Proper way to set WCS

[Thee Rickster ™]

I am tying to get CNC to implement a true WCS. 

Center of the earth is everyone's orgin. 

 

Let me guess....they'll fix it for X11?????      ROUR!

 

Or maybe they will put out an MU3 for X7 before they release X8?

[Tinyfxds]

I love Dynamic WCS.  I used Surfcam before drinking the Mastercam Kool-Aid and I wish they would have had a Dynamic WCS feature.  It is very useful and one of the features I use on a daily basis 

[Jayson Kramer]

This is a interesting topic this has turned into. I have been using the system being MC for over 28 years. but in this day I use WCS option for just about everything and barely Move the part.

I know like JP stated we used to not be able to do 5axis with WCS but most these days you can now and have had good success. there still a few things on the 5axis and WCS that I will not due. but some this issue is going away with the next release to.

I have been teaching customers and students for years about Dynamic WCS , Dynamic Xform and Dynamic Plans with good success.

 

But this discussion is good, as you get a little bit more of a understanding were other programmers are coming form and why they do things the way they do.

 

JP I asked as the voice on the video. I watched some of it and said really this is john. I was not matching the voice. nicely done.

[Zoober]

I use templates. For every machine. With many components (tombstones, vises, dovetails, you name it) on various levels. It is always easier to move a single part to the template zero than to gather up all components and do multiple translate 3D's to match my part. Specially in 5 axis, where I have my rotational offsets pre modeled in. And all my posts calculate my G10's rather nicely.

[Newbeeee™]

 

JP I asked as the voice on the video. I watched some of it and said really this is john. I was not matching the voice. nicely done.

Haha - so you were expecting some big deep growling bear?

[Guest]

Haha - so you were expecting some big deep growling bear?

 

LMAO  RAWR

 

[Tinyfxds]

Based off his Avatar, I was expecting a French accent.  Of course this would mean I should sound like a 3 year old girl

[Sticky]

I am tying to get CNC to implement a true WCS. 

Center of the earth is everyone's orgin. 

 

Can you go into more depth by what you mean by a "true" wcs?

[Thee Awbade™]

Can you go into more depth by what you mean by a "true" wcs?

 

Well we could either go with everything relative to the exact center of the Earth, or the exact center of the sun. However; both of those are only relative to our Solar system. 

 

We COULD map the entire universe and demand all cad models be relative in space to the exact center point of the universe. I'm pretty sure that's the one he's mentioning as regards to a "true" wcs

[Newbeeee™]

WCS - Work co-ordinate or World co-ordinate.

I'll just worry about it being work and let someone else worry about the world...

[betts]

Perhaps I am a relic of days of future past......

 

 

 

In older versions, working on ANYTHING multi-axis your sanity depended on being on the origin......even now I leave nothing to chance, if I have a process that works, I don't mess with it.

Copy that red leader! I always tell people "you don't have to do it the way I am, and I can show you other ways, but I do what I do because it works and I am used to it"

 

I see both sides of the "move" issue. Remember you are ALWAYS moving something. If you don't move the part you move the tooling, and if you don't move the tooling you move the part. In a mold setting I liked to leave it all as is. As mentioned above if there is a change it is all in the right place. Doing production work and moving the part doesn't bother me at all. I don't see the need to leave more than one part in a file, and with the WCS (did a lot of work before it came around) it is easy to "re-move" the part if needed.

[Jayson Kramer]

Haha - so you were expecting some big deep growling bear?

Well kind of. after all these years of talking on the phone with him. LOL

I know I hate the way I sound on my videos. but do them anyways.

[AMTMFG]

Thanks for all the info and the video.

I have been using MasterCam on and off since the DOS days, and as stated by several others in earlier posts.

I do what I do becaus that is what seems to work, and many days it is all I know.

 

I have never used many of the newer features such as the Dynamic WCS, Dynamic WCS, and such.

It may be time to start learning some of these newer features.

 

With that being said.

 

Is there a way to set the the WCS systems in a simmilar fashion as shown in the video, to meet these condition, with only one model file in the MC file?

