Will Mastercam can be used to program this machine

[David Colin]

Hi,

 

my boss is interesting in a new (used) machine: XY120 PLUS TAKAMAZ (2 turrets, 2 spindles, mill-turn)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfm4_VTHEhE

 

I'm programming Integrex machines daily with lathe posts, this is ok because i don't really need turrets sync but with this new machine this will be a new story...

So i wondered if Mastercam with MT add-on will be able to make it work at its full potential?  Moreover, i know that CNC is the one and only supplier for Mill-turn machine definitions(+PP) and all is locked. How to know if CNCsoftware will have that machine definition available?

I'd like to program it in Mastercam but perhaps to get a specific CAM software for this machine would be the way to?

 

Any advice from people with experience in programming these machines is welcome.

 

[Watcher]

The answer for your question is French and it's on version 7.10

 

It's a mistake IMHO to spend time tweaking MC and a post for that equipment. It's way to complex to be handled by MC.

 

Now let me put on my flameproof suit.

 

JM2C

[David Colin]

Can you be more specific? A french software in V7.10 (that sounds great as i'm french ^^^)?

[jlw™]

It rhymes with Soptolid.

[slyym]

Wow that looked cool the way the second spindle followed the tool. What about Mastercam millturn? It should do that I think. Right now I'm just using regular mastercam and programming an  Okuma multus. I obviously don't get a full simulation but I'm cool with that.  Esprit would probably be the be3st choice if you want full simulation.

[David Colin]

Thank you it reminds me something... I'll look into it but i thought its features were close to Mastercam. I read about to a 'part maker' stuff too.

[Watcher]

I might be wrong about this but last time I heard CNC was not offering MT posts for machines other than the mainstream machines out there, like Doosans, Okumas, Mazaks... I think it's highly unlikely they already cover this specific machine.

 

But again, I might be bloody wrong about this.

[jaydenn]

You need to understand the machine control scheme before you can understand your software requirements.

It's quite likely that you simply program the 2nd spindle normally, and the control takes care of the syncing.

 

J

[Watcher]

You need to understand the machine control scheme before you can understand your software requirements.

It's quite likely that you simply program the 2nd spindle normally, and the control takes care of the syncing.

 

J

J...

 

I've never seen or heard about a control that handles anything related to sync without user explicit programming.

 

Have you seen anything like this before? If so, could you please elaborate more? I'm interested to learn about it...

[slyym]

I might be wrong about this but last time I heard CNC was not offering MT posts for machines other than the mainstream machines out there, like Doosans, Okumas, Mazaks... I think it's highly unlikely they already cover this specific machine.

 

But again, I might be bloody wrong about this.

That code cant be all that bad. It probably just 2 streams with wait codes and a code to make it follow the right tool. I know our post guy here in Houston could put something together for it. Now again your not gonna get a full simulation but if your good its not needed.

[Watcher]

That code cant be all that bad. It probably just 2 streams with wait codes and a code to make it follow the right tool. I know our post guy here in Houston could put something together for it. Now again your not gonna get a full simulation but if your good its not needed.

Got your point...

 

But mine is... With the options out there that can do the entire job, does it make sense to get a half baked solution just to stay in the same ecosystem?

 

If it was my dollar I'd say no.

 

No need to have half dozen systems in a shop, but with that machine, regular MC does not make sense. MT might be a solution as long as it delivers the whole package.

 

I would not risk the safety of an operator or the accuracy of the machine playing with bad simulation knowing there are options....

 

Just my opinion...

[slyym]

If a company is going to invest the money to buy equipment like that then getting the proper software along with it is a no brainer to me.

[jaydenn]

J...

 

I've never seen or heard about a control that handles anything related to sync without user explicit programming.

 

Have you seen anything like this before? If so, could you please elaborate more? I'm interested to learn about it...

 

Most controls do handle the difficult stuff.

 

Although it looks complicated, visually, it's likely just a matter of a sync code, like slyym mentioned.

 

I didn't mean the "control will do it all for you...". More like "A simple sync code will do the trick!"

 

J

[Watcher]

Most controls do handle the difficult stuff.

