Worst crash ever?

[Thee Rickster ™]

I was waiting for someone to say they broke a pencil or something

 

Ok, speaking of pencil

 

My worst crash was about $5500, a proven tool renumbering bug.

 

cutting for 27 hours( tons of ribs) and (insert favorite software here)

decided to give the 1/16 ball(water/rest) a t5, and the 1/16 (pencil) a T6 which was a

1/2" em.

 

lost the customer due to it being late

[MIL-TFP-41]

There used to be a video on youtube...a horizontal machine was probing a bunch of features on a tombstone....looked to be right and the end of the probing....and a rapid z move into the tombstone with the probe. It was violent enough that you could see the whole tombstone move. No chance of repairing that probe.....

 

Wish I could find that vid again.

[The Cathedral]

Nothing beats a good ol' ramming-the-spindle-into-the-tombstone crash.

 

Had that happen here; $20k repair bill for the spindle. Tombstone itself was fine, except for the sheared-off retention knobs.

[Newbeeee™]

Ok, speaking of pencil

 

My worst crash was about $5500, a proven tool renumbering bug.

 

cutting for 27 hours( tons of ribs) and (insert favorite software here)

decided to give the 1/16 ball(water/rest) a t5, and the 1/16 (pencil) a T6 which was a

1/2" em.

 

lost the customer due to it being late

ouch.

I must admit, that's one of the things I scan a prog for in NCPlot - work offset G# and THD.

We have modded the post so it throws an alarm incase they don't match but...

[Bob W.]

 

We have modded the post so it throws an alarm incase they don't match but...

I find it unfortunate that bugs last long enough that people end up modifying their posts because they know the fix might be a few (or several) releases away.  

[Newbeeee™]

I find it unfortunate that bugs last long enough that people end up modifying their posts because they know the fix might be a few (or several) releases away.  

Yup - But it's cheaper than damaging a machine...

We also modded the post to disable automatic work offset numbering (-1)  - this 'nearly' caught us a couple of times as well.

So we enter the offset number we want rather than mcam assigning it without us realising because we have a plane set wrong!

[Thee Rickster ™]

I find it unfortunate that bugs last long enough that people end up modifying their posts because they know the fix might be a few (or several) releases away.  

 

Tool renumbering got fixed at X5 and did not revert back, so far (x7)

 

'''''''We have modded the post so it throws an alarm incase they don't match but...''''''

 

So you had a problem at some point with tool renumbering and a crash

made you modify the post?   That's how it bit me.   I wish they would have made it known

or at minimum put these alarms you speak of in the post they provide with the software.

[Guest]

I prefer to use MACRO variables for H and D. On Matsuuras it's how you do Tool Life Management. On other machines because setup guys like ot change tool numbers. They only have to change something twice; the stage, and the tool change. No H's need to be changed and no D's need to be changes. Easy Peazy. It also eliminates and possible software bugs related to tool renumbering.

 

[Tyler Robotson]

I'm waiting for a 5-axis to come in here and I think all heads are going to turn my way for programming at least to start, so hopefully I won't have too many embarassing updates to the thread

[Newbeeee™]

I'm waiting for a 5-axis to come in here and I think all heads are going to turn my way for programming at least to start, so hopefully I won't have too many embarassing updates to the thread

Hey Newb - just keep the car ticking over in the parking lot - just in case 

[Thee Rickster ™]

I prefer to use MACRO variables for H and D. On Matsuuras it's how you do Tool Life Management. On other machines because setup guys like ot change tool numbers. They only have to change something twice; the stage, and the tool change. No H's need to be changed and no D's need to be changes. Easy Peazy. It also eliminates and possible software bugs related to tool renumbering.

 

 

Don't have the experience like you.

 

old school patter/mold maker from prints, never did much hand

gramming at the controller (Drilling, circular interpolation), just plain old 3-d software gramming and

design.

So i dont know much on macros and other things i know very little about.... LOL 

 

[Newbeeee™]

Tool renumbering got fixed at X5 and did not revert back, so far (x7)

 

'''''''We have modded the post so it throws an alarm incase they don't match but...''''''

 

So you had a problem at some point with tool renumbering and a crash

made you modify the post?   That's how it bit me.   I wish they would have made it known

or at minimum put these alarms you speak of in the post they provide with the software.

We're still running 5 (and 7) but just going to 9 (beta).

5 has been rock solid and we only had the renumber once but caught it. It never did it again but because of reading issues here, we changed the post.

The annoying thing with 5 has been drill cycles occasionally changing it's R value to 0... but we know that.

7 has been good for me although the other guy here hasn't touched it because the verify is a joke (his words).

So as we're a beta site we'll go straight into 9 and miss 8.

In for a penny.....

[Thee Rickster ™]

We're still running 5 (and 7) but just going to 9 (beta).

5 has been rock solid and we only had the renumber once but caught it. It never did it again but because of reading issues here, we changed the post.