 

Set-Up Info:

Double-loc vise with jaws that run parallel to the "Y" Axis The vise is mounted on a tunnion indexer that rotates about the "X" axis.

 

the modle would be located at the first work offset Origin with the top of the part faceing the Top work plane.

 

G54 Vise position #1  --  Skim Cut Face & Mill Part Profile on A0.0  WCS settings in the operation  --  WCS = Top,  T-Plane = G54,  C-Plane = G54  ( G54 WCS  set with Z towards Top View )

G55 Vise position #1  --  Drill and Tap 3 holes on A-90.0  --  WCS = Top,  T-Plane = G55,  C-Plane = G55  ( G55 WCS plane set with Z towards Front Plane )

 

 

G56 Vise position #2  --  Face Mill part to overall height. A0.0  WCS = Top, T-Plane = G56,  C-Plane = G56  ( G56 WCS plane set with Z towards Bottom Plane )

 

Is there a way to set the WCS for G56 that Mastercam will recognize that the "A" rotation angle is releated to the top view "A0.0" and not the bottom view "A180.0. When I follow the instructions in the video and set all my work planes. Then create the tool paths. The work completed on the second vise position always posts a A180.0 index position.

In the past I have created a second instance of the model with the bottom of the part facing the top plane.

If this can be prevented it could reduce alot of additional work making new modle levels at different locations and levels.

 

Hope I explained the question clearly.

 

Thanks

 

Brad,

[Guest]

I'd have to see your file to be certain but if you create a new WCS and set your planes to top, you should not get ANY A motion as your WCS and yout Tool Plane would be equal

 

Something isn't set right if you're getting A motion, your tool plane is not equal to your WCS

[Newbeeee™]

Well kind of. after all these years of talking on the phone with him. LOL

I know I hate the way I sound on my videos. but do them anyways.

Jay - you sound great.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yu big girl :

[CJep]

Brad,

Like JP said it's tough to say without seeing the file, however if you're looking for 5axis positioning by using toolplanes you should only have one World Coordinate System. Wether you move the part to Mcam's origin or create a custom WCS all the toolplanes will rotate around that WCSystem origin.

[K2csq7]

Also, are you sure your MD is set up properly?

This is probably not the case but..........

Front plane could be A90 C0 or A-90 C180.....

I know you don't have a C axis, but if the MD is not proper you could be seeing rotations for a rotary you don't have... simply posted with the axis labeled as A instead of the default C....

 

I would consult my reseller to get a handle on what is actually happening, be certian you have a good foundation. 

 

And YESSSSS you need to get familiar with the Dynamic Xform & WCS & Planes..... All of which are HUGE timesavers. You could also have your reseller give you a quick rundown. You seem to have a good handle on things so it would not be a big deal for the reseller to help ya out. 

[AMTMFG]

Here is an example of what I am seeing when I set my WCS settings

I have attached Three ZIP2GO files, and 2 coded programs

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

 

Set-Up information

VMC with a double-loc vise with the jaws parallel to the "Y" axis

rotation about "X" axis

 

Case 1      ( VP = Vise Position )

VP 1 Op 1 = Face Mill Top View  --  WCS Plane in Operation       WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G54  --  C-Plane = G54

VP 2 Op 2 = Face Mill Bottom View  --                                          WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G55  --  C-Plane = G55

VP 1 Op 3 = Mill Slot Back View   --                                              WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G56  --  C-Plane = G56

VP 1 Op 4 = Mill Slot Front View   --                                             WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G57  --  C-Plane = G57

 

This format outputs an A axis index for every position, including Op 2 where this would be in a second vise position on A0.0, not A180.0

 

Case 2      ( VP = Vise Position )

VP 1 Op 1 = Face Mill Top View  --  WCS Plane in Operation       WCS = G54  --   T-Plane = G54  --  C-Plane = G54

VP 2 Op 2 = Face Mill Bottom View  --                                          WCS = G55  --   T-Plane = G55  --  C-Plane = G55

VP 1 Op 3 = Mill Slot Back View   --                                               WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G56  --  C-Plane = G56

VP 1 Op 4 = Mill Slot Front View   --                                              WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G57  --  C-Plane = G57

 

This output would be correct if Op 2 was not missing the work coordinate callout G55.  ( Actual Program )

 

Case 3      ( VP = Vise Position )

VP 1 Op 1 = Face Mill Top View  --  WCS Plane in Operation       WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G54  --  C-Plane = G54

VP 2 Op 2 = Face Mill Bottom View  --                                          WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G55  --  C-Plane = G55   <----- X/Y 90deg dynamic rotation from previous examples.

