Post processing for multiple machines

[themachinist]

I am not aware of a way to post a program for multiple machining centers in a single operation.

 

We currently run 5 post processors and generating code for a different machine is usually accomplished by swapping the machine definition, since we are not programming specifically for each machine. The workflow for post processing for multiple machining centers seems to be having multiple Machine Groups. Is that correct?

 

What is the easiest way to generate an NC file for several controls?

[jeff]

Maybe one of the brainiacs in here can/have used a c-hook to do this, sometimes I have to post to 2 diff controls so I just swap mmd's

[Colin Gilchrist]

You can handle all of this in the post processor (multiple NC file generation), assuming the Kinematic Arrangement is the same for all of the machines you want to post to. Otherwise, I recommend loading multiple Machine Groups, copying all of the ops/toolpath groups to each machine, and then setting a different NC File Name, and Program Number (optional) for each Machine Group.

 

Then you can select all the Machine Groups, and post one time.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

The multiple machine group method becomes unmanageable when you get into revisions; there's no way to ensure congruency between groups after making changes.  What I did was have one post with a user prompt asking which machine to post for.  Then any time there's something the post needs to handle differently for a certain machine it references your answer to make the choice.  

[guitar]

You can handle all of this in the post processor (multiple NC file generation), assuming the Kinematic Arrangement is the same for all of the machines you want to post to. Otherwise, I recommend loading multiple Machine Groups, copying all of the ops/toolpath groups to each machine, and then setting a different NC File Name, and Program Number (optional) for each Machine Group.

 

Then you can select all the Machine Groups, and post one time.

 

 

 

This is what I did. I wrote my post to handle 19 different machines. When you hit post, a popup box appears asking you to select the machine: and, after that, another pop up for the programmer.

[AMCNitro]

What about saving a file for each machine?  Program is the same but you just change the control definition and save it with a different name.  It'd be easier when making revisions you just save it again and it rewrites it.

[JAMMAN]

The absolute easiest thing would be to have all the machines themselves be identical, I imagine that would get expensive

 

I use the change the machine def method though i usually save the file off afterward with a hint to the machine it is for. Hard drive is cheap these days.

[civiceg]

 

 

This is what I did. I wrote my post to handle 19 different machines. When you hit post, a popup box appears asking you to select the machine: and, after that, another pop up for the programmer.

 

How do you handle different control/machine definitions?

[Guest]

This is what I did. I wrote my post to handle 19 different machines. When you hit post, a popup box appears asking you to select the machine: and, after that, another pop up for the programmer.

 

I have had to dig through those kinds of post after the "genius" has left........it can turn into a complete effin' nightmare in those cases

[Newbeeee™]

I have had to dig through those kinds of post after the "genius" has left........it can turn into a complete effin' nightmare in those cases

What I would say is this is a good idea IMO, but for a couple of similar machines.

We had the same post for VMC's and Robodrills, where the machines were identical except for tool preselect.

So simple and easy.

But we have 4 identical machines and 3 other identical machines, so it works.

However, if you have a clusterfcuk of machines, then I'd stay w e l l clear of this approach.

[Guest]

What I would say is this is a good idea IMO, but for a couple of similar machines.

We had the same post for VMC's and Robodrills, where the machines were identical except for tool preselect.

So simple and easy.

But we have 4 identical machines and 3 other identical machines, so it works.

However, if you have a clusterfcuk of machines, then I'd stay w e l l clear of this approach.

 

My experience was your latter description.......a hodgepodge of machines

[Newbeeee™]

My experience was your latter description.......a hodgepodge of machines

I can NEVER understand what makes companies go this route?

Different controls, and different spindles/pull studs etc.

Ohhh, that holder won't fit that machine yada yada.

Standardisation is a wonderful thing..........if only people would do it!

[guitar]

How do you handle different control/machine definitions?

 

 

Let's just say, in order to make the user's life easier, the programmers task may be harder. Yes. Everything in the post had to be broken down by control/machine type and controlled with "If/then"  type statements. It works like a charm. Getting it going was a b1tch though.