The annoying thing with 5 has been drill cycles occasionally changing it's R value to 0... but we know that.

7 has been good for me although the other guy here hasn't touched it because the verify is a joke (his words).

So as we're a beta site we'll go straight into 9 and miss 8.

In for a penny.....

 

Thats odd, to me verify is one of the only reasons i upped from 6.

If I cant save time anywhere else, I'll take it in Verify!

 

Using verify in any WCS position rocks,

so glad they finally got up to speed with most the others.

[Tyler Robotson]

Hey Newb - just keep the car ticking over in the parking lot - just in case 

 

Apparently I get to blame everything on the retiring guy here I'm 'sort of' replacing for the first 6 months. After that it's Canadiana-Blame-Game

[Colin Gilchrist]

Apparently I get to blame everything on the retiring guy here I'm 'sort of' replacing for the first 6 months. After that it's Canadiana-Blame-Game

 

If anything happens, just blame it on the Metric to Inch conversion...

[Newbeeee™]

Thats odd, to me verify is one of the only reasons i upped from 6.

If I cant save time anywhere else, I'll take it in Verify!

 

Using verify in any WCS position rocks,

so glad they finally got up to speed with most the others.

Kwality of the verify for the work we do  -  csk holes looking on screen like they've been cut at S1000000 F99999999999 with no dwell...

Also, small corner rad tools looking faceted etc.

It wasn't a big problem for me (using it) as I'd know that although the csk tool may look crap on screen, on the machine it won't be an issue.

Don't get me wrong, I like the new verify but I do think it was released a bit too early...

[Thee Rickster ™]

Kwality of the verify for the work we do  -  csk holes looking on screen like they've been cut at S1000000 F99999999999 with no dwell...

Also, small corner rad tools looking faceted etc.

It wasn't a big problem for me (using it) as I'd know that although the csk tool may look crap on screen, on the machine it won't be an issue.

Don't get me wrong, I like the new verify but I do think it was released a bit too early...

 

Same here, but its much much FASTER, then ..... turbo

 

I just trust that its not gonna cut all that ugly crap that it shows..... LOL

(only looking for gouges here)

[Tyler Robotson]

If anything happens, just blame it on the Metric to Inch conversion...

 

Yeah, I keep asking people for metric tools. Metric vices, metric adjustable wrench, metric endmill lengtheners.. 

[Tyler Robotson]

Kwality of the verify for the work we do  -  csk holes looking on screen like they've been cut at S1000000 F99999999999 with no dwell...

Also, small corner rad tools looking faceted etc.

It wasn't a big problem for me (using it) as I'd know that although the csk tool may look crap on screen, on the machine it won't be an issue.

Don't get me wrong, I like the new verify but I do think it was released a bit too early...

If you crank the precision in the MachineSimulationDefaults.xml you can get it pretty close to the old one. 

[Guest]

@ Tyler... if you guys need a router, we rep CR Onsrud now and you're in my territory. :

[Guest]

Don't have the experience like you.

 

old school patter/mold maker from prints, never did much hand

gramming at the controller (Drilling, circular interpolation), just plain old 3-d software gramming and

design.

So i dont know much on macros and other things i know very little about.... LOL 

 

In your tool change cycle, the line after the M06 add this;

#517=#4120

 

After you make that first tool change after you add the above line, you will always know what tool is in the spindle.

 

Now, all your part programs can use G43 H#517, and G41/G42 D#517

 

If you machine only has Tool Offset A (H&D cannot match), then add the following line after the #517... line;

#518=[#517+30]

 

Change 30 to whatever offset you want to add to the tool number for your D's.

 

HTH

[Newbeeee™]

Yeah, I keep asking people for metric tools. Metric vices, metric adjustable wrench, metric endmill lengtheners.. 

Have you been sent to the stores yet for a long weight?

[Newbeeee™]

If you crank the precision in the MachineSimulationDefaults.xml you can get it pretty close to the old one. 

Hey tech support ( ) - I'm sure I did that but just refresh my memory please.

Is it precision factor or precision index or none of them?

And what was the settings?

[The Cathedral]

Yeah, I keep asking people for metric tools. Metric vices, metric adjustable wrench, metric endmill lengtheners.. 

 

Royale with cheese

[Colin Gilchrist]

Kwality of the verify for the work we do  -  csk holes looking on screen like they've been cut at S1000000 F99999999999 with no dwell...

Also, small corner rad tools looking faceted etc.

It wasn't a big problem for me (using it) as I'd know that although the csk tool may look crap on screen, on the machine it won't be an issue.

Don't get me wrong, I like the new verify but I do think it was released a bit too early...

 

Have you tried using the "Accurate Zoom" function? First, make sure you turn off "Turbo Mode", then cut your part. At any time during Verification, use the "Accurate Zoom". This will give you a better rendering of the cut part.