                                                                                                                                                                                                This is actually how this part should sit in vise position 2.

                                                                                                                                                                                                Allows index for angled face & side holes

VP 1 Op 3 = Mill Slot Back View   --                                              WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G56  --  C-Plane = G56

VP 1 Op 4 = Mill Slot Front View   --                                             WCS = Top  --   T-Plane = G57  --  C-Plane = G57

 

On top of the condition that would be seen in case 1, it also gives errors about the axis combination.

I believe that MasterCam is thinking I am trying to accomplish 3+2 axis positioning.

Even though this is possible in a 4 axis machine based on the vise position, part orientation and index rotation.

Mastercam will not allow error free output of code. This is why I have been programming to case number 1 and creating multiple instances of the part roatated to mimic the exact position and plane it would be found in a machine.

 

Does anyone see a way to prevent this additional work?

AMT_Z2G.zip

[CJep]

When using toolplanes for rotation the first method you described should work fine as long as you have maintained the X positive direction of the plane. For example if you try to use the "back" plane when rotating around the X axis, you get a rotation error when posting code. Because the toolplane tells the post processor that the X&Y axis have been rotated 180' around the Z axis. To maintain the correct positive X direction you can rotate the Top or Front toolplanes for the bottom & back of the index fixture. The actual A axis output you get has to do with how the machine def is set up to output positive rotation CW or CCW. If you are setting up individual parts relative to their location in the fixture you could set the toolplane origins to the part, or use Mcam's origin as the center of rotation. The toolplanes should rotate around Mcam's Top World Coordinate System.

 

You could set this up to do all your rotations using one part. However if changing the X&Y positive direction is required based on fixturing you would need to use one of the generic 5 axis posts so the X&Y code will be correct and there will be no rotational errors but you will get more than one axis of rotation in the code. The other option would be a custom post processor. Do you have the option to call the rotation as a work offset in the registry of the machine control?

[AMTMFG]

Cjep,

 

Thnaks for the reply. What you have said reconfirms why I have been doing it this way for year. Though I have learned alot from this post. Like the fact I have to get myself using some of the newer features.

I have been playing with the Dynamic Transform and Dynamic WCS the last couple of days, and they really seem efficient!

Is there a way to get the dynamic settings to recognize theoretical sharps?

 

It would be nice if Mastercam would implement a WCS manager simmilar to the operations manager. Where one could assign multiple set-up instances to a machine/toolpath group, and then assign a set of WCS to an individual instance. In the operation one would pick a setup instance then choose from the created WCS created under that instance to control the WCS, T-Plane, & C-Plane as we do now.

 

Finnaly, had there been major changes in the stock models feature for verify? Is there any way to assign multiple stock models, and have them related to operations?

 

Thanks

[crazy^millman]

Is there a way to get the dynamic settings to recognize theoretical sharps?

 

Thanks

 

Yes and no. Depends on the shape. If they are normal geometric shapes then yes if they are free form shapes then something like Verisurf is needed.

 

How would you go about it? Surfaces are always your best friend. Make a separate level with your surfaces you want to use. Then untrim them and then extend them it they are not touching at the place you want them to touch at. Then use the create curve at intersection and done.

 

HTH

 

John Nice Video Good work as always.

[mcdoggie]

I am tying to get CNC to implement a true WCS.

Center of the earth is everyone's orgin.

[Sticky]

K2csq7, can you explain to us what you mean by true WCS?

[Newbeeee™]

I am tying to get CNC to implement a true WCS. 

Center of the earth is everyone's orgin. 

Humour Sticky, just Humour

[Sticky]

Oh.