[guitar]

I have had to dig through those kinds of post after the "genius" has left........it can turn into a complete effin' nightmare in those cases

Well, instead of whining about the fact that he did something different than what you would do (as machinists typically do to get the spotlight put on themselves about how they saved the world from something that did not need to be fixed) write your own and stop whining. Then maintain many posts when only 1 is needed. Yup, makes alotta sense, in a 3rd world sort of way. My post works flawlessly.

[Newbeeee™]

JP - Consider yourself rollocked!

[Guest]

JP - Consider yourself rollocked!

 

I have had to clean up messes from people who thought they were SOOO smart.....believe me, a customer doesn't like downtime because some yahoo with a god complex made something far more complicated then need be and that he just wants it to work.

 

It's a cool notion but once that person leaves wherever they were, much of it tends to falls apart.

 

and that's when the reseller has to go in and pick up the mess

 

But enough, sorry about hijack!

[AMCNitro]

I can NEVER understand what makes companies go this route?

Different controls, and different spindles/pull studs etc.

Ohhh, that holder won't fit that machine yada yada.

Standardisation is a wonderful thing..........if only people would do iSometSmetim

Sometimes when shops start small and the owner is the first employee and machinist shops will by what they can get for a good price as the shop grows. 

[guitar]

I have had to clean up messes from people who thought they were SOOO smart.....believe me, a customer doesn't like downtime because some yahoo with a god complex made something far more complicated then need be and that he just wants it to work.

 

It's a cool notion but once that person leaves wherever they were, much of it tends to falls apart.

 

and that's when the reseller has to go in and pick up the mess

 

But enough, sorry about hijack!

 

 

That's a great mentality. Are you running Mastercam v1 on windows 3.1?

[guitar]

Sometimes when shops start small and the owner is the first employee and machinist shops will by what they can get for a good price as the shop grows. 

 

I work for a company that has been in business for 30 years and they still have this mentality. They have 50 machines. Of course they bought everything with absolutely no options, like through spindle coolant. Yeah, they were all great, fell-off-the-truck bargains. Haas indexers on fanuc mills. But, when they want to make life a headache they got every possible option to do that. 

[themachinist]

I work for a company that has been in business for 30 years and they still have this mentality. They have 50 machines. Of course they bought everything with absolutely no options, like through spindle coolant. Yeah, they were all great, fell-off-the-truck bargains. Haas indexers on fanuc mills. But, when they want to make life a headache they got every possible option to do that.

This is pretty much my experience with shops that have less than 150 employees.

[AlbertZini]

http://www.emastercam.com/board/topic/78945-mastercam-posts/

[The Cathedral]

I can NEVER understand what makes companies go this route?

Different controls, and different spindles/pull studs etc.

Ohhh, that holder won't fit that machine yada yada.

Standardisation is a wonderful thing..........if only people would do it!

 

It's not always that simple, though. For example, all our lathes are from the same maker (Okuma). However, after buying and upgrading machines for thirty plus years, you tend to end up with a whole mess of different controls. We have absolutely shiny brand new Okuma P300 controls, and we still have two perfectly running green Okumas with the green screen OSP5020, and damn near every version inbetween. It makes it a headache.

[Matthew Hajicek - Singularity]

 

 

I have had to dig through those kinds of post after the "genius" has left........it can turn into a complete effin' nightmare in those cases

 

A genius will comment and organize his code well.  A "genius" (air quotes) will not.

[Gary]

I work for a company that has been in business for 30 years and they still have this mentality. They have 50 machines. Of course they bought everything with absolutely no options, like through spindle coolant. Yeah, they were all great, fell-off-the-truck bargains. Haas indexers on fanuc mills. But, when they want to make life a headache they got every possible option to do that. 

30yrs in business. Yep must be doing it all wrong.

[Newbeeee™]

30yrs in business. Yep must be doing it all wrong.

I guess the statement meant that if they changed their ways and worked a bit smarter, they'd make a whole lot more.