 

Although it looks complicated, visually, it's likely just a matter of a sync code, like slyym mentioned.

 

I didn't mean the "control will do it all for you...". More like "A simple sync code will do the trick!"

 

J

I've learned along the years that adding sync codes in the right locations is not a trivial task, although the command itself is.

 

IMHO is one of the most underestimated tasks in programming. I also learned that a system with native functionality to handle it is like water to wine in terms of how fast and safe it makes the programming tasks. I'm sure Mastercam MT kicks MC lathe xxxx hands down in this area.

[gcode]

The list of machines supported by MT is pretty small

I looked into it for the Okuma VTM we have here but it was not available.

I'm not sure there would be much advantage to it anyway.

It's a single spindle 5X vertical lathe and sync codes are not necessary.

[Watcher]

Very simple example:

 

Reordering synched operations in a system that cannot handle it well is  a real PITA. 

 

Now do it in a system designed to support it well and you are good to go in seconds.

 

Had an Edgecam training a few weeks ago about this and I was surprised to see how well it handles synched operations. 

 

These days, WYSIWYG is a must for these tasks, IMHO. Crashing a MTM machine is not only expensive: It´s bad business too because they´re mechanically more sophisticated (and therefore often less robust) and a crash may render poor accuracy results in the mid/long term.

 

We have a dual spindle Mori NT here and operators crashed it half dozen times in the past 3 years. It´s now just unreliable for certain tasks, and Mori wants a ton of $$$ to "attempt" to make it Ok again. Those crashes had nothing to do with sync codes though...

 

That speaks volumes to me about how important the right CAM system and post, well trained people and simulation are for these machines. 

[YoDoug®]

Back to the original post, In Tsugamis that function is called superposition. It's a Fanuc control function that builders can implement. There is an M code for each axis to activate and deactivate. The control does the vector math in the background to "chase" a part after a moving tool. It is a common function in Swiss style machines. 

[crazy^millman]

Back to the original post, In Tsugamis that function is called superposition. It's a Fanuc control function that builders can implement. There is an M code for each axis to activate and deactivate. The control does the vector math in the background to "chase" a part after a moving tool. It is a common function in Swiss style machines. 

 

EuroTech's have the same capability.

 

NCSIMUL can verify these with no issues. Nice to pick on a cut in the graphics and see the line of code and tool cutting right in places verses the Auto-diff process you have to use in Vericut that is not anywhere near the same. People keep throwing out other CAM for these machine, but then fall back to the old hat for Verification in the same sentence.

[YoDoug®]

EuroTech's have the same capability.

 

NCSIMUL can verify these with no issues. Nice to pick on a cut in the graphics and see the line of code and tool cutting right in places verses the Auto-diff process you have to use in Vericut that is not anywhere near the same. People keep throwing out other CAM for these machine, but then fall back to the old hat for Verification in the same sentence.

 

I know that in Esprit the Mcodes for Axis sync, Axis composition, and axis superposition are handle as sync codes. However I do not know if the verification shows the superposition moves or not. I do not really work on the Tsugami's, we have dedicated AE's for Tsugami.

[Watcher]

...

People keep throwing out other CAM for these machine, but then fall back to the old hat for Verification in the same sentence.

Not trying to enter into an argument here, and I hope I don´t, but I´ve learned that verification is really something an ideal shop should have, regardless the brand. It´s just a different animal and CAM is not there yet nor needs to. We both understand why very well Ron...

 

So I´d recommend it for nearly every shop with a machine with at least one rotary axis.

 

That being said, some other CAMs can handle synchronization of channels and machine simulation remarkably well, and although I´d never say "Verification is not needed" because I understand verification offers much more than collision detection, I´d risk a finger or two of my own for a few CAM systems in areas I´d not do it for MC by no means.

 

Like an old friend use to say, nothing can be everything to everyone. I understand this, but I also understand that a bunch of things don´t need to be necessarily heavily dependent on the skill set of who is doing it... Technology exists to make complex things easier and simple for people that not necessarily have the willing to stand out in their trades... Multi-channel sync is one of these things... I understand it very well, but I find disgusting to use my time and capacity to workaround it when and if there are better ways... I prefer to let technology to handle it for me...

