CAM for on machine programming

[Guest]

Yes, it isn't making a nice excel spreadsheet with the feature names, deviations etc though. If you have tomsbtone with 80 parts, with 20 features each, and you need to do 100% inspection CNC reporter is going to save you a boatload of time

 

X POSITION  5.8895
Y POSITION    .0003
Z POSITION    .0000
DIAMETER/SIZE   1.7507
X SURFACE ANGLE/4TH ANGLE/ANGLE    .0000
X ERROR    .0005
Y ERROR    .0007
Z ERROR/Y SURF ANGLE    .0000
SIZE ERROR    .0007
X ANGLE ERROR/ERROR    .0000
TRUE POS. ERROR    .0017
METAL CONDITION    .0000
DIRECTION INDICATOR    .0000
OUT OF TOLERANCE FLAG 1-7    .0000
PROBE ERROR FLAG 0-2    .0000

 

[Guest]

...how are you handling things like re running a tool once you've had the probe measure a surface and update the tool offset? Do you guys have some sort of trick for adding statements?

 

It's pretty simple really. M machine the feature. Probe the feature. If it needs to be re-machined, capture the current tool wear offset for later retrieval, update the offset based on the amount of error from the probe cycle. Go back to the machining cycle, machine it again. Probe the feature again. If it's in tolerance return the old offset value to the register and continue on.

 

Why return the value to the register? Because just in case another programmer is using that tool in other jobs.

[Sticky]

X POSITION 5.8895
Y POSITION .0003
Z POSITION .0000
DIAMETER/SIZE 1.7507
X SURFACE ANGLE/4TH ANGLE/ANGLE .0000
X ERROR .0005
Y ERROR .0007
Z ERROR/Y SURF ANGLE .0000
SIZE ERROR .0007
X ANGLE ERROR/ERROR .0000
TRUE POS. ERROR .0017
METAL CONDITION .0000
DIRECTION INDICATOR .0000
OUT OF TOLERANCE FLAG 1-7 .0000
PROBE ERROR FLAG 0-2 .0000

 

 

As I said, already knew that. Here is the link to Renishaws CNC reporter: http://www.renishaw.ca/en/renishaw-cnc-reporter--8479

 

Its cheap, and gives you a lot more control for assigning feature names, go no go, analyzing historical data etc.

 

Yes I know you can just do it yourself, and enter everything into excel, but like in my example above, doing it for 800 operations gets old when this system does it automatically and seamlessly, you know, less work?

 

It's pretty simple really. M machine the feature. Probe the feature. If it needs to be re-machined, capture the current tool wear offset for later retrieval, update the offset based on the amount of error from the probe cycle. Go back to the machining cycle, machine it again. Probe the feature again. If it's in tolerance return the old offset value to the register and continue on.

 

Why return the value to the register? Because just in case another programmer is using that tool in other jobs.

 

I understand how to re machine the feature. I'm wondering how you command it from the drill cycles though. Do you have some sort of provision for adding statements?

[Guest]

I give it a line number to go back to in one of the available variables. This only works when you don't have dupe line numbers. I also have a counter that will only re-machine/probe a feature a certain number of times. After that if it's not good then I will notify the operator either by alarm message#3000=x(YADDA, YADDA, YADDA) (if on a 2 pallet machine) or by a NG flag on the pallet/face on a multi-pallet machine.

[Sticky]

Hmmmm, sounds like Productivity+ would be a little bit easier to use for measure/remachine type work then, provided you can get it integrated.

[GoetzInd]

Hmmmm, sounds like Productivity+ would be a little bit easier to use for measure/remachine type work then, provided you can get it integrated.

 

I don't know. We use a simple macro that we wrote that handles all of this and automatically goes back to the last N block (tool that machined feature). Very simple and we just throw it in with a manual entry.

 

Mike

[Sticky]

Yeah I guess its not too big of a deal to do the mnp.

[crazy^millman]

Sticky, here are some topics that might give you a little back story about what I was trying get across in my response.

