma specs by Doosan. Just like Federal Mogul makes components for Toyoda, Chrysler, Ford, GM, etc. The OEM specs and the supplier builds it to the spec.

 

Look I'm only offended that you messaged me through this forum to ask for help, then came on this forum and bashed the company I work for with the info I gave you.

 

I will be the first to admit that there are some weird ways that Okuma does things, but the things they do better than most other builders far outweigh the oddities.

 

And Joe, Don't get me started on Mazak

[Guest]

There's only a handful of QUALITY large casting houses in the world. No reason to build you own if you don't need to.

[DavidB]

I tested 3 machines all 3 axis verticals. A Doosan DNM 500 a Makino PS95 and a Feeler the Doosan was a clear winner.

The Doosan was also the cheapest.

I'm a small manufacture and I'm sure the Doosan will do its job. The money saved will get me tools, vice and moving costs all under the price of the Makino.

[DavidB]

Doosan beat out a Makino on performance????

 

 

Yes the Doosan gave a better surface finish. The Ra figure was twice as good in some areas also. All machines use the Fanuc Oi-MD controller the advantage the Doosan has was the ability to use an R value with the G05.1 Q1 R?. The Makino only has a M250 or a M251 with the look ahead function.

 

The Doosan could do the roughing quicker (R2) and the finishing was a little slower in cycle time with its best finishing (R10) butt he surface finish was much better than the Makino.

 

Bang for buck also the Doosan was a winner.

[medaq]

I tested 3 machines all 3 axis verticals. A Doosan DNM 500 a Makino PS95 and a Feeler the Doosan was a clear winner.

The Doosan was also the cheapest.

I'm a small manufacture and I'm sure the Doosan will do its job. The money saved will get me tools, vice and moving costs all under the price of the Makino.

 

I have been running the Doosan dnm400 for a about a year in our shop. So far the machine is vary capable. Not one problem, finishes are great. For the price, I do not think you can beat it. Even against the haas. if you price this machine out spec for spec, the dnm still came out cheaper.