 

Look at this example:

 

 

Right now 99.9% of us are not dealing with it what is shown above... I honestly don´t even know if I´d know how to program correctly in the first shot, by hand, the part above in machine above with the approach shown above... One day, it might become a standard. I prefer to learn and know about it now rather than when it becomes a must to know.

 

JM2C

[Watcher]

I know that in Esprit the Mcodes for Axis sync, Axis composition, and axis superposition are handle as sync codes. However I do not know if the verification shows the superposition moves or not. I do not really work on the Tsugami's, we have dedicated AE's for Tsugami.

 

I think both mainstream high-end solutions, NCSimul and VERICUT can handle superimposition through a technique called axis coupling or axis linking. It basically consists in making one axis to be "attached" to another so when the master moves, the slave follows. A simple example of this is used in MoriSeiki NT machines with a dual spindle. In such machines you don´t have a C2 axis on the counter chuck. It´s always C. So you either activate one chuck or another as the main C axis or you can couple them through a M-Code. When you do so, whenever you program the C axis, both chucks move together, with opposite directions, in synch. NCSimul and VERICUT can handle it.

 

I presume the same technique is used to whatever axes combos you might have.

[crazy^millman]

Not trying to enter into an argument here, and I hope I don´t, but I´ve learned that verification is really something an ideal shop should have, regardless the brand. It´s just a different animal and CAM is not there yet nor needs too. We both understand why very well Ron...

 

So I´d recommend it for nearly every shop with a machine with at least one rotary axis.

 

That being said, some other CAMs can handle synchronization of channels and machine simulation remarkably well, and although I´d never say "Verification is not needed" because I understand verification offers much more than collision detection, I´d risk a finger or two of my own for a few CAM systems in areas I´d not do it for MC by no means.

 

Like an old friend use to say, nothing can be everything to everyone. I understand this, but I also understand that a bunch of things don´t need to be necessarily heavily dependent on the skill set of who is doing it... Technology exists to make complex things easier and simple for people that not necessarily have the willing to stand out in their trades... Multi-channel sync is one of these things... I understand it very well, but I find disgusting to use my time and capacity to workaround it when and if there are better ways... I prefer to let technology to handle it for me...

 

Look at this example:

 

 

Right now 99.9% of us are not dealing with it what is shown above... I honestly don´t even know if I´d know how to program correctly in the first shot, by hand, the part above in machine above with the approach shown above... One day, it might become a standard. I prefer to learn and know about it now rather than when it becomes a must to know.

 

JM2C

 

My friend never and argument you know that. Just putting out other options is all like you are doing as well. All good stuff in my book.

 

3 Turrets are fun and 4 Turrets are very cool also. I tried talking a customer into a 4 turret machine because they could not increase the work force, but could swap out  machines. They thought it was crazy to have 2 spindles and 4 turrets pinching turning parts at the same time. Not much different than the rotary index machines. That is a whole lot going on at one time.

[gcode]

My friend never and argument you know that. Just putting out other options is all like you are doing as well. All good stuff in my book.

 

3 Turrets are fun and 4 Turrets are very cool also. I tried talking a customer into a 4 turret machine because they could not increase the work force, but could swap out  machines. They thought it was crazy to have 2 spindles and 4 turrets pinching turning parts at the same time. Not much different than the rotary index machines. That is a whole lot going on at one time.

and it doesn't take a very big brain fart to turn a half million dollar jewel into 20k pounds of scrap iron

[mkd]

and it doesn't take a very big brain fart to turn a half million dollar jewel into 20k pounds of scrap iron

...on a 3 axis, let alone a 13 axis

[YoDoug®]

and it doesn't take a very big brain fart to turn a half million dollar jewel into 20k pounds of scrap iron

 

I hate having to hand edit code or cut/paste into finished programs. You have to make an edit to a tool path that is too cumbersome for hand edits so you go into Mcam, edit the tool path and repost. Then you have to remember to do all of your hand edits again or just cut/paste the new tool path code into the existing program. You do this enough times and you will eventually miss something.