 

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=17722

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=15291

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=19194

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=24313

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=28834

http://www.emasterca...showtopic=31183

 

I have had my share of battles with probing and maybe this will give you some insight into how deep I have looked and things I have done to deal with this very subject.

[Guest]

Hmmmm, sounds like Productivity+ would be a little bit easier to use for measure/remachine type work then, provided you can get it integrated.

Not really. I'm not doing a very good job of explain the process so I'll give it another go.

 

My operations go a little something like this;

 

Machine Feature 1

Machine Feature 2

Machine Feature 3

Probe Feature 3

Copy of Machine Feature 3 (only runs if necessary/possible)

Re-Probe Feature 3(only if necessary)

Machine Feature 4

Machine Feature 5

etc...

[crazy^millman]

In process inspection to me is better handled using the drilling cycles than what productivity plus does. It is not developed by CNC Software or even a true integrated partner of CNC Software. Renishaw had 10% stake in Delcam and made a mint when it was bought by Autodesk. Renishaw has a good product so do not take what I am saying as a slam on their product. I am saying they are in the hardware business and have great machine macros and tools for collecting information. When you use their product and do thing their way you get the results they way they want you to see them and use them. I cannot go into great detail about things I know because I am under confidential agreement with certain companies.

 

I do not like Renishaw's method for one reason and one reason alone it is dumb and does not respect or look to GD&T in the model. Verisurf looks to the model and uses the model as the Authority as the master so to speak for looking for it's deviation. Verisurf then compares the measured data back to that authority. The information collected and compared back to that authority stays inside of the Mastercam file. Take the Master3DGage sample part I helped model up. It has key features all defined in the model using Verisurf MBD tools. Let say we wanted to do the back side that has 2d features on it. We can program whatever we want to check and have the machine go check. We get that measured information back from the machine and then compare it to the model we just used to program it too and see results. No guessing no looking to Excel sheets and Charts and other things to know what feature is what feature. We look at our Model we just made out Manufacturing program to. We then make a Probe operation to check that feature. The machine machines and then measures that feature. The machine then reports that measured information back to our model and we know instantly what is good or bad. No guessing no going to read some GD&T book what is the quality or true position or composite tolerance of that feature. Since we took the time to define it to or model or we read it in from a compatible CAD software we are done. We click on a report tab and then it also fills out our AS9100 form.

 

I have a Turn Key project right now with 250 dimensions with well over 100 Radii call outs on it. Inspection has 250 items to put on the AS9100 form. Educated Engineer would put .01 Full Profile on the Model and been done. Inspection or the machine was looking to the model and measuring based off of that easier to check, easier to machine and easier to know if you are making a good quality part or not. Seeing it real time back to your programmed model in Mastercam would take Mastercam to a level no CAM/CAD system can do. Sad thing is all the parts and pieces needed are there.

[Newbeeee™]

I have a Turn Key project right now with 250 dimensions with well over 100 Radii call outs on it. Inspection has 250 items to put on the AS9100 form. Educated Engineer would put .01 Full Profile on the Model and been done.

It's funny that inspection to CAD model has been around for quite a few years yet 'designers' on the whole are ignorant to it.

Yet it would save hours and hours of detailing and checking for producing prints, and therefore drastically reduce design to market.

We have recently had a couple of different customers into our place and shown them CMM verification to model and it's blown them away to the extent that they're now going this way.

[Guest]

 

It's funny that inspection to CAD model has been around for quite a few years yet 'designers' on the whole are ignorant to it.

Yet it would save hours and hours of detailing and checking for producing prints, and therefore drastically reduce design to market.

We have recently had a couple of different customers into our place and shown them CMM verification to model and it's blown them away to the extent that they're now going this way.

The machine shop is driving inspection. Most inspectors are 20 years behind in technology and those are the guys running the CMMs!!!

 

It's a good thing Verisurf came along and threatened the big boys or else we'd still only have DMIS and no check